COURTYARDS COMM LIVING CENTER

907 EAST WALKER STREET, FULTON, MS 38843 (662) 862-6140
For profit - Individual 66 Beds COMMUNITY ELDERCARE SERVICES Data: November 2025 6 Immediate Jeopardy citations
Trust Grade
0/100
#154 of 200 in MS
Last Inspection: May 2025

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

Overview

Courtyards Community Living Center has received an F grade, indicating poor performance and significant concerns about care quality. It ranks #154 out of 200 facilities in Mississippi, placing it in the bottom half of nursing homes in the state, and it is the second-best option in Itawamba County, with only one other facility available. The facility is improving, having reduced its number of issues from 28 in 2024 to 8 in 2025, but it still faces serious challenges, including a concerning 66% staff turnover rate, which is higher than the state average. They have incurred $117,659 in fines, suggesting ongoing compliance problems, and their RN coverage is only average, which means that registered nurses may not always be available to catch potential issues. Specific incidents include failures to address significant weight loss in residents, which resulted in serious health risks, highlighting both critical neglect in nutritional care and a lack of timely communication with physicians about residents' deteriorating conditions. Overall, while there are signs of improvement, families should weigh these serious weaknesses when considering this facility.

Trust Score
F
0/100
In Mississippi
#154/200
Bottom 23%
Safety Record
High Risk
Review needed
Inspections
Getting Better
28 → 8 violations
Staff Stability
⚠ Watch
66% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
Penalties
✓ Good
$117,659 in fines. Lower than most Mississippi facilities. Relatively clean record.
Skilled Nurses
○ Average
Each resident gets 30 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — about average for Mississippi. RNs are the most trained staff who monitor for health changes.
Violations
⚠ Watch
39 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
★☆☆☆☆
1.0
Overall Rating
★★☆☆☆
2.0
Staff Levels
★★☆☆☆
2.0
Care Quality
★☆☆☆☆
1.0
Inspection Score
Stable
2024: 28 issues
2025: 8 issues

The Good

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

Facility shows strength in fire safety.

The Bad

1-Star Overall Rating

Below Mississippi average (2.6)

Significant quality concerns identified by CMS

Staff Turnover: 66%

20pts above Mississippi avg (46%)

Frequent staff changes - ask about care continuity

Federal Fines: $117,659

Well above median ($33,413)

Significant penalties indicating serious issues

Chain: COMMUNITY ELDERCARE SERVICES

Part of a multi-facility chain

Ask about local staffing decisions and management

Staff turnover is elevated (66%)

18 points above Mississippi average of 48%

The Ugly 39 deficiencies on record

6 life-threatening 5 actual harm
May 2025 8 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0565 (Tag F0565)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on staff and resident interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to make prompt efforts to resolve a grievance from resident Council meetings and communicate step...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on staff and resident interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to make prompt efforts to resolve a grievance from resident Council meetings and communicate steps towards a resolution of a grievance concerning sheets not being changed on shower days for three (3) of six (6) meeting minutes reviewed. Meeting dates of 3/11/25, 4/7/25, and 5/6/25 Findings include: Record review of facility's policy titled, Grievances and Complaints, dated 2/14/23, revealed, Process - Social Services will act as the grievance officer for the facility and oversee the grievance process. Upon receipt of a grievance, Social Services will complete a written report within 5 (five) working days of the filed grievance and determine what corrective actions, if any, should be taken . Social Services must notify the person who filed the grievance, within 10 working days of the filed grievance, in the form of a report. Copies of this report will be available to the person filing the grievance at any time. If filer is not satisfied with the results of the investigation, the filer may file a report with the local ombudsman. Contact information for the local ombudsman should be easily accessible and visible in the facility . During the Resident Council meeting held on 5/20/25 at 3:00 PM, the Resident Council President stated there was a concern for several months regarding the bed sheets not being changed on the residents' shower days. Other members present as well as the president stated this had been a concern, but felt the situation had recently improved. They all agreed that other concerns expressed by the council members were addressed and corrected timely, but the concern with sheets not being changed took longer than it should have to resolve. During an interview on 5/21/25 at 10:20 AM, the Director of Nursing (DON) revealed the residents expressed a grievance of the sheets not getting changed on shower days during the last three Resident Council meetings and the facility failed to timely resolve this concern. She acknowledged the residents had the right to voice a grievance in resident council and the staff had the responsibility to address the concern and follow up with the resolution reported back to the council members. She acknowledged there had been changes in staff roles and positions, and following the grievance process to ensure the concern was resolved timely was overlooked. She confirmed the facility failed to follow the grievance process for a concern voiced in Resident Council in a timely manner. During an interview on 5/21/25 at 2:00 PM, the Activity Director stated she was new to the role of Activity Director, and she attended the Resident Council meeting in April and May and the bed sheets not being changed was mentioned during those meetings. She revealed that in the May meeting, the residents stated the concern with sheets not being changed had improved but still was an occasional concern. She stated the process she followed for a grievance during resident Council was to provide copies of the concerns to the Social Worker who was the grievance officer, and the Social Worker would give the information to the department heads of each area of concern. She stated that once the grievance process was discussed by other areas, she was informed of what resolution was found and she would discuss the grievance and resolution in the next meeting. An interview on 5/22/25 at 9:40 AM with the Social Worker revealed she was the grievance officer in the facility, and she was notified of concerns from the Resident Council group. These concerns were given to the appropriate department head and the department heads would in-service and put a plan in place to resolve the grievance. She acknowledged the Director of Nursing and the Activity Director were new to these roles and she was also new to the social service role and these changes in staffing could have affected the communication of the grievance. She confirmed the facility failed to follow the grievance process timely to resolve the issue of the bed sheets not being changed. Record review of Resident Council Minutes dated 3/11/25, revealed, Sheets not changed on shower days. Record review of Resident Council Minutes dated 4/7/25, revealed, Shower days - sheets still not being changed. Record review of Resident Council Minutes dated 5/6/25, revealed, Still not changing sheets after showers. Record review of Guidelines for Documentation of Resident Council Responses dated April 7, 2025, revealed for nursing, Day shift not changing sheets. Director of Nursing addressed and wrote comment, Shower team will strip beds on shower days. Record review of Guidelines for Documentation of Resident Council Responses dated 5/6/25, revealed for nursing Sheets not changed. This was noted and dated 5/12/25 by the DON. No comments were noted.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0578 (Tag F0578)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on resident and staff interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to honor a resident's rig...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on resident and staff interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to honor a resident's right to make healthcare decisions for one (1) of twenty-four residents reviewed for Advance Directives (Resident #53). Findings include: A review of the facility policy titled Advance Directives, with a revision date of 11/2022, revealed: Decision-Making Capacity upon admission, the interdisciplinary team assesses the resident's decision-making capacity and identifies the primary decision-maker if the resident is determined not to have decision-making capacity . A review of the facility policy titled Resident Rights, with a revision date of [DATE], revealed, (a) Residents' Rights. The resident has a right to . self-determination . During an interview with Resident #53 on [DATE], at 8:05 AM, he was asked about his code status, and resident stated that he would like staff to do everything possible to save his life. He confirmed that no one in the facility had ever asked him about his wishes related to code status. Record review of the Code Status form for Resident #53 revealed Do Not Attempt Resuscitation signed by the resident representative on [DATE]. During an interview with the admission Coordinator at 10:05 AM on [DATE], she confirmed that Resident #53 had a high Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS), and that staff should have asked him about his choice related to Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) status and should have updated his record accordingly and stated, At the end of the day, it should be the resident's choice. During an interview with Registered Nurse (RN) #1 on [DATE], at 4:14 PM, she confirmed that Resident #53 had a high BIMS score and should have been asked what he preferred his code status to be. She acknowledged that by failing to ask the resident about his wishes, staff did not allow him to exercise autonomy and self-determination. Record review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of [DATE], revealed his BIMS score was a 14, indicating that the resident was cognitively intact. Record review of the admission Record revealed the facility admitted Resident #53 on [DATE], with a medical diagnosis including Essential (Primary) Hypertension.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0582 (Tag F0582)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on staff interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide the required Advanced Beneficiary Notice to residents discharged from Part A and continued to live i...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on staff interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide the required Advanced Beneficiary Notice to residents discharged from Part A and continued to live in the facility and had skilled benefit days remaining for two (2) of three (3) residents reviewed for Advanced Beneficiary Notice. Residents #26 and Resident #58 Findings include: Record review of facility's policy, Medicare Advanced Beneficiary Notice, dated 7/24/23, revealed, Residents are informed in advance when changes will occur to their bills. The facility issues the Skilled Nursing Facility Advanced Beneficiary Notice (CMS form 10055) to the resident prior to providing care that Medicare usually covers, but may not pay for because the care is considered 'not medically reasonable and necessary' or 'custodial' . During an interview on 5/21/25 at 10:00 AM, the Business Office Manager revealed she failed to provide the Skilled Nursing Facility Advance Beneficiary Notice of Non-Coverage CMS Form #10055 to Resident #26 and Resident #58. She revealed both residents remained in the facility after being discharged from Part A with time remaining and she mistakenly omitted these residents from receiving the required notification. During an interview on 5/21/25 at 10:10 AM, the Director of Nursing revealed Resident #26 and Resident #58 remained in the facility after being discharged from Part A with time remaining. She confirmed that it was required to provide the resident or resident's representative information of non-coverage for skilled nursing service and the facility failed to provide written notifications to these two residents/representatives. Record review of Beneficiary Notice - Residents discharged Within the Last Six Months revealed Resident #26 was discharged from Part A on 3/7/25 and remained in the facility. Review revealed Resident #58 was discharged from Part A on 1/30/25 and remained in the facility. Record review of Resident #26's SNF (Skilled Nursing Facility) Beneficiary Protection Notification Review revealed Medicare Part A Skilled Services start date was 2/12/25 and the last covered day of Part A service was 3/6/25. The review revealed, The facility/provider initiated the discharge from Medicare Part A Services when benefit days were not exhausted. Record review of Resident #58's SNF Beneficiary Protection Notification Review revealed Medicare Part A Skilled Services start date was 12/4/24 and the last covered day of Part A service was 1/29/25. The review revealed, The facility/provider initiated the discharge from Medicare Part A Services when benefit days were not exhausted.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0761 (Tag F0761)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Resident #56 During an observation of the medication administration pass for Resident #56 on 5/20/25 at 10:30 AM, LPN #1 prepare...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Resident #56 During an observation of the medication administration pass for Resident #56 on 5/20/25 at 10:30 AM, LPN #1 prepared medications for administration. The resident had an order for Potassium Chloride Liquid 20 MEQ (milliequivalent) per 15 ml (milliliters) give 10 MEQ by mouth - Directions mix 7.5 ml (10 MEQ) in 120 ml of water and give by mouth one time a day. LPN #1 mixed the Potassium Chloride Liquid into 120 ml of thickened water and took this with the other medications into the resident's room. The resident drank part of the medication/water mixture and did not want the remainder, and the nurse told her she would leave it at the bedside, and she would try again later. LPN #1 left the room with the medication on the resident's overbed table and pushed the medication cart down the hall to the next resident's room. When asked about leaving the medication at bedside, LPN #1 acknowledged it was not safe to leave medications unattended since another resident could take it. She acknowledged that potassium was a medication that could be dangerous for a resident not needing extra potassium and should not have been left at bedside. She then went into the room and discarded the medication. She confirmed she had been in-serviced on not leaving medication at bedside. An interview with the facility's Pharmacist on 5/20/25 at 10:40 AM, revealed the facility nurses are not to leave medication unattended at a resident's bedside and this was discussed during the most recent in-service. During an interview on 5/21/25 at 10:10 AM, the Director of Nursing acknowledged that for the safety of the residents as well as other people in the facility, medications should be stored properly and should not be left unattended at the bedside. She stated another resident could have taken the medication which could have led to health problems for them, especially with potassium. She confirmed the facility failed to properly store medications. Record review of in-service by the DON and Pharmacist titled, Med Pass - General dated 4/10/25, revealed LPN #1's signature on the sign-in sheet which indicated she attended the training. The in-service consisted of Med Pass Points which included, Meds are never to be left at the bedside for the resident to take later. Record review of Resident #56's Order Summary Report revealed an order dated 12/2/24 for Potassium Chloride Liquid 20 MEQ per 15 ml (10%) - give 10 MEQ by mouth one time a day related to Hypokalemia. Directions: Mix 7.5 ml (10 MEQ) in 120 ml of water and give by mouth one time a day. Record review of Resident #56's admission Record revealed she was admitted by the facility on 8/7/24. Her diagnoses included Alzheimer's Disease and Chronic Kidney Disease. Record review of Resident #56's MDS with ARD of 4/17/25 revealed the resident had a BIMS score of three (3) which indicated the resident had severe cognitive impairment. Based on observation, resident and staff interview, record review and facility policy review, the facility failed to safely store medications two (2) of (5) five residents medications observed. (Resident #5 and #56) Findings include: Record review of facility policy titled, Medications, Individual Medication Storage Cabinets dated 8/25/14, revealed, Medication administration utilizing individual medication storage cabinets will meet the same criteria for timeliness, infection control, and medication safety as standard medication administration. Resident #5 On 5/20/25 at 8:42 AM, an observation and interview with Resident #5 revealed a Simethicone Capsule 125 milligram (MG) sitting in a medicine cup on her bedside table. Resident #5 confirmed that the capsule was her stomach medication, which the nurse had left for her to take later today. On 5/20/25 at 8:45 AM, an interview with the Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #1 confirmed that she had left medication in a medicine cup for Resident #5 on her bedside table for her to take later. She acknowledged that this practice was inappropriate, as it posed a risk that another resident could mistakenly take the medication. A record review of Resident #5's Order Summary Report dated 5/20/25, revealed, .Simethicone Capsule 125 MG Give one (1) capsule by mouth three times a day for bloating, gas . On 5/22/25 at 9:00 AM, an interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed that medication should never be left at the bedside for a resident to take later. She stated that this practice puts other residents at risk because anyone could come into the room and take the medication that was not prescribed for them, or the resident could wait too late to take it and she has another dose upcoming at noon. A record review of Resident #5's admission Record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that included Unspecified Dementia. A record review of Resident #5's Minimum Data Set (MDS) revealed an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 4/1/25 under Section C, a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 8 which indicated the resident had moderate cognitive impairment.
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 observation, resident and staff interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to utilize st...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, resident and staff interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to utilize standard precautions with glove use during medication administration for Resident #35 and failed to use Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) during catheter care for Resident #55 for two (2) of six (6) resident care areas observed. The scope for F 880 was increased to E due to a prior citation on the last annual recertification survey on 2/20/24, which represents a pattern of deficiency. Findings include: Record review of facility policy titled, Medication Administration - General Guidelines dated 8/25/14, revealed, .Hand hygiene is performed and gloves are used in accordance with standard precautions for medication administration . Record review of facility policy titled, Infection Prevention and Control Program Overview, dated 10/6/17, revealed, The goals of the infection prevention and control program are to: A. decrease the risk of infection to residents and personnel . Resident #35 During observation of the medication administration pass for Resident #35 on 5/20/25 at 10:10 AM, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #1 prepared medications for administration. The resident had an order for Vitamin B12 250 micrograms (mcg) and a 500 mcg Vitamin B12 was available. LPN #1 used the pill splitter to half the tablet. She placed her ungloved finger on half of the tablet to hold it in the pill splitter, and she dropped the other half into the resident's medication cup. She then picked up the other half of tablet in the pill splitter with her bare finger and placed it back into the medication bottle. During an interview with LPN #1, she confirmed for infection control purposes, she should have disposed of the tablet or worn gloves so her bare hands would not contaminate the medications in the bottle. She stated she had been in-serviced on infection control during medication pass. During an interview on 5/20/25 at 10:40 AM, the facility's Pharmacist stated the facility's nursing staff had been in-serviced on infection control during medication administration. During an interview on 5/21/25 at 10:10 AM, the Director of Nursing (DON) revealed infection control measures were to be used during medication administration. She confirmed the facility failed to ensure safe practices were used to decrease the likelihood of the spread of infection by placing a medication that had been in the nurse's ungloved hands back into the medication bottle. Record review of in-service by the DON and pharmacist titled, Med Pass - General dated 4/10/25, revealed LPN #1's signature on the sign-in sheet which indicated she attended the training. The in-service consisted of Med Pass Points which included, Infection Control . Never touch any medication with your bare hands. Record review of Resident #35's Order Summary Report revealed an order dated 2/27/25 for Cyanocobalamin Tablet 250 micrograms by mouth daily for B12 deficiency. Record review of Resident #35's admission Record revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that included Alzheimer's Disease, Hypertension, and Osteoporosis. Record review of Resident #35's Minimum Data Set (MDS) with Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 5/1/25 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of three (3) which indicated the resident had a severe cognitive impairment. Resident #55 Review of facility policy titled, Enhanced Barrier Precautions with no date revealed, Policy Statement Enhanced barrier precautions (EBPs) are utilized to prevent the spread of multi-drug resistant organisms (MDROs) to residents. Policy Interpretation and Implementation .3. Examples of high-contact resident care activities requiring the use of gown and gloves for EPBs include: .g. device care .urinary catheter . During an observation on 5/21/25 at 9:28 AM of catheter care for Resident # 55 with Certified Nursing Assistants (CNAs) #1 and #2, it was revealed that both CNAs failed to use Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) during catheter care. On 5/21/25 at 9:36 AM, an interview with CNAs #1 and #2 revealed that neither CNA was aware that EBP should have been used during catheter care. CNA #1 stated that EBP are used to prevent the spread of infection between the resident and staff and/or from resident to resident. Additionally, she confirmed that not adhering to the EPB could cause an infection for Resident #55. On 5/21/25 at 9:54 AM, an interview with the DON confirmed that EBP should have been used during catheter care and that the CNAs were trained to do so. She verbalized that EBP were put into place to help prevent the spread of infection and failing to utilize EBP could place Resident #55 at an increased risk for infection. Record review of Order Summary Report for Resident #55 dated 5/21/25, revealed, .Catheter care using soap and warm water or wipes every shift . Record review of admission Record for Resident #55 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included Neuromuscular Dysfunction of Bladder. A record review of Resident #55's MDS with an ARD of 3/1/25, and in Section C, Resident #55 has a BIMS score of 13 which indicates that the resident is cognitively intact.
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 staff interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to implement comprehensive care plans ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on staff interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to implement comprehensive care plans for two (2) of the twenty-four resident care plans reviewed. (Resident #8 and Resident #53). The scope for F 656 was increased to E due to a prior citation on the last annual recertification survey on 2/20/24, which represents a pattern of deficiency. Findings include: Review of facility policy titled Care Plans, Comprehensive Person-Centered, reviewed on 10/22, revealed: Policy Statement: A comprehensive, person-centered care plan that includes measurable objectives and timetables to meet the resident's physical, psychosocial and functional needs is developed and implemented for each resident . 7. Policy Interpretation and Implementation .The comprehensive, person-centered care plan: b. describes the services that are to be furnished to attain or maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being . Resident #8 Record review of the care plan date initiated 10/7/24 revealed, The resident has an Activities of Daily Living (ADL) self-care performance deficit related to sequela of Cerebrovascular Accident (CVA), dementia, muscle weakness, difficulty walking and unsteadiness. Intervention: Check nail length and trim and clean on bath day and as necessary . During an observation and interview on 5/19/25 at 6:43 PM with Resident #8, it was revealed that the resident was lying in bed wearing a white t-shirt, and his fingernails were one-half inch (1/2) long with a brown substance underneath and jagged edges. The resident confirmed that he preferred his nails to be trimmed short and kept clean. An observation and interview on 5/20/25 at 3:20 PM with Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #1 confirmed that Resident #8 did indeed have long, dirty fingernails with a brown substance underneath. She revealed that nails were supposed to be cleaned and trimmed on shower days, and that Resident #8's shower days were Monday, Wednesday, and Friday (M/W/F) but that the resident did not receive his shower yesterday. An observation also revealed that Resident #8 was wearing the same clothing today as he did yesterday. During an interview on 5/22/25 at 9:05 AM with the Minimum Data Set (MDS) nurse, she revealed that comprehensive care plans were developed to help guide staff in providing resident-centered care. She confirmed that the care plan was not implemented for Resident #8 due to staff not providing him with a shower on his scheduled shower day or trimming and cleaning his nails as needed. MDS Nurse also verbalized that this could result in poor hygiene for the resident, skin tears due to the condition of his nails, which could lead to infection with potential for slow healing related to his Diabetes diagnosis. A record review of Resident #8's admission Record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that included Unspecified Sequelae of Cerebral Infarction, Type II Diabetes Mellitus with other Diabetic Kidney Complication, and Need for Assistance with Personal Care. A record review of Resident #8's MDS revealed an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 4/1/25 and, in Section C, a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 9 which indicated the resident had moderate cognitive impairment. Resident #53 Record review of Resident #53's care plan date initiated 4/22/24 revealed, I have an ADL self-care performance deficit related to dementia (progressive), aging and disease process .Interventions .Bathing/Showering: Check nail length and trim and clean on bath day and as necessary . Provide sponge bath when a full bath or shower cannot be tolerated . During an observation and interview on 5/19/25 at 6:30 PM with Resident #53, it was revealed that he had one-fourth inch (1/4) facial hair and mild odor. The resident stated his shower days were Monday, Wednesday, and Friday (M/W/F), but he did not receive his shower today. He verbalized, I guess they don't have enough girls working today. Resident #53 confirmed that they normally shave him while he's in the shower and that he preferred to be clean-shaven. He further stated, I hope no one has to get close to me today because I haven't had a shower since Friday. During an interview on 5/20/25 at 3:05 PM with CNA #1, it was revealed that Resident #53 did not receive his scheduled shower on Monday, 5/19/25 on the day shift or night shift. She also revealed that Resident #53 did not receive his shower yesterday or today, but she did shave him today. During an interview on 5/22/25 at 9:00 AM with Minimum Data Set (MDS) nurse, she revealed comprehensive care plans were developed to help guide staff in providing resident-centered care. She confirmed that the care plan was not implemented on 5/19/25 for Resident #53 when he did not receive his scheduled shower. She also verbalized this could result in poor hygiene for the resident. A record review of Resident #53's admission Record revealed that the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that included Unspecified Dementia, Unspecified Lack of Coordination, and Muscle Weakness. A record review of Resident #53's MDS revealed an ARD of 4/17/25 under Section C, a BIMS score of 14, which indicated that the resident was cognitively intact.
CONCERN (E)

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

ADL Care (Tag F0677)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, resident and staff interviews, record review, and facility policy review the facility failed to provide Ac...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, resident and staff interviews, record review, and facility policy review the facility failed to provide Activities of Daily Living (ADL) care for two (2) of 24 residents (Residents #8 and #53) observed during the initial tour. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure nail care was provided for Resident #8, failed to provide shaving for Resident #53, and failed to provide showers for both Residents #8 and #53 in accordance with their scheduled care routines and facility policy. The scope for F 677 was increased to E due to a prior citation on the last annual recertification survey on 2/20/24, which represents a pattern of deficiency. Cross reference F725 Findings include: Review of facility policy titled, Bath, Shower/Tub revised 8/25/14 revealed, .Purpose: The purposes of this procedure are to promote cleanliness, provide comfort to the resident and to observe the condition of the resident's skin . Review of facility policy titled, Fingernails/Toenails, Care of revised date 2/18 revealed, Purpose: The purposes of this procedure are to clean the nail bed, to keep nails trimmed, and to prevent infections . Resident #8 On 5/19/25 at 6:43 PM during an observation and interview with Resident #8, it was revealed that the resident was lying in bed wearing a white t-shirt, and his fingernails were one-half inch (1/2) long with a brown substance underneath and jagged edges. The resident confirmed that he preferred his nails to be trimmed short and kept clean. On 5/20/25 at 3:20 PM an observation and interview with Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #1 confirmed that Resident #8 had long, dirty fingernails with a brown substance underneath. She revealed that nails were supposed to be cleaned and trimmed on shower days, and that Resident #8's shower days were Monday, Wednesday, and Friday (M/W/F). She further mentioned that due to a staffing shortage yesterday (5/19/25), that Resident #8 did not receive his shower during the day shift. An observation revealed that Resident #8 was wearing the same clothing today as he did yesterday. CNA #1 confirmed that Resident #8 could develop an infection in his nails or could suffer a skin tear or even a staph infection due to the current condition of his nails. An observation and interview on 5/20/25 at 3:25 PM with Resident #8, it was revealed that the resident was lying in bed wearing the same white t-shirt, which was now covered with food stains and the resident confirmed he had not had a shower since Friday, 5/16/25. During an interview on 5/20/25 at 3:45 PM with the Director of Nursing (DON), she confirmed that nails should be cleaned and trimmed at least weekly and as needed (PRN). She further confirmed that long, dirty nails with jagged edges could cause a skin tear and could lead to infection. A record review of Resident #8's admission Record revealed he was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that included Unspecified Sequelae of Cerebral Infarction, Type II Diabetes Mellitus with other Diabetic Kidney Complication, and Need for Assistance with Personal Care. A record review of Resident #8's Minimum Data Set (MDS) revealed an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 4/1/25 under Section C, revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 9 which indicated that he had moderate cognitive impairment. Resident #53 On 5/19/25 at 6:30 PM during an observation and interview with Resident #53, it was revealed that he had one-fourth inch (1/4) facial hair and a mild odor. The resident stated his shower days were M/W/F, but he did not receive his shower today. He verbalized, I guess they don't have enough girls working today. Resident #53 confirmed that they normally shaved him while he's in the shower and that he preferred to be clean-shaven. He further stated, I hope no one has to get close to me today because I haven't had a shower since Friday. On 5/20/25 at 3:02 PM during an interview with CNA #3, it was revealed that on M/W/F, the odd-numbered rooms received showers and on Tuesday, Thursday, Saturday (T/Th/S), the even-numbered rooms received showers. She revealed that yesterday, 5/19/25, a CNA called in, and they pulled one of the CNAs from the shower team to cover the call-in, which left only one CNA to do showers. CNA #3 revealed that when that happens, the shower aide only gives showers to rooms one through ten during the day shift and rooms eleven through twenty-one were supposed to receive showers during the night shift. CNA #3 further confirmed that linens were normally changed on shower days and revealed that if the residents didn't receive showers on those scheduled days, their linens were not changed either. During an interview on 5/20/25 at 3:05 PM with CNA #1, she confirmed that Resident #53 did not receive his scheduled shower yesterday. During an interview on 5/20/25 at 3:46 PM with the DON, it was confirmed that staffing was a problem, especially over the last two weeks. A record review of Resident #53's admission Record revealed that the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that included Unspecified Dementia, Unspecified Lack of Coordination, and Muscle Weakness. A record review of Resident #53's MDS revealed an ARD of 4/17/25, and in Section C, a BIMS score of 14, which indicated that the resident was cognitively intact.
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0725 (Tag F0725)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure sufficient nursing staff were a...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure sufficient nursing staff were available to meet the Activities of Daily Living (ADL) needs of dependent residents, as required by the residents' care plans and the facility's staffing policy. This failure resulted in two (2) of 61 sampled residents (Resident #8 and Resident #53) not receiving scheduled showers, hygiene care, and nail care. Findings include: Review of facility's policy titled, Staffing with review date 10/22 revealed, Policy Statement Our facility provides sufficient numbers of staff with the skills and competency necessary to provide care and services for all residents in accordance with resident care plans and the facility assessment . Record review of the Payroll Based Journal Staffing Data Report for Fiscal Year Quarter 1 2025 (October 1 - December 31), revealed, Excessively Low Weekend Staffing Triggered = Weekend Staffing data is excessively low. During an observation and interview on 5/19/25 at 6:30 PM with Resident #53 revealed one-fourth inch (1/4) facial hair and mild body odor. Resident #53 stated his shower days were Monday/Wednesday/Friday (M/W/F), but he did not receive his shower today. He verbalized, I guess they don't have enough girls working today. Resident #53 confirmed they normally shaved him while he's in the shower and he preferred to be clean shaven. He also revealed that they normally changed his sheets too, but that had not been done either. Resident #53 further stated, I hope no one has to get close to me today because I haven't had a shower since Friday. A record review of Resident #53's admission Record revealed that the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that included Unspecified Dementia, Unspecified Lack of Coordination, and Muscle Weakness. A record review of Resident #53's MDS revealed an ARD of 4/17/25, and in Section C, a BIMS score of 14, which indicated that the resident was cognitively intact. An observation and interview on 5/20/25 at 3:20 PM with CNA #1 confirmed that Resident #8 had long, dirty fingernails with a brown substance underneath. She revealed that nails were supposed to be cleaned and trimmed on shower days, and that Resident #8's shower day was M/W/F. She further revealed that due to a staffing shortage yesterday (5/19/25) that Resident #8 did not receive his shower on day shift. Resident #8 stated he had not had a shower since 05/16/25. An observation revealed that Resident #8 had the same clothing on today as he did yesterday and now his shirt had food stains throughout the front of it. A record review of Resident #8's admission Record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that included Unspecified Sequelae of Cerebral Infarction, Type II Diabetes Mellitus with other Diabetic Kidney Complication, and Need for Assistance with Personal Care. A record review of Resident #8's MDS revealed an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 4/1/25 and, in Section C, a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 9 which indicated the resident had moderate cognitive impairment. During an interview with Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #3 on 5/20/25 at 3:02 PM, she stated there had been a call-in the previous day, which caused them to have to pull a shower aide to cover floor duties. She further verbalized that when such situations arise, the remaining shower aide was responsible for providing showers to residents in rooms 1 through 10, while the night shift staff was tasked with handling the remaining residents. CNA #3 confirmed that this staffing issue sometimes resulted in residents not receiving their showers on their scheduled shower days and not getting their bed linens changed. She confirmed that bed linens were supposed to be changed routinely on shower days. During an interview on 5/20/25 at 3:46 PM, with the Director of Nursing (DON), revealed that the facility has been actively seeking to fill these open positions by utilizing platforms on social media, as well as hosting job fairs. Despite these efforts, she expressed difficulty in attracting and retaining qualified staff. An interview on 5/21/25 at 9:08 AM with Registered Nurse (RN) #1, she revealed that she recently moved to the floor from Minimum Data Set (MDS) Nurse due to staffing problems. She confirmed that the facility had been struggling with staffing recently and stated, We struggle a little bit, but we make do. RN #1 verbalized that the facility had participated in several job fairs, posted openings on social media, handed out flyers to local businesses and churches, etc. She further revealed that corporate held a job fair recently and had no nursing or CNA applicants/prospects to show up. RN #1 stated, to say we are struggling is putting it mildly. She confirmed the pay scale for CNAs was low there and they were the backbone of the facility. An interview on 5/21/25 at 9:19 AM with CNA #4 (shower aide) she revealed that she was pulled from the shower team to work the floor often due to staff call ins, which meant residents would miss their shower days. She confirmed that this leaves only one (1) shower aide for the entire building which sometimes caused showers and other things to be missed.
Dec 2024 2 deficiencies
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Resident Rights (Tag F0550)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on staff and resident interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to honor a resident's right to be treated with dignity and respect for two (2) of four (4) reside...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on staff and resident interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to honor a resident's right to be treated with dignity and respect for two (2) of four (4) residents reviewed for resident rights. Resident #1 and #3 Findings include: Record review of the facility policy titled, Resident Rights, dated 7/24/23, revealed, Employees shall treat all residents with kindness, respect, and dignity. 1. Federal and state laws guarantee certain basic rights to all residents of this facility. These rights include the resident's right to: a. a dignified existence; b. be treated with respect, kindness, and dignity. Resident #1 During an interview on 12/11/24 at 11:50 AM, Resident #1 stated there was an incident where she was made to feel like a nobody and was pushed in her wheelchair by Registered Nurse (RN) #1. She stated she was putting the phone back at the nurses' station and was speaking to the Dietary Manager when RN #1 came up and told her, in a very rude way, to get out of that area because only staff were allowed there and then pushed her wheelchair with force. Resident #1 stated she told RN #1, Don't push me and don't touch me or my chair!. She stated she also told RN #1 that if the rules were changed, they needed to inform the residents since she had been going behind the desk to use the phone since she had been in the facility. She revealed she continued by telling RN#1 that this was her home and not a prison. She stated she was not physically harmed but felt upset that she was scolded like that. An interview with the Dietary Manager on 12/11/24 at 1:45 PM confirmed she was at the nurses' station when the incident between Resident #1 and RN #1 occurred, and she reported this to the social worker. She confirmed that Resident #1 was returning the phone to the desk and RN #1 came up and told her she could not be back there. She stated that the resident told RN#1 that she was just putting up the phone and RN#1 said you cannot be behind the desk. She revealed that RN#1 squeezed between Resident #1's chair and the nurses' station wall which might have pushed Resident #1's chair, but she did not see RN #1 intentionally push the chair. She stated the resident was visibly upset and said she felt like a prisoner and that she had rights, then rolled back to her room. She stated she understood why the resident was so upset since this was her home and she had every right to use the phone. She stated that RN#1 was not yelling but the way it came out did sound rude and should have been worded differently. During a phone interview on 12/11/24 at 4:45 PM, RN#1 confirmed she upset Resident #1 and stated that she never meant to hurt Resident #1's feelings or to make her feel bad in any way. She stated she was speaking to the staff and not directly to the resident to remind staff of the confidential information that had to be protected. She stated she did not push the resident, and the resident propelled herself to her room. She revealed she did not realize there was a concern until she was told that Resident #1 was upset so she and the Director of Nursing (DON) went to apologize immediately. She stated she realizes now that even though she was not speaking directly to the resident, the resident was there and heard everything that was said. She admitted that it was not respectful to speak about that when the resident was there and knew she was the one being talked about. She stated that each resident should be treated with dignity and respect and even though she did not mean to upset the resident, she could see how that situation caused Resident #1 to be upset with hurt feelings. During an interview on 12/12/24 at 9:45 AM, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #1 stated she was at the nurses' station when Resident #1 came to return the phone and was speaking to the Dietary Manager. She confirmed that she heard RN #1 tell Resident #1 that she could not be behind the desk, and she needed to get out from behind there. She stated that RN#1 did not yell, but had a blunt, stern, and matter of fact tone. She stated she was charting and did not see RN#1 push her chair. She confirmed that the resident was upset and angry about the incident. An interview with the Administrator on 12/12/24 at 10:45 AM confirmed each resident had the right to be treated with dignity and respect. She confirmed the facility failed to ensure that Resident #1's rights were honored when she felt she was scolded and reprimanded by a staff member. Record review of Resident #1's admission Record revealed the facility admitted her on 1/16/24 with medical diagnoses that included Multiple Sclerosis and Systemic Lupus Erythematosus. Record review of Resident #1's Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 10/7/24 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 which indicated this resident was cognitively intact. Resident #3 During a record review of the Resident Council Meeting minutes, it was revealed that during the meeting on 11/26/24 there was a concern involving Resident #3. The entry on the Resident Council minutes sheet read as follows: (Resident #4) let us know that a nurse assistant was ugly to (Resident #3) on 11/23/24 while the residents were watching the Alabama football game .I met with DON alongside (Administrator) to report the issue. They stated they would open an investigation and talk with the CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant). Resident #4 said the aid told Resident #3 she was tired of dealing with him. This was signed by the Activity Director on 11/26/24. An interview with the Activity Director on 12/11/24 at 12:15 PM confirmed that during the Resident Council meeting on 11/26/24, Resident #4 was asked by Resident #3 to tell of the incident that occurred. She stated Resident #4 said that he and Resident #3 were watching a football game in the dining room and a CNA was rude to Resident #3 telling him that she was tired of working with him. She stated that while Resident #4 was telling of the incident that had occurred, Resident #3 was teary eyed. The Administrator was in the meeting with her, and they both went and reported it to the Director of Nursing and was told it would be investigated. During an interview on 12/11/24 at 1:30 PM, Resident #4 confirmed that he witnessed an incident where a CNA was rude to Resident #3. He stated he does not know which CNA it was. He stated this occurred during the Alabama football game on Saturday 11/23/24 and he and Resident #3 were in the dining area watching the game. Resident #3 was leaning in his chair, and he went to get staff because he was concerned Resident #3 would fall. The CNA told Resident #3 something like she was damn tired of doing this s**t and this upset Resident #3. He stated that the next evening, Resident #3 came to him and was still upset asking if he would mention this in the next Resident Council meeting. He stated he was not sure what the facility did for this situation, but he knew they were aware it happened. An interview with Resident #3 on 12/11/24 at 1:40 PM, confirmed that he was in the dining room watching a football game and was needing a pillow so Resident #4 went to get the staff. He thought it was CNA #2 that came to check on him and he asked her for a pillow, and she said, No, you don't need that pillow and I'm tired of doing this and did not get it for him. He stated she did not cuss at him, but it did upset him, and he thought, Woah, oh no, that's not good and she should help. He stated it did upset him, that he needed something to help him be more comfortable and that care was denied. He stated it was rude and disrespectful and not sure if abusive, but it was not right and it did make me get pretty down and upset. He confirmed that Resident #4 witnessed this and the next day after the incident he was still bothered about it and asked Resident #4 to mention it in the Resident Council meeting since he did not feel comfortable talking about it. During a phone interview on 12/11/24 at 4:00 PM, CNA #2 revealed she was at the desk and Resident #4 came to the desk and said something was wrong with Resident #3 because he was leaning and falling from his chair. She revealed that she went to the dining room and there was no concern with Resident #3's position. She revealed that she thought Resident #3 was upset due to a phone conversation with his mother and not her or the care. She stated she did not tell the resident she was tired of caring for him and would not say that to any resident. An interview with the Administrator on 12/12/24 at 10:45 AM revealed she was aware of what was reported regarding a CNA being ugly to Resident #3 because it was reported in the Resident Council, and she was in the meeting. She stated she and the Activity Director informed the Director of Nursing who spoke with the staff involved and could not determine whether any abuse occurred. She stated that the staff interviewed told her that Resident #3 was upset since it was Thanksgiving time, and his mother had changed the date she was going to pick him up. She stated after speaking to the two staff members, she felt there were no concerns since she was told he was only upset because his mother was not going to pick him up for Thanksgiving. Record review of Resident #3's admission Record revealed the facility admitted the resident on 11/3/23 with medical diagnoses that included Cerebral Palsy. Record review of Resident #3's MDS with an ARD of 10/11/24 revealed a BIMS score of 14 which indicated this resident was cognitively intact.
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Grievances (Tag F0585)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on staff and resident interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to make prompt efforts to resolve and thoroughly investigate grievances from Resident Council mee...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on staff and resident interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to make prompt efforts to resolve and thoroughly investigate grievances from Resident Council meetings for eight (8) of the last nine (9) Resident Council meetings. Findings include: Record review of the facility policy titled, Grievances and Complaints dated 2/14/23, revealed, Social Services will act as the grievance officer for the facility and oversee the grievance process. Grievance forms should be kept outside of the office, where residents, family members, and staff members can access them at any time. All grievances will be reported to Social Services and Social Services will follow the following procedure to investigate and work to resolve the grievance. Step 1 Upon receipt of a grievance, Social Services will complete a written report within 5 working days of the filed grievance and determine what corrective actions, if any, should be taken .Step 2 Social Services must notify the person who filed the grievance, within 10 working days of the filed grievance, in the form of a report . During a record review of the Resident Council Minutes, it was revealed that during the meeting on 11/26/24 there was a concern involving Resident #3. The entry on the Resident Council Minutes sheet read as follows: (Resident #4) let us know that a nurse assistant was ugly to (Resident #3) on 11/23/24 while the residents were watching the Alabama game . I met with DON (Director of Nursing) alongside (Administrator) to report the issue. They stated they would open an investigation and talk with the CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant). Resident #4 said the aid told Resident #3 she was tired of dealing with him. This was signed by the Activity Director on 11/26/24. The record review of Resident Council Minutes revealed repeated concerns with staff's use of cell phones in the facility was a mentioned during the meetings held on 9/5/24, 9/11/24, 9/18/24, 9/26/24, 11/14/24, and 11/26/24. The concern for the staff turning call lights off and not providing requested care unless they were assigned to that resident was voiced during the meetings on 8/14/24, 9/5/24, 11/14/24, 11/26/24, and 12/5/24. Repetitive concerns of bed sheets not being changed were voiced on 7/24/24, 8/14/24, 9/5/24, 9/11/24, 9/18/24, 9/26/24, and 10/9/24. During an interview on 12/11/24 at 11:50 AM, Resident #1 revealed she attended the Resident Council meetings regularly. She stated there are grievances that continued to be a concern even though they were mentioned in the meetings often. She stated one of these areas was that some of the Certified Nursing Assistants (CNA) did not assist her with care unless they were assigned to her. She stated they say things like they don't have her and they will let her CNA know and that delayed receiving the needed care. She also stated another frequent grievance was that some staff were on their phones often and if they had time for that, they should have time to provide the care requested. An interview with the Activity Director on 12/11/24 at 12:15 PM confirmed that during the Resident Council meetings, residents had voiced grievances which included the staff being on their phones and the staff only providing care for the residents they were assigned to. She stated the grievances in the Resident Council meetings were listed on the meeting minutes form and were provided and signed off by each department so the concerns could be addressed and resolved. She stated part of the grievance process was to make sure the staff in the area of concern was aware so a solution could be implemented. Activity Director confirmed that during the Resident Council meeting on 11/26/24, Resident #4 was asked by Resident #3 to tell of the incident that occurred. She stated Resident #4 said that he and Resident #3 were watching a football game in the dining room and a CNA was rude to Resident #3 telling him that she was tired of working with him. The Administrator was in the meeting with her, and they both went and reported it to the Director of Nursing and was told it would be investigated. On 12/11/24 at 1:30 PM, dduring an interview, Resident #4 revealed he witnessed an incident where a CNA was rude to Resident #3. He stated he does not know which CNA it was. He stated this occurred during the Alabama football game on Saturday 11/23/24 and he and Resident #3 were in the dining area watching the game. He stated he was not sure what the facility did for this situation, but he knew they were aware it happened. An interview with the Administrator on 12/12/24 at 10:45 AM confirmed the facility failed to address the recurring grievances in Resident Council meetings concerning phone use by staff and staff not providing care for residents assigned to another staff member. She was aware of what was reported in the Resident Council meeting concerning Resident #3 since she was in the meeting. She stated she and the Activity Director informed the Director of Nursing that it was mentioned in resident council that Resident #3 had been talked to in a mean way and was denied care. She reported back to me that she had spoken with the staff involved and could not determine that any abuse had occurred. She informed me that the staff told her that Resident #3 was upset after a phone call to his mother. She stated after speaking to the two staff members, she felt there were no concerns since she was told he was only upset because his mother was not going to pick him up for Thanksgiving. She revealed the facility failed to develop a plan to correct the concerns and keep residents informed of the process towards a resolution. She admitted there had been concerns voiced in Resident Council meetings that had not been resolved and the residents were not informed of the steps taken to resolve the grievance. She stated any grievance should be investigated and steps should be taken to resolve the concern. Record review of Resident #1's admission Record revealed the facility admitted her on 1/16/24. Record review of Resident #1's Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 10/7/24 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 which indicated this resident was cognitively intact.
Aug 2024 4 deficiencies 3 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

Based on observation, staff and resident interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to protect the resident ' s right to be free from physical, verbal, and mental abuse...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, staff and resident interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to protect the resident ' s right to be free from physical, verbal, and mental abuse by staff for one (1) of three (3) residents reviewed for abuse. Resident #1 Findings include: Record review of facility policy titled, Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation and Misappropriation Prevention Program, dated 10/2022, revealed, Policy Statement: Residents have the right to be free from abuse .This include but is not limited to verbal, mental, or physical abuse Policy Interpretation and Implementation .5. Establish and maintain a culture of compassion and caring for all residents . Record review of facility policy titled, Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and/or Exploitation Prevention Plan Education, with revision date of 11/14/17, revealed, The resident has the right to be free from abuse .by anyone, including, but not limited to facility staff . Following are relevant definitions provided by CMS (Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services): Abuse - The willful infliction of injury, unreasonable confinement, intimidation or punishment with resulting physical harm, pain or mental anguish. Verbal abuse - The use of oral, written or gestured language that willfully includes disparaging and derogatory terms to residents . Physical abuse - Includes hitting, slapping, pinching, and kicking . Mental abuse - Includes, but is not limited to, humiliation, harassment, threats of punishment . Psychosocial harm - Include but are not limited to extreme embarrassment, ongoing humiliation, degradation as a human being. Willful - the individual must have acted deliberately, not that he/she must have intended to inflict injury or harm . Record review of facility policy titled, Resident Rights, dated 7/24/23, revealed Employees shall treat all residents with kindness, respect, and dignity. 1. Federal and state laws guarantee certain basic rights to all residents of this facility. These rights include the resident's right to: . c. be free from abuse, neglect, misappropriation of property, and exploitation . During an interview on 8/13/24 at 8:45 AM, the Corporate Interim Director of Nursing (DON) revealed on 8/10/24, there was an allegation of abuse that alleged Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA)#1, who had only been an employee at the facility for approximately two weeks, abused Resident #1 while providing care. CNA #2 was a witness to this abuse and immediately reported the incident to the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON). CNA #1 refused to write a statement on what occurred. She was suspended immediately and has since been terminated. The DON stated this was reported to the State Agency (SA), Attorney General's Office, Local Police, Medical Doctor, and the Resident's Representative and an investigation was being done. She stated Resident #1 was physically hurt, upset, embarrassed and humiliated about what happened and he considered leaving the facility because he was afraid. She stated this was Resident #1's home and to know he was considering leaving was upsetting to her and it was an indicator of how afraid he felt. She confirmed that each resident has the right to be free from abuse and the facility failed to protect this resident from physical, verbal, mental abuse and psychosocial harm by an employee of the facility. An interview and observation of Resident #1 on 8/13/24 at 10:10 AM, revealed the resident in his room sitting in his motorized wheelchair. Contractures of upper and lower extremities was noted. He was smiling and talking and when asked about any incidents that had occurred in the facility, he immediately became wide-eyed and grimaced and stated a CNA hurt him and talked to him in a bad way. He stated he was embarrassed to tell what happened since it was awful. He stated he had never been treated that way before and had not been treated that way since. He expressed he was embarrassed to say what was said but then he continued and said a few days ago he was wet and needed to be changed and CNA #1 told him over and over again that he pissed on his shirt. He stated he felt humiliated and embarrassed that she would say that when he could not control that his shirt was wet. He stated she told him she had a child at home with my issues. He continued speaking and said when he was in the bed getting changed, CNA #1 hit him extremely hard with her open hand in his private parts and said that will make you relax. He stated he tried to call out how bad that hurt, but was unable to get the words out, then she grabbed his nipples one in each hand and pinched them hard and quick several times and he was saying owwww in pain. He stated that CNA #2 was also in the room during this and she heard and saw what CNA #1 did and told her to stop hurting me, and she did stop but then laughed about it. He stated he was afraid, embarrassed, and hurt and he had pain for several hours after it happened. He stated he was not sure if he received pain medicine when it happened, but he did take his pain medicine when he needed it. He stated he loved living in the facility, but after this occurred, he wanted to leave since he no longer felt safe and only decided to stay when they reassured him that CNA #1 would not be back. During an interview on 8/13/24 at 11:15 AM, CNA #2 revealed that on 8/10/24, she was working on the hall with CNA #1 who was a new employee at the facility. That morning before lunch, she went to assist CNA #1 with Resident #1's care since he was a two-person assist and a lift was used for transfers. The resident had taken his fluid pill and had a heavy urine output that soaked through and got his shirt wet, and CNA #1 kept telling him over and over again that you have pissed this nice shirt, you have pissed this nice shirt and his face turned red and she could tell that he was embarrassed and humiliated. He was in his wheelchair and the lift was used to transfer him to the bed to be cleaned and changed. She stated she had worked with Resident #1 many times and knew that whenever the resident was transferred, he would tense up, and it would take him a few seconds to relax. She stated when he was on the bed, she told him to relax, everything is fine, you are safe, just breathe and we will get you cleaned up like she always told him so that he would know he was safe on the bed and not to worry. She stated she heard something like nuts mentioned and she thought it was from the TV and all of a sudden CNA #1 with an open hand and with a forcible swing, hit the resident between his legs and hit his testicles and said, Nuts! That will make you relax! She stated the force was so great that both of his legs flew up and he did not yell out but made a noise and winced and became red in the face like he was about to cry. She knew he was in pain and embarrassed. She stated this happened so quickly and out of the blue with no warning. She told CNA #1 not to hit the resident and she pressed the call light for assistance so she could stay with resident to ensure he was safe, but rounds were being made and the other staff did not come immediately. She reached for the resident's clean shirt and turned back to see CNA #1 pinching the resident's nipples with strong force, one in each hand so using both hands and the resident did a wince like expression and an owwwwwww sound and she knew he was in pain. She stated she told CNA #1 to stop and leave the resident alone and that treatment was uncalled for. She did stop but stood there and laughed while he was in pain. CNA #1 told the resident she had a child at home with issues like you have. She stated CNA #1 did all of this harm to the resident within seconds. They got Resident #1 in his chair and she reported this incident immediately to Registered Nurse (RN) #2 and then to the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON). About five minutes had passed and she went back to check on the resident and he told her he was still having some pain and he was embarrassed that this occurred and she told him that none of that was his fault and CNA #1 was wrong to do it. He told her he was scared she would do this again and he did not want to be near her and CNA #2 reassured him that she was gone and would not be back. She stated she had been in-serviced on abuse and neglect but she never thought she would actually see it. She stated she was bothered how CNA #1 harmed him and laughed while he was in pain. She stated she had spoken with the resident several times since this occurred and at first, he wanted to leave the facility because he did not feel safe but wanted to stay since he found out that CNA #1 would not return. She stated Resident #1 was very intelligent but had a childlike innocence and was so trusting and she felt that he was broken-hearted with this treatment. An interview with the Social Service Director (SSD) on 8/13/24 at 2:30 PM, revealed when this incident was reported by CNA #2, she was notified and interviewed Resident #1. He told her what had happened, how it hurt, and how it made him feel embarrassed and nervous. He also told her he wanted to leave the facility because he was afraid. She and the ADON stayed with him to try to decrease his anxiety and he did calm down when he knew that CNA #1 would not be back to the facility and could not harm him again. During an interview on 8/14/24 at 1:45 PM, RN #2 revealed she was working when the incident occurred. CNA #2 reported it to her and then reported it to the ADON. She stated she immediately checked on Resident #1 and he was hurting, upset, and afraid and said he did not want CNA #1 around him and she told him CNA #1 would not be back. She stated he was uncomfortable but did not require additional medications than he had already received. An interview on 8/14/24 at 2:00 PM, with the ADON revealed she was in the facility when this occurred and CNA #1 was immediately suspended and sent out of the facility. The provider was notified and ordered the resident a medication for anxiety if it was needed. A body audit was completed and no bruising or open areas were present. The resident said he was hurt and embarrassed and he was afraid CNA #1 would do this again. THe ADON stated she reassured Resident #1 that CNA #1 would not be back. Attempted to contact CNA #1 by phone on 8/13/24 at 11:45 AM (message left), 12:50 PM, 2:44 PM, and on 8/14/24 at 8:15 AM (message left). There was no answer or return of call from the messages left. Record review of Social Service Director's Progress Note dated 8/10/24 at 12:00 revealed, Was notified by ADON that a CNA had popped resident in his private area and pinched his nipples. SSD interviewed resident for any trauma and psychosocial. Resident stated what happened and that he was anxious about what happened and that he did not want her near him. Resident was comforted by SSD and ADON and assured him that would not happen again and that she would not be around him. Resident stated he felt safe here, just nervous. ADON notified MD and got Vistaril ordered for resident to help calm him down. Police Dept notified and report filed. Ombudsman notified and family notified. Resident family was thankful for staff acting on the situation and stated they did not want her around him. Family assured that she would not be around him. Will continue to observe and monitor. Record review of ADON's note dated 8/10/24 revealed, This nurse was informed by a CNA that another CNA popped this resident on the nuts because he was too tense and needed to relax and that she also pinched his nipples. Resident is very anxious about the situation and does not want to have her near him again. This nurse sent CNA home and reported to Administrator and RNC (Regional Nurse Consultant) and SSD. Notified RP and MD. MD gave new order for Vistaril 25 mg (milligrams) every 6 hours prn (as needed) x 14 days for anxiety. RP aware Record review of PHQ-9 Version 3 (which stated responses to PHQ-9 can indicate possible depression) dated 8/10/24, revealed, Resident denies any depression. Resident does state he is feeling nervous after incident. Resident also states he is embarrassed. Resident was calmed down by SSD and ADON by talking about different things like weather, tv shows, and music. MD notified for Vistaril to help calm resident down. This was signed by Social Service Director. Record review of Pain Evaluation dated 8/10/24 at 12:45 PM, revealed, Have you had pain or hurting at any time in the last 5 days? Response - Yes. Date of pain onset listed as 8/10/24. Description of pain was aching and tender. How much of the time have you experienced pain or hurting over the last 5 days? Response - Occasionally. Has the resident had any of the following changes in daily activities or habits? Response - Changes in mood/emotions (e.g. anger, crying, depressed, etc.) Check box for each of the following nonverbal/noncognitive signs which could indicate the presence of pain. Response - Facial expressions - grimacing/distorted face. Conclusion - Pain management intervention is necessary, refer to resident plan of care. Record review of Police Department Incident Report revealed an incident date of 8/10/24 with Resident #1 at the facility. The review of the report's narrative revealed, On Saturday, August 10, 2024 (Proper name removed) Police Department was dispatched to (Proper name of facility removed) for a possible abuse to a resident by an employee at their facility. (Proper name of CNA #2 removed) stated she witness another CNA (Proper name of CNA #1 removed) abuse (Proper name of Resident #1 removed) and (proper name of CNA #1 removed) proceeded to hit him in his testicles while changing him. (Proper name of CNA #2 removed) told him to relax and breath that he was safe on the bed. (Proper name of CNA #1 removed) told him Nuts! That will make you relax! and proceeded to pinch (proper name or Resident #1) nipples. (CNA #2) stated that due to the fluid pills daily so he urinated heavily and wet his shirt and (CNA #1) constantly said to him you have pissed this nice shirt. (CNA #2) advised that she could tell it embarrassed him and then (CNA #2) reported the incident to management. Record review of admission Record revealed the facility admitted Resident #1 initially on 11/3/23, and the most recent admission was 7/9/24. His diagnoses included cerebral palsy, contracture of left wrist, right wrist, right ankle and foot, and left ankle and foot. Record review of Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 7/15/24 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14 which indicated the resident was cognitively intact.
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

Deficiency F0697 (Tag F0697)

A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident

Based on resident and staff interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to control pain for a resident who was experiencing moderate to intense pain for one (1) of three ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on resident and staff interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to control pain for a resident who was experiencing moderate to intense pain for one (1) of three (3) residents reviewed for pain medication administration. Resident #3 Record review of facility policy titled Medication Administration - General Guidelines dated 8/25/14, revealed, .Medications are administered as prescribed in accordance with good nursing principles and practices .2. Administration . b. Medications are administered in accordance with written orders of the attending physician . During an interview on 8/13/24 at 9:10 AM, Resident #3 revealed she had Multiple sclerosis, Lupus, Arthritis, and Chronic pain and was on a pain medication regimen every four hours around the clock and this regimen kept her pain controlled, but if I miss even one dose, it sets me back for a week. She revealed that in June, her medication was not available, and the nurses gave her a different medication until hers was received from the pharmacy and even though it helped the pain, it did not help as much as her ordered medication did. She stated the most recent time was about a week ago and she waited until her medication was available so she could have it as soon as it arrived, and during that time she was experiencing moderate pain. She stated the nurses tried to explain the situation and why the medication was not available, but their explanation did not help her pain. During an interview with Registered Nurse (RN) #1 on 8/13/24 at 2:30 PM, revealed recently when she was assigned to Resident #3 the medication was not available for the 4:00 AM nor the 8:00 AM dose. Resident #3 was having pain and her pain level was nine (9) when the noon dose was administered. During an interview on 8/14/24 at 1:30 PM, the Director of Nurses (DON), acknowledged there were times the resident did not receive her pain medication as ordered because it was unavailable in the facility which led to Resident #3 missing two doses of her medication. On 08/06/24, the resident missed her 4:00 AM and her 8:00 AM doses of her pain medication which led to pain during that time with a documented pain level score of nine (9) when the dose was administered which indicated intense pain. Record review of Order Summary Report revealed an active order written on 6/4/24 for Oxycodone 15 milligram (MG) one tablet by mouth every four hours related to chronic pain syndrome. Record review of the August 2024 Electronic Medication Administration Record (EMAR) revealed Rate level of pain from 0-10 with (1) being the least and 10 being the most intense. On 8/6/24, the resident did not receive her 4:00 AM and 8:00 AM scheduled pain medication. The resident did receive the 12:00 noon dose and at that time the pain level was documented as 9, which was the only time in the month of August that pain level was that high. Record review of the August 2024 EMAR revealed a pain level on 8/5/24 night shift of 4 and the pain level on 8/6/24 day shift was 5 indicating pain for resident. Pain level on 8/6/24 at 12:00 noon when medication was administered after the two missed doses was 9 which indicated intense pain. Record review of admission Record revealed the facility admitted Resident #3 on 1/16/24. Her diagnoses included Multiple sclerosis, Lupus, and Chronic pain syndrome. Record review of Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 7/12/24 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS)score of 15 which indicated the resident was cognitively intact.
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

Pharmacy Services (Tag F0755)

A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident

Based on resident and staff interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to have available and administer an ordered medication for pain control for one (1) of three (3) r...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on resident and staff interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to have available and administer an ordered medication for pain control for one (1) of three (3) residents reviewed for pain medication administration. Resident #3 Findings include: Record review of facility policy titled Medication Administration - General Guidelines dated 8/25/14, revealed, Medications are administered as prescribed in accordance with good nursing principles and practices and only by persons legally authorized to do so. 2. Administration: . b. Medications are administered in accordance with written orders of the attending physician. During an interview on 8/13/24 at 9:10 AM, Resident #3 revealed there had been times in June 2024 and August 2024 that she did not receive her pain medication as ordered due to it not being available in the facility. She stated she had Multiple sclerosis, Lupus, Arthritis, and chronic pain and was on a pain medication regimen every four hours around the clock and this regimen kept her pain controlled, but if I miss even one dose, it sets me back for a week. She revealed that in June, her medication was not available and the nurses gave her a different medication until hers was received from the pharmacy and even though it helped the pain, it did not help as much as her ordered medication did. She stated the most recent time was about a week ago and she waited until her medication was available so she could have it as soon as it arrived, and during that time she was experiencing moderate pain. She stated the nurses tried to explain the situation and why the medication was not available, but their explanation did not help her pain. An interview with Registered Nurse (RN) #1 on 8/13/24 at 2:30 PM, revealed there had been times when Resident #3's pain medication was not available when it was due. This recently occurred when she was assigned to the resident and the medication was not available for the 4:00 AM nor the 8:00 AM dose. She stated she notified the Director of Nursing (DON) who obtained the prescription and picked up the medication from the pharmacy. She revealed that when the medication arrived, she gave the resident her noon dose. She stated the resident did not express that she was experiencing uncontrolled pain and she appeared to be tolerating missing the medication without distress, but she was having pain and her pain level was nine (9) when the noon dose was administered She explained that the resident received the pain medication every 4 hours and pharmacy only sent a card of 30 for this resident, and that amount did not last for many days. Also, if a medication was wasted due to being dropped, the resident would be one pill short and would run out even quicker. She acknowledged the medication should have been available as ordered for the resident's pain control. On 8/14/24 at 1:30 PM, during an interview with the Director of Nurses (DON), she acknowledged there were times the resident did not receive her pain medication as ordered because it was unavailable in the facility. She stated in June, the resident was out of her ordered pain medication, so they spoke with the doctor and obtained an order to give a medication that was available in the emergency kit, and it eased her pain but not as well as her ordered medication. They put a new process in place at that time to prevent that from occurring again, but on 08/06/24, the resident missed her 4:00 AM and her 8:00 AM doses of her pain medication which led to pain during that time with a documented pain level score of nine (9) when the dose was administered which indicated intense pain. She stated it was determined that their process failed since the resident received six tablets each day and the medication card only lasted 5 days. The facility failed to reorder this timely which led to the resident missing two doses of her medication. She stated the facility has a medication emergency kit that could be used with a physician's order, but Resident #3's ordered medication was not stocked in that system due to it being a stronger medication than others. The resident used medication from the emergency kit in June but did not on 8/6/24 even though it was available if she had wanted it. She confirmed that all ordered medications should be available and administered as prescribed and the facility failed to ensure that pain medication was available to meet the needs of Resident #3. Record review of Order Summary Report revealed an active order written on 6/4/24 for Oxycodone 15 milligram (MG) one tablet by mouth every four hours related to chronic pain syndrome. Record review of the August 2024 Electronic Medication Administration Record (eMAR) revealed Rate level of pain from 0-10 with (1) being the least and 10 being the most intense. On 8/6/24, the resident did not receive her 4:00 AM and 8:00 AM scheduled pain medication. The resident did receive the 12:00 noon dose and at that time the pain level was documented as 9, which was the only time in the month of August that pain level was that high. Record review of August 2024 EMAR revealed a pain level on 8/5/24 night shift of 4 and the pain level on 8/6/24 day shift was 5 indicating pain for resident. Pain level on 8/6/24 at 12:00 noon when medication was administered after the two missed doses was 9 which indicated intense pain. Record review of EMAR revealed the resident did not receive her pain medication for the 8:00 PM dose on 6/16/24 and also did not receive the 12:00 midnight, 4:00 AM, or 8:00 AM doses on 6/17/24. Record review of Individual Patient's Narcotics Record with start date of 8/1/24 and end date of 8/6/24 revealed the resident received last dose of these 30 tablets at midnight on 8/6/24. Record review of Controlled Drug Receipt/Record/Disposition Form revealed the resident received first dose from this card on 8/6/24 at 11:20 AM. Record review of admission Record revealed the facility admitted Resident #3 on 1/16/24. Her diagnoses included Multiple sclerosis, Lupus, and Chronic pain syndrome. Record review of Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 7/12/24 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 which indicated the resident was cognitively intact.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Grievances (Tag F0585)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on Resident Representative and staff interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to make prompt efforts to resolve a grievance and communicate the steps towards a ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on Resident Representative and staff interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to make prompt efforts to resolve a grievance and communicate the steps towards a resolution of the grievance concerning call lights not being answered timely for two (2) of five (5) monthly Grievance/Concern Logs reviewed. Findings include: Record review of facility's policy titled, Call Light, Use Of, dated 2/12/07 and revised on 11/15/19, revealed, It is the policy of this facility to have an adequately equipped communication system that allows residents to call for staff. Purpose: 1. To respond promptly to resident's call for assistance. 2. To assure call system is in proper working order. The policy also revealed, 1. All personnel should be aware of call lights at all times. 2. Answer call lights promptly whether or not you are assigned to the resident. 6. Answer call lights in a prompt, calm, courteous manner, turning off the call light as soon as you enter the room. Record review of facility's policy titled, Resident Rights, dated 7/24/23, revealed, Policy Statement: Employees shall treat all residents with kindness, respect, and dignity Policy Interpretation and Implementation 1. Federal and state laws guarantee certain basic rights to all residents of this facility. These rights include the resident's right to .: u. voice grievances to the facility, or other agency that hears grievances, without discrimination or reprisal and without fear of discrimination or reprisal; v. have the facility respond to his or her grievances . Record review of facility policy titled, Grievances and Complaints, dated 2/14/23, revealed, Social Services will act as the grievance officer for the facility and oversee the grievance process.All grievances will be reported to Social Services and Social Services will follow the following procedure to investigate and work to resolve the grievance .Step 1 Upon receipt of a grievance, Social Services will complete a written report within 5 working days of the filed grievance and determine what corrective actions, if any, should be taken. If the grievance is related to any form of abuse or harassment, the administrator must be notified immediately. Step 2 Social Services must notify the person who filed the grievance, within 10 working days of the filed grievance, in the form of a report. Copies of this report will be available to the person filing the grievance at any time . During an interview on 8/13/24 at 5:40 PM, Resident #2's Resident Representative revealed the call light for Resident #2 was not being answered timely and that she had filed a grievance regarding this issue. She stated the resident was unable to care for her own needs and needed the staff to respond timely, and if staff members were available to be sitting at the desk, they should be available to answer the light. During an interview on 8/14/24 at 1:20 PM, the Social Service Director revealed she was the person responsible for overseeing the grievance process and she would have been the one to have gotten the grievance from the family. She confirmed the issue with the call lights not being answered timely was mentioned several times also in the Resident Council meetings as well as on the Grievance Log. She stated it was the residents' right to have their concerns addressed, and due to staffing changes, the facility failed to ensure the proper department was aware of the grievance, failed to make prompt efforts to resolve the concern, and failed to communicate the steps being taken towards the resolution for the call lights not being answered timely. During an interview on 8/14/24 at 1:30 PM, the Interim Director of Nursing (DON) revealed it was the residents' right to have any grievance addressed through the grievance process. She confirmed the grievance of the call lights not being answered timely was expressed during the Resident Council meetings as well as on the Monthly Grievance Log and the facility failed to resolve this grievance and communicate the solution with the residents and/or the family who may have filed a grievance. Record review of Monthly Grievance/Concern Log for May 2024 and for June 2024 revealed the grievance for the call lights not being answered timely. Record review of Resident Council Minutes revealed for the months of March 2024 and June 2024 call lights not being answered timely was voiced as a grievance. Record review of Resident Council Minutes for May 2024 revealed Old Business (Follow up on last month's minutes and identify staff person responsible) as Nursing: Call lights not being answered in a timely manner during 3-11 shift. There were no minutes from April 2024's meeting due to inability to locate, but this indicated there was a concern for the previous month. Record review of the facility's Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) dated 7/25/24, revealed Problem: Missing Resident Council Minutes for the month of February 2024 and April 2024. Plan of Correction: Activity Director (AD) resigned on 7/24/24. New AD in place as of 7/25/24. Resident Council Meeting Minutes will be completed monthly by AD and over seen by Social Service Director (SSD). Resident Council Meeting Minutes will be monitored by SSD/AD and or ADMIN monthly x 3 months. This was signed by the Social Service Director.
Aug 2024 1 deficiency 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

Accident Prevention (Tag F0689)

A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on staff interviews, record reviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure a resident was kept free fr...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on staff interviews, record reviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure a resident was kept free from an accident resulting in an injury during facility transport for one (1) of (4) residents reviewed for accidents. Resident #1. Findings include: A record review of the facility's policy titled, Accidents and Incidents undated revealed, Policy: It is the policy of this facility that the resident environment remains as free of accidents and hazards as possible and those residents receive supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents whenever possible. This is accomplished through the identification and evaluation of environmental hazards and individual risk factors, implementing interventions to reduce hazards and risks that are identified, and monitoring for the effectiveness of the interventions . A record review of Emergency Department Note date of service: 06/20/24 revealed, Resident #1 with a chief complaint of Extremity Laceration. (EMS states that facility told them that patient was in wheelchair that wasn't locked, and the wheelchair rolled into the bumper of a car. Patient's left leg was caught between the wheelchair and the car's bumper and cut her leg.) . Musculoskeletal: Comments: Left leg with a large 8-inch laceration muscle exposed anterior tib-fib (tibia/fibual) In an interview on 7/31/24 at 12:40 PM, Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) #1 revealed she is the transport CNA for the facility, which involves loading the residents onto the facility van and driving them to their appointments. She revealed the day that Resident #1 got hurt, she had an assistant helping her and the assistant had asked where the van keys were. She revealed she locked the resident's wheelchair, left the resident, and was going around the back of the van to give her assistant the keys. She revealed when she got behind the van she heard Resident #1 yell, Help. She revealed she went back around to the resident, and the resident wasn't up against the van, but she had blood in her shoe. She confirmed she did lock the wheelchair, however, she did leave the resident alone to go and give the other CNA the keys. During a phone interview on 7/31/24 at 12:45 PM, the Psychiatric Nurse Practitioner revealed she was pulling into the facility parking lot on 6/20/24 and saw the resident roll down in her wheelchair unassisted and hit her left leg on the end of the van. She revealed when she got up to the van the resident was bleeding and went inside and reported the incident. During an interview on 7/31/24 at 2:40 PM, a Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) revealed on that 6/20/24, Resident #1 had a doctor's appointment and was being transported by the facility van. She revealed the Psychiatric Nurse Practitioner came inside and informed me that a resident was outside and was bleeding and needed help. She revealed When I got outside to assess the situation, it was bad. The resident had a severe laceration to her left leg. It took us a while to get the bleeding stopped. The resident was transported by ambulance to the hospital. I don't think she (Resident #1) unlocked her wheelchair. I've never pushed her somewhere and locked her chair, and then she unlocked it. I think the wheelchair wheels were not locked and she rolled into the van. During an interview on 7/31/24 at 3:00 PM, the Director of Nurses (DON) revealed I don't feel like the wheelchair wheels were locked, and if they were locked, I don't think she (Resident #1) would have had the strength to unlock them. The DON confirmed the facility failed to ensure the safety of the resident by ensuring the wheelchair was locked, and the resident was not left unattended. A review of the admission Record revealed Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included Chronic Systolic (Congestive) heart failure, Paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, and Chronic kidney disease, Stage 3A. Record review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 5/13/2024 revealed Resident #1 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 04, indicating severe cognitive impairment.
Feb 2024 21 deficiencies 6 IJ (2 affecting multiple)
CRITICAL (J)

Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation

Notification of Changes (Tag F0580)

Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident

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

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, staff and resident interview, record review and facility policy review, the facility failed to notify the physician for a significant change in condition for two (2) of six (6) residents sampled for nutrition Resident #20 and Resident #13 as evidenced by: 1) failed to recognize, evaluate, communicate, and address a resident's nutritional needs, which resulted in an unintended significant weight loss of 6.92% (percent) in one (1) month, which further led to a significant weight loss of 17.52% (percent) in four (4) months. Resident #13. The facility's failure to notify the attending physician of a significant change in condition, and act upon the residents' weight loss, placed the resident, and all other residents residing in the facility at risk for serious harm, serious injury, serious impairment, or possible death. 2) failed to identify, communicate, and address a resident at risk for malnutrition due to prolonged nausea and vomiting, and failure to identify a decrease in food intake due to pain and nausea resulted in an unintended significant weight loss of 40.5 pounds in six (6) months. Resident #20. The facility's failure to notify the attending physician of a significant change in condition, and address the residents' prolonged symptoms of nausea and vomiting, and decreased food intake placed the resident and all other residents residing in the facility at risk for serious harm, serious injury, serious impairment, or possible death. The facility's failure also resulted in a functional decline for Resident #20, which potentially resulted in the resident's admission to hospice services on 2/14/24. The State Agency (SA) identified an Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) that began on 11/02/23 when the facility failed to recognize, evaluate, and address Resident #13's nutritional needs, which resulted in an unintended significant weight loss of 6.92% (percent) in one (1) month, which further led to a significant weight loss of 17.52% (percent) in four (4) months. The IJ existed at: 42 CFR §483.10(g)(14) Notification of Changes - F580 - Scope/Severity J The facility Administrator was notified of the IJ on 2/13/24 at 4:30 PM and provided the IJ Template. The facility provided an acceptable Removal Plan on 2/14/24, in which they alleged all corrective actions to remove the IJ were completed on 2/13/24 and the IJ removed on 2/14/24. The SA validated the Removal Plan on 2/20/24 and determined the IJ was removed. Therefore, the scope and severity for 42 CFR §483.10(g)(14) Notification of Changes - F580, was lowered from a J to a D while the facility develops a plan of correction to monitor the effectiveness of the systemic changes to ensure the facility sustains compliance with regulatory requirements. Findings Include: Record review of the facility policy titled Change in a Resident's Condition or Status with a review date of 7/24/23 revealed, Policy Statement: Our facility notifies the resident, his or her attending physician, and the resident representative of changes in the resident's medical/mental condition and/or status .Policy interpretation and Implementation: 1. The nurse will notify the resident's attending physician or physician on call when there has been a (an): . c. adverse reaction to a medication; d. significant change in the resident's physical/emotional/mental condition; e. need to alter the resident's medical treatment significantly; . i. specific instruction to notify the physician of changes in the resident's condition . Resident #20 Cross reference F600, F692 On 2/11/24 at 3:19 PM, an observation and interview with Resident #20 revealed her lying in a fetal position at the foot of the bed. The room was dark upon entrance and the door to her room was closed, and a garbage can was located on the floor beside the resident and she stated she was sick to her stomach. She had a washcloth in her hand and was wiping her face which was observed as pale, lips were dry, and she was thin in appearance. On 2/12/24 at 8:29 AM, an observation of Resident #20 revealed her lying on her right side in bed with a garbage can located on the floor, close by the resident. The breakfast tray was located on the bedside table untouched. CNA #2 entered the resident's room, and stated the resident refused to eat or drink due to nausea. CNA #2 removed the tray cover, and the resident began to retch and vomited a small amount of clear substance. The resident was weak and pale, and her lips were dry. On 2/12/24 at 8:35 AM, in an interview with CNA #2 revealed she had worked at the facility for three (3) weeks and Resident #20 had refused to eat or drink everyday that she had been here since then. She explained that the resident had been nauseated, dry heaving, and vomiting for the past three (3) weeks, since she had been employed at the facility. She confirmed that she had reported the symptoms to the medication nurse every day that she worked. Record review of Resident #20's Progress Notes from 11/01/23 through 2/11/24, revealed there was not any documentation that the resident had nausea and vomiting or that she refused meals. Record review of the Occupational Therapy Progress Notes dated 2/01/24 revealed, Patient refused: pt (patient) is refusing to eat and has poor appetite. pt (patient) c/o (complains of) nausea almost every day, but is not eating even with max encouragement and assist from therapist. Also revealed under, Assessment and Summary of Skilled Services: . therapist encouraging pt (patient) daily to eat and providing assist, but pt (patient) refuses to eat and c/o (complains of) nausea . Record review of the Order Summary Report for Resident #20 revealed an order dated 2/11/24 at 1827 (6:27 PM), Ondansetron HCL (Hydrochloride) Tablet 4 (four) MG (milligrams) Give 1 (one) tablet by mouth every 6 (six) hours as needed for Nausea and Vomiting . Record review of Resident #20's January and February 2024 Medication admission Record (MAR) revealed, there was not a physician's order for nausea/vomiting medication before the new order for Zofran started on 2/11/24, which indicated the resident's symptoms of prolonged nausea and vomiting were left untreated. Record review of the Meal Intake Documentation Report completed by the Certified Nurse Aides (CNAs) revealed, Resident #20 refused eighteen (18) meals from 12/18/23 through 12/31/23. She refused thirty-one (31) meals in the month of January 2024, with a total of thirty-nine (39) meals consumed at 0-25% (percent), and she refused sixteen (16) meals from 2/01/24 through 2/11/24, with a total of fourteen (14) meals consumed at 0-25% (percent). Record review of Resident #20's weights revealed a significant weight loss of 13.9% (percent) in one (1) month, 21.6% (percent) in three (3) months, and 26.2% (percent) in six (6) months. Record review of the Order Summary Report for Resident #20 revealed an order dated 1/04/24, Regular diet Regular texture, Regular consistency . Also revealed an order dated 1/04/24, Med Pass 2.0 two times a day for supplement. On 2/11/24 at 3:55 PM, during an interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) revealed Resident #20's condition had declined over the past couple of months related to her diagnosis of dementia. She explained that the resident had a significant decline after she fell in December 2023, and received a fracture of the T-12 vertebrae and had to be placed on strong pain medications. She stated, to her knowledge, the resident had not experienced any nausea and vomiting until yesterday when the Survey Agency brought it to her attention. She stated none of the staff had reported it to her and that she should be aware of what was happening with the resident if something like that was going on. She revealed she was aware that the resident was not eating or drinking and had been refusing meals and stated she had made the physician aware of the resident's decline, and the significant weight loss. Record review of the Consultant Registered Dietician (RD) Note dated 12/27/23, for Resident #20 revealed the RD (Registered Dietician) recommended, Med Pass 2 oz (ounces) BID (twice daily), weekly weights x (times) 4 (four) weeks, and add Fortified Pudding BID (twice daily) at lunch and dinner . Record review of the Consultant Registered Dietician (RD) Note dated 1/5/24, for Resident #20 revealed, Resident w/(with) significant wt (weight) loss x (times) 1 (one) mo (month) (-9%) and x (times) 6 (six) mo (months) (-13.7%) (percent). Po (by mouth) intake likely not meeting nutritional needs. Resident is at risk for skin breakdown and wt (weight) loss d/t (due to) decreased appetite . NO N/V/c/D (nausea, vomiting, complaints of diarrhea) documented. Also revealed under REC (recommendations): Resident may benefit from an appetite stimulant, please document % (percentage) of supplement consumed daily, add fortified pudding BID (twice daily) at lunch and dinner, weekly weights x (times) 4 (four) weeks to assure stable weight . Record review of the Consultant Registered Dietician (RD) Note) dated 2/10/24, for Resident #20 revealed, Resident w/(with) significant wt (weight) loss x times 1 (one) mo (month), x (times) 3 (three) mo (months) and x (times) 6 (six) mo (months) . consuming <25% w/(with) refusals of meals . Po (by mouth) intake likely not meeting nutritional needs . NO N/V/c/D (nausea, vomiting, complaints of diarrhea) documented. Also revealed under REC (recommendations): Resident may benefit from an appetite stimulant, please document % of supplement consumed daily, weekly weights x 4 weeks to assure stable weight, if po (by mouth) intake and wt (weight) status does not improve, resident may benefit from an alternate means of nutrition support. Record review of the Order Summary Report for Resident #20 revealed there was not a physician's order for fortified pudding at lunch and supper or a medication to stimulate appetite per Registered Dietician (RD) recommendations. On 2/11/24 at 4:20 PM, an interview with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #3 revealed Resident #20 had a decline over the past several weeks. She explained that the resident would not eat or drink, including the med pass supplement. She stated that usually they cannot get her to take her medications and that the resident would eat crushed ice chips, but that was about it. LPN #3 explained that she noticed a change after the resident fell and hurt her back and she was in a lot of pain and she confirmed that she had not notified the resident's physician of the change in the resident's condition. On 2/12/24 at 6:05 PM, a telephone interview with Medical Director revealed the staff had contacted him last night regarding Resident #20 having nausea and vomiting, and he had ordered Zofran as needed. He confirmed that the staff had not contacted him or made him aware of the residents' decline in condition or her refusal to eat or drink. He stated that he was not notified of her significant weight loss (40.5 pounds in 6 months) or the Registered Dietician (RD) recommendations. He confirmed Resident #20's current condition was serious and stated What you have relayed screams neglect. Record review of Resident #20's Physician Nursing Home Visit dated 1/26/24 revealed, No concerns reported by the nursing staff The physician progress note did not identify any documentation to support the resident's nausea and vomiting or weight loss. On 2/13/24 at 8:13 AM, an interview with the Dietary Manager (DM) revealed Resident #20 did not have a physician's order for fortified pudding, and to her knowledge, had never been started on an appetite stimulate. She explained that the facility had trouble getting the RD recommendations and that she just realized last week on Friday 2/9/24 that they were going to her spam email. She confirmed that lack of implementation of the RD recommendations could cause the resident to have weight loss and malnourishment. On 2/13/24 at 10:38 AM, an interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed after reviewing Resident #20's progress notes, she observed there was no documentation to support a decline and there was no documentation to show the Medical Director had been notified. She revealed before the fall the resident was ambulatory, rarely in bed, and she took herself to the bathroom. She stated she would sit up in a chair in her room and after the fall the resident required more help with her Activities of Daily Living (ADLs), stayed in bed, became incontinent, had more falls, and required the staff to assist with eating. She confirmed that the facility should have notified the physician immediately when the decline came about, and verbalized that was a failure on their part. The DON stated that the facility did not reach out to the physician to inquire about drawing labs or starting any intravenous fluids throughout these months of the resident refusing to eat or drink. She stated that she did report the weight loss to the physician while he was inside the facility and stated, I do not recall the date or month I notified him. She confirmed that she did not have documentation to support her notification. On 2/13/24 at 2:10 PM, an interview with the Administrator (ADM) revealed Resident #20's weight loss had been discussed in January 2024 during a PAR (patients at risk) meeting. The ADM confirmed that the Dietary Recommendations for Resident #20 had not been implemented and that the facility failed to document the significant changes that occurred in the resident's condition. She stated, I know the documentations not there. She revealed that she was told the DON had reached out to the physician and stated, It looks bad on our part. Record review of the Progress Notes for Resident #20 dated 2/14/24, Proper Name Hospice consulted per MD (medical doctor) order and family request . for declining condition related to Alzheimer's disease . Record review of the Transfer/Discharge Report revealed the facility admitted Resident #20 on 1/24/22 with medical diagnoses that included Alzheimer's disease, Rheumatoid Arthritis, and Wedge compression fracture of T 11-T 12 vertebra, subsequent encounter for fracture with delayed healing. Record review of Minimum Data Set (MDS) with Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 01/10/24 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of 03 which indicated the resident had severe cognitive impairment. Prior MDS's dated 09/18/23 revealed a BIMS of 11, MDS dated [DATE] revealed a BIMS of 9. Resident #13 Cross reference F600, F692 On 2/13/24 at 11:05 AM, during an observation and interview Resident #13, lying in bed, stated she had lost weight while in the facility. She revealed there were times she did not eat well and she was not on supplements. On 2/14/24 at 11:40 AM, during an interview the DON confirmed Resident #13 had a significant weight loss which was not reported to the physician, therefore, no interventions to prevent and treat the nutritional status concerns were ordered and her weight continued to decrease. She confirmed the facility's failure to notify Resident #13's physician led to a 6.92% weight loss during her first month at the facility and to a 17.52% weight loss during her first four months at the facility. On 2/15/24 at 8:45 AM, an interview with the facility's Regional Nurse Consultant confirmed the facility neglected to identify a nutritional concern and to notify the physician of a significant weight loss, therefore, no interventions to prevent adverse consequences were ordered and the resident's weight continued to decline. Record review of Resident #13's admission Record revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included Stevens-Johnson Syndrome, Non-pressure ulcers, Anxiety Disorder, Major Depressive Disorder. Record review of Minimum Data Set (MDS) with Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 12/12/23 revealed a BIMS score of 12 which indicated the resident had a moderate cognitive impairment. The facility submitted the following removal plan: On 02/13/2024 at 4:30 PM the Mississippi State Department of Health (MSDH) state survey team notified the Administrator of an Immediate Jeopardy for failing to ensure processes were in place to review and implement Registered Dietician (RD) recommendations, notify the physician of weight loss, and implement interventions to address weight loss for Resident #20, who had lost 40.5lbs in the last six months. Resident #20 also had nausea and vomiting and was not eating or drinking adequately for the last three weeks and the facility had failed to notify the physician of the significant change. The facility failed to follow care plan interventions to identify weight loss and address weight loss for Resident #20. The facility failed to have an effective Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) meeting to ensure all recommendations from the Registered Dietician were addressed in a prompt manner. Review of facility processes revealed that the recommendations from the registered dietician was being sent to the Dietary Manager via email and the emails were not received and not presented to the interdisciplinary team and reviewed by the provider and implemented. Interview with staff indicates that resident has had poor appetite since January, and it was not documented in the medical record. On 02/11/2024 at 6:27 PM, the facility nurse notified the provider and obtained orders for anti-emetic. On 2/12/2024 at 9:27 am, the facility attempted to transfer resident to the emergency room for evaluation and treatment as indicated. The Responsible Party refused for resident to be sent to the emergency room on this date. The facility obtained a physician's order for hospice services. On 02/13/2024 5:00 PM, In-services began on Abuse and Neglect for all staff by the Assistant Director of Nursing. All staff will be trained prior to returning to work. In-services began by Assistant Director of Nursing on Documentation, Provider Notification, and Change of Condition. All staff will be trained prior to returning to work. On 02/13/2024 at 5:15 PM, Social Services and Medical Records Nurse interviewed all residents regarding Nausea and Vomiting to ensure all significant changes of conditions were reported to the providers. It was noted upon interview that nine (9) residents reported recent complaints of nausea and vomiting, one (1) resident noted to have yellow discharge from mouth and nose, 1 resident was unable to recall when nausea or vomiting occurred with no staff being knowledgeable of nausea or vomiting, two (2) residents reported nausea or vomiting after eating, 2 residents reported not having appetite or eating, 1 resident reported nausea but did not report to nurse, 2 residents reported nausea and medications received. On 02/13/2024 at 5:30 PM, all residents were audited for weight loss by the Director of Nursing, Regional Nurse Consultant, and Minimum Data Set Nurse. Results of weight loss audit were reviewed by the medical director (15 unplanned weight losses, 1 planned) and new orders and diagnoses were provided by the medical director. All nutrition care plans audited by Minimum Data Set Nurse on 02/13/2024 with 5 residents whose registered dieticians' recommendations were not on care plans, dietary recommendations reviewed with providers and orders received per providers. On 02/13/2024 at 6:05 PM, the Director of Nursing notified the physician of all 9 residents, notified the Institutional Specialized Needs Plan (ISNP) nurse practitioner of all residents (4) and hospice of all residents (1) with Nausea and Vomiting with new orders received from provider. 1 resident reviewed with new orders for chest x-ray due to cough, congestion, and yellow discharge from mouth and nose, 2 residents were ordered medications for reflux, 1 resident noted to be receiving antibiotics and has orders in place for anti-emetic medications, 1 resident reported abdominal pain and MD was notified and seen resident on 02/12/2024 with new orders for stool softener, 1 resident noted to have diarrhea and has been antibiotics new orders received for Zofran and anti-diarrheal, 1 resident noted to have weight loss and nausea and vomiting new orders received on 2/11/2024 to start Zofran and start peri-actin the family was not agreeable to start peri-actin and wanted to wait to speak to hospice on 02/14/2024, 2 residents did not report nausea to nurses at time of occurrence. On 02/13/2024 at 6:59 PM, Social Services and Medical Records nurse interviewed residents with BIMS 10 or higher to ensure feeling of safe and are free of health concerns, no health or safety concern during interviews. On 02/13/2024 at 8:30 PM, all Registered Dietician recommendations for last 90 days audited by Dietary Manager and Minimum Data Set Nurse with 5 residents whose registered dietician recommendations were not addressed. All Dietary recommendations reviewed with the Medical Director (5) and subsequent providers as appropriate Hospice (2 residents who have been on hospice services prior to survey entrance) and Institutional Special Needs Program nurse practitioner (1), new orders received from providers as appropriate. On 02/13/2024 at 8:40 PM, All nutrition care plans audited by Minimum Data Set Nurse with 5 residents whose registered dieticians' recommendations were not on care plans, dietary recommendations reviewed with providers and orders received per providers and care plans updated. On 02/13/2024 at 9:00 PM, all residents noted with weight loss were reviewed with the Medical Director, the Medical Director performed medication review on all residents with weight loss. Ad Hoc QAPI was held on 02/13/2024 at 10:15 PM with the Medical Director via phone, Administrator, Director of Nursing, Social Services, Minimum Data Set Nurse, Life Connections Coordinator, Regional Nurse Consultant, Regional Director of Operations, Assistant Director of Nursing, Registered Nurse Supervisor, Dietary Manager, and Medical Records Nurse. The Minimum Data Set Nurse has been designated as the Quality Assurance Nurse with responsibility reviewing all audits, Performance Improvement Plans, Quality Measures, and actively participating in the Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement meetings. All areas of deficiencies were reviewed in Ad-Hoc Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement meeting. Medical Records nurse or Assistant Director of Nursing will be responsible for receiving Registered Dietician recommendations, reviewing with providers, entering orders, and progress notes. New processes for Medical Director to review facility weight losses each week on visit, Registered Dietitian recommendations to be reviewed weekly with the Interdisciplinary Team and the Medical Director by Friday, in the event Registered Dietician recommendations are not received, the medical director will be notified. The Dietary Manager will review the weight and vital sign exception report and present findings in the clinical meeting. The Director of Nursing will review weights and registered dietician recommendations. The Director of Nursing will review progress notes daily. The administrator will review the audit findings weekly. All results will be reviewed in Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement meetings. On 02/13/2024 at 10:00 PM, One-on-one Inservice conducted with Administrator by the Regional Director of Operations for weights, care plans, Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement, Notifying Physicians, Registered Dietician Recommendations, Documentation, and Administration Processes. The Regional Nurse Consultant conducted one-on-one in-services with the Director of Nursing, Dietary Manager, Assistant Director of Nursing, Medical Records Nurse, and Minimum Data Set Nurse regarding weights, care plans, Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement, Notifying Physicians, Registered Dietician Recommendations, Documentation and Administration Processes. One-on-one in-service conducted with the Dietary Manager by the Administrator regarding Communication of Dietary Recommendations, Review of Recommendations, and reporting any identified areas of concerns with Dietary Recommendations. All nurses who provided care to resident #20 for the previous 3 weeks were provided One-on-one in-services regarding reporting changes of condition to provider, documentation, and following plan of care then were provided with a post-test to confirm understanding of one-on-one in-services. As of 02/14/2024, the facility alleges compliance. All corrective action completed on 02/13/2024. The Survey Agency (SA) validated the facility's Corrective Actions on 2/20/24: The SA validated through record review that Resident #20 was ordered an anti-emetic for nausea/vomiting. The SA validated through interview and record review that in-services were conducted for Abuse and neglect, documentation, provider notification, and change of condition. No staff can return to work until they have received in-services. The SA validated through record review that all residents were interviewed and screened for symptoms of nausea and vomiting and the physician was notified of the findings with physician orders if appropriate. The SA validated through record review and staff interview that all residents were audited for weight loss and the Medical Director was updated. All nutrition care plans were audited and updated with dietary recommendations. The SA validated through record review that all residents with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIM's) of 10 or higher were interviewed to ensure feeling safe in their environment and free from health concerns. The SA validated through record review that all Registered Dietician (RD) recommendations were audited and addressed with the provider as appropriate. The SA validated the Medical Director reviewed the resident with weight loss and performed medication review. The SA validated through staff interview and record review on 2/20/24 that an Emergency Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) meeting was conducted on 2/13/24 with all members in attendance. The SA validated through record review and staff interview that one-on-one in-services were conducted on weights, care plans, Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI), notifying physicians, reporting changes, Registered Dietician Recommendations, Documentation, and Administrative Processes. No staff can return to work until they have received in-services. The SA validated on 02/20/24 that all corrective actions were completed on 2/13/24 and the IJ (Immediate Jeopardy) was removed as of 2/14/24.
CRITICAL (J)

Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation

Comprehensive Care Plan (Tag F0656)

Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Resident #15 Record review of the Care Plan, undated, for Resident #15 revealed, I have an ADL self-care performance deficit . I...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Resident #15 Record review of the Care Plan, undated, for Resident #15 revealed, I have an ADL self-care performance deficit . Interventions: .BED MOBILITY: The resident uses half rails x (times) 2 (two) to improve bed mobility . On 2/12/24 at 2:30 PM, an observation of Resident #15 revealed the resident lying in bed with her eyes open. She was alert/verbal and confused. Three -quarter (¾) side rails were up on both sides. Record review of the Quarterly Evaluation for Resident #15 dated 9/05/23 revealed, Summary Findings . 2. Type of rail in use: Half rail 3. Rails in use: Bilateral . 5. Bed rails are indicated and serve as an enabler to promote independence: yes . On 2/12/24 at 2:50 PM, an interview and observation with the Director of Nursing (DON) , confirmed Resident #15 had three-quarter (3/4) rails. She stated she had no idea how long the rails had been on the bed. An interview with the Minimum Data Set (MDS) Nurse on 2/14/24 at 5:19 PM, revealed that the purpose of the Care Plan was for the staff to know how to care for a resident. She confirmed that Resident #15 did not have a care plan for the applied bed rails. Record review of the admission Record for Resident #15 revealed the facility admitted Resident #15 on 9/02/23 with diagnoses that included Unspecified dementia, Other seizures and Repeated falls. The facility submitted the following removal plan: On 02/13/2024 at 4:30 PM, the Mississippi State Department of Health (MSDH) state survey team notified the Administrator of an Immediate Jeopardy for failing to ensure processes were in place to review and implement Registered Dietician (RD) recommendations, notify the physician of weight loss, and implement interventions to address weight loss for Resident #20, who had lost 40.5 lbs in the last six months. Resident #20 also had nausea and vomiting and was not eating or drinking adequately for the last three weeks and the facility had failed to notify the physician of the significant change. The facility failed to follow care plan interventions to identify weight loss and address weight loss for Resident #20. The facility failed to have an effective Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) meeting to ensure all recommendations from the Registered Dietician were addressed in a prompt manner. Review of facility processes revealed that the recommendations from the registered dietician was being sent to the Dietary Manager via email and the emails were not received and not presented to the interdisciplinary team and reviewed by the provider and implemented. Interview with staff indicates that resident has had poor appetite since January, and it was not documented in the medical record. On 02/11/2024 at 6:27 PM, the facility nurse notified the provider and obtained orders for anti-emetic. On 2/12/2024 at 9:27 am, the facility attempted to transfer resident to the emergency room for evaluation and treatment as indicated. The Responsible Party refused for resident to be sent to the emergency room on this date. The facility obtained a physician's order for hospice services. On 02/13/2024 5:00 PM, In-services began on Abuse and Neglect for all staff by the Assistant Director of Nursing. All staff will be trained prior to returning to work. In-services began by Assistant Director of Nursing on Documentation, Provider Notification, and Change of Condition. All staff will be trained prior to returning to work. On 02/13/2024 at 5:15 PM, Social Services and Medical Records Nurse interviewed all residents regarding Nausea and Vomiting to ensure all significant changes of conditions were reported to the providers. It was noted upon interview that nine (9) residents reported recent complaints of nausea and vomiting, one (1) resident noted to have yellow discharge from mouth and nose, 1 resident was unable to recall when nausea or vomiting occurred with no staff being knowledgeable of nausea or vomiting, two (2) residents reported nausea or vomiting after eating, 2 residents reported not having appetite or eating, 1 resident reported nausea but did not report to nurse, 2 residents reported nausea and medications received. On 02/13/2024 at 5:30 PM, all residents were audited for weight loss by the Director of Nursing, Regional Nurse Consultant, and Minimum Data Set Nurse. Results of weight loss audit were reviewed by the medical director (15 unplanned weight losses, 1 planned) and new orders and diagnoses were provided by the medical director. All nutrition care plans audited by Minimum Data Set Nurse on 02/13/2024 with 5 residents whose registered dieticians' recommendations were not on care plans, dietary recommendations reviewed with providers and orders received per providers. On 02/13/2024 at 6:05 PM, the Director of Nursing notified the physician of all 9 residents, notified the Institutional Specialized Needs Plan (ISNP) nurse practitioner of all residents (4) and hospice of all residents (1) with Nausea and Vomiting with new orders received from provider. 1 resident reviewed with new orders for chest x-ray due to cough, congestion, and yellow discharge from mouth and nose, 2 residents were ordered medications for reflux, 1 resident noted to be receiving antibiotics and has orders in place for anti-emetic medications, 1 resident reported abdominal pain and MD was notified and seen resident on 02/12/2024 with new orders for stool softener, 1 resident noted to have diarrhea and has been antibiotics new orders received for Zofran and anti-diarrheal, 1 resident noted to have weight loss and nausea and vomiting new orders received on 2/11/2024 to start Zofran and start peri-actin the family was not agreeable to start peri-actin and wanted to wait to speak to hospice on 02/14/2024, 2 residents did not report nausea to nurses at time of occurrence. On 02/13/2024 at 6:59 PM, Social Services and Medical Records nurse interviewed residents with BIMS 10 or higher to ensure feeling of safe and are free of health concerns, no health or safety concern during interviews. On 02/13/2024 at 8:30 PM, all Registered Dietician recommendations for last 90 days audited by Dietary Manager and Minimum Data Set Nurse with 5 residents whose registered dietician recommendations were not addressed. All Dietary recommendations reviewed with the Medical Director (5) and subsequent providers as appropriate Hospice (2 residents who have been on hospice services prior to survey entrance) and Institutional Special Needs Program nurse practitioner (1), new orders received from providers as appropriate. On 02/13/2024 at 8:40 PM, All nutrition care plans audited by Minimum Data Set Nurse with 5 residents whose registered dieticians' recommendations were not on care plans, dietary recommendations reviewed with providers and orders received per providers and care plans updated. On 02/13/2024 at 9:00 PM, all residents noted with weight loss were reviewed with the Medical Director, the Medical Director performed medication review on all residents with weight loss. Ad Hoc QAPI was held on 02/13/2024 at 10:15 PM with the Medical Director via phone, Administrator, Director of Nursing, Social Services, Minimum Data Set Nurse, Life Connections Coordinator, Regional Nurse Consultant, Regional Director of Operations, Assistant Director of Nursing, Registered Nurse Supervisor, Dietary Manager, and Medical Records Nurse. The Minimum Data Set Nurse has been designated as the Quality Assurance Nurse with responsibility reviewing all audits, Performance Improvement Plans, Quality Measures, and actively participating in the Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement meetings. All areas of deficiencies were reviewed in Ad-Hoc Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement meeting. Medical Records nurse or Assistant Director of Nursing will be responsible for receiving Registered Dietician recommendations, reviewing with providers, entering orders, and progress notes. New processes for Medical Director to review facility weight losses each week on visit, Registered Dietitian recommendations to be reviewed weekly with the Interdisciplinary Team and the Medical Director by Friday, in the event Registered Dietician recommendations are not received, the medical director will be notified. The Dietary Manager will review the weight and vital sign exception report and present findings in the clinical meeting. The Director of Nursing will review weights and registered dietician recommendations. The Director of Nursing will review progress notes daily. The administrator will review the audit findings weekly. All results will be reviewed in Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement meetings. On 02/13/2024 at 10:00 PM, One-on-one Inservice conducted with Administrator by the Regional Director of Operations for weights, care plans, Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement, Notifying Physicians, Registered Dietician Recommendations, Documentation, and Administration Processes. The Regional Nurse Consultant conducted one-on-one in-services with the Director of Nursing, Dietary Manager, Assistant Director of Nursing, Medical Records Nurse, and Minimum Data Set Nurse regarding weights, care plans, Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement, Notifying Physicians, Registered Dietician Recommendations, Documentation and Administration Processes. One-on-one in-service conducted with the Dietary Manager by the Administrator regarding Communication of Dietary Recommendations, Review of Recommendations, and reporting any identified areas of concerns with Dietary Recommendations. All nurses who provided care to resident #20 for the previous 3 weeks were provided One-on-one in-services regarding reporting changes of condition to provider, documentation, and following plan of care then were provided with a post-test to confirm understanding of one-on-one in-services. As of 02/14/2024, the facility alleges compliance and all corrective actions were completed on 02/13/2024. The Survey Agency (SA) validated the facility's Corrective Actions on 2/20/24: The SA validated through record review that Resident #20 was ordered an anti-emetic for nausea/vomiting. The SA validated through interview and record review that in-services were conducted for Abuse and neglect, documentation, provider notification, and change of condition. No staff can return to work until they have received in-services. The SA validated through record review that all residents were interviewed and screened for symptoms of nausea and vomiting and the physician was notified of the findings with physician orders if appropriate. The SA validated through record review and staff interview that all residents were audited for weight loss and the Medical Director was updated. All nutrition care plans were audited and updated with dietary recommendations. The SA validated through record review that all residents with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIM's) of 10 or higher were interviewed to ensure feeling safe in their environment and free from health concerns. The SA validated through record review that all Registered Dietician (RD) recommendations were audited and addressed with the provider as appropriate. The SA validated the Medical Director reviewed the resident with weight loss and performed medication review. The SA validated through staff interview and record review on 2/20/24 that an Emergency Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) meeting was conducted on 2/13/24 with all members in attendance. The SA validated through record review and staff interview that one-on-one in-services were conducted on weights, care plans, Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI), notifying physicians, reporting changes, Registered Dietician Recommendations, Documentation, and Administrative Processes. No staff can return to work until they have received in-services. The SA validated that all corrective actions were completed on 2/13/24 and the IJ was removed as of 2/14/24. Resident #26 Record review revealed an ADL care plan in place for Resident #26 with a focus on ADL self-care performance deficit related to Parkinson's disease with an intervention under Bathing/showering to check nail length and trim and clean on bath day and as necessary. Report any changes to the nurse. During an observation and interview on 02/11/24 at 5:55 PM, Resident #26's fingernails on both hands were approximately one-half (1/2) inch long and jagged with a brown substance underneath the nails. Resident #26 revealed he would like his nails to be cut because they are too long. An interview with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #2 on 02/12/24 at 2:55 PM, revealed Resident #26 is a diabetic and his nails must be cut by a registered nurse, the LPNs are not allowed to cut diabetic nails. She confirmed while reviewing Resident #26's care plan that Resident #26 did not have a care plan for his nails to be cut only by a registered nurse. During an interview on 02/12/24 at 3:10 PM, the DON revealed the registered nurses are responsible for doing diabetic nail care. She confirmed that Resident #26 did not have on his ADL or diabetic care plan for the registered nurses to cut his nails and revealed his care plan was not developed to specify the nail care for a diabetic. She confirmed he did not have an order for his fingernails to be cut by an RN and therefore it didn't show up on the Treatment Administration Record (TAR) for the registered nurse to cut his nails. Record review of Resident #26's admission Record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with medical diagnoses that included Parkinsonism, Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus with hyperglycemia. Record review of Resident #26's Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of [DATE], revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 03, which indicated the resident is severely cognitively impaired. Based on observation, resident and staff interview, record review and facility policy review, the facility failed to implement a comprehensive care plan for five (5) of eighteen sampled residents as evidenced by: Resident #13, #15, #20, #26, and #54 1) failed to implement the nutritional care plan for Resident #13 which resulted in a significant weight loss which placed the resident at risk for dehydration, malnutrition, skin breakdown and placed the resident and all other residents residing in the facility at risk for serious harm, serious injury, serious impairment, and possibly death. 2) failed to implement a pain and nutritional care plan for Resident #20 which resulted in the resident experiencing prolonged nausea, vomiting, and an infrequent passage of stool (constipation), significant weight loss, with a potential outcome for fecal impaction, bowel obstruction (blockage), dehydration, malnutrition, skin breakdown and placed the resident and all other residents residing in the facility at risk for serious harm, serious injury, serious impairment, and possibly death. Findings that did not rise to the level of Immediate Jeopardy: 3) failed to implement a care plan for personal hygiene for Resident #26, and Resident #54 as evidenced by long nails with a brown/black substance underneath. 4) failed to implement a care plan for bedrails and oxygen for Resident #15. The State Agency (SA) identified an Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) that began on 11/02/23 when the facility failed to recognize, evaluate, and address Resident #13's nutritional needs, which resulted in an unintended significant weight loss of 6.92% (percent) in one (1) month, which further led to a significant weight loss of 17.52% (percent) in four (4) months. The facility's failure to consult a Registered Dietician (RD), notify the attending physician of a significant change in condition, and act upon the residents' weight loss, placed the resident, and all other residents residing in the facility at risk for serious negative outcomes. The IJ existed at: 42 CFR §483.21(b)(1) Comprehensive Care Plans - F656 - Scope/Severity J The facility Administrator was notified of the IJ on 2/13/24 at 4:30 PM and provided the IJ Template. The facility provided an acceptable Removal Plan on 2/14/24, in which they alleged all corrective actions to remove the IJ were completed on 2/13/24 and the IJ removed on 2/14/24. The SA validated the Removal Plan on 2/20/24 and determined the IJ was removed on 2/14/24. Therefore, the scope and severity for 42 CFR §483.21(b)(1) Comprehensive Care Plans - F656 was lowered from a J to a D while the facility develops a plan of correction to monitor the effectiveness of the systemic changes to ensure the facility sustains compliance with regulatory requirements. Findings Include: Review of the facility policy titled Care Plan - Comprehensive undated, revealed, Policy Statement: It is the policy of this facility to develop comprehensive care plan for each resident that includes measurable objectives and timetables to meet the resident's medical, nursing, and psychological needs .Procedure: 1. An interdisciplinary team, in coordination with the resident and his/her family or representative, develops and maintains a comprehensive care plan for each resident. 2. The comprehensive care plan had been designated to: a. Incorporate identified focus areas b. Incorporate risk factors associated with identified problems c. Build on the resident's strengths d. Reflect treatment goals and objectives in measurable outcomes that incorporate the resident's personal and cultural preferences and wishes e. Identify the professional services that are responsible for each element of care f. Enhance the optional functioning of the resident by focusing of rehabilitative programs and resources as needed . Resident #13 Cross reference F580, F600, F692 During an interview on 2/13/24 at 11:05 AM, Resident #13 stated she had lost weight while in the facility. She revealed there were times she did not eat well and she did not receive supplements. Record review of Resident #13's Comprehensive Care Plan dated 12/19/23 revealed a care plan for potential nutritional problems with interventions including, Observe/record/report to MD (medical doctor) PRN (as needed) signs/symptoms of malnutrition: emaciation (Cachexia), muscle wasting, significant weight loss - three (3) pounds in one week, greater than 5% in one month, and greater than 7.5% in 3 months. At 11:40 AM on 2/14/24, during an interview the Director of Nursing (DON) revealed Resident #13 had a significant weight loss which was not reported to the physician for interventions, therefore, her weight continued to decrease. This led to a 6.92% weight loss during her first month at the facility and to a 17.5% weight loss during her first four months at the facility. She confirmed the resident's care plan for nutritional problems included an intervention to report to the physician as needed any signs or symptoms of malnutrition or significant weight loss and this was not followed. She confirmed the facility failed to follow care plan. At 8:45 AM on 2/15/24, an interview with the facility's Regional Nurse Consultant , revealed the physician was not consulted concerning Resident #13 significant weight loss so therefore, no interventions were initiated and weight continued to decline. She confirmed the care plan informed staff to notify the physician for concerns with nutrition such as weight loss and this was not followed. An interview with the Minimum Data Set (MDS) Registered Nurse (RN) on I2/14/24 at 5:30 PM, revealed the purpose of the care plan was for the staff to know the resident's needs and preferences and how to care for the resident and this resident's care plan for nutritional needs was not followed. Record review of Resident #13's admission Record revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included Stevens-Johnson Syndrome, Non-pressure Ulcers, Anxiety Disorder, Major Depressive Disorder. Record review of Minimum Data Set (MDS) with Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 12/12/23 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 12 which indicated the resident was moderately cognitively impaired. Resident #20 Cross reference F580, F600, F684, F692 Record review of Resident #20's Pain Care Plan revealed under, Interventions/Tasks: . Observe/document for side effects of pain medication. Observe for constipation; . nausea; vomiting; . Report occurrences to the physician. Record review of Resident #20's Order Summary Report revealed an order dated 1/02/24, Norco Oral Tablet 7.5 -325 MG (milligrams) (Hydrocodone-Acetaminophen) Give 7.5 mg (milligrams) by mouth every 6 (six) hours related to Pain . Record review of Resident #20's Order Summary Report revealed an order dated 12/13/23, Tramadol HCL (Hydrochloride) Tablet 50 MG (milligrams) Give 1 tablet by mouth every 12 (twelve) hours as needed for pain. Also revealed an order dated 12/13/23, Tramadol HCL (Hydrochloride)Tablet 50 MG (milligrams) Give 2 (two) tablets by mouth every 12 (twelve) hours as needed for pain . At 3:19 PM on 2/11/24, an observation and interview with Resident #20, revealed her lying in a fetal position at the foot of the bed with small garbage can was located on the floor close beside the resident. She stated she was sick to her stomach and had a washcloth in her hand and was wiping her face. At 8:35 AM on 2/12/24, an interview with Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) #2 revealed Resident #20 had been nauseated, dry heaving, and vomiting for the three (3) weeks since she had been employed at the facility. She revealed that she had reported it to the medication nurse every day that she worked. At 5:36 PM on 2/13/24, an interview with the Director of Nursing, confirmed that the facility did not have a monitoring tool in place for Resident #20 to monitor for the common side effects of an opioid pain medication such as constipation, nausea, and vomiting. The DON confirmed that the resident's care plan was not being followed because the physician had not been notified of the nausea and vomiting. Record review of Resident #20's Nutritional Care Plan revealed, Focus: I have potential nutritional problem .Interventions/Tasks: 01/04/24 - discussed weight loss in idt (interdisciplinary) meeting, nsg (nursing) to notify md (Medical Doctor) of weight change and await instruction to poc (plan of care) . 01/05/24 - RD (Registered Dietician) consult . Resident may benefit from an appetite stimulant . Add fortified pudding BID (twice daily) at lunch and dinner . 02/10/24 - RD review . Resident may benefit from appetite stimulant . If po (by mouth) intake and wt (weight) status does not improve, Resident may benefit from an alternate means of nutrition support. Will continue to monitor po (by mouth) intake, wt (weight) trends, labs and skin . Record review of Resident #20's weights revealed a significant weight loss of 13.9% (percent) in one (1) month, 21.6% (percent) in three (3) months, and 26.2% (percent) in six (6) months. Record review of the Order Summary Report for Resident #20 revealed there was not a physician's order for fortified pudding at lunch and supper or a medication to stimulate appetite per Registered Dietician (RD) recommendations. An interview with the Minimum Data Set (MDS) Nurse on 2/14/24 at 5:23 PM revealed that she developed the Nutritional Care Plan for Resident #20 by reading the Registered Dietician (RD) progress notes in the Electronic Medical Record (EMR) and adding the recommendations to the Care Plan. She revealed that she was aware that the resident did not have a physician's order for the fortified pudding or an appetite stimulant, but she thought the RD recommendation should be listed on the care plan. She stated, I can't say if the nutritional care plan was being followed because the weight loss was being addressed, even though the RD recommendations were not implemented. She revealed the purpose of the care plan was to give staff a guide to follow to know how to care for a resident. Record review of the Transfer/Discharge Report revealed the facility admitted Resident #20 on 1/24/22 with medical diagnoses that included Alzheimer's disease, rheumatoid arthritis, primary open-angled glaucoma, and wedge compression fracture of T 11-T 12 vertebra, subsequent encounter for fracture with delayed healing. Record review of Minimum Data Set (MDS) with Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 01/10/24 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 03 which indicated the resident had severe cognitive impairment. Prior MDS's dated 09/18/23 revealed a BIMS of 11, MDS dated [DATE] revealed a BIMS of 9. Findings that did not rise to the level of IJ: Resident #54 Record review of Resident #54's Comprehensive Care Plan revealed the resident had an Activities of Daily Living self-care performance deficit. One intervention listed was personal hygiene - partial moderate assist. An interview with and observation of Resident #54 on 02/12/24 at 9:30 AM, revealed his fingernails were noted to be approximately 1/2 inch from nail bed with dark brown/black substance noted under each nail. He stated he prefers his nails to be kept short and he would like for them to be trimmed today. An interview on 2/12/24 at 3:20 PM, the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) confirmed Resident #54 had multiple scratch marks on abdomen and arms and nails were long and dirty with a substance under nails that appeared to be old dried blood. She confirmed the resident's nails should be kept clean and trimmed to the length the resident preferred and since he preferred his nails short, the staff needed to assist him to ensure this was done. She confirmed the facility failed to provide the resident's Activities of Daily Living (ADL) care for his nail care needs. She confirmed that nail care was part of the resident's personal hygiene care plan and this was not followed. An interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 2/12/24 at 4:55 PM, revealed the facility failed to ensure adequate Activity of Daily Living (ADL) nail care for a dependent resident was done. She confirmed the care plan was to inform staff of the needs and preferences for each resident and this part of Resident #54's personal hygiene care plan was not followed. During an interview on I2/14/24 at 5:30 PM, the Minimum Data Set (MDS) Registered Nurse (RN) confirmed the purpose of the care plan was for the staff to know the resident's needs and preferences and how to take care of the resident and this resident's care plan for personal hygiene assistance was not followed. Record review of Resident #54's admission Record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included Muscle Weakness and Lack of Coordination. Record review of Resident #54's Minimum Data Set (MDS) with Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 1/5/24, Section GG revealed for personal hygiene, Resident #54 required partial/moderate assistance. Section C revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 11 which indicated the resident had moderate cognitive impairment.
CRITICAL (J)

Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation

Deficiency F0692 (Tag F0692)

Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, staff and resident interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to maintain a...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, staff and resident interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to maintain acceptable parameters of nutrition for two (2) of six (6) residents sampled for nutrition as evidence by: Resident #13 and Resident #20 1) failed to recognize, evaluate, and address a resident's nutritional needs, which resulted in an unintended significant weight loss of 6.92% (percent) in one (1) month, which further led to a significant weight loss of 17.52% in four (4) months. Resident #13. The facility's failure to consult a Registered Dietician (RD), notify the attending physician of a significant change in condition, and act upon the residents' weight loss, placed the resident, and all other residents residing in the facility at risk for serious harm, serious injury, serious impairment, and possibly death. 2) failed to identify and address a resident at risk for malnutrition due to prolonged nausea and vomiting, and failure to identify a decrease in food intake due to pain and nausea resulted in an unintended significant weight loss of 40.5 pounds in six (6) months. Resident #20. The facility's failure to implement a Registered Dietician (RD) recommendation, notify the attending physician of a significant change in condition, and address the residents' prolonged symptoms of nausea and vomiting, and decreased food intake placed the resident and all other residents residing in the facility at risk for serious harm, serious injury, serious impairment, and possibly death. The facility's neglect also resulted in a functional decline for Resident #20, which possibly resulted in the resident's admission to hospice services on 2/14/24. The State Agency (SA) identified an Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) and Substandard Quality of Care (SQC) that began on 11/02/23 when the facility failed to recognize, evaluate, and address Resident #13's nutritional needs, which resulted in an unintended significant weight loss of 6.92% (percent) in one (1) month, which further led to a significant weight loss of 17.52% (percent) in four (4) months. The facility's failure to consult a Registered Dietician (RD), notify the attending physician of a significant change in condition, and act upon the residents' weight loss, placed the resident, and all other residents residing in the facility at risk for serious negative outcomes. The IJ and SQC existed at: CFR §483.25(g)(1) Nutrition/Hydration Status Maintenance - F692- Scope /Severity J The facility administrator was notified of the IJ and SQC on 2/13/24 at 4:30 PM and provided the IJ Template. The facility provided an acceptable Removal Plan on 2/14/24, in which they alleged all corrective actions to remove the IJ were completed on 2/13/24 and the IJ removed on 2/14/24. The SA validated the Removal Plan on 2/20/24 and determined the IJ was removed on 2/14/24. Therefore, the scope and severity for 42 CFR §483.25(g)(1) Nutrition/Hydration Status Maintenance - F692, was lowered from a J to a D while the facility develops a plan of correction to monitor the effectiveness of the systemic changes to ensure the facility sustains compliance with regulatory requirements. Findings Include: Review of the facility policy titled Weight Assessment and Intervention with a review date of 8/2003 revealed, Policy Statement: Resident weights are monitored for undesirable or unintended weight loss or gain Weight Assessment: 1. Residents are weighed upon admission and at intervals weekly or monthly or as ordered by the physician 3. Any weight change of 5% or more since the last weight assessment is retaken the next day for confirmation. a. If the weight is verified, nursing will immediately notify the dietician in writing. 5. The threshold for significant unplanned and undesired weight loss will be based on the following criteria . a. 1 month- 5% weight loss is significant; greater than 5% is severe. b. 3 months- 7.5% weight loss is significant; greater than 7.5% is severe. c. 6 months- 10% weight loss is significant; greater than 10% is severe Under, Evaluation: . 2. The physician and the multidisciplinary team identify conditions and medications that may be causing anorexia, weight loss or increasing the risk of weight loss. Review of the facility policy titled Nutritional Assessment with a review date of 7/24/23 revealed, Policy Statement: As part of the comprehensive assessment, a nutritional assessment, including current nutritional status and risk factors for impaired nutrition, shall be conducted for each resident .Policy interpretation and Implementation: 1. The dietician, in conjunction with the nursing staff and healthcare practitioners, will conduct a nutritional assessment for each resident upon admission (within current baseline assessment timeframes) and as indicated by a change that places the resident at risk for impaired nutrition. 4. The multidisciplinary team shall identify, upon the resident's admission and upon his or her change of condition, the following situations that place the resident at increased risk for impaired nutrition. d. Medication changes - includes changes resulting in loss of appetite, nausea, constipation, lethargy, decreased absorption, swallowing difficulties., etc h. Fluid and nutrient loss-prolonged fluid and nutrient loss secondary to diarrhea and/or vomiting that may increase nutritional requirements . Resident #20 Cross reference F580, F692, F656 An observation and interview with Resident #20 on 2/11/24 at 3:19 PM, revealed her lying in a fetal position at the foot of the bed with a garbage can located on the floor beside the resident. The resident stated she was sick to her stomach and had a washcloth in her hand and was wiping her face. The resident's color was pale, lips were dry, and she was thin in appearance. An observation and interview with Resident #20 on 2/11/24 at 6:07 PM, revealed her lying on her right side in bed. The resident stated she was nauseated and could not eat dinner. She stated, I'm just sick. An interview on 2/11/24 at 6:12 PM, with Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) #7 revealed Resident #20 refused her dinner tray due to nausea and vomiting. She stated she was unsure how long the resident had been sick. An observation of Resident #20 on 2/12/24 at 8:29 AM, revealed her lying on her right side in bed. The garbage can was located on the floor, close by the resident. The breakfast tray was located on the bedside table untouched. CNA #2 entered the resident's room, and stated the resident refused to eat or drink due to nausea. CNA #2 removed the tray cover, and the resident began to retch and vomited a small amount of clear substance. The resident was weak, pale, and her lips were dry. An interview with CNA #2 on 2/12/24 at 8:35 AM, revealed she had worked at the facility for three (3) weeks and Resident #20 had refused to eat or drink since then. She explained that the resident had been nauseated, dry heaving, and vomiting for the past three (3) weeks since she had been employed at the facility. CNA #2 confirmed that she had reported the symptoms to the medication nurse every day that she worked. An interview with CNA #1 on 2/15/24 at 8:35 AM, revealed Resident #20 refused breakfast due to nausea. She stated that she had notified the nurse each time that she witnessed the resident with nausea and vomiting or refusing to eat and drink. Record review of Resident #20's Progress Notes from 11/01/23 through 2/11/24, revealed there was not any documentation that the resident had nausea and vomiting or that she refused meals. Record review of the Occupational Therapy Progress Notes dated 2/01/24 revealed, Patient refused: pt (patient) is refusing to eat and has poor appetite. pt (patient) c/o (complains of) nausea almost every day, but is not eating even with max encouragement and assist from therapist. Also revealed under, Assessment and Summary of Skilled Services: . therapist encouraging pt (patient) daily to eat and providing assist, but pt (patient) refuses to eat and c/o (complains of) nausea. Record review of the Order Summary Report for Resident #20 revealed an order dated 2/11/24 at 1827 (6:27 PM), Ondansetron HCL (Hydrochloride) Tablet 4 (four) MG (milligrams) Give 1 (one) tablet by mouth every 6 (six) hours as needed for Nausea and Vomiting . Record review of Resident #20's January and February Medication admission Record (MAR) revealed, there was not a physician's order for nausea/vomiting medication before the new order for Ondansetron HCL started on 2/11/24, which indicated the resident's symptoms of prolonged nausea and vomiting were left untreated. Record review of the Meal Intake Documentation Report completed by the Certified Nurse Aides (CNAs) revealed, Resident #20 refused eighteen (18) meals from 12/18/23 through 12/31/23. She refused thirty-one (31) meals in the month of January 2024, with a total of thirty-nine (39) meals consumed at 0-25% (percent), and she refused sixteen (16) meals from 2/01/24 through 2/11/24, with a total of fourteen (14) meals consumed at 0-25% (percent). Record review of Resident #20's Order Summary Report revealed an order dated 1/08/24, Weekly weights x (times) 4 (four) weeks one time a day every 7 day(s) . Record review of Resident #20's Weight Summary revealed the following weights: 8/03/23 - 154.5 pounds 9/07/23 - 152.2 pounds 10/5/23 - 147.6 pounds 11/01/23 - 145.4 pounds 12/04/23 - 145 pounds 1/03/24 - 132.4 pounds 1/10/24 - 129.6 pounds 1/16/24 - 124 pounds 1/23/24 - 133.2 pounds 1/30/24 - 122.8 pounds 2/06/24 - 114 pounds 02/15/24 - 110 pounds Record review of Resident #20's weights revealed a significant weight loss of 13.9% (percent) in one (1) month, 21.6% (percent) in three (3) months, and 26.2% (percent) in six (6) months. Record review of the Order Summary Report for Resident #20 revealed an order dated 1/04/24, Regular diet Regular texture, Regular consistency . Also revealed an order dated 1/04/24, Med Pass 2.0 two times a day for supplement. An interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 2/11/24 at 3:55 PM, revealed Resident #20's condition had declined over the past couple of months related to her diagnosis of dementia. She explained that the resident had a significant decline after she fell in December 2023, and received a fracture of the T-12 vertebrae and had to be placed on strong pain medications. She stated, to her knowledge, the resident had not experienced any nausea and vomiting until yesterday when the Survey Agency brought it to her attention. She stated none of the staff had reported it to her and confirmed that she should be aware of what was happening with the resident. She revealed she was aware that the resident was not eating or drinking and had been refusing meals. The DON stated she had made the physician aware of the resident's decline, and the significant weight loss, and the Registered Dietician (RD) had evaluated her. An interview with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #3 on 2/11/24 at 4:20 PM, revealed Resident #20 had a decline over the past several weeks. She explained that the resident would not eat or drink anything, including the med pass supplement. She stated that usually they cannot get her to take her medications and that the resident would eat crushed ice chips, but that's about it. LPN #3 explained that she noticed a change after the resident fell and hurt her back and was in a lot of pain. She confirmed that she had not notified the resident's physician of the change in condition. A telephone interview with Medical Director on 2/12/24 at 6:05 PM, revealed the staff had contacted him last night regarding Resident #20 having nausea and vomiting, and he had ordered Zofran (Ondansetron) as needed. He confirmed that the staff had not contacted him or made him aware of the resident's decline in condition or her refusal to eat or drink. He stated that he was not notified of her significant weight loss (40.5 pounds in 6 months) or the Registered Dietician (RD) recommendations. He confirmed Resident #20's current condition was serious and stated what you have relayed to me screams neglect. Record review of the emergency room (ER) Report dated 12/17/23, revealed Resident #20 was transported to the ER after suffering an unwitnessed fall at the facility with complaints of back pain. Findings of the CT (Cat Scan) of the Spine Lumbar without contrast dated 12/17/23 revealed, There is a T-12 vertebral fracture involving both the superior and inferior endplates as well as the posterior cortex. Record review of Resident #20's Order Summary Report revealed an order dated 1/08/24, RD (Registered Dietician) consult . Record review of the Consultant Registered Dietician (RD) Note dated 12/27/23, for Resident #20 revealed the RD (Registered Dietician) recommended, Med Pass 2 oz (ounces) BID (twice daily), weekly weights x (times) 4 (four) weeks, and add Fortified Pudding BID (twice daily) at lunch and dinner . Record review of the Consultant Registered Dietician (RD) Note dated 1/5/24, for Resident #20 revealed, Resident w/(with) significant wt (weight) loss x (times) 1 (one) mo (month) (-9%) and x (times) 6 (six) mo (months) (13.7%) (percent). Po (by mouth) intake likely not meeting nutritional needs. Resident is at risk for skin breakdown and wt (weight) loss d/t (due to) decreased appetite . NO N/V/c/D (nausea, vomiting, complaints of diarrhea) documented. Also revealed under REC (recommendations): Resident may benefit from an appetite stimulant, please document % (percentage) of supplement consumed daily, add fortified pudding BID (twice daily) at lunch and dinner, weekly weights x (times) 4 (four) weeks to assure stable weight . Record review of the Consultant Registered Dietician (RD) Note) dated 2/10/24, for Resident #20 revealed, Resident w/(with) significant wt (weight) loss x times 1 (one) mo (month), x (times) 3 (three) mo (months) and x (times) 6 (six) mo (months) . consuming <25% w/(with) refusals of meals . Po (by mouth) intake likely not meeting nutritional needs . NO N/V/c/D (nausea, vomiting, complaints of diarrhea) documented. Also revealed under REC (recommendations): Resident may benefit from an appetite stimulant, please document % of supplement consumed daily, weekly weights x 4 weeks to assure stable weight, if po (by mouth) intake and wt (weight) status does not improve, resident may benefit from an alternate means of nutrition support. Record review of the Order Summary Report for Resident #20 revealed there was not a physician's order for fortified pudding at lunch and supper or a medication to stimulate appetite per Registered Dietician (RD) recommendations. Record review of Resident #20's Physician Nursing Home Visit dated 1/26/24 revealed, No concerns reported by the nursing staff The physician progress note did not identify any documentation to support the resident's nausea and vomiting or weight loss. An interview with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #2 on 2/13/24 at 7:45 AM, revealed Resident #20 was not drinking the med pass supplement, and was refusing meals. She stated that the resident had been refusing meals for several weeks. She revealed that the resident's family was highly involved with her care, and the resident would report nausea to them, and they would come and notify her. An interview with the Dietary Manager (DM) on 2/13/24 at 8:13 AM, revealed that she was new to the role and had been in the position since June 2023. She revealed that the facility had weekly PAR (Patients at Risk) meetings where the weights were discussed. She stated all the Department Heads attend the meetings. The DM revealed, if a resident should need a RD (Registered Dietician) consult, she would notify the RD after the weekly PAR meeting by texting or calling. She stated that the RD would usually text her back to let her know she had the resident down on her list. She revealed that the RD did not come to the facility and did all her consultations remotely. She explained that the RD was consulted on Resident #20 in January 2024, but confirmed that she had not seen any RD recommendations. She stated that the resident had never received fortified pudding, and to her knowledge, had never started on an appetite stimulate. She explained that the facility had trouble getting the RD recommendations. The DM stated she just realized last week on Friday 2/9/24 that the RD recommendations were going to her spam email. She revealed that she tried to open the email and the email read it was quarantined. She revealed that she told the Director of Nursing (DON) that she was not receiving anything from the RD, and she thought the DON had texted her. She revealed that the Administrator had been going into all the residents 'progress notes and printing out the recommendations to make sure they were being implemented. She confirmed that lack of implementation of the RD recommendations could cause the resident to have weight loss and malnourishment. A telephone interview with the Registered Dietician (RD) on 2/13/24 at 9:56 AM, revealed that she worked remotely and tried to be onsite every 60-90 days. She revealed that her last visit to the facility was December 16, 2023. The RD explained that she had access to the Electronic Medical Record (EMR) and was able to chart under the residents' Progress Notes or under the Miscellaneous tab. She revealed that she was usually notified by the Director of Nursing (DON) or the Dietary Manager (DM) when a resident needed a dietary consultation. The RD stated she was notified in late December that Resident #20 needed to be seen due to a significant change. She revealed that she recommended med pass 2 ounces twice daily as a supplement, weekly weights and fortified pudding added with lunch and dinner. She revealed that she also did a consultation on Resident #20 on 1/5/24 and 2/10/24 and recommended that the resident would benefit from an appetite stimulant. She explained that she emailed all her recommendations to the Administrator (ADM), Director of Nursing (DON), Dietary Manager (DM), and the Regional Nursing Consultant (RNC). She explained that she marked on the recommendations if the physician needed to be contacted for a physician order. She confirmed that Resident #20's recommendation was marked to contact the physician for an appetite stimulant and adding the fortified pudding. She stated that she was unable to contact the doctor or write orders because she did not have the authority with her contract with the facility. She stated that she had not been contacted by anyone from the facility reporting that they had not received Resident #20's dietary recommendations. An interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 2/13/24 at 10:38 AM, revealed Resident #20 functional status had declined since her fall and after reviewing the progress notes, she observed there was no documentation to support a decline, nausea, and vomiting or food refusal. She revealed before the fall the resident was ambulatory, rarely in bed, and she took herself to the bathroom. She revealed that she would sit up in a chair in her room. She stated after the fall the resident required more help with her Activities of Daily Living (ADLs), stayed in bed, became incontinent, had more falls, and required the staff to assist with eating. She confirmed that the facility should have notified the physician immediately when the decline came about, and verbalized that was a failure on their part. She explained that the facility had spoken with the son about placing the resident on hospice today, and he had agreed. She explained that she knew it looked bad that they had consulted hospice, but she stated we had talked to the son before, and he thought she might recover. The DON stated that the facility did not reach out to the physician to inquire about drawing labs or any intravenous fluids throughout these months of the resident refusing to eat or drink. She stated that she did report the weight loss to the physician while he was inside the facility. She stated, I do not recall the date or month I notified him. She confirmed that she did not have documentation to support her notification. She stated that the facility was not receiving any of the dietary recommendations, and the Dietary Manager (DM) determined that the emails were going to her junk folder. She explained that the Administrator was going into the resident notes and printing them out to ensure they were all implemented. The DON stated that the RD would also add her notes to the Electronic Medical Record (EMR) and would not tell anyone. She revealed that she had texted the RD to tell her that the recommendations were not received, and the RD would reply that she would resend them. The DON revealed that she had never received any emails from the RD, and confirmed that she had not gone into her junk email to search and see if they came to her that way. The DON stated, I have over 700 junk emails and I do not have time to do that. An interview with the Administrator (ADM) on 2/13/24 at 2:10 PM, revealed the Registered Dietician (RD) worked remotely, and she had seen her in the facility twice. She explained that they were in the process of trying to find a RD onsite. She revealed that the facility usually communicates with the current RD through email or text messages and the last RD recommendation she had received by email was in August 2023. She stated that the Dietary Manager (DM) had received some, but they went to her spam folder encrypted. She explained that she had not reached out to the RD herself to follow up and that the facility had not started an audit and stated they tried to go over the recommendations in the High-Risk meetings. She stated that Resident #20 had been discussed in January 2024 during a PAR (patients at risk) meeting. The ADM confirmed that the Dietary Recommendations for Resident #20 had not been implemented and that the facility failed to document the significant changes that occurred in the resident's condition. She stated, I know the documentations not there. She revealed that she was told the Director of Nursing (DON) had reached out to the physician and stated, It looks bad on our part. An interview with Social Services (SS) on 2/13/24 at 3:00 PM, revealed she had reached out to the family of Resident #20 about the functional decline on 1/10/24. She revealed that the son did not want to do hospice at that time and was hoping the resident would perk up. She explained that since then, she followed up with the family and explained that the resident continued to decline and asked them to reconsider hospice services again. Record review of the Progress Notes for Resident #20 dated 2/14/24, Proper Name Hospice consulted per md order and family request . for declining condition related to Alzheimer's disease . An interview with the Minimum Data Set (MDS) Nurse on 2/14/24 at 5:23 PM, revealed that she did a significant change MDS after Resident #20 fell in December 2023, and after it was identified in the facility's clinical meeting that the resident had a significant weight loss in January 2024. She revealed that after the fall, the resident declined in her ability to get out of bed, and she was no longer able to sit in a chair, which was what the resident liked to do. She explained that the resident experienced increased pain, worsening incontinence and was required to wear a back brace when she was out of the bed. She stated that staff had identified the weight loss, and, in her opinion, it was being addressed. She confirmed that the documentation was absent to support a decline in the residents' condition, and stated she went off what was discussed in the High-Risk meetings. She revealed that she was aware that the resident did not have a physician order for the fortified pudding or an appetite stimulant that was recommended by the Registered Dietician (RD). Record review of the Transfer/Discharge Report revealed the facility admitted Resident #20 on 1/24/22 with medical diagnoses that included Alzheimer's disease, Rheumatoid Arthritis, Primary Open-angled Glaucoma, and Wedge Compression Fracture of T 11-T 12 vertebra, subsequent encounter for fracture with delayed healing. Record review of Minimum Data Set (MDS) with Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 01/10/24 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of 03 which indicated the resident had severe cognitive impairment. Prior MDSs dated 09/18/23 revealed a BIMS of 11, MDS dated [DATE] revealed a BIMS of 9. Resident #13 Cross reference F580, F600, F656 During an observation and interview on 2/13/24 at 11:05 AM, Resident #13 appeared comfortable lying in bed and stated she had lost weight while in the facility. She revealed there were times she did not eat well and she was not on supplements. During an interview on 2/14/24 at 11:40 AM, the Director of Nursing (DON) revealed Resident #13 had a significant weight loss which was not reported to the physician for interventions, therefore, her weight continued to decrease. She stated the Registered Dietician (RD) had not been consulted concerning the significant weight loss. She confirmed that due to the physician and the RD not being notified, the resident had a weight loss that could have possibly been avoided if interventions had been put in place for the resident's nutritional well-being. She confirmed the facility neglected to recognize, evaluate, and address the resident's weights, failed to notify the physician of the weight decline, and failed to consult the RD, therefore, appropriate evaluations and interventions were not ordered or initiated which put the resident at risk for a continued weight loss. She confirmed these failures led to a significant weight loss of 6.92% during Resident #13's first month at the facility and to a 17.52% weight loss during her first four months at the facility. An interview with the facility's Regional Nurse Consultant on 2/15/24 at 8:45 AM, revealed the physician nor the nurse practitioner were notified of Resident #13's significant weight loss and therefore, no interventions were initiated and weight continued to decline. She stated the initial consult with the Registered Dietician (RD) was on admission due to her wounds and once her weight was trending down, no additional consults were made. She confirmed the facility neglected to identify, evaluate, and intervene for nutritional concerns and, therefore, an avoidable weight loss occurred due to the facility's failure to appropriately manage the resident's nutritional needs. During an interview on 2/15/24 at 12:00 PM, the Dietary Manager confirmed she was unaware of Resident #13's significant weight loss and failed to ensure the Registered Dietician was notified of the weight loss concern. Record review of Weights and Vitals Summary revealed Resident #13's weight on 10/3/23 of 166.1 pounds and a weight on 11/2/23 of 154.6 pounds which listed a comparison weight of an 11.5 pound decrease and a 6.9% weight loss. Resident #13's weight on 2/5/24 was 137 pounds and compared to the admission weight 4 months previously of 166.1 pounds on 10/3/23 listed a comparison weight of a 29.1 pound decrease and a 17.5% weight loss. Record review of Resident #13's admission Record revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included Stevens-Johnson Syndrome, Non-pressure Ulcers, Anxiety Disorder, Major Depressive Disorder. Record review of Minimum Data Set (MDS) with Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 12/12/23 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of 12 which indicated the resident had a moderate cognitive impairment. The facility submitted the following removal plan: On 02/13/2024 at 4:30 PM, the Mississippi State Department of Health (MSDH) state survey team notified the Administrator of an Immediate Jeopardy for failing to ensure processes were in place to review and implement Registered Dietician (RD) recommendations, notify the physician of weight loss, and implement interventions to address weight loss for Resident #20, who had lost 40.5 lbs in the last six months. Resident #20 also had nausea and vomiting and was not eating or drinking adequately for the last three weeks and the facility had failed to notify the physician of the significant change. The facility failed to follow care plan interventions to identify weight loss and address weight loss for Resident #20. The facility failed to have an effective Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) meeting to ensure all recommendations from the Registered Dietician were addressed in a prompt manner. Review of facility processes revealed that the recommendations from the registered dietician was being sent to the Dietary Manager via email and the emails were not received and not presented to the interdisciplinary team and reviewed by the provider and implemented. Interview with staff indicates that resident has had poor appetite since January, and it was not documented in the medical record. On 02/11/2024 at 6:27 PM, the facility nurse notified the provider and obtained orders for anti-emetic. On 2/12/2024 at 9:27 am, the facility attempted to transfer resident to the emergency room for evaluation and treatment as indicated. The Responsible Party refused for resident to be sent to the emergency room on this date. The facility obtained a physician's order for hospice services. On 02/13/2024 5:00 PM, In-services began on Abuse and Neglect for all staff by the Assistant Director of Nursing. All staff will be trained prior to returning to work. In-services began by Assistant Director of Nursing on Documentation, Provider Notification, and Change of Condition. All staff will be trained prior to returning to work. On 02/13/2024 at 5:15 PM, Social Services and Medical Records Nurse interviewed all residents regarding Nausea and Vomiting to ensure all significant changes of conditions were reported to the providers. It was noted upon interview that nine (9) residents reported recent complaints of nausea and vomiting, one (1) resident noted to have yellow discharge from mouth and nose, 1 resident was unable to recall when nausea or vomiting occurred with no staff being knowledgeable of nausea or vomiting, two (2) residents reported nausea or vomiting after eating, 2 residents reported not having appetite or eating, 1 resident reported nausea but did not report to nurse, 2 residents reported nausea and medications received. On 02/13/2024 at 5:30 PM, all residents were audited for weight loss by the Director of Nursing, Regional Nurse Consultant, and Minimum Data Set Nurse. Results of weight loss audit were reviewed by the medical director (15 unplanned weight losses, 1 planned) and new orders and diagnoses were provided by the medical director. All nutrition care plans audited by Minimum Data Set Nurse on 02/13/2024 with 5 residents whose registered dieticians' recommendations were not on care plans, dietary recommendations reviewed with providers and orders received per providers. On 02/13/2024 at 6:05 PM, the Director of Nursing notified the physician of all 9 residents, notified the Institutional Specialized Needs Plan (ISNP) nurse practitioner of all residents (4) and hospice of all residents (1) with Nausea and Vomiting with new orders received from provider. 1 resident reviewed with new orders for chest x-ray due to cough, congestion, and yellow discharge from mouth and nose, 2 residents were ordered medications for reflux, 1 resident noted to be receiving antibiotics and has orders in place for anti-emetic medications, 1 resident reported abdominal pain and MD w[TRUNCATED]
CRITICAL (J)

Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation

Deficiency F0865 (Tag F0865)

Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on staff interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed maintain an effective Quality Assurance...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on staff interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed maintain an effective Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) program to identify, analyze, and address residents with weight loss for two (2) of six (6) residents reviewed for nutrition. Resident #13 and Resident #20. The facility's Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) review indicated the facility's failure resulted in a lack of action to identify and address weight loss, which placed Resident #13 and Resident #20, and all other residents residing in the facility at risk for serious harm, serious injury, serious impairment, and possibly death. The State Agency (SA) identified an Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) that began on 11/02/23 when the facility failed to recognize, evaluate, and address Resident #13's nutritional needs, which resulted in an unintended significant weight loss of 6.92% (percent) in one (1) month, which further led to a significant weight loss of 17.52% (percent) in four (4) months. The facility's failure to consult a Registered Dietician (RD), notify the attending physician of a significant change in condition, and act upon the residents' weight loss, placed the resident, and all other residents residing in the facility at risk for serious negative outcomes. The IJ existed at: 42 CFR §483.75(a) Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) Program - F865 - Scope/Severity J The facility Administrator was notified of the IJ on 2/13/24 at 4:30 PM and provided the IJ Template. The facility provided an acceptable Removal Plan on 2/14/24, in which they alleged all corrective actions to remove the IJ were completed on 2/13/24 and the IJ removed on 2/14/24. The SA validated the Removal Plan on 2/20/24 and determined the IJ was removed on 2/20/24. Therefore, the scope and severity for 42 CFR §483.75(a) Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) Program was lowered from a J to a D while the facility develops a plan of correction to monitor the effectiveness of the systemic changes to ensure the facility sustains compliance with regulatory requirements. Findings include: Record review of the facility policy titled Quality Assessment and Performance Improvement undated, revealed, Overview: The Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) committee will implement a process that is ongoing, multi level, and facility wide that encompasses managerial, administrative, clinical, ancillary, and environmental services as well as contracted services and suppliers. The program should address all systems of care and management practices while emphasizing safety, quality of life, and resident choice. The primary purpose of the committee is to identify and analyze actual or potential quality issues, develop and implement appropriate plans to improve performance, to address identified quality issues, and monitor the effectiveness of implemented changes. The committee will make any needed revisions to performance improvement plans. Other purpose of the QAPI committee are to maintain satisfactory, consistent functioning of systems, to prevent deviations from care processes (to the extent possible), to discern issues and concerns with facility systems, and to correct said systems as needed. The committee will ensure that information about the QAPI committee activity is provided to consultants or others who are not members of the committee but have responsibility of the Governing Body oversight. Governance And Leadership: The committee will consist of the facility administrator, the Director of Nursing, the Medical Director, the Infection Preventionist and at least 3 other designated key staff members. The facility administrator will be responsible for the effective functioning of the QAPI program but may designate one or more persons to be accountable for QAPI. The minutes of the monthly QAPI meeting will be reviewed with the Medical Director for input. The methodology utilized by the facility to identify quality concerns incorporates the following: Establishment of critical items .Data gathering and trending including input from staff, residents, and families regarding quality problems and opportunities for improvement .Establishment of benchmarks for critical items utilizing the best available evidence to define goals . Utilization of root cause analysis Resident #20 Record review of Resident #20's weights revealed a significant weight loss of 13.9% (percent) in one (1) month, 21.6% (percent) in three (3) months, and 26.2% (percent) in six (6) months. The Dietary Manager (DM) interview on 2/13/24 at 8:13 AM, revealed she was new to the role and had been in the position since June 2023. She revealed the facility had weekly PAR (Patients at Risk) meetings where the weights were discussed. She stated all the department heads attend the meetings but that the Registered Dietician (RD) does not attend PAR or Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) meetings. The RD sends her recommendations and we are suppose to review them at the quarterly meetings. The Registered Dietician (RD) revealed during a telephone interview with on 2/13/24 at 9:56 AM, she worked remotely and tried to be onsite every 60-90 days. She revealed that her last visit to the facility was December 16, 2023. The RD explained she had access to the Electronic Medical Record (EMR) and was able to chart under the residents' Progress Notes or under the Miscellaneous tab. She revealed she did not attend the Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) meetings. The Director of Nursing (DON) interview on 2/13/24 at 10:38 AM, revealed she had been in the position since October 2023 and she had been to one (1) Quality Assurance (QA) meeting since she started and could not recall if weights were even discussed. The DON stated she had not conducted any tracking/trending on the facility's weight loss, and confirmed that she should have. She stated the Registered Dietician (RD) did not attend Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) meetings or the weekly PAR meetings. The Administrator (ADM) interview on 2/13/24 at 2:10 PM, revealed the last Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) meeting conducted on weight loss was February 7, 2024, and included audits conducted by the DON on weights, physician orders, and Dietary Consults. She revealed no other QAPI's had been conducted pertaining to weight loss, and she was unsure what the Director of Nursing (DON) had completed in her tracking and trending and she confirmed that the Medical Director was not in attendance for the last meeting and stated she went over everything by phone. The Regional Nursing Consultant (RNC) interview on 2/14/24 at 5:40 PM, revealed the facility did not have a great QAPI (Quality Assurance Performance Improvement) system in place for identifying, tracking, and trending weight loss. The Administrator interview on 2/14/24 at 4:36 PM, , revealed she was the contact person for Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI). She revealed we have a meeting monthly which includes the Director of nursing (DON), Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON), Dietary, Maintenance, Social Services and all personnel that were required. An interview with the Chief Clinical Officer (CCO) on 2/15/24 at 11:00 AM, revealed the facility has struggled with getting a Director of Nursing (DON). She stated they have had 4 DON's since the previous survey in 2022. She confirmed the facility did not have a great Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) program and revealed the corporate office was in the process of revamping the QAPI program so each facility will have a uniformed template to use. Record review of the QA (Quality Assurance) meeting minutes dated 1/9/24 for the month review of December 2023 revealed, . Director of Nursing -weights, auditing orders, and making rounds. No documentation was provided to indicate tracking and trending resident weight loss or to address what actions were put in place. The specific residents who had significant weight loss were not mentioned. Record review of the QA (Quality Assurance) meeting minutes dated 2/7/24 for the month review of January 2024 revealed, . Director of Nursing -weights, auditing orders, and making rounds. No documentation was provided to indicate tracking and trending resident weight loss or to address what actions were put in place. The specific residents who had significant weight loss were not mentioned. Record review of the Transfer/Discharge Report revealed the facility admitted Resident #20 on 1/24/22 with medical diagnoses that included Alzheimer's disease, Rheumatoid Arthritis, and Wedge compression fracture of T 11-T 12 vertebra, subsequent encounter for fracture with delayed healing. Resident #13 Record review of Weights and Vitals Summary revealed Resident #13's weight on 10/3/23 was 166.1 pounds and a weight on 11/2/23 was 154.6 pounds which listed a comparison weight of an 11.5 pound decrease and a 6.9% weight loss. Resident #13's weight on 2/5/24 was 137 pounds and compared to the admission weight 4 months previously of 166.1 pounds on 10/3/23 listed a comparison weight of a 29.1 pound decrease and a 17.5% weight loss. Record review of Resident #13's admission Record revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included Stevens-Johnson Syndrome, Non-pressure Ulcers, Anxiety Disorder, Major Depressive Disorder. The facility submitted the following removal plan: On 02/13/2024 at 4:30 PM, the Mississippi State Department of Health (MSDH) state survey team notified the Administrator of an Immediate Jeopardy for failing to ensure processes were in place to review and implement Registered Dietician (RD)recommendations, notify the physician of weight loss, and implement interventions to address weight loss for Resident #20, who had lost 40.5 lbs in the last six months. Resident #20 also had nausea and vomiting and was not eating or drinking adequately for the last three weeks and the facility had failed to notify the physician of the significant change. The facility failed to follow care plan interventions to identify weight loss and address weight loss for Resident #20. The facility failed to have an effective Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) meeting to ensure all recommendations from the Registered Dietician were addressed in a prompt manner. Review of facility processes revealed that the recommendations from the registered dietician was being sent to the Dietary Manager via email and the emails were not received and not presented to the interdisciplinary team and reviewed by the provider and implemented. Interview with staff indicates that resident has had poor appetite since January, and it was not documented in the medical record. On 02/11/2024 at 6:27 PM, the facility nurse notified the provider and obtained orders for anti-emetic. On 2/12/2024 at 9:27 am, the facility attempted to transfer resident to the emergency room for evaluation and treatment as indicated. The Responsible Party refused for resident to be sent to the emergency room on this date. The facility obtained a physician's order for hospice services. On 02/13/2024 5:00 PM, In-services began on Abuse and Neglect for all staff by the Assistant Director of Nursing. All staff will be trained prior to returning to work. In-services began by Assistant Director of Nursing on Documentation, Provider Notification, and Change of Condition. All staff will be trained prior to returning to work. On 02/13/2024 at 5:15 PM, Social Services and Medical Records Nurse interviewed all residents regarding Nausea and Vomiting to ensure all significant changes of conditions were reported to the providers. It was noted upon interview that nine (9) residents reported recent complaints of nausea and vomiting, one (1) resident noted to have yellow discharge from mouth and nose, 1 resident was unable to recall when nausea or vomiting occurred with no staff being knowledgeable of nausea or vomiting, two (2) residents reported nausea or vomiting after eating, 2 residents reported not having appetite or eating, 1 resident reported nausea but did not report to nurse, 2 residents reported nausea and medications received. On 02/13/2024 at 5:30 PM, all residents were audited for weight loss by the Director of Nursing, Regional Nurse Consultant, and Minimum Data Set Nurse. Results of weight loss audit were reviewed by the medical director (15 unplanned weight losses, 1 planned) and new orders and diagnoses were provided by the medical director. All nutrition care plans audited by Minimum Data Set Nurse on 02/13/2024 with 5 residents whose registered dieticians' recommendations were not on care plans, dietary recommendations reviewed with providers and orders received per providers. On 02/13/2024 at 6:05 PM, the Director of Nursing notified the physician of all 9 residents, notified the Institutional Specialized Needs Plan (ISNP) nurse practitioner of all residents (4) and hospice of all residents (1) with Nausea and Vomiting with new orders received from provider. 1 resident reviewed with new orders for chest x-ray due to cough, congestion, and yellow discharge from mouth and nose, 2 residents were ordered medications for reflux, 1 resident noted to be receiving antibiotics and has orders in place for anti-emetic medications, 1 resident reported abdominal pain and MD was notified and seen resident on 02/12/2024 with new orders for stool softener, 1 resident noted to have diarrhea and has been antibiotics new orders received for Zofran and anti-diarrheal, 1 resident noted to have weight loss and nausea and vomiting new orders received on 2/11/2024 to start Zofran and start peri-actin the family was not agreeable to start peri-actin and wanted to wait to speak to hospice on 02/14/2024, 2 residents did not report nausea to nurses at time of occurrence. On 02/13/2024 at 6:59 PM, Social Services and Medical Records nurse interviewed residents with BIMS 10 or higher to ensure feeling of safe and are free of health concerns, no health or safety concern during interviews. On 02/13/2024 at 8:30 PM, all Registered Dietician recommendations for last 90 days audited by Dietary Manager and Minimum Data Set Nurse with 5 residents whose registered dietician recommendations were not addressed. All Dietary recommendations reviewed with the Medical Director (5) and subsequent providers as appropriate Hospice (2 residents who have been on hospice services prior to survey entrance) and Institutional Special Needs Program nurse practitioner (1), new orders received from providers as appropriate. On 02/13/2024 at 8:40 PM, All nutrition care plans audited by Minimum Data Set Nurse with 5 residents whose registered dieticians' recommendations were not on care plans, dietary recommendations reviewed with providers and orders received per providers and care plans updated. On 02/13/2024 at 9:00 PM, all residents noted with weight loss were reviewed with the Medical Director, the Medical Director performed medication review on all residents with weight loss. Ad Hoc QAPI was held on 02/13/2024 at 10:15 PM with the Medical Director via phone, Administrator, Director of Nursing, Social Services, Minimum Data Set Nurse, Life Connections Coordinator, Regional Nurse Consultant, Regional Director of Operations, Assistant Director of Nursing, Registered Nurse Supervisor, Dietary Manager, and Medical Records Nurse. The Minimum Data Set Nurse has been designated as the Quality Assurance Nurse with responsibility reviewing all audits, Performance Improvement Plans, Quality Measures, and actively participating in the Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement meetings. All areas of deficiencies were reviewed in Ad-Hoc Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement meeting. Medical Records nurse or Assistant Director of Nursing will be responsible for receiving Registered Dietician recommendations, reviewing with providers, entering orders, and progress notes. New processes for Medical Director to review facility weight losses each week on visit, Registered Dietitian recommendations to be reviewed weekly with the Interdisciplinary Team and the Medical Director by Friday, in the event Registered Dietician recommendations are not received, the medical director will be notified. The Dietary Manager will review the weight and vital sign exception report and present findings in the clinical meeting. The Director of Nursing will review weights and registered dietician recommendations. The Director of Nursing will review progress notes daily. The administrator will review the audit findings weekly. All results will be reviewed in Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement meetings. On 02/13/2024 at 10:00 PM, One-on-one Inservice conducted with Administrator by the Regional Director of Operations for weights, care plans, Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement, Notifying Physicians, Registered Dietician Recommendations, Documentation, and Administration Processes. The Regional Nurse Consultant conducted one-on-one in-services with the Director of Nursing, Dietary Manager, Assistant Director of Nursing, Medical Records Nurse, and Minimum Data Set Nurse regarding weights, care plans, Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement, Notifying Physicians, Registered Dietician Recommendations, Documentation and Administration Processes. One-on-one in-service conducted with the Dietary Manager by the Administrator regarding Communication of Dietary Recommendations, Review of Recommendations, and reporting any identified areas of concerns with Dietary Recommendations. All nurses who provided care to resident #20 for the previous 3 weeks were provided One-on-one in-services regarding reporting changes of condition to provider, documentation, and following plan of care then were provided with a post-test to confirm understanding of one-on-one in-services. As of 02/14/2024, the facility alleges compliance and all corrective action completed on 02/13/2024. The Survey Agency (SA) validated the facility's Corrective Actions on 2/20/24: The SA validated through record review that Resident #20 was ordered an anti-emetic for nausea/vomiting. The SA validated through interview and record review that in-services were conducted for Abuse and neglect, documentation, provider notification, and change of condition. No staff can return to work until they have received in-services. The SA validated through record review that all residents were interviewed and screened for symptoms of nausea and vomiting and the physician was notified of the findings with physician orders if appropriate. The SA validated through record review and staff interview that all residents were audited for weight loss and the Medical Director was updated. All nutrition care plans were audited and updated with dietary recommendations. The SA validated through record review that all residents with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIM's) of 10 or higher were interviewed to ensure feeling safe in their environment and free from health concerns. The SA validated through record review that all Registered Dietician (RD) recommendations were audited and addressed with the provider as appropriate. The SA validated the Medical Director reviewed the resident with weight loss and performed medication review. The SA validated through staff interview and record review on 2/20/24 that an Emergency Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) meeting was conducted on 2/13/24 with all members in attendance. The SA validated through record review and staff interview that one-on-one in-services were conducted on weights, care plans, Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI), notifying physicians, reporting changes, Registered Dietician Recommendations, Documentation, and Administrative Processes. No staff can return to work until they have received in-services. The SA validated that all corrective actions were completed on 2/13/24 and the IJ was removed as of 2/14/24.
CRITICAL (K)

Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation

Free from Abuse/Neglect (Tag F0600)

Someone could have died · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, staff and resident interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to protect a ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, staff and resident interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to protect a residents right to be free from neglect for two (2) of three (3) residents sampled for abuse, Resident #13 and Resident #20 as evidence by: 1) neglected to recognize, communicate, evaluate, and address a resident's nutritional needs, which resulted in an unintended significant weight loss of 6.92% (percent) in one (1) month, which further led to a significant weight loss of 17.52% (percent) in four (4) months. Resident #13. The facility's failure to consult a Registered Dietician (RD), notify the attending physician of a significant change in condition, and act upon the residents' weight loss, placed the resident, and all other residents residing in the facility at risk for serious serious harm, serious injury, serious impairment, or possibly death. 2) neglected to identify, communicate, and address a resident at risk for malnutrition due to prolonged nausea and vomiting, and failure to identify a decrease in food intake due to pain and nausea resulted in an unintended significant weight loss of 40.5 pounds in six (6) months. Resident #20. The facility's failure to implement a Registered Dietician (RD) recommendation, notify the attending physician of a significant change in condition, and address the residents' prolonged symptoms of nausea and vomiting, and decreased food intake placed the resident and all other residents residing in the facility at risk for serious harm, serious injury, serious impairment, or possibly death. The facility's neglect also resulted in a functional decline for Resident #20, which potentially resulted in the resident's admission to hospice services on 2/14/24. The State Agency (SA) identified an Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) and Substandard Quality of Care (SQC) that began on 11/02/23 when the facility failed to recognize, evaluate, and address Resident #13's nutritional needs, which resulted in an unintended significant weight loss of 6.92% (percent) in one (1) month, which further led to a significant weight loss of 17.52% (percent) in four (4) months. The facility's failure to consult a Registered Dietician (RD), notify the attending physician of a significant change in condition, and act upon the residents' weight loss, placed the resident, and all other residents residing in the facility at risk for serious negative outcomes. The IJ and SQC existed at: 42 CFR §483.12 Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation - F600 - Scope/Severity J The facility Administrator was notified of the IJ and SQC on 2/13/24 at 4:30 PM and provided the IJ Template. The facility provided an acceptable Removal Plan on 2/14/24, in which they alleged all corrective actions to remove the IJ were completed on 2/13/24 and the IJ removed on 2/14/24. The SA validated the Removal Plan on 2/20/24 and determined the IJ was removed on 2/14/24. Therefore, the scope and severity for 42 CFR §483.12 Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation - F600, was lowered from a J to a D while the facility develops a plan of correction to monitor the effectiveness of the systemic changes to ensure the facility sustains compliance with regulatory requirements. Findings Include: Review of the facility policy titled Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation and Misappropriation Prevention Program with a revision date of 10/22 revealed, Policy Statement: Residents have the right to be free from abuse, neglect, misappropriation of resident property and exploitation. This includes but is not limited to freedom from corporal punishment, involuntary seclusion, verbal, mental, sexual or physical abuse, and physical or chemical restraints not used to treat the resident ' s symptoms .Policy Interpretation and Implementation: The resident abuse, neglect and exploitation prevention program consists of a facility-wide commitment and resource allocation to support the following objectives: 1. Protect residents from abuse, neglect, exploitation or misappropriation of property by anyone including, but not necessarily limited to a. facility staff; . 2. Develop and implement policies and protocols to prevent and identify: . neglect of residents; . Resident #20 Cross reference F580, F656, F692 During an observation and interview with Resident #20 on 2/11/24 at 3:19 PM, revealed her lying in a fetal position at the foot of the bed. Upon entrance to the room the door was closed, the room was dark and it was observed that a garbage can was located on the floor beside the resident. The resident stated she was sick to her stomach and she had a washcloth in her hand and was wiping her face. The resident 's color was pale, lips were dry, and she was thin in appearance. During an observation and interview with Resident #20 on 2/11/24 at 6:07 PM, revealed her lying on her right side in bed. The resident stated she was nauseated and could not eat dinner and stated, I'm just sick. During an observation of Resident #20 on 2/12/24 at 8:29 AM, revealed her lying on her right side in bed. The garbage can was located on the floor, close by the resident. The breakfast tray was located on the bedside table untouched. CNA #2 entered the resident's room, and stated the resident refused to eat or drink due to nausea. CNA #2 removed the tray cover, and the resident began to retch and vomited a small amount of clear substance into the garbage can. The resident was observed as weak and pale, and her lips were dry. During an interview with CNA #2 on 2/12/24 at 8:35 AM, revealed she had worked at the facility for three (3) weeks and Resident #20 had refused to eat or drink everyday since then. She explained that the resident had been nauseated, dry heaving, and vomiting for the past three (3) weeks, that she had been employed at the facility. She confirmed that she had reported the symptoms to the medication nurse every day that she worked. Record review of Resident #20's Progress Notes from 11/01/23 through 2/11/24, revealed there was not any documentation that the resident had nausea and vomiting or that she refused meals. Record review of the Occupational Therapy Progress Notes dated 2/01/24 revealed, Patient refused: pt (patient) is refusing to eat and has poor appetite. pt (patient) c/o (complains of) nausea almost every day, but is not eating even with max encouragement and assist from therapist. Also revealed under, Assessment and Summary of Skilled Services: . therapist encouraging pt (patient) daily to eat and providing assist, but pt (patient) refuses to eat and c/o (complains of) nausea . Record review of the Order Summary Report for Resident #20 revealed an order dated 2/11/24 at 1827 (6:27 PM), Ondansetron HCL (Hydrochloride) Tablet (Zofran) 4 (four) MG (milligrams) Give 1 (one) tablet by mouth every 6 (six) hours as needed for Nausea and Vomiting . Record review of Resident #20's January and February Medication admission Record (MAR) revealed, there was not a physician ' s order for nausea/vomiting medication before the new order for Zofran started on 2/11/24, which indicated the resident's symptoms of prolonged nausea and vomiting were left untreated. Record review of the Meal Intake Documentation Report completed by the Certified Nurse Aides (CNAs) revealed, Resident #20 refused eighteen (18) meals from 12/18/23 through 12/31/23. She refused thirty-one (31) meals in the month of January 2024, with a total of thirty-nine (39) meals consumed at 0-25% (percent), and she refused sixteen (16) meals from 2/01/24 through 2/11/24, with a total of fourteen (14) meals consumed at 0-25% (percent). Record review of Resident #20's Order Summary Report revealed an order dated 1/08/24, Weekly weights x (times) 4 (four) weeks one time a day every 7 day(s) . Record review of Resident #20's weights revealed a significant weight loss of 13.9% (percent) in one (1) month, 21.6% (percent) in three (3) months, and 26.2% (percent) in six (6) months. Record review of the Order Summary Report for Resident #20 revealed an order dated 1/04/24, Regular diet Regular texture, Regular consistency . Also revealed an order dated 1/04/24, Med Pass 2.0 two times a day for supplement. During an interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 2/11/24 at 3:55 PM revealed Resident #20's condition had declined over the past couple of months. She explained that the resident had a significant decline after she fell in December 2023, and received a fracture of the T-12 vertebrae and had to be placed on strong pain medications. She stated, to her knowledge, the resident had not experienced any nausea and vomiting until yesterday when the Survey Agent brought it to her attention. She stated none of the staff had reported it to her and that she should be aware of what was happening with the resident. She revealed she was aware that the resident was not eating or drinking and had been refusing meals and that she had made the physician aware of the resident's decline, and the significant weight loss, and the Registered Dietician (RD) had evaluated her. An interview with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #3 on 2/11/24 at 4:20 PM, revealed Resident #20 had a decline over the past several weeks. She explained that the resident would not eat or drink anything, including the med pass supplement. She stated that usually they cannot get her to take her medications. She revealed that the resident would eat crushed ice chips, but that's about it. LPN #3 explained that she noticed a change after the resident fell and hurt her back and was in a lot of pain. She confirmed that she had not notified the resident's physician of the change in condition. During a telephone interview with Medical Director on 2/12/24 at 6:05 PM, revealed the staff had contacted him last night regarding Resident #20 having nausea and vomiting, and he had ordered Zofran as needed. He confirmed that the staff had not contacted him or made him aware of the residents' decline in condition or her refusal to eat or drink. He stated that he was not notified of her significant weight loss (40.5 pounds in 6 months) or the Registered Dietician (RD) recommendations. He confirmed Resident #20's current condition was serious and stated What you have relayed screams neglect. Record review of Resident #20's Order Summary Report revealed an order dated 1/08/24, RD (Registered Dietician) consult . Record review of the Consultant Registered Dietician (RD) Note dated 12/27/23, for Resident #20 revealed the RD (Registered Dietician) recommended, Med Pass 2 oz (ounces) BID (twice daily), weekly weights x (times) 4 (four) weeks, and add Fortified Pudding BID (twice daily) at lunch and dinner . Record review of the Consultant Registered Dietician (RD) Note dated 1/5/24, for Resident #20 revealed, Resident w/(with) significant wt (weight) loss x (times) 1 (one) mo (month) (-9%) and x (times) 6 (six) mo (months) (13.7%) (percent). Po (by mouth) intake likely not meeting nutritional needs. Resident is at risk for skin breakdown and wt (weight) loss d/t (due to) decreased appetite . NO N/V/c/D (nausea, vomiting, complaints of diarrhea) documented. Also revealed under REC (recommendations): Resident may benefit from an appetite stimulant, please document % (percentage) of supplement consumed daily, add fortified pudding BID (twice daily) at lunch and dinner, weekly weights x (times) 4 (four) weeks to assure stable weight . Record review of the Consultant Registered Dietician (RD) Note) dated 2/10/24, for Resident #20 revealed, Resident w/(with) significant wt (weight) loss x times 1 (one) mo (month), x (times) 3 (three) mo (months) and x (times) 6 (six) mo (months) . consuming <25% w/(with) refusals of meals . Po (by mouth) intake likely not meeting nutritional needs . NO N/V/c/D (nausea, vomiting, complaints of diarrhea) documented. Also revealed under REC (recommendations): Resident may benefit from an appetite stimulant, please document % of supplement consumed daily, weekly weights x 4 weeks to assure stable weight, if po (by mouth) intake and wt (weight) status does not improve, resident may benefit from an alternate means of nutrition support. Record review of the Order Summary Report for Resident #20 revealed there was not a physician's order for fortified pudding at lunch and supper or a medication to stimulate appetite per Registered Dietician (RD) recommendations. Record review of Resident #20's Physician Nursing Home Visit dated 1/26/24 revealed, No concerns reported by the nursing staff The physician progress note did not identify any documentation to support the resident's nausea and vomiting or weight loss. An interview with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #2 on 2/13/24 at 7:45 AM, revealed Resident #20 was not drinking the med pass supplement, and was refusing meals. She stated that the resident had been refusing meals for several weeks and that the resident's family was highly involved with her care, and the resident would report nausea to them, and the family would come and let us know when they were there for a visit. LPN #2 confirmed that there was no documentation in the nurses notes to indicate that the resident had nausea or vomiting. During an interview with the Dietary Manager (DM) on 2/13/24 at 8:13 AM, revealed that she was new to the role and had been in the position since June 2023. She revealed that the facility had weekly PAR (Patients at Risk) meetings where the weights of the residents were discussed and stated all the department heads attend the meetings. The DM revealed, if a resident should need a RD (Registered Dietician) consult, she would notify the RD after the weekly PAR meeting by texting or calling. She stated that the RD would usually text her back to let her know she had the resident down on her list. She revealed that the RD did not come to the facility and did all her consultations remotely. She explained that the RD was consulted on Resident #20 in January 2024, but confirmed that she had not seen any RD recommendations since that time. She stated that the resident had never received fortified pudding, and to her knowledge, had never started on an appetite stimulate. She explained that the facility had trouble getting the RD recommendations and that she just realized last week on Friday 2/9/24 that the RD recommendations were going to her spam email. She revealed that she tried to open the email and the email read it was quarantined. She revealed that she told the Director of Nursing (DON) that she was not receiving anything from the RD, and she thought the DON had texted her and took care of it. She confirmed that lack of implementation of the RD recommendations could cause the resident to have further weight loss and malnourishment. During a telephone interview with the Registered Dietician (RD) on 2/13/24 at 9:56 AM, she stated she was notified in late December that Resident #20 needed to be seen due to a significant weight change. She confirmed that she recommended med pass 2 ounces twice daily as a supplement, weekly weights and fortified pudding added with lunch and dinner. She revealed that she also did a consultation on Resident #20 on 1/5/24 and 2/10/24 and recommended that the resident would benefit from an appetite stimulant. She explained that she emailed all her recommendations to the Administrator (ADM), Director of Nursing (DON), Dietary Manager (DM), and the Regional Nursing Consultant (RNC). She explained that she marked on the recommendations if the physician needed to be contacted for a physician order and confirmed that Resident #20's recommendation was marked to contact the physician for an appetite stimulant and adding the fortified pudding. She stated that she was unable to contact the doctor or write orders because she did not have the authority with her contract with the facility. She stated that she had not been contacted by anyone from the facility reporting that they had not received Resident #20's dietary recommendations During an interview with the DON on 2/13/24 at 10:38 AM, revealed Resident #20 functional status had declined since her fall. She confirmed after reviewing the progress notes, she observed there was no documentation to support a decline, nausea, and vomiting or food refusal. She revealed before the fall the resident was ambulatory, rarely in bed, and she took herself to the bathroom. She revealed that she would sit up in a chair in her room. She stated after the fall the resident required more help with her Activities of Daily Living (ADLs), stayed in bed, became incontinent, had more falls, and required the staff to assist with eating. She confirmed that the facility should have notified the physician immediately when the decline came about, and verbalized that was a failure on their part. She explained that the facility had spoken with the son about placing the resident on hospice today, and he had agreed. She explained that she knew it looked bad that they had consulted hospice, but she stated we had talked to the son before, and he thought she might recover. The DON stated that the facility did not reach out to the physician to inquire about drawing labs or any intravenous fluids throughout these months of the resident refusing to eat or drink and experiencing significant weight loss. She stated that she did report the weight loss to the physician while he was inside the facility. She stated, I do not recall the date or month I notified him, and confirmed that she did not have documentation to support her notification. She stated that the facility was not receiving any of the dietary recommendations, and the Dietary Manager (DM) determined that the emails were going to her junk folder. The DON stated that the RD would also add her notes to the Electronic Medical Record (EMR) and would not tell anyone. The DON revealed that she had never received any emails from the RD, and confirmed that she had not gone into her junk email to search and see if they came to her that way. The DON stated, I have over 700 junk emails and I do not have time to do that. The DON confirmed that with 60 residents in the facility she should have noticed when she was not getting anything from the RD each month but confirmed that she hadn't noticed. During an interview with the ADM on 2/13/24 at 2:10 PM, revealed the Registered Dietician (RD) worked remotely, and she had seen her in the facility twice. She revealed that the facility usually communicates with the current RD through email or text messages and confirmed that the last RD recommendation she had received by email was in August 2023. She stated that the Dietary Manager (DM) had received some, but they went to her spam folder encrypted. She revealed in November 2023 she started going into the resident notes and printing out the recommendations. She explained that she had not reached out to the RD herself to follow up. The ADM stated they tried to go over the recommendations in the High-Risk meetings and that Resident #20 had been discussed in January 2024 during a PAR (patients at risk) meeting. The ADM confirmed that the Dietary Recommendations for Resident #20 had not been implemented and that the facility failed to document the significant changes that occurred in the resident's condition. She stated, I know the documentations not there. It looks bad on our part. During an interview with Social Services (SS) on 2/13/24 at 3:00 PM, revealed she had reached out to the family of Resident #20 about the functional decline on 1/10/24. She revealed that the son did not want to do hospice at that time and was hoping the resident would perk up. She explained that since then, she followed up with the family and explained that the resident continued to decline and asked them to reconsider hospice services again. The SS confirmed that she was unaware that the physician had not been notified of the significant changes with the resident. Record review of the Progress Notes for Resident #20 dated 2/14/24, Proper Name Hospice consulted per md (medical doctor) order and family request . for declining condition related to Alzheimer's disease . During an interview with the Minimum Data Set (MDS) Nurse on 2/14/24 at 5:23 PM, revealed that she did a significant change MDS after Resident #20 fell in December 2023, and after it was identified in the facility's clinical meeting that the resident had a significant weight loss in January 2024. She revealed that after the fall, the resident declined in her ability to get out of bed, and she was no longer able to sit in a chair, which was what the resident liked to do. She explained that the resident experienced increased pain, worsening incontinence and was required to wear a back brace when she was out of the bed. She confirmed that the documentation was absent to support a decline in the resident's condition, and stated she went off what was discussed in the High-Risk meetings. She revealed that she was aware that the resident did not have a physician order for the fortified pudding or an appetite stimulant that was recommended by the Registered Dietician (RD). Record review of the Transfer/Discharge Report revealed the facility admitted Resident #20 on 1/24/22 with medical diagnoses that included Alzheimer's disease, rheumatoid arthritis, primary open-angled glaucoma, and wedge compression fracture of T 11-T 12 vertebra, subsequent encounter for fracture with delayed healing. Record review of Minimum Data Set (MDS) with Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 01/10/24 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of 03 which indicated the resident had severe cognitive impairment. Prior MDS's dated 09/18/23 revealed a BIMS of 11, MDS dated [DATE] revealed a BIMS of 9. Resident #13 Cross reference F580, F656, F692 An observation and interview on 2/13/24 at 11:05 AM, Resident #13, lying in bed, stated she had lost weight while in the facility. She revealed there were times she did not eat well and she was not on supplements. An interview on 2/14/24 at 11:40 AM, the Director of Nursing (DON) revealed Resident #13 had a significant weight loss which was not reported to the physician for interventions, therefore, her weight continued to decrease. She stated the Registered Dietician (RD) had not been consulted concerning the significant weight loss. She confirmed that due to the physician and the RD not being notified, the resident had a weight loss that could have possibly been avoided if interventions had been put in place for the resident's nutritional well-being. She confirmed each resident has the right to appropriate care, and the facility failed to provide the needed nutritional care. She confirmed the facility neglected to recognize, evaluate, and address the resident's weights, failed to notify the physician of the weight decline, and failed to consult the RD, therefore, appropriate evaluations and interventions were not ordered or initiated which put the resident at risk for a continued weight loss. She confirmed these failures led to a significant weight loss of 6.92% during Resident #13's first month at the facility and to a 17.52% weight loss during her first four months at the facility. An interview with the facility's Regional Nurse Consultant on 2/15/24 at 8:45 AM, revealed the physician nor the nurse practitioner were notified of Resident #13's significant weight loss and therefore, no interventions were initiated and weight continued to decline. She stated the initial consult with the Registered Dietician (RD) was on admission due to her wounds and once her weight was trending down, no additional consults were made. She confirmed each resident has the right to receive appropriate care and the facility failed to provide the needed nutritional care for this resident. She confirmed the facility neglected to identify, evaluate, and intervene for nutritional concerns and, therefore, an avoidable weight loss occurred due to the facility's failure to appropriately manage the resident's nutritional needs. An interview on 2/15/24 at 12:00 PM, the Dietary Manager confirmed she was unaware of the resident's significant weight loss and failed to ensure the Registered Dietician was notified of the weight loss concern. Record review of Weights and Vitals Summary revealed Resident #13's admission weight on 10/3/23 was 166.1 pounds and a weight on 11/2/23 was 154.6 pounds which listed a comparison weight of an 11.5 pound decrease and a 6.9% weight loss. Resident #13's weight on 2/5/24 was 137 pounds and compared to the admission weight 4 months previously of 166.1 pounds on 10/3/23 listed a comparison weight of a 29.1 pound decrease and a 17.5% weight loss. Record review of Resident #13's admission Record revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included Stevens-Johnson Syndrome, Non-pressure Ulcers, Anxiety Disorder, Major Depressive Disorder. Record review of Minimum Data Set (MDS) with Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 12/12/23 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of 12 which indicated the resident had a moderate cognitive impairment. The facility submitted the following removal plan: On 02/13/2024 at 4:30 PM the Mississippi State Department of Health (MSDH) state survey team notified the Administrator of an Immediate Jeopardy for failing to ensure processes were in place to review and implement Registered Dietician (RD) recommendations, notify the physician of weight loss, and implement interventions to address weight loss for Resident #20, who had lost 40.5lbs in the last six months. Resident #20 also had nausea and vomiting and was not eating or drinking adequately for the last three weeks and the facility had failed to notify the physician of the significant change. The facility failed to follow care plan interventions to identify weight loss and address weight loss for Resident #20. The facility failed to have an effective Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) meeting to ensure all recommendations from the Registered Dietician were addressed in a prompt manner. Review of facility processes revealed that the recommendations from the registered dietician was being sent to the Dietary Manager via email and the emails were not received and not presented to the interdisciplinary team and reviewed by the provider and implemented. Interview with staff indicates that resident has had poor appetite since January, and it was not documented in the medical record. On 02/11/2024 at 6:27 PM, the facility nurse notified the provider and obtained orders for anti-emetic. On 2/12/2024 at 9:27 am, the facility attempted to transfer resident to the emergency room for evaluation and treatment as indicated. The Responsible Party refused for resident to be sent to the emergency room on this date. The facility obtained a physician's order for hospice services. On 02/13/2024 5:00 PM, In-services began on Abuse and Neglect for all staff by the Assistant Director of Nursing. All staff will be trained prior to returning to work. In-services began by Assistant Director of Nursing on Documentation, Provider Notification, and Change of Condition. All staff will be trained prior to returning to work. On 02/13/2024 at 5:15 PM, Social Services and Medical Records Nurse interviewed all residents regarding Nausea and Vomiting to ensure all significant changes of conditions were reported to the providers. It was noted upon interview that nine (9) residents reported recent complaints of nausea and vomiting, one (1) resident noted to have yellow discharge from mouth and nose, 1 resident was unable to recall when nausea or vomiting occurred with no staff being knowledgeable of nausea or vomiting, two (2) residents reported nausea or vomiting after eating, 2 residents reported not having appetite or eating, 1 resident reported nausea but did not report to nurse, 2 residents reported nausea and medications received. On 02/13/2024 at 5:30 PM, all residents were audited for weight loss by the Director of Nursing, Regional Nurse Consultant, and Minimum Data Set Nurse. Results of weight loss audit were reviewed by the medical director (15 unplanned weight losses, 1 planned) and new orders and diagnoses were provided by the medical director. All nutrition care plans audited by Minimum Data Set Nurse on 02/13/2024 with 5 residents whose registered dieticians' recommendations were not on care plans, dietary recommendations reviewed with providers and orders received per providers. On 02/13/2024 at 6:05 PM, the Director of Nursing notified the physician of all 9 residents, notified the Institutional Specialized Needs Plan (ISNP) nurse practitioner of all residents (4) and hospice of all residents (1) with Nausea and Vomiting with new orders received from provider. 1 resident reviewed with new orders for chest x-ray due to cough, congestion, and yellow discharge from mouth and nose, 2 residents were ordered medications for reflux, 1 resident noted to be receiving antibiotics and has orders in place for anti-emetic medications, 1 resident reported abdominal pain and MD was notified and seen resident on 02/12/2024 with new orders for stool softener, 1 resident noted to have diarrhea and has been antibiotics new orders received for Zofran and anti-diarrheal, 1 resident noted to have weight loss and nausea and vomiting new orders received on 2/11/2024 to start Zofran and start peri-actin the family was not agreeable to start peri-actin and wanted to wait to speak to hospice on 02/14/2024, 2 residents did not report nausea to nurses at time of occurrence. On 02/13/2024 at 6:59 PM, Social Services and Medical Records nurse interviewed residents with BIMS 10 or higher to ensure feeling of safe and are free of health concerns, no health or safety concern during interviews. On 02/13/2024 at 8:30 PM, all Registered Dietician recommendations for last 90 days audited by Dietary Manager and Minimum Data Set Nurse with 5 residents whose registered dietician recommendations were not addressed. All Dietary recommendations reviewed with the Medical Director (5) and subsequent providers as appropriate Hospice (2 residents who have been on hospice services prior to survey entrance) and Institutional Special Needs Program nurse practitioner (1), new orders received from providers as appropriate. On 02/13/2024 at 8:40 PM, All nutrition care plans audited by Minimum Data Set Nurse with 5 residents whose registered dieticians' recommendations were not on care plans, dietary recommendations reviewed with providers and orders received per providers and care plans updated. On 02/13/2024 at 9:00 PM, all residents noted with weight loss were reviewed with the Medical Director, the Medical Director performed medication review on all residents with weight loss. Ad Hoc QAPI was held on 02/13/2024 at 10:15 PM with the Medical Director via phone, Administrator, Director of Nursing, Social Services, Minimum Data Set Nurse, Life Connections Coordinator, Regional Nurse Consultant, Regional Director of Operations, Assistant Director of Nursing, Registered Nurse Supervisor, Dietary Manager, and Medical Records Nurse. The Minimum Data Set Nurse has been designated as the Quality Assurance Nurse with responsibility reviewing all audits, Performance Improvement Plans, Quality Measures, and actively participating in the Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement meetings. All areas of deficiencies were reviewed in Ad-Hoc Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement meeting. Medical Records nurse or Assistant Director of Nursing will be responsible for receiving Registered Dietician recommendations, reviewing with providers, entering orders, and progress notes. New processes for Medical Director to review facility weight losses each week on visit, Registered Dietitian recommendations to be revi[TRUNCATED]
CRITICAL (K)

Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation

Administration (Tag F0835)

Someone could have died · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, resident and staff interview, record review, and job description review, the facility failed to be adminis...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, resident and staff interview, record review, and job description review, the facility failed to be administered in a manner that ensured residents with significant weight loss would get the necessary nutritional support and services to ensure their well-being for two (2) of three (3) residents sampled for abuse/neglect as evidenced by: Resident #13 and Resident #20 1) failed to recognize, evaluate, and address a resident's nutritional needs, which resulted in an unintended significant weight loss of 6.92% (percent) in one (1) month, which further led to a significant weight loss of 17.52% (percent) in four (4) months. Resident #13. The facility's failure to consult a Registered Dietician (RD), notify the attending physician of a significant change in condition, and act upon the residents' weight loss, placed the resident, and all other residents residing in the facility at risk for serious harm, serious injury, serious impairment, and possibly death. 2) failed to identify and address a resident at risk for malnutrition due to prolonged nausea and vomiting, and failure to identify a decrease in food intake due to pain and nausea resulted in an unintended significant weight loss of 40.5 pounds in six (6) months. Resident #20. The facility's failure to implement a Registered Dietician (RD) recommendation, notify the attending physician of a significant change in condition, and address the residents' prolonged symptoms of nausea and vomiting, and decreased food intake placed the resident and all other residents residing in the facility at risk for serious harm, serious injury, serious impairment, and possibly death. The facility's neglect also resulted in a functional decline for Resident #20, which possibly resulted in the resident's admission to hospice services on 2/14/24. The State Agency (SA) identified an Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) that began on 11/02/23 when the facility failed to recognize, evaluate, and address Resident #13's nutritional needs. The IJ existed at: 42 CFR §483.70 Administration - F835- Scope/Severity K The facility Administrator was notified of the IJ on 2/13/24 at 4:30 PM and provided the IJ Template. The facility provided an acceptable Removal Plan on 2/14/24, in which they alleged all corrective actions to remove the IJ were completed on 2/13/24 and the IJ removed on 2/14/24. The SA validated the Removal Plan on 2/20/24 and determined the IJ was removed on 2/14/24. Therefore, the scope and severity for 42 CFR §483.70 Administration - F835 was lowered from a K to an E while the facility develops a plan of correction to monitor the effectiveness of the systemic changes to ensure the facility sustains compliance with regulatory requirements. Findings Include: Review of the Job Description for the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) with a revision date of 8/10/27 revealed, Summary: As Nursing Home Administrator, you will be responsible for the overall operations, leadership, management and success of the facility in accordance with resident/employee needs, government regulations, and company policy. Responsible for . quality assurance, regulatory management, . and resident care .Essential Duties And Responsibilities: . Direct and coordinate medical, nursing and administrative staffs and services. Conduct regular rounds to monitor delivery of nursing care and operation of support departments. Ensure consultants and other support resources are appropriately utilized. Review of the Job Description for the Director of Nursing (DON) with a revision date of 8/10/17 revealed, Summary: To manage overall operation of the Nursing Services Department in accordance with Company Policies, standards of nursing practices and governmental regulations so as to maintain excellent care of all the Residents' and employee's needs .Essential Duties And Responsibilities: Work with the Administrator, Consultants, and facility staff in planning all aspects of nursing services to include interface with other disciplines and departments. Conduct regular rounds to review care. Assess resident's physical and psychosocial status. Monitor care activities and documentation to ensure the delivery of nursing care according to the physician's order, care plans, and established standards and facility policies. Follow and ensures compliance with State, Federal, and company QAPI (Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement) standards. Follow and ensures medication administration is conducted in accordance with nursing standards and facility policies . Review of the Job Description for the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) with a revision date of 8/10/17 revealed, Summary: . Also assist the Director of Nursing in managing overall operations of the Nursing Services Department in accordance with Company policies, standards of nursing practices and government regulations so as to maintain excellent care of all the Residents' and employee's needs Essential Duties And Responsibilities: . Responsible for overseeing nursing services in the absence of the Director of Nursing. Assists in conducting regular rounds to monitor resident activity and ensure resident quality of care. Assess resident's physical and psychosocial status. Personally participates in the assessment and delivery of care. Follow and ensures compliance with State, Federal, and Company QAPI standards. Record review of the facility policy titled Dietician with a review date of 7/24/23 revealed, Policy Interpretation and Implementation: 1. A qualified dietician or other clinically qualified nutrition professional will help oversee food and nutrition services provided to the residents. 9. Our facility's dietician is responsible for, but not necessarily limited to: a. assessing nutritional needs of residents; . f. participating in quality assurance and performance improvement (QAPI) when food and nutrition services are involved . Resident #20 Observation and interview with Resident #20 on 2/11/24 at 3:19 PM, revealed her lying in a fetal position at the foot of the bed with garbage can located on the floor beside the resident. The resident stated she was sick to her stomach and had a washcloth in her hand and was wiping her face. The resident's color was pale, lips were dry, and she was thin in appearance. Interview with the DON on 2/11/24 at 3:55 PM, revealed Resident #20's condition had declined over the past couple of months. She explained that the resident had a significant decline after she fell in December 2023, and received a fracture of the T-12 vertebrae and had to be placed on strong pain medications. She stated, to her knowledge, the resident had not experienced any nausea and vomiting until yesterday when the Survey Agency brought it to her attention. She stated none of the staff had reported it to her and that she should be aware of what was happening with the resident. She revealed she was aware that the resident was not eating or drinking and had been refusing meals. An interview with the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) on 2/11/24 at 6:18 PM, revealed she had not been informed by the staff that Resident #20 had been experiencing nausea and vomiting and stated she was unsure how long the resident had been sick. Observation of Resident #20 on 2/12/24 at 8:29 AM, revealed her lying on her right side in bed. The garbage can was located on the floor, close by the resident. The breakfast tray was located on the bedside table untouched. Certified Nurse Aid CNA #2 entered the resident's room and stated the resident refused to eat or drink due to nausea. CNA #2 removed the tray cover, and the resident began retching and vomited a small amount of clear substance. The resident was weak, pale, and her lips were dry. Interview with CNA #2 on 2/12/24 at 8:35 AM, revealed she had worked at the facility for three (3) weeks and that the resident had been refusing to eat or drink since then. She explained that the resident had been nauseated, dry heaving, and vomiting for the three (3) weeks since she had been employed, and she had reported it to the medication nurse every day that she worked. Interview with CNA #1 on 2/15/24 at 8:35 AM revealed Resident #20 refused breakfast due to nausea and she had notified the nurse each time that she witnessed the resident with nausea and vomiting or refusing to eat and drink. Record review of Resident #20's Progress Notes from 11/01/23 through 2/11/24, revealed there was not any documentation that the resident had nausea and vomiting or that she refused meals. Record review of the Occupational Therapy Progress Notes dated 2/01/24 revealed, Patient refused: pt (patient) is refusing to eat and has poor appetite. pt (patient) c/o (complains of) nausea almost every day, but is not eating even with max encouragement and assist from therapist. Also revealed under, Assessment and Summary of Skilled Services: . therapist encouraging pt (patient) daily to eat and providing assist, but pt (patient) refuses to eat and c/o (complains of) nausea. Record review of the Order Summary Report for Resident #20 revealed an order dated 2/11/24 at 1827 (6:27 PM), Ondansetron HCL (Hydrochloride) (Zofran) Tablet 4 (four) MG (milligrams) Give 1 (one) tablet by mouth every 6 (six) hours as needed for Nausea and Vomiting . Record review of Resident #20's January and February 2024 Medication admission Record (MAR) revealed, there was not a physician's order for nausea/vomiting medication before the new order for Zofran started on 2/11/24, which indicated the resident's symptoms of prolonged nausea and vomiting were left untreated. Record review of the Meal Intake Documentation Report completed by the Certified Nurse Aides (CNAs) revealed, Resident #20 refused eighteen (18) meals from 12/18/23 through 12/31/23. She refused thirty-one (31) meals in the month of January 2024, with a total of thirty-nine (39) meals consumed at 0-25% (percent), and she refused sixteen (16) meals from 2/01/24 through 2/11/24, with a total of fourteen (14) meals consumed at 0-25% (percent). Record review of Resident #20's weights revealed a significant weight loss of 13.9% (percent) in one (1) month, 21.6% (percent) in three (3) months, and 26.2% (percent) in six (6) months. Record review of the Dietary Recommendations dated 12/27/23, for Resident #20 revealed the RD (Registered Dietician) recommended, Med Pass 2 oz (ounces) BID (twice daily), weekly weights x (times) 4 (four) weeks, and add Fortified Pudding BID (twice daily) at lunch and dinner . Record review of the Consultant Registered Dietician (RD) Note dated 1/5/24, for Resident #20 revealed, Resident w/(with) significant wt (weight) loss x (times) 1 (one) mo (month) (-9%) and x (times) 6 (six) mo (months) (13.7%) (percent). Po (by mouth) intake likely not meeting nutritional needs. Resident is at risk for skin breakdown and wt (weight) loss d/t (due to) decreased appetite . NO N/V/c/D (nausea, vomiting, complaints of diarrhea) documented. Also revealed under REC (recommendations): Resident may benefit from an appetite stimulant, please document % (percentage) of supplement consumed daily, add fortified pudding BID (twice daily) at lunch and dinner, weekly weights x (times) 4 (four) weeks to assure stable weight . Record review of the Consultant Registered Dietician (RD) Note) dated 2/10/24, for Resident #20 revealed, Resident w/(with) significant wt (weight) loss x times 1 (one) mo (month), x (times) 3 (three) mo (months) and x (times) 6 (six) mo (months) . consuming <25% w/(with) refusals of meals . Po (by mouth) intake likely not meeting nutritional needs . NO N/V/c/D (nausea, vomiting, complaints of diarrhea) documented. Also revealed under REC (recommendations): Resident may benefit from an appetite stimulant, please document % of supplement consumed daily, weekly weights x 4 weeks to assure stable weight, if po (by mouth) intake and wt (weight) status does not improve, resident may benefit from an alternate means of nutrition support. Record review of the Order Summary Report for Resident #20 revealed there was not a physician's order for fortified pudding at lunch and supper or a medication to stimulate appetite per Registered Dietician (RD) recommendations. Telephone interview with Medical Director on 2/12/24 at 6:05 PM, revealed the staff had contacted him last night regarding Resident #20 having nausea and vomiting, and he had ordered Zofran as needed. He confirmed that the staff had not contacted him or made him aware of the residents' decline in condition or her refusal to eat or drink. He stated that he was not notified of her significant weight loss (40.5 pounds in 6 months) or the Registered Dietician (RD) recommendations. He confirmed Resident #20's current condition was serious and stated what you have relayed screamed neglect. Record review of Resident #20's Physician Nursing Home Visit dated 1/26/24 revealed, No concerns reported by the nursing staff The physician progress note did not identify any documentation to support the resident's nausea and vomiting or weight loss. Interview with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #2 on 2/13/24 at 7:45 AM, revealed Resident #20 was not drinking the med pass supplement, and was refusing meals. She stated that the resident had been refusing meals for several weeks. She revealed that the resident's family was highly involved with her care, and the resident would report nausea to them, and they would come and notify her. Interview with the Dietary Manager (DM) on 2/13/24 at 8:13 AM, revealed that the RD was consulted on Resident #20 in January 2024, but confirmed that she had not seen any RD recommendations. She stated that the resident had never received fortified pudding, and to her knowledge, had never started on an appetite stimulate. She explained that the facility had trouble getting the RD recommendations. The DM stated she just realized last week on Friday 2/9/24 that the RD recommendations were going to her spam email. She revealed that she tried to open the email and the email read it was quarantined. She revealed that she told the DON that she was not receiving anything from the RD, and she thought the DON had texted her. She revealed that the administrator had been going into all the residents' progress notes and printing out the recommendations to make sure they were being implemented. She confirmed that lack of implementation of the RD recommendations could cause the resident to have weight loss and malnourishment. Telephone interview with the Registered Dietician (RD) on 2/13/24 at 9:56 AM, the RD stated she was notified in late December that Resident #20 needed to be seen due to a significant change. She revealed that she recommended med pass 2 ounces twice daily as a supplement, weekly weights and fortified pudding added with lunch and dinner. She revealed that she also did a consultation on Resident #20 on 1/5/24 and 2/10/24 and recommended that the resident would benefit from an appetite stimulant. She explained that she emailed all her recommendations to the ADM, DON, DM, and the Regional Nursing Consultant (RNC). She explained that she marked on the recommendations if the resident's physician needed to be contacted for a physician order. She stated that she had not been contacted by anyone from the facility reporting that they had not received Resident #20's dietary recommendations. Interview with the DON on 2/13/24 at 10:38 AM. she confirmed after reviewing the progress notes, she observed there was no documentation to support Resident #20's decline, nausea, and vomiting or food refusal. She confirmed that the facility should have notified the physician immediately when the decline came about, and verbalized that was a failure on their part. The DON stated that the facility did not reach out to the physician to inquire about drawing labs or starting any Intravenous fluids (IV) throughout these months of the resident refusing to eat or drink. She stated that she did report the weight loss to the physician while he was inside the facility. She stated, I do not recall the date or month I notified him. She confirmed that she did not have documentation to support her notification. She stated the RD recommendations were not implemented because the facility was not receiving any of them, and the DM determined that the emails were going to her junk folder. She explained that the Administrator was going into the resident notes and printing them out to ensure they were all implemented. She revealed she was unsure if an audit was conducted to ensure all the recommendations were implemented. The DON stated that the RD would also add notes into the Electronic Medical Record (EMR) and would not tell anyone. She revealed that she had texted the RD to tell her that the recommendations were not received, and the RD would reply that she would resend them. The DON stated she had never received any emails from the RD, and confirmed that she had not gone into her junk email to search and see if they came to her that way. The DON stated, I have over 700 junk emails and I do not have time to do that. Interview with the Administrator (ADM) on 2/13/24 at 2:10 PM, revealed that the facility usually communicates with the current RD through email or text messages. The ADM stated the last RD recommendation she had received by email was in August 2023 and that the Dietary Manager (DM) had received some, but they went to her spam folder encrypted. She explained that she had not reached out to the RD herself to follow up and confirmed that the facility had not started an audit and stated they tried to go over the recommendations in the High-Risk meetings. She stated that Resident #20 had been discussed in January 2024 during a PAR (patients at risk) meeting. The ADM confirmed that the Dietary Recommendations for Resident #20 had not been implemented and that the facility failed to document the significant changes that occurred in the resident's condition. She stated, I know the documentations not there. She revealed that she was told the DON had reached out to the physician and stated, It looks bad on our part. Record review of Resident #20's Order Summary Report revealed an order dated 1/02/24, Norco Oral Tablet 7.5 -325 MG (milligrams) (Hydrocodone-Acetaminophen) Give 7.5 mg (milligrams) by mouth every 6 (six) hours related to Pain . Record review of Resident #20's Order Summary Report revealed an order dated 12/13/23, Tramadol HCL (Hydrochloride) Tablet 50 MG (milligrams) Give 1 tablet by mouth every 12 (twelve) hours as needed for pain. Also revealed an order dated 12/13/23, Tramadol HCL (Hydrochloride)Tablet 50 MG (milligrams) Give 2 (two) tablets by mouth every 12 (twelve) hours as needed for pain . Record review of Resident #20's Pain Care Plan revealed under, Interventions/Tasks: . Observe/document for side effects of pain medication. Observe for constipation; . nausea; vomiting; . Report occurrences to the physician. Record review of Resident #20's BM (bowel movement) Report dated 1/29/24 through 2/13/24 revealed one (1) medium BM documented on 2/04/24. All other days documented as None or Not Applicable . Interview with the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) on 2/13/24 at 5:10 PM, revealed the aides were responsible for documenting the bowel movements every shift. She revealed if a resident did not have a bowel movement in 3 days, it will trigger the charting system dashboard and will alert the DON. She revealed that the dashboard was checked every morning by the DON after the daily stand-up meeting to identify which residents had not had a BM. She explained that the DON would then check with the nurses and the aides on the floor to identify if a resident had a BM, and maybe it was not documented. If a resident had not had a BM, a process was followed through with pulling a standing order for a laxative. She revealed that Resident #20's BM report was not firing to the dashboard to alert the staff of no BM. Interview with the DON on 2/13/24 at 5:36 PM, confirmed the facility did not have a monitoring tool in place for the residents receiving high doses of opioid pain medication to monitor for the common side effects of constipation, nausea, and vomiting. She revealed that Resident #20's BM Report was not firing to the charting system database to alert the staff of no BM. She confirmed that Resident #20 had not had a documented BM since 2/4/24. She explained that the resident was incontinent, so if she did have a bowel movement, the staff would have known. She stated that the physician had not been notified at this point. She revealed that she was going to tell Resident #20's nurse to administer a laxative, and she would follow up with the resident in the morning. Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 2/14/34 at 9:20 AM, revealed she was unsure if Resident #20 had a bowel movement (BM) overnight. She revealed that with everything going on in the facility yesterday, she forgot to notify the nurse caring for the resident last night that she needed a laxative. She explained if a laxative had been administered it would be documented on the Medication Administration Record (MAR) and it was not. She stated, I will get someone to do it now. Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 2/14/24 at 2:55 PM, revealed she had not notified the nurse on the floor caring for Resident #20 to give her a laxative and confirmed the physician had not been made aware. Interview with the Regional Nursing Consultant (RNC) and Regional Director of Operations (RDO) on 2/14/24 at 3:05 PM, confirmed they were not aware Resident #20 had not had a bowel movement (BM) since 2/04/24. They both revealed that a situation such as that should be taken seriously, and the physician should have already been notified and that they would take care of it right away. Record review of the progress Notes for Resident #20 dated 2/14/24 at 15:52 (3:52 PM) revealed, Note Text: Resident has not had a bm since 2/04/24. This nurse notified (Proper Name of Doctor) and he gave a one time order for lactulose. He also gave an order for xray flat and upright. This was ordered by the nurse. Record review of Resident #20's Abdominal X-Ray report dated 2/14/24 revealed under, Impression: 1. No free air or bowel obstruction. 2. Moderate stool in colon compatible with constipation. Record review of the Transfer/Discharge Report revealed the facility admitted Resident #20 on 1/24/22 with medical diagnoses that included Alzheimer's disease, Rheumatoid Arthritis, and Wedge compression fracture of T 11-T 12 vertebra, subsequent encounter for fracture with delayed healing. Record review of Minimum Data Set (MDS) with Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 01/10/24 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 03 which indicated the resident had severe cognitive impairment. Prior MDS's dated 09/18/23 revealed a BIMS of 11, MDS dated [DATE] revealed a BIMS of 9. Resident #13 Cross reference F600, F692, F580, F684 Interview on 2/14/24 at 11:40 AM, the DON revealed Resident #13 had a significant weight loss which was not reported to the physician for interventions, therefore, her weight continued to decrease. She confirmed the facility neglected to recognize, evaluate, and address the resident's weights, failed to notify the physician of the weight decline, and failed to consult the RD, therefore, appropriate evaluations and interventions were not ordered or initiated which put the resident at risk for a continued weight loss. She confirmed these failures of the facility's administration led to a significant weight loss of 6.92% during Resident #13's first month at the facility and to a 17.52% weight loss during her first four months at the facility. InterIview with the facility's Regional Nurse Consultant on 2/15/24 at 8:45 AM, revealed the physician nor the nurse practitioner were notified of Resident #13's significant weight loss and therefore, no interventions were initiated and weight continued to decline. She confirmed the facility's Administration was responsible for overseeing the residents' care and ensuring the needed services were available and received, but the facility's administration failed to do this. She confirmed the facility neglected to identify, evaluate, and intervene for nutritional concerns and, therefore, an avoidable weight loss occurred due to the facility Administration's failure to appropriately manage the resident's nutritional needs. Record review of Resident #13's admission Record revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included Stevens-Johnson Syndrome, Non-pressure Ulcers, Anxiety Disorder, Major Depressive Disorder. Record review of Resident #13's Minimum Data Set (MDS) with Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 12/12/23 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of 12 which indicated the resident had moderate cognitive impairment. The facility submitted the following removal plan: On 02/13/2024 at 4:30 PM the Mississippi State Department of Health (MSDH) state survey team notified the Administrator of an Immediate Jeopardy for failing to ensure processes were in place to review and implement Registered Dietician (RD) recommendations, notify the physician of weight loss, and implement interventions to address weight loss for Resident #20, who had lost 40.5 lbs in the last six months. Resident #20 also had nausea and vomiting and was not eating or drinking adequately for the last three weeks and the facility had failed to notify the physician of the significant change. The facility failed to follow care plan interventions to identify weight loss and address weight loss for Resident #20. The facility failed to have an effective Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) meeting to ensure all recommendations from the Registered Dietician were addressed in a prompt manner. Review of facility processes revealed that the recommendations from the registered dietician was being sent to the Dietary Manager via email and the emails were not received and not presented to the interdisciplinary team and reviewed by the provider and implemented. Interview with staff indicates that resident has had poor appetite since January, and it was not documented in the medical record. On 02/11/2024 at 6:27 PM, the facility nurse notified the provider and obtained orders for anti-emetic. On 2/12/2024 at 9:27 am, the facility attempted to transfer resident to the emergency room for evaluation and treatment as indicated. The Responsible Party refused for resident to be sent to the emergency room on this date. The facility obtained a physician's order for hospice services. On 02/13/2024 5:00 PM, In-services began on Abuse and Neglect for all staff by the Assistant Director of Nursing. All staff will be trained prior to returning to work. In-services began by Assistant Director of Nursing on Documentation, Provider Notification, and Change of Condition. All staff will be trained prior to returning to work. On 02/13/2024 at 5:15 PM, Social Services and Medical Records Nurse interviewed all residents regarding Nausea and Vomiting to ensure all significant changes of conditions were reported to the providers. It was noted upon interview that nine (9) residents reported recent complaints of nausea and vomiting, one (1) resident noted to have yellow discharge from mouth and nose, 1 resident was unable to recall when nausea or vomiting occurred with no staff being knowledgeable of nausea or vomiting, two (2) residents reported nausea or vomiting after eating, 2 residents reported not having appetite or eating, 1 resident reported nausea but did not report to nurse, 2 residents reported nausea and medications received. On 02/13/2024 at 5:30 PM, all residents were audited for weight loss by the Director of Nursing, Regional Nurse Consultant, and Minimum Data Set Nurse. Results of weight loss audit were reviewed by the medical director (15 unplanned weight losses, 1 planned) and new orders and diagnoses were provided by the medical director. All nutrition care plans audited by Minimum Data Set Nurse on 02/13/2024 with 5 residents whose registered dieticians' recommendations were not on care plans, dietary recommendations reviewed with providers and orders received per providers. On 02/13/2024 at 6:05 PM, the Director of Nursing notified the physician of all 9 residents, notified the Institutional Specialized Needs Plan (ISNP) nurse practitioner of all residents (4) and hospice of all residents (1) with Nausea and Vomiting with new orders received from provider. 1 resident reviewed with new orders for chest x-ray due to cough, congestion, and yellow discharge from mouth and nose, 2 residents were ordered medications for reflux, 1 resident noted to be receiving antibiotics and has orders in place for anti-emetic medications, 1 resident reported abdominal pain and MD was notified and seen resident on 02/12/2024 with new orders for stool softener, 1 resident noted to have diarrhea and has been antibiotics new orders received for Zofran and anti-diarrheal, 1 resident noted to have weight loss and nausea and vomiting new orders received on 2/11/2024 to start Zofran and start peri-actin the family was not agreeable to start peri-actin and wanted to wait to speak to hospice on 02/14/2024, 2 residents did not report nausea to nurses at time of occurrence. On 02/13/2024 at 6:59 PM, Social Services and Medical Records nurse interviewed residents with BIMS 10 or higher to ensure feeling of safe and are free of health concerns, no health or safety concern during interviews. On 02/13/2024 at 8:30 PM, all Registered Dietician recommendations for last 90 days audited by Dietary Manager and Minimum Data Set Nurse with 5 residents whose registered dietician recommendations were not addressed. All Dietary recommendations reviewed with the Medical Director (5) and subsequent providers as appropriate Hospice (2 residents who have been on hospice services prior to survey entrance) and Institutional Special Needs Program nurse practitioner (1), new orders received from providers as appropriate. On 02/13/2024 at 8:40 PM, All nutrition care plans audited by Minimum Data Set Nurse with 5 residents whose registered dieticians' recommendations were not on care plans, dietary recommendations reviewed with providers and orders received per providers and care plans updated. On 02/13/2024 at 9:00 PM, all residents noted with weight loss were reviewed with the Medical Director, the Medical Director performed medication review on all residents with weight loss. Ad Hoc QAPI was held on 02/13/2024 at 10:15 PM with the Medical Director via phone, Administrator, Director of Nursing, Social Services, Minimum Data Set Nurse, Life Connections Coordinator, Regional Nurse Consultant, Regional Director of Operations, Assistant Director of Nursing, Registered Nurse Supervisor, Dietary Manager, and Medical Records Nurse. The Minimum Data Set Nurse has been designated as the Quality Assurance Nurse with responsibility reviewing all audits, Performance Improvement Plans, Quality Measures, and actively participating in the Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement meetings. All areas of deficiencies were reviewed in Ad-Hoc Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement meeting. Medical Records nurse or Assistant Director of Nursing will be responsible for receiving Registered Dietician recommendations, reviewing with providers, entering orders, and progress notes. New processes for Medical Director to review facility weight losses each week on visit, Registered Dietitian recommendations to be reviewed weekly with the Interdisciplinary Team and[TRUNCATED]
SERIOUS (G)

Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures

Quality of Care (Tag F0684)

A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, resident and staff interview, record review, facility policy review, and job description review, the facility failed to recognize and assess risk factors for a resident receiving...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, resident and staff interview, record review, facility policy review, and job description review, the facility failed to recognize and assess risk factors for a resident receiving an opioid pain medication and failed to ensure that a resident received care in accordance with professional standards of practice, for one (1) of two (2) residents reviewed for pain management. Resident #20. Resident #20 experiencing prolonged nausea, vomiting, and an infrequent passage of stool (constipation) with a potential outcome for fecal impaction, and bowel obstruction (blockage). Findings Include: Record review of the facility policy titled Change in a Resident's Condition or Status with a review date of 7/24/23 revealed Policy Statement: Our facility notifies the resident, his or her attending physician, and the resident representative of changes in the resident's medical/mental condition and/or status .Policy Interpretation and Implementation: 1. The nurse will notify the resident's attending physician or physician on call when there has been a (an): .d. significant change in the resident's physical/emotional/mental condition; e. need to alter the resident's medical treatment significantly; . i. specific instruction to notify the physician of changes in the resident's condition Record review of the Job Description for the Director of Nursing (DON) with a revision date of 8/10/17 revealed, Summary: To manage overall operation of the Nursing Services Department in accordance with Company Policies, standards of nursing practices and governmental regulations so as to maintain excellent care of all the Residents' and employee's needs Essential Duties And Responsibilities: . Conduct regular rounds to review care. Assess resident's physical and psychosocial status. Monitor care activities and documentation to ensure the delivery of nursing care according to the physician's order, care plans, and established standards and facility policies . Record review of Resident #20's Order Summary Report revealed an order dated 1/02/24, Norco Oral Tablet 7.5 -325 MG (milligrams) (Hydrocodone-Acetaminophen) Give 7.5 mg (milligrams) by mouth every 6 (six) hours related to Pain . Record review of Resident #20's Order Summary Report with active orders as of 2/13/24, revealed an order dated 12/13/23, Tramadol HCL (Hydrochloride) Tablet 50 MG (milligrams) Give 1 tablet by mouth every 12 (twelve) hours as needed for pain. Also revealed an order dated 12/13/23, Tramadol HCL (Hydrochloride)Tablet 50 MG (milligrams) Give 2 (two) tablets by mouth every 12 (twelve) hours as needed for pain . Record review of Resident #20's BM (bowel movement) Report dated 1/29/24 through 2/13/24, revealed one (1) medium BM documented on 2/04/24. All other days were documented as None or Not Applicable, which indicated the resident had not had a BM in 9 (nine) days. Record review of Resident #20's Pain Care Plan revealed under, Interventions/Tasks: . Observe/document for side effects of pain medication. Observe for constipation; . nausea; vomiting; .Report occurrences to the physician . An observation and interview with Resident #20 on 2/11/24 at 3:19 PM, revealed her lying in a fetal position at the foot of the bed. A small garbage can was located on the floor close beside the resident and the resident stated she was sick to her stomach. The resident had a washcloth in her hand and was wiping her face. An observation and interview with Resident #20 on 2/11/24 at 6:07 PM, revealed she was lying on her right side in bed and was still nauseated and could not eat dinner. She stated, I'm just sick. An interview with Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) #2 on 2/12/24 at 8:35 AM, revealed Resident #20 had been nauseated, dry heaving, and vomiting for the three (3) weeks since she had been employed at the facility. She revealed that she had reported it to the medication nurse every day that she worked. An interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 2/12/24 at 3:55 PM, revealed Resident #20 had a significant decline after she fell in December 2023, and received a fracture of the T-12 vertebrae and had to be placed on pain medications. She revealed to her knowledge the resident had not experienced any nausea and vomiting until yesterday when the State Agency brought it to her attention. The DON confirmed that she should have been aware of what was going on with the resident. Record review of the Occupational Therapy Progress Notes dated 2/01/24 revealed, Patient refused: pt (patient) is refusing to eat and has poor appetite. Pt (patient) c/o (complains of) nausea almost every day, but is not eating even with max encouragement and assist from therapist. Also revealed under, Assessment and Summary of Skilled Services: . therapist encouraging pt (patient) daily to eat and providing assist, but pt (patient) refuses to eat and c/o (complains of) nausea . An interview with the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) on 2/13/24 at 5:10 PM, revealed that the aides were responsible for documenting the bowel movements every shift. She revealed if a resident did not have a bowel movement in 3 days, it would trigger the charting system dashboard and would alert the Director of Nursing (DON). She revealed that the dashboard was checked every morning by the DON, after the daily stand-up meeting, to identify which residents had not had a bowel movement. The ADON explained that the DON would then check with the nurses and the aides on the floor to identify if a resident had a BM, and maybe it was not documented. If a resident had not, a process was followed through with pulling a standing order for a laxative. She revealed that Resident #20's BM report was not firing to the dashboard to alert the DON of no BM. An interview with the DON on 2/13/24 at 5:36 PM, confirmed that the facility did not have a monitoring tool in place for Resident #20 to monitor for the common side effects of an opioid pain medication such as constipation, nausea, and vomiting. She revealed that Resident #20's BM (bowel movement) report was not firing to the charting system database to alert her that the resident had not had a BM in 3 days. The DON stated she would tell Resident #20's nurse to administer a laxative and follow up with the resident in the morning. During an interview and record review on 2/13/24 at 5:50 PM, with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #3 revealed she had not received in a report from the previous shift that Resident #20 needed a laxative. LPN #3 looked at the BM (bowel movement) summary report and confirmed that the last BM was documented on 2/4/24 which was 9 days prior. She stated that the facility had standing orders for a laxative that could be administered. An interview with LPN #3 on 2/14/24 at 8:50 AM, revealed that she did not administer a laxative to Resident #20 yesterday on the 3-11 shift and stated that she had not been directed by anyone to do so. An interview with the DON on 2/14/34 at 9:20 AM, revealed that she was unsure if Resident #20 had a BM overnight an stated that with everything going on in the facility, she forgot to notify the nurse caring for the resident to administer a laxative. The DON explained if a laxative had been administered, it would be documented on the Medication Administration Record (MAR), and she confirmed that it was not documented. She stated, I will get someone to do it. An interview with the DON on 2/14/24 at 2:55 PM, revealed that she had not notified the nurse on the floor to give Resident #20 a laxative. She stated that the resident's physician had not been contacted related to the no bowel movement (BM) in 10 days. An interview with the Regional Nursing Consultant (RNC) and Regional Director of Operations (RDO) on 2/14/24 at 3:05 PM, revealed they were not aware of Resident #20's condition of not having a BM since 2/04/24. They acknowledged that the situation should be taken seriously, and the physician should have been notified immediately and that they would get right on it. Record review of the Progress Notes for Resident #20 dated 2/14/24 at 15:52 (3:52 PM) revealed, Note Text: Resident has not had a BM since 2/04/24. This nurse notified (Proper Name of Physician) and he gave a one time order for lactulose. He also gave an order for Xray flat and upright Record review of Resident #20's Abdominal X-Ray report dated 2/14/24 revealed under, Impression: 1. No free air or bowel obstruction. 2. Moderate stool in colon compatible with constipation . Record review of the Transfer/Discharge Report revealed the facility admitted Resident #20 on 1/24/22 with medical diagnoses that included Alzheimer's disease, Rheumatoid arthritis, Primary open-angled glaucoma, and Wedge compression fracture of T 11-T 12 vertebra, subsequent encounter for fracture with delayed healing. Record review of Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 01/10/24 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 03 which indicated the resident had severe cognitive impairment.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0604 (Tag F0604)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, staff and family interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to identify a bed rail as a physical restraint and restricted a resident's freedom of m...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, staff and family interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to identify a bed rail as a physical restraint and restricted a resident's freedom of movement for one (1) of 28 sampled residents. Resident #15 Findings Include: Record review of the facility policy titled Physical Restraints dated 4/23/12 revealed Policy: It is the policy of this facility that residents have the right to be free of physical restraints not required to treat the resident's medical symptoms. Physical restraints are not to be used for the convenience of the staff or as punishment of the resident. Physical restraints or safety devices are only used to enable and/or promote functional independence of the resident after consultation with a physical or occupational therapist, upon order of physician, and discussion with the resident's responsible party . A telephone interview on 02/12/24 at 09:40 AM, with a family member of Resident #15 revealed that the facility had not contacted her regarding the application of bed rails. An observation of Resident #15 on 2/12/24 at 2:30 PM, revealed the resident lying in bed with her eyes open, she was alert, but confused. Three-quarter (¾) side rails up on both sides of the bed were observed and the resident was trying to get up and scooted herself to the end of the opening of the bed rail, toward the footboard, and sat up on the end of the bed. Record review of the Order Summary Report for Resident #15 revealed an order dated 9/27/23, 1/2 (one-half) Side Rails X (times) 2 (two) as an enabler . An interview with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #1 on 2/12/24 at 2:40 PM revealed that Resident #15 had the side rails to prevent her from getting up due to falls. She confirmed that Resident #15 would not be able to lower the rails on her own and explained that the resident could get herself up and down from the bed into a wheelchair. She revealed that the resident usually scooted herself to the end of the bed, and sat between the rail opening when she wanted to get up. She stated she was unsure what the risks were associated with the bed rails. An interview and observation with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 2/12/24 at 2:50 PM, revealed she was unsure why Resident #15 had the three-quarter (3/4) bed rails. She confirmed that the bed rails kept the resident from getting up on her own and were a barrier for her safely getting up. The DON explained the resident could possibly crawl over the top of the rails or become entrapped. She stated she had no idea how long the rails had been on the bed, and the facility had not performed a restraint assessment that would indicate a need for them. The DON explained that to her knowledge, a bed rail consent had not been signed by the family. An interview with the Regional Nurse Consultant (RNC) on 2/14/24 at 9:02 AM, revealed that after searching, she could not locate a signed consent by the family, a bed rail assessment, or a physician's order for the applied bed rails. Record review of the Quarterly Evaluation for Resident #15 dated 9/05/23 revealed, Summary Findings . 2. Type of rail in use: Half rail 3. Rails in use: Bilateral . 5. Bed rails are indicated and serve as an enabler to promote independence: yes . Record review of the admission Record for Resident #15 revealed the facility admitted Resident #15 on 9/02/23 with diagnoses that included Unspecified dementia, Other seizures and Repeated falls.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Investigate Abuse (Tag F0610)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on staff and resident interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to investigate and report ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on staff and resident interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to investigate and report an allegation of abuse for one (1) of 18 residents sampled. Resident #8 Findings include: Record review of facility policy titled Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation or Misappropriation - Reporting and Investigating, dated 10/22, revealed, Policy Statement: All reports of resident abuse (including injuries of unknown origin), neglect, exploitation, or theft/misappropriation of resident property 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 Interpretation and Implementation .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; b. The local/state ombudsman; c. The resident's representative; d. Adult protective services (where state law provides jurisdiction in long-term care); e. Law enforcement officials; f. The resident's attending physician; and g. The facility medical director. 3. 'Immediately' is defined as: a. within two hours of an allegation involving abuse or result in serious bodily injury; or b. within 24 hours of an allegation that does not involve abuse or result in serious bodily injury .Investigating Allegations: 1. All allegations are thoroughly investigated. The administer initiates investigations . An observation and interview on 2/14/24 at 10:05 AM, revealed Resident #8 was sitting in her wheelchair in her room and rubbing her left shoulder. She stated her left shoulder was bothering her today and it had been bothering her since the nurse threw her against the wall. She revealed she gave her son some water and the nurse was angry, grabbed her arm, and intentionally pushed her into the wall which hurt her shoulder and she reported this to the staff. During an interview on 2/14/24 at 10:10 AM, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #1 revealed there was an incident when a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) informed her she had witnessed Resident #8 pouring out her son's thickened water and replacing it with regular water. She stated she went to the room and explained to Resident #8 that regular water could make her son sick, but the resident got angry and told her that she could give her son water if she wanted to. She stated the resident was in her wheelchair, but tried to get out of her wheelchair so she assisted her through the doorway into the hallway and the resident started to propel herself to her room. She stated the resident then complained of pain in her left shoulder and told LPN #1 that she bumped it on the door when she was in the bathroom. LPN #1 stated that Resident #8 then told her, The nurse threw her on the floor and The nurse grabbed her by the hair and drug her out of the room. The resident returned to her room and told her roommate's visitor that she had been abused and that she was thrown on the floor by the staff and the roommate's visitor reported this to her. LPN #1 stated she reported this allegation of abuse to the Director of Nursing (DON) and wrote a statement on the events that occurred. A body audit was done and no bruising or redness of her skin was found and her only complaint was that her shoulder was sore. She stated the resident had a fracture in that shoulder prior to being in the facility and had pain in that shoulder prior to this allegation. She stated she had been in-serviced on abuse and neglect and reporting and she denied that she threw the resident against the wall or hurt the resident in any other way. An interview with the DON on 2/14/24 at 10:15 AM, revealed she was aware of the allegation of abuse from Resident #8 and confirmed she spoke with the staff and received their statements. She spoke with the resident who told her a different scenario of what happened including she was thrown on the floor and she was walking and the nurse pushed against the wall. She stated since the resident was unable to walk and with the resident's different recollections of event, she felt that the allegation was not substantiated so therefore she didn't report it. She revealed she had been in-serviced on abuse and neglect and reporting and did not remember discussing this allegation with the Administrator, who was the person responsible for reporting, so she was unsure if this was reported to the required entities. The DON confirmed she failed to notify the Administrator of the allegation of abuse and did not follow up with reporting. During an interview on 2/14/24 at 10:20 AM, the Administrator stated she was aware that Resident #8 received a shoulder x-ray due to pain from an injury she had prior to her admission to the facility, but she was unaware of any abuse allegation concerning this resident. She stated there was poor communication between the staff and she was not informed of the allegation. An interview with the Administrator on 2/14/24 at 10:45 AM, confirmed the DON and other staff members were aware of the allegation of abuse concerning Resident #8, but she was not notified, therefore, the facility failed to investigate and report the allegation of abuse as required. Record review of Resident #8's admission Record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included, Dementia, Polyneuropathy, Major Depressive Disorder, Anxiety Disorder, Dizziness, and Intervertebral Disc Disorder. Record review of Resident #8's Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 2/6/24, revealed the resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 8, which indicated the resident had a moderate cognitive impairment.
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 staff interviews, record review, and facility policy review the facility failed to accurately complete Section N of the...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on staff interviews, record review, and facility policy review the facility failed to accurately complete Section N of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for a Resident, as evidenced by incorrectly coding anticoagulant medication usage during the 7-day observation look-back period for one (1) of four (4) residents sampled for anticoagulant use. Resident # 23 Findings include: Record review of the facility policy titled, Resident Assessment dated June 1, 2000, revealed, It is the policy of this facility that a comprehensive review of a resident's needs be made within fourteen (14) days of the resident's admission. Procedure . 3 .Information derived from the comprehensive assessment enables the staff to plan care that allows the resident to reach his/her highest practicable level of functioning and may include: .m. Drug therapy (all prescription and over-the-counter medication taken by the resident, including dosage and frequency of administration) . Record review of the MDS with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of [DATE], revealed under section N, Resident #23 received seven (7) days of anticoagulant medication for the observation look back period of 1/19/24 through 1/25/24. Record review of the Electronic Medication Administration Record (eMAR) for the MDS 7-day observation look-back period for anticoagulant medication revealed Resident #23 did not receive anticoagulant medication between 1/19/24 and 1/25/24. An interview with the MDS Coordinator on 02/13/24 at 11:25 AM, confirmed Resident #23 was coded on the 7-day look-back period for receiving an anticoagulant medication. She revealed that Resident #23 received an antibiotic medication instead of an anticoagulant and the 7 days of anticoagulant medication was coded in error. Record review of the admission Record for Resident #23 revealed he was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included Pneumonia, Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and Malignant neoplasm of bladder.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0658 (Tag F0658)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, staff interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure delivery of care met professional standards of nursing practice for a resident receiving...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, staff interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure delivery of care met professional standards of nursing practice for a resident receiving continuous oxygen for one (1) of five (5) residents reviewed with continuous oxygen. Resident #15 Findings Include: Record review of the facility policy titled Change in a Resident's Condition or Status with a review date of 7/24/23 revealed, Policy Statement: Our facility notifies the resident, his or her attending physician, and the resident representative of changes in the resident's medical/mental condition and/or status .Policy interpretation and Implementation: 1. The nurse will notify the resident's attending physician or physician on call when there has been a (an): . f. refusal of treatment or medications two (2) or more consecutive times) . Record review of the facility policy titled Oxygen Administration dated 8/25/14, revealed . Preparation: 1. Verify that there is a physician's order for this procedure . Documentation: After completing the oxygen setup or adjustment, the following information should be recorded in the resident's medical record: . 7. How the resident tolerated the procedure. 8. If the resident refused the procedure, the reason(s) why and the intervention taken. Reporting: 1. Notify the supervisor if the resident refuses the procedure . On 2/11/24 at 4:39 PM, in an observation of Resident #15, revealed the resident lying in bed with her eyes closed. She was unable to arouse to verbal stimuli. The resident's oxygen concentrator was observed by the bedside, with the cannula laying over the concentrator. On 2/12/24 at 2:35 PM, in an observation of Resident #15, revealed the resident lying in bed. The resident was alert/verbal and confused. The oxygen cannula was observed laying over the oxygen concentrator at the bedside. Record review of the Order Summary Report for Resident #15 revealed an order dated 1/12/24, O2 (oxygen) on continuously at 2ls (two liters) bnc. (by nasal cannula) every shift . On 2/12/24 at 2:43 PM in an observation and interview with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #1 confirmed that Resident #15 had not been wearing oxygen. LPN # 1 revealed the resident had been refusing to wear the oxygen for a while. She revealed that she had not notified the physician of the resident's refusal. She revealed that she should have documented that the resident refused the oxygen on the Medication Administration Record (MAR), instead she documented it as administered, which indicated the resident was wearing it. LPN #1 stated she was unsure how long a resident must refuse a medication before the physician was contacted to notify. On 2/12/24 at 2:57 PM, in an observation and interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed she was aware that Resident #15 had been refusing oxygen, and to her knowledge, none of the staff had reached out to the physician to make him aware. She confirmed that the Medication Administration Record (MAR) should reflect that the resident refused, and the facility should have notified the physician. Record review of the February 2024, Medication Administration Record (MAR) revealed an order dated,1/12/24 O2 (oxygen) on continuously at 2ls (two liters) bnc (by nasal cannula) every shift documented as administered 2/1/24 through 2/12/24 with no refusals. Record review of the Progress Notes for Resident #15 revealed there was not any documentation to support the refusal of oxygen. Record review of the admission Record for Resident #15 revealed the facility admitted Resident #15 on 9/02/23 with diagnoses that included Unspecified dementia, Other seizures and Repeated falls.
CONCERN (D)

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

ADL Care (Tag F0677)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, staff and resident interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure r...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, staff and resident interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents who required assistance with Activities of Daily Living (ADLs) were assisted with personal hygiene as evidenced by long, jagged nails with brown substance underneath nails and unshaven facial hair for three (3) of eighteen residents sampled. Resident #11, Resident #26, and Resident #54 Findings include: Record review of the facility policy titled Shaving The Resident dated 8/25/14, revealed Purpose: The purpose of this procedure is to promote cleanliness and to provide skin care . Record review of facility policy titled, A.M. Care (Day Tour of Duty) with a revision date of August 25, 2014 revealed Purpose: 1. To refresh the resident. 2. To provide cleanliness, comfort and neatness Equipment: See specific procedures for: Care of nails.Documentation 1. Date, time, care provided . 4. Signature, title and date . Resident #11 An observation and interview with Resident #11 on 2/11/24 at 3:26 PM, revealed the resident was up in his chair in the hallway. The resident was observed with one-eighth (1/8) inch of white facial hair. An interview with Resident #11 on 2/11/24 at 3:31 PM, revealed he would like to be shaved on his shower days that were scheduled on Tuesday, Thursday, and Saturday. He stated that he did not get shaved yesterday and explained that he was not sure why. An observation and interview of Resident #11 on 2/12/24 at 3:05 PM, with the Administrator (ADM), confirmed that the resident needed shaving. The resident explained to the ADM that he had not been shaved since last Tuesday (2/06/24). The ADM revealed that they have a shower team that worked Monday through Friday and were responsible for shaving the residents. She revealed on Saturday's, it was the assigned aide's responsibility. She revealed that shaving was expected to be done with the showers. Record review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 1/29/24 revealed, under section GG, Resident #11 required partial/moderate assistance with personal hygiene. Record review of the admission Record revealed the facility admitted Resident #11 on 10/05/20 with medical diagnoses that included peripheral vascular disease, acquired absence of unspecified leg above knee, gout, heart failure, and essential (primary) hypertension. Resident #26 An observation and interview on 02/11/24 at 5:55 PM, Resident #26's fingernails on both hands were approximately one-half (1/2) inch long and jagged with a brown substance underneath the nails. Resident #26 revealed he would like his nails to be cut because they are too long. An observation and interview on 02/12/24 at 2:50 PM, with Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #6 confirmed that Resident #26's nails were long and uneven and had a brown substance under them and needed to be cleaned and trimmed. She stated, I'll check with the nurse to see if the resident is diabetic or not, the aides aren't allowed to do diabetic nails and I'm not sure if he is or not. On 02/12/24 at 2:55 PM, an interview and record review with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #2 revealed Resident #26 is a diabetic and his nails must be cut by a Registered Nurse (RN). She stated the LPNs are not allowed to cut diabetic nails. During a review of Resident #26's Treatment Administration Record (TAR), LPN #2 confirmed it was not listed on his TAR for the RN's to do nail care and there was no place for the nurses to document. An interview and observation on 02/12/24 at 3:10 PM, the Director of Nurses (DON) revealed the RNs are responsible for providing diabetic nail care. She revealed it should show up on the Treatment Administration Record (TAR) and the RN would sign off that it has been done. She confirmed that Resident #26's fingernails were long and jagged with a brown substance under them, and stated, The resident could scratch himself and cause a skin tear or infection. Record review of Resident #26's admission Record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with medical diagnoses that included Parkinsonism, Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus with hyperglycemia. Record review of Resident #26's MDS an ARD of 12/19/23, revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 03, which indicated the resident is severely cognitively impaired. Resident #54 An interview and observation on 02/12/24 at 9:30 AM, revealed Resident #54's fingernails were noted to be approximately one-half (1/2) inch from the nail bed and extending over the tips of his fingers with a dark brown/black substance noted under each nail. Resident #54 stated he preferred his nails to be kept short and he would like for them to be trimmed today. During an observation and interview with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #3 on 2/12/24 at 3:00 PM, she observed Resident #54 had scratch marks on his abdomen and arms and the dark substance under his nails appeared to be dried blood. She confirmed his nails were long and dirty and needed to be cleaned and trimmed to protect his skin and to honor his preference for short nails. She stated the CNAs were to do residents' nail care on bath days and it was her responsibility to make sure this was done. She confirmed nail care for this resident had not been done recently. On 2/12/24 at 3:20 PM, the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) confirmed Resident #54's nails were long and dirty and scratches on his abdomen and arms were noted. The ADON confirmed the resident's nails were long and dirty with a substance that appeared to be old dried blood from scratching his skin and this resident's nails were not kept clean and trimmed to the length the resident preferred. She confirmed the facility failed to provide the resident's ADL nail care assistance for his nail care needs. During an interview on 2/12/24 at 4:55 PM, the DON confirmed the facility failed to ensure adequate ADL nail care for a dependent resident was done. She confirmed the resident's nails were not kept clean and short as preferred by the resident. Record review of Resident #54's admission Record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included Muscle Weakness and Lack of Coordination. Record review of Resident #54's MDS with an ARD of 1/5/24, Section GG revealed for personal hygiene, Resident #54 required partial/moderate assistance. Resident #54's BIMS score was 11 which indicated the resident had moderate cognitive impairment.
CONCERN (D)

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

Respiratory Care (Tag F0695)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, staff interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to follow the physicians order for continuous oxygen usage for one (1) of five (5) residents revie...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, staff interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to follow the physicians order for continuous oxygen usage for one (1) of five (5) residents reviewed for continuous oxygen. Resident #15 Findings Include: Record review of the facility policy titled Oxygen Administration dated 8/25/14, revealed . Preparation: 1. Verify that there is a physician's order for this procedure . Documentation: After completing the oxygen setup or adjustment, the following information should be recorded in the resident's medical record: . 7. How the resident tolerated the procedure. 8. If the resident refused the procedure, the reason(s) why and the intervention taken. Reporting: 1. Notify the supervisor if the resident refuses the procedure . Record review of the Order Summary Report with active orders as of 2/12/24 for Resident #15 revealed an order dated 1/12/24, O2 (oxygen) on continuously at 2ls (two liters) bnc. (by nasal cannula) every shift . An observation on 2/11/24 at 4:39 PM, of Resident #15 revealed her lying in bed with her eyes closed. She was unable to arouse to verbal stimuli. The resident's oxygen concentrator was observed by the bedside, with the oxygen cannula laying over the concentrator. An observation of Resident #15 on 2/12/24 at 2:35 PM, revealed the resident lying in bed. The resident was alert/verbal and confused. The oxygen cannula was observed laying over the oxygen concentrator at the bedside. An observation and interview with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #1 on 2/12/24 at 2:43 PM, confirmed Resident #15 had not been wearing oxygen. LPN #1 explained she had applied the oxygen this morning, and the resident refused to keep it on. She revealed the resident had been refusing to wear the oxygen for a while. She confirmed she had not made the physician aware of the resident's refusal, and stated she should have. LPN #1 confirmed she should have documented that the resident refused, and instead she documented the oxygen as administered, which indicated the resident was using it. She stated she was unsure how long a resident must refuse a medication before the physician was contacted. An observation and interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 2/12/24 at 2:57 PM, confirmed she was aware Resident #15 had not been wearing the oxygen that was ordered continuous. She revealed the resident had been refusing to wear the oxygen, and to her knowledge, none of the staff had reached out to the physician to make him aware. She confirmed the Medication Administration Record (MAR) should reflect the resident's refusal, and the facility should have reached out to the physician to notify. Record review of the February 2024, Medication Administration Record (MAR) revealed an order dated 1/12/24, O2 (oxygen) on continuously at 2ls (two liters) bnc (by nasal cannula) every shift. The MAR was documented as oxygen having been administered 2/1/24 through 2/12/24, with no refusals documented. Record review of the Progress Notes for Resident #15 revealed there was not any documentation to support the refusal of oxygen. Record review of the admission Record for Resident #15 revealed the facility admitted Resident #15 on 9/02/23 with diagnoses that included Unspecified dementia, Other seizures and Repeated falls.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0700 (Tag F0700)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, family and staff interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to perform an accurate bed rail assessment, and failed to ensure that the bed rails did...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, family and staff interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to perform an accurate bed rail assessment, and failed to ensure that the bed rails did not pose a risk of injury for one (1) of 28 residents sampled. Resident #15 Findings Include: Record review of the facility policy titled Bed Rails dated 5/10/17 revealed Policy Statement: It is the policy of this center to limit the use of bed rails and similar devices unless the benefit outweighs the risk. No rails of any type will be applied to a bed without prior assessment as to the appropriateness of the use and the device selected. This policy applies to the use of any type of rail attached to the bed, for any purpose. This includes side rails, half rails, quarter rails, split rails, assist rails, enabler bars ect., whether full or partial length. Before using a side rail for any reason, the staff shall inform the resident and or family/responsible party about any benefits or potential hazards associated with side rails . Assessment and Documentation: A side rail assessment screen is completed on each resident upon admission, quarterly, and as needed A physician order will be obtained, a care plan implemented, and side rails will be checked for functionality and placement. Record review of the Quarterly Evaluation for Resident #15, dated 9/05/23, revealed under, Summary Findings . 2. Type of rail in use: Half rail 3. Rails in use: Bilateral . 5. Bed rails are indicated and serve as an enabler to promote independence: yes . During a telephone interview on 2/12/24 at 9:40 AM, with Resident #15's family member, revealed, the facility did not contact her regarding the application of bed rails. She stated that a bed rail consent had not been signed. During an observation on 2/12/24 at 2:30 PM, of Resident #15, revealed her lying in bed with her eyes open. She was alert, but confused. Three-quarter (¾) side rails were up on both sides of the bed and the resident was observed trying to get up, and scooted herself to the end of the opening of the bed rail, toward the footboard, and sat up on the end of the bed. During an interview and observation with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 2/12/24 at 2:50 PM, revealed she did not know why Resident #15 had the three-quarter (3/4) bed rails. She confirmed that the side rails kept the resident from getting up on her own and was a barrier for her safely getting up. She explained that the resident could possibly try to crawl over the top of the rails. The DON acknowledged there was a possibility of entrapment with the open style rails. She revealed that she had no idea how long the rails had been on the bed, and the facility had not performed an assessment that would indicate a need for them. She explained that to her knowledge, the family had not signed a consent. An interview with the Minimum Data Set (MDS) Nurse on 2/14/24 at 5:19 PM, revealed she had never seen the three-quarter (3/4) rails on Resident #15's bed. She explained when she did the resident's last Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment in November 2023, the resident had the ½ (one-half) side rails. The MDS Nurse stated the resident had a room change and stated those three-quarter (3/4) rails must have been on the bed in that room. Record review of the Order Summary Report for Resident #15 revealed an order dated 9/27/23, 1/2 (one-half) Side Rails X (times) 2 (two) as an enabler . Record review of the admission Record for Resident #15 revealed the facility admitted Resident #15 on 9/02/23 with diagnoses that included Unspecified dementia, Other seizures and Repeated falls.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0726 (Tag F0726)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on staff interview, record review and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure an employee maintained a curre...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on staff interview, record review and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure an employee maintained a current Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) certification for one (1) of twenty-seven Certified Nurse Aide certifications reviewed. CNA #5 Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled; Registry of Nurse Aides dated [DATE] revealed It is the policy of this facility that certified nurse aides licenses be verified through the registry of nurse aides. Record review of the Mississippi Nurse Aide Registry revealed CNA # 5's certification expired on [DATE]. An interview on [DATE] at 11:55 AM, the Assistant Director of Nurses (ADON) revealed CNA #5 was hired on [DATE] and confirmed the CNA's certification expiration date of [DATE] was overlooked. The ADON stated she tries to look at each CNA's certification at least every 6 months to make sure they aren't expiring. An interview on [DATE] at 12:05 PM, the Director of Nurses (DON) revealed CNA #5's last day of employment was on [DATE] and she was terminated for unrelated issues. She revealed she wasn't aware that CNA #5's certification ended on [DATE] and confirmed that CNA #5 had worked through [DATE] with an expired certification. An interview on [DATE] at 12:15 PM, the Administrator (ADM) revealed the Business Office Manager verifies and prints the CNA certifications upon hire as part of the onboarding process. She revealed it should have been flagged that CNA #5's certification was going to be out at the end of the month since she had just been hired on [DATE] and CNA #5 should have been told to renew her certification. The ADM stated this was an oversight on our part.
CONCERN (D)

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

Infection Control (Tag F0880)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure hand hygiene was performed during medication pass to prevent the spread of infection for four (4) of el...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure hand hygiene was performed during medication pass to prevent the spread of infection for four (4) of eleven residents observed during medication pass. Resident #20, Resident #48, Resident #55, and Resident #211 Findings Include: Record review of the facility policy titled Handwashing dated June 1, 2000, revealed Policy Statement: It is the policy of this facility that handwashing be regarded as the single most important means of preventing the spread of infection. Procedure: 1. All personnel shall wash their hands to prevent the spread of infection and disease to other residents, personnel, and visitors 7. Alcohol gel may be used during med pass for three times before washing hands. During an observation of medication pass on 2/14/24 at 7:55 AM, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #3 prepared medications for Resident #211, entered the resident's room and applied gloves, administered the medications, removed the gloves, and exited the resident's room without performing hand hygiene. She then prepared and administered medications for Resident #48 and Resident #55 without performing hand hygiene. Lastly, she prepared Resident #20's medication, entered the resident's room, applied gloves, administered eye drops in both eyes, and exited the room without using hand hygiene. She returned to the medication cart and began to prepare medications for another resident. An interview with LPN #3 on 2/14/24 at 8:30 AM, confirmed that she administered medications to four (4) residents and did not perform hand hygiene. She revealed that the purpose of hand hygiene was to kill germs and prevent the spread of infection. She stated that she should have used hand sanitizer before and after each resident. An interview with the Regional Nurse Consultant (RNC) on 2/15/24 at 8:15 AM, revealed the purpose of hand hygiene was to reduce the risk of cross contamination and the spread of infection. She stated hand hygiene should be done before and after contact with a resident. Record review of a document titled Med pass points, undated and unsigned, revealed, .Infection control: Wash hands or use hand sanitizer in between each resident. Actually look at it more specifically as exiting and re-entering a room even if you are still working on the same person . Record review of the Handwashing Training dated 1/24/24 revealed under, Hand hygiene with alcohol based hand rubs: In most situations, the preferred method of hand hygiene is with an alcohol based hand rub a. Before and after direct contact with residents . d. Before preparing or handling medications . j. After removing gloves . Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #3 was in attendance for the in-service.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0919 (Tag F0919)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, resident and staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure a resident had acc...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, resident and staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure a resident had access to the call light system for (1) of 60 residents on initial tour. Resident #8. Findings include: Record review of facility policy titled, Call System, Resident, undated, revealed, .Residents are provided with a means to call staff directly for assistance through a communication system that directly calls a staff member or a centralized work station. Policy Interpretation and Implementation: 1. Each resident is provided with a means to call staff directly for assistance from his/her bed, from toileting/bathing facilities and from the floor . An interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 2/11/24 at 4:30 PM, revealed Resident #8 was living in this room and when her son was discharged from the hospital and returned to the facility on [DATE], Resident #8 wanted her son to be in the room with her so she could take care of him. She stated this room was small and designed for one person, but the resident wanted to be with her son, so we put them together in here to see how it works out. She stated one call light is shared since beds are close. On 2/11/24 at 5:10 PM, an observation of Resident #8's room and an interview with Resident #8 revealed her son had been in the hospital and when he was discharged from hospital and returned to facility, he moved into the room with her so she could take care of him. She stated her son had been sick and she wanted to be there to care for him since he's not doing well. She stated her son had a call light but she did not have one and they need to get me one, too. The observation revealed one call light/cord attached to the one call light outlet available in the room. During an interview on 2/12/24 at 4:00 PM, the Maintenance Director stated the room Resident #8 and her son were in was designed for one resident and had only one call light and one call light outlet. He stated in the past, he had an adapter cord that split one call light outlet into two call light cords, but this divider was not being used and the room only had one call light cord available. He confirmed there were two residents in the room and there was only one call light available for use by one resident and each resident should have access to a call light. An interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 2/12/24 at 4:20 PM, revealed Resident #8's room was designed for one resident, not two, and only one call light was available for use for one resident. The DON confirmed a call light must be available and within reach for each resident to use to contact staff when assistance was needed to ensure each resident could receive prompt care. The DON confirmed the facility failed to provide Resident #8 with a call light and therefore, she was unable to contact staff if assistance was needed. Record review of Resident #8's admission Record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included, Dementia, Polyneuropathy, Major Depressive Disorder, Anxiety Disorder, Dizziness. Record review of Resident #8's Minimum Data Set (MDS) with Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 2/6/24, revealed the resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of 8, which indicated the resident was moderately cognitively impaired.
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Unnecessary Medications (Tag F0759)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, staff interview, record review and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure the medication er...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, staff interview, record review and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure the medication error rate was five (5) percent (%) or less for two (2) of twenty-six medication opportunities. Findings Include: Review of the facility's Med Error Rate following reconciliation indicated the medication error rate was 7.69% (percent). Record review of the facility policy review titled Medication Administration-General Guidelines with a revision date of 8/25/14 revealed PROCEDURE: . 2. Administration: . b. Medications are administered in accordance with written orders of the attending physician . 3. Documentation: a. The individual who administers the medication dose records the administration on the resident's MAR (Medication Administration Record) directly after the medication is given. At the end of each medication pass, the person administering the medications reviews the MAR to ensure necessary doses were administered and documented . An observation during medication pass with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #3 on 2/14/24 at 7:45 AM, revealed she prepared Resident #211's medications while reading the Medication Administration Record (MAR), and entered the resident's room and administered the following medications: Diclofenac Sodium External Gel 1% ([pain), Ascorbic Acid 500 MG (milligrams) (supplement), Gabapentin 300 MG (pain), Multivitamin (supplement), Metoprolol Tartrate 12.5 MG (blood pressure), Propafenone 150 MG (heart rhythm), Zinc 220 MG (supplement), Tramadol 50 MG (pain), and Juven oral packet (supplement). Record review of the Medication Administration Record (MAR) after reconciliation of the medication observation revealed the medication Apixaban 5 MG (blood thinner) was not administered to Resident #211 by LPN #3. Record review of Resident #211's MAR for February 2024, revealed an order dated 2/2/24, Apixaban Oral Tablet 5 MG Give 1 (one) tablet by mouth two times a day related to Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation . An interview with LPN #3 on 2/14/24 at 8:40 AM, revealed she thought she had administered the medication Apixaban 5 MG to Resident #211. She revealed she read the MAR, popped the medication out of the blister pack into the med cup and clicked the prepared button. LPN #3 opened the medication cart to pull out the medication card and revealed that the medication was in the cart. She stated, I somehow missed it. She confirmed she should have read the MAR and ensured the medication was in the med cup before marking the medication as prepared. Record review of Resident #211's admission Record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with medical diagnoses that included Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation, Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus with Hyperglycemia, and Essential (Primary) Hypertension. Resident #20 An observation on 2/14/24 at 8:20 AM, of medication pass with LPN #3 revealed that she entered Resident #20's room and administered Brimonidine 0.1% eye drops two (2) drops to both eyes. Record review of the MAR for Resident #20 revealed an order dated 12/13/23, Brimonidine Tartrate Solution 0.1 % (percent) Instill 1 (one) drop in both eyes two times a day for glaucoma . Record review of the MAR after reconciliation of the medication observation revealed the medication Brimonidine 0.1.% (lowers pressure in the eye) should have been administered as one (1) drop to both eyes. An interview with LPN #3 on 2/14/24 at 8:40 AM, confirmed that she gave Resident #20 two (2) drops in each eye instead of the ordered (1) drop. She revealed this was a medication error, and they would have to let the physician know and revealed that she misread the order. Record review of the Transfer/Discharge Report revealed the facility admitted Resident #20 on 1/24/22 with medical diagnoses that included Primary open-angled glaucoma and Alzheimer's disease.
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Deficiency F0760 (Tag F0760)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on observation, staff interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure a resident was free of any significant medication errors for one (1) of eleven medicatio...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, staff interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure a resident was free of any significant medication errors for one (1) of eleven medication administration observations. Resident #211 Findings Include: Record review of the facility policy review titled Medication Administration - General Guidelines with a revision date of 8/25/14 revealed .PROCEDURE: .Documentation: a. The individual who administers the medication dose records the administration on the resident's MAR (Medication Administration Record) directly after the medication is given. At the end of each medication pass, the person administering the medications reviews the MAR to ensure necessary doses were administered and documented . On 2/14/24 at 7:45 AM, during a med pass observation and interview, with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #3 revealed, she prepared Resident #211's medications while reading the MAR and entered the resident's room and administered the following medications: Diclofenac Sodium External Gel 1% (pain), Ascorbic Acid 500 MG (milligrams) (supplement), Gabapentin 300 MG (pain), Multivitamin (supplement), Metoprolol Tartrate 12.5 MG (blood pressure), Propafenone 150 MG (heart rhythm), Zinc 220 MG (supplement), Tramadol 50 MG (pain), and Juven oral packet (supplement). When asked about Apixaban 5 MG, LPN #3 opened the medication cart to pull out the medication card and revealed that the medication was in the cart. She stated, I somehow missed it. She confirmed that she should have read the MAR and ensured the medication was in the med cup before marking the medication as prepared. Record review of the MAR after reconciliation of the medication observation, revealed the medication Apixaban 5 MG (milligrams)(blood thinner) was not administered to Resident #211. Record review of Resident #211's MAR for February 2024, revealed an order dated 2/2/24, Apixaban Oral Tablet 5 MG Give 1 (one) tablet by mouth two times a day related to Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation . On 2/15/24 at 8:20 AM, during an interview with the Regional Nurse Consultant (RNC) revealed the medication Apixaban (blood thinner) was considered a high-risk medication and a missed dose could place Resident #211's health at risk. Record review of the admission Record revealed the facility admitted Resident #211 to the facility on 2/03/24 with medical diagnoses that included Paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, Type 2 diabetes mellitus with hyperglycemia, and Essential (primary) hypertension.
CONCERN (F)

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

Deficiency F0801 (Tag F0801)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

Based on staff interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure qualifying certifications were held by the Dietary Manager during ten (10) of 10 days of survey. Fin...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on staff interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure qualifying certifications were held by the Dietary Manager during ten (10) of 10 days of survey. Findings include: Record review of facility policy titled Dietary Manager, dated 12/21/17, revealed, .Procedure: 1. The Dietary Manager is a qualified dietetic service supervisor licensed by this state in accordance with the American Dietetic Association's rules, regulations, and guidelines; . During an interview on 2/13/24 at 10:45 AM, the Dietary Manager revealed she had worked as Dietary Manager at the facility for approximately six months and stated she was not certified and was not enrolled in a program to become certified. She revealed corporate did not have a Certified Dietary Manager come into facility to assist the facility's dietary staff. She revealed the Registered Dietician (RD) met remotely for consults and in the time she had worked at the facility, she had not had an in-person visit with the RD. An interview with the Administrator on 2/14/24 at 4:45 PM, revealed she was unaware a certification for the Dietary Manager position was required and she thought the facility had one year from the hire date for the Dietary Manager to obtain certification and the Dietary Manager's hire date was 6/19/23. She confirmed the facility's Dietary Manager was not certified or enrolled in a certification program and there was no corporate staff member that served as a consultant for the Dietary Manager.
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 staff interview, record review, and facility procedure review, the facility failed to submit accurate staffing data into the Payroll-Based Journal (PBJ) system for one (1) of four (4) quarter...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on staff interview, record review, and facility procedure review, the facility failed to submit accurate staffing data into the Payroll-Based Journal (PBJ) system for one (1) of four (4) quarters reviewed. Fourth quarter 2023. Findings include: The facility provided a document on letterhead, that revealed, There is not a manual or a written policy on coding salary staff when they change from one position to another. There is a procedure that the Business Office Manager follows. The Business Office Manager notifies Human Resources to make the proper adjustments. The BOM also notifies Human Resources if an hourly employee worked in a different capacity other than his/her position. Signed by the Administrator on 2/14/24. Record review of PBJ Staffing Data Report CASPER Report 1705D FY (Fiscal Year) Quarter 4 2023 (July 1-September 30), revealed Excessively Low Weekend Staffing-Triggered. Triggered= Submitted Weekend Staffing data is excessively low. During an interview on 02/12/24 at 10:31 AM, the Chief Clinical Officer revealed we had an issue last quarter with coding incorrectly. During an interview on 02/12/24 at 11:05 AM, the Administrator (ADM) revealed she is also a Certified Nurse Aide (CNA), and when she or the Director of Nurses (DON) or Assistant Director of nurses (ADON) works on the weekend for adequate coverage they are supposed to let the Business Office Manager (BOM) know that they worked the weekend so their hours could be coded to reflect on the PBJ. She confirmed that they had not been notifying the BOM when they worked and that is why it triggered for low weekend staffing. During an interview on 02/14/24 at 09:55 AM, the Human Resources/Business Office Manager revealed when a salary staff member works the weekend shift, they are supposed to let me know so that I can go in and manually change the hours to reflect the correct weekend hours. She confirmed if they don't let me know then it doesn't get changed to reflect the hours worked and that is what happened with the incorrect data being submitted.
Aug 2022 3 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

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

Unnecessary Medications (Tag F0759)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review and staff interview the facility failed to maintain a medication error rate of less than 5 p...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review and staff interview the facility failed to maintain a medication error rate of less than 5 percent (%) as evidenced by a medication error rate for two (2) errors out of 27 opportunities with an error rate of 7.4 %. This affected Resident # 43. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Medication Administration-General Guidelines with a revision date of 8/25/2014 revealed Policy: Medications are administered as prescribed in accordance with good nursing principles and practices and only by person legally authorized to do so. Personnel authorized to administer medications do so only after they have familiarized themselves with the medication. The facility has sufficient staff to allow administering of medications without unnecessary interruptions . Review of the facility policy titled Medication, Administration Through An Enteral Tube with a revision date of 08/25/2014 revealed Purpose .To safely and accurately administer oral medication through an enteral tube .Procedure 2. Turn off pump to stop continuous feeding 1-2 hours prior to administration of medication that should be given on an empty stomach . An observation on 8/3/22 at 8:45 AM, revealed Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) # 1 administered Keppra 500 milligrams (mg) via (by) Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy (PEG) tube and Dilantin 200 mg by mouth (PO) to Resident # 43. LPN # 1 restarted Resident #43's enteral feeding via PEG tube immediately after administering the medications. An interview on 8/3/22 at 8:55 AM, with LPN # 1 confirmed she administered the Keppra 500 mg via PEG tube, but it was ordered to be given PO. LPN # 1 also confirmed she restarted the resident's enteral feeding via PEG tube immediately after administering the Dilantin 200 mg, but the order was to hold the enteral feeding for one hour before and after administering Dilantin. She confirmed the Keppra should have been given PO and the enteral feeding should have been held until an hour after the Dilantin was administered. She stated, I am so nervous with you here, I feel like I am back in nursing school. She revealed that the danger of restarting the enteral feeding immediately after the Dilantin was that the Dilantin might not be absorbed by the stomach which could lead to an increase in seizures. She revealed she is not sure why Keppra is given PO instead of via PEG. She confirmed that she has worked at the facility for 5 years and has been trained on how to do medication administration and understood the orders, but just got nervous. An interview on 8/3/22 at 11:45 AM, with the Pharmacy Consultant confirmed that the enteral feeding should be held an hour before and after administering Dilantin. He stated, The resident would need to be monitored for increased seizure activity due to the enteral feeding not being held after the administration of Dilantin. He revealed the Keppra being given by mouth should not hurt the resident and that levels are drawn often. An interview on 8/3/22 at 12:00 PM, with the Director of Nurses (DON), the Administrator and the Corporate Nurse confirmed that an enteral feeding should be held for one hour before and after Dilantin administration and that Keppra being given via PEG tube instead of PO was a medication error. The Corporate Nurse revealed she would call the resident's Doctor to notify him of the medication errors regarding the Keppra being given via PEG tube instead of PO and the enteral feeding being restarted after the Dilantin administration. An interview on 8/3/22 at 1:50 PM, with the Corporate Nurse revealed she called the resident's doctor and made him aware of the medication errors. She revealed the staff are going to draw Keppra and Dilantin levels in the morning, they have completed an incident report, staff are to monitor seizure activity every shift for 3 days. An interview on 8/4/22 at 9:15 AM, with the LPN-Infection Control Nurse revealed she has not been able to find any skills check offs for LPN # 1. LPN-Infection Control Nurse revealed she has been here two months, so she is unaware if skills check offs were being done on the nurses prior to her starting here. Record review of Resident # 43's admission Record revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with medical diagnoses that included Dysphagia following cerebral infarction, Aphasia following cerebral infarction, Unspecified convulsions, Essential primary hypertension and Gastro-esophageal reflux disease without esophagitis. Record review of Resident # 43's Order Summary Report revealed the following orders: 07/14/22-Hold tube feeding 1 hour before and 1 hour after administration of Dilantin four times a day. 07/21/22-Dilantin capsule 100 mg, give 200 mg by mouth one time a day for convulsions. 07/21/22-Keppra tablet 500 mg, give 500 mg by mouth two times a day for convulsions. Record review of Resident #43's Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 07/08/22 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 13 which indicated Resident #43 is cognitively intact.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0760 (Tag F0760)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, record review and facility policy review the facility failed to ensure residents were free from...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, record review and facility policy review the facility failed to ensure residents were free from significant medication errors as evidenced by medication given by wrong route and failing to hold an enteral feeding for one hour post Dilantin administration for one (1) of four (4) resident's observed. Resident # 43 Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Medication Administration-General Guidelines with a revision date of 8/25/2014 revealed Policy: Medications are administered as prescribed in accordance with good nursing principles and practices and only by person legally authorized to do so. Personnel authorized to administer medications do so only after they have familiarized themselves with the medication. The facility has sufficient staff to allow administering of medications without unnecessary interruptions . During an observation on 08/3/22 at 8:45 AM, revealed Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) # 1 administer Keppra 500 milligrams (mg) via (by) Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy (PEG) tube and Dilantin 200 mg by mouth (PO) to Resident # 43. LPN # 1 then restarted the resident's enteral feeding via PEG tube immediately after administering the medications. On 08/3/22 at 8:55 AM, during an interview with LPN # 1, she confirmed she administered the Keppra 500 mg via PEG tube, but it was ordered to be given PO. LPN # 1 also confirmed she restarted the resident's enteral feeding via PEG tube immediately after administering the Dilantin 200 mg, but the order was to hold the enteral feeding for one hour before and after administering Dilantin. She confirmed the Keppra should have been given PO and the enteral feeding should have been held until an hour after the Dilantin was administered. She stated, I am so nervous with you here, I feel like I am back in nursing school. She revealed that the danger of restarting the enteral feeding immediately after the Dilantin was that the Dilantin might not be absorbed by her stomach which could lead to an increase in seizures. She revealed she is not sure why Keppra is given PO instead of via PEG. At 11:45 AM, on 8/3/22 during an interview with the Pharmacy Consultant confirmed that the enteral feeding should be held an hour before and after administering Dilantin. He stated, The resident would need to be monitored for increased seizure activity due to the enteral feeding not being held after the administration of Dilantin. He revealed the Keppra being given by mouth should not hurt the resident and that levels are drawn often. During an interview on 08/3/22 at 12:00 PM, with the Director of Nurses (DON), the Administrator and the Corporate Nurse confirmed that an enteral feeding should be held for one hour before and after Dilantin administration and that Keppra being given via PEG tube instead of PO was a medication error. The Corporate Nurse revealed she would call the resident's Physician to notify him of the medication errors regarding the Keppra being given via PEG tube instead of PO and the enteral feeding being restarted after the Dilantin administration. On 08/3/22 at 1:50 PM, the Corporate Nurse revealed during an interview she called the resident's Physician and made him aware of the medication errors. She revealed the staff are going to draw Keppra and Dilantin levels in the morning, they have completed an incident report, staff are to monitor seizure activity every shift for 3 days. An interview on 08/4/22 at 9:15 AM with the Infection Control Nurse revealed she has not been able to find any skills check offs for LPN # 1. The Infection Control Nurse revealed she is unaware if skills check offs were being done on the nurses prior to her starting here. Record review of Resident # 43's admission Record revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with medical diagnoses that included Dysphagia following cerebral infarction, Aphasia following cerebral infarction, Unspecified Convulsions, Essential primary hypertension and Gastro-esophageal reflux disease without esophagitis. Review of Resident # 43's Order Summary Report revealed the following orders: 07/14/22-Hold tube feeding 1 hour before and 1 hour after administration of Dilantin four times a day. 07/21/22-Dilantin capsule 100 millgrams (mg), give 200 mg by mouth one time a day for convulsions. 07/21/22-Keppra tablet 500 mg, give 500 mg by mouth two times a day for convulsions. Review of the Resident #43's Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 07/08/22 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 13 which indicated the resident is cognitively intact.
CONCERN (D)

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

Infection Control (Tag F0880)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, staff interview and facility policy review the facility failed to prevent the likelihood of the spread of infection as evidenced by the lack of use of a barrier during medication...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, staff interview and facility policy review the facility failed to prevent the likelihood of the spread of infection as evidenced by the lack of use of a barrier during medication administration of oral medications, eye drops and an inhaler for one (1) of four (4) residents reviewed. Resident # 4 (Unsampled resident) Findings Include: Review of the facility policy titled, Standard Precautions with a revision date of 05/30/22 revealed under Policy Statement .Standard precautions will be used in the care of all residents regardless of their diagnoses or suspected or confirmed infection status. Standard precautions presume that all blood, body fluids, secretions, and excretions (except sweat), non-intact skin and mucous membranes may contain transmissible infectious agents. Record review of a document on letterhead dated 8/4/22 and signed by the Administrator, revealed Courtyards Community Living Center does not have a policy regarding placing a barrier during medication administration. An observation on 08/3/22 at 8:15 AM, revealed Registered Nurse (RN) # 1 prepared by mouth (PO) medications, placed those, along with a hand-held inhaler and a bottle of eye drops on top of her medication cart with no barrier. RN # 1 then entered Resident # 4's room and put all the prepared medications on top of the residents overbed table with no barrier and did not disinfect the table prior to placing the medications there. This observation revealed RN # 1 administered all the medications then returned to her medication cart and put the bottle of eye drops and the hand held inhaler on top of the medication cart with no barrier and no prior disinfecting. RN # 1 then opened her medication drawers and put the bottle of eye drops and the hand held inhaler back in their boxes and returned them to the drawer that included other resident's medications. An interview on 08/3/22 at 8:30 AM, with RN # 1 confirmed she did not use a barrier for Resident # 4's medication preparation and administration, but she should have. She confirmed that it is the policy of this facility that a barrier should be used to prevent cross contamination and infection control issues. She stated, I know better, I have to use a barrier when I do treatments, I just got nervous. An interview on 08/4/22 at 11:15 AM, with the Director of Nurses (DON) confirmed RN # 1 should have put a barrier down before setting the resident's medications on top of her overbed table to prevent infection control issues and contamination. An interview on 08/4/22 at 12:20 PM, with the DON revealed the facility does not have a policy regarding having a barrier down when administering medication, but it is expected to be done to prevent contamination.
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Life-Threatening (Immediate Jeopardy)
J - Isolated K - Pattern L - Widespread
Actual Harm
G - Isolated H - Pattern I - Widespread
Potential for Harm
D - Isolated E - Pattern F - Widespread
No Harm (Minor)
A - Isolated B - Pattern C - Widespread

Questions to Ask on Your Visit

  • "What changes have you made since the serious inspection findings?"
  • "Why is there high staff turnover? How do you retain staff?"
  • "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
  • "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"

Our Honest Assessment

Strengths
  • • Licensed and certified facility. Meets minimum state requirements.
Concerns
  • • Multiple safety concerns identified: 6 life-threatening violation(s), 5 harm violation(s), $117,659 in fines, Payment denial on record. Review inspection reports carefully.
  • • 39 deficiencies on record, including 6 critical (life-threatening) violations. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
  • • $117,659 in fines. Extremely high, among the most fined facilities in Mississippi. Major compliance failures.
  • • Grade F (0/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
Bottom line: This facility has 6 Immediate Jeopardy findings. Serious concerns require careful evaluation.

About This Facility

What is Courtyards Comm Living Center's CMS Rating?

CMS assigns COURTYARDS COMM LIVING CENTER an overall rating of 1 out of 5 stars, which is considered much below average nationally. Within Mississippi, 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 Courtyards Comm Living Center Staffed?

CMS rates COURTYARDS COMM LIVING CENTER's staffing level at 2 out of 5 stars, which is below average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 66%, which is 20 percentage points above the Mississippi average of 46%. High turnover can affect care consistency as new staff learn residents' individual needs. RN turnover specifically is 88%, which is notably high. RNs provide skilled clinical oversight, so turnover in this role can affect medical care quality.

What Have Inspectors Found at Courtyards Comm Living Center?

State health inspectors documented 39 deficiencies at COURTYARDS COMM LIVING CENTER during 2022 to 2025. These included: 6 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death), 5 that caused actual resident harm, and 28 with potential for harm. Immediate Jeopardy findings are rare and represent the most serious regulatory concerns. They require immediate corrective action.

Who Owns and Operates Courtyards Comm Living Center?

COURTYARDS COMM LIVING CENTER is owned by a for-profit company. For-profit facilities operate as businesses with obligations to shareholders or private owners. The facility is operated by COMMUNITY ELDERCARE SERVICES, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 66 certified beds and approximately 58 residents (about 88% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in FULTON, Mississippi.

How Does Courtyards Comm Living Center Compare to Other Mississippi Nursing Homes?

Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Mississippi, COURTYARDS COMM LIVING CENTER's overall rating (1 stars) is below the state average of 2.6, staff turnover (66%) is significantly higher than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (1 stars) is much below the national benchmark.

What Should Families Ask When Visiting Courtyards Comm Living Center?

Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "What changes have been made since the serious inspection findings, and how are you preventing similar issues?" "How do you ensure continuity of care given staff turnover, and what is your staff retention strategy?" "Can you walk me through typical staffing levels on day, evening, and night shifts?" "Can I visit during a mealtime to observe dining assistance and food quality?" These questions are particularly relevant given the facility's Immediate Jeopardy citations, the facility's high staff turnover rate, and the below-average staffing rating.

Is Courtyards Comm Living Center Safe?

Based on CMS inspection data, COURTYARDS COMM LIVING CENTER has documented safety concerns. Inspectors have issued 6 Immediate Jeopardy citations (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death). The facility has a 1-star overall rating and ranks #100 of 100 nursing homes in Mississippi. Families considering this facility should ask detailed questions about what corrective actions have been taken since these incidents.

Do Nurses at Courtyards Comm Living Center Stick Around?

Staff turnover at COURTYARDS COMM LIVING CENTER is high. At 66%, the facility is 20 percentage points above the Mississippi average of 46%. Registered Nurse turnover is particularly concerning at 88%. RNs handle complex medical decisions and coordinate care — frequent RN changes can directly impact care quality. High turnover means new staff may not know residents' individual needs, medications, or preferences. It can also be disorienting for residents, especially those with dementia who rely on familiar faces. Families should ask: What is causing the turnover? What retention programs are in place? How do you ensure care continuity during staff transitions?

Was Courtyards Comm Living Center Ever Fined?

COURTYARDS COMM LIVING CENTER has been fined $117,659 across 3 penalty actions. This is 3.4x the Mississippi average of $34,255. 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 Courtyards Comm Living Center on Any Federal Watch List?

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