DANIEL HEALTH CARE INC DBA THE MEADOWS

1905 SOUTH ADAMS STREET, FULTON, MS 38843 (662) 862-2165
For profit - Corporation 130 Beds Independent Data: November 2025 1 Immediate Jeopardy citation
Trust Grade
68/100
#32 of 200 in MS
Last Inspection: May 2025

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

Overview

Daniel Health Care Inc., also known as The Meadows, has a Trust Grade of C+, indicating it is slightly above average in quality but not without areas for improvement. It ranks #32 out of 200 nursing homes in Mississippi, placing it in the top half of facilities in the state, and is the best option out of two in Itawamba County. The facility’s performance is stable, with four issues reported in both 2023 and 2025. Staffing is a strength, rated at 4 out of 5 stars with a turnover rate of 42%, which is better than the state average. However, there are concerns, including a critical finding where the facility did not ensure a registered nurse was scheduled for a resident needing respiratory care, and another incident where a resident’s urinary catheter bag was not covered, compromising their dignity. Overall, while The Meadows has solid staffing and no fines, families should be aware of the critical care gaps identified in inspections.

Trust Score
C+
68/100
In Mississippi
#32/200
Top 16%
Safety Record
High Risk
Review needed
Inspections
Holding Steady
4 → 4 violations
Staff Stability
○ Average
42% turnover. Near Mississippi's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
Penalties
✓ Good
No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Mississippi facilities.
Skilled Nurses
✓ Good
Each resident gets 49 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than average for Mississippi. RNs are trained to catch health problems early.
Violations
○ Average
10 deficiencies on record. Average for a facility this size. Mostly minor or procedural issues.
★★★★☆
4.0
Overall Rating
★★★★☆
4.0
Staff Levels
★★★☆☆
3.0
Care Quality
★★★★☆
4.0
Inspection Score
Stable
2023: 4 issues
2025: 4 issues

The Good

  • 4-Star Staffing Rating · Above-average nurse staffing levels
  • Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
  • No fines on record
  • Staff turnover below average (42%)

    6 points below Mississippi average of 48%

Facility shows strength in staffing levels, fire safety.

The Bad

Staff Turnover: 42%

Near Mississippi avg (46%)

Typical for the industry

The Ugly 10 deficiencies on record

1 life-threatening
May 2025 4 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

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

Resident Rights (Tag F0550)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, staff interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to promote dignity by not ensuring the use of a privacy cover for the urinary catheter bag for on...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, staff interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to promote dignity by not ensuring the use of a privacy cover for the urinary catheter bag for one (1) of five (5) residents reviewed with a catheter. (Resident #2) Findings Include: Review of the facility policy titled Catheter Placement Policy, with a revision date of August 14, 2017, revealed catheter bags should be placed inside a privacy bag. Review of the facility policy titled Dignity Policy, with a revision date of September 6, 2010, revealed care should be provided in a manner and in an environment that maintains or enhances each resident's dignity with respect in full recognition of his or her individuality. On 5/27/25 at 9:40 AM, observation of Resident #2 revealed the resident lying in bed with a urinary catheter bag hanging at the bedside, uncovered and lacking a privacy cover. Record review of the physician orders revealed Resident #2 had an order for a suprapubic catheter. During an interview with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN)# 1 at Resident 2's bedside on 5/28/25 at 9:42 AM, she confirmed that the resident should have a privacy cover on his catheter bag and stated, It can be embarrassing for the resident, and it's a dignity issue. During an interview with Director of Nursing (DON) on 5/28/25 at 11:47 AM, she stated, All staff know that they should have a privacy bag over the catheter bag for dignity. We have enough catheter bag covers for the wheelchair and bed. Record review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 5/14/2025, revealed in Section C a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score was an 8, indicating the resident's cognitive status was moderately impaired. Item H0100: Appliances revealed, A. Indwelling catheter. Record review of the Record of admission revealed the facility admitted Resident #2 on 8/19/2017, with medical diagnoses including Urinary Retention.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0553 (Tag F0553)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on resident and staff interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to involve a bed-bound resident for a scheduled care plan meeting for one (1) of 21 sampled resid...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on resident and staff interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to involve a bed-bound resident for a scheduled care plan meeting for one (1) of 21 sampled residents. Resident #80 Findings Include: Review of the Care Plan Invitation Policy unrevised revealed, It is the policy of this facility that invitations to care plan conferences will be handled in the following manner: The resident and/or the responsible party will be invited to attend the care planning conference by one week prior to the scheduled date . A formal interdisciplinary care planning conference will be held weekly on Thursday. All members present are to provide input and sign the care plan verifying attendance . Review of the Resident Rights Policy with a revision date of 12/06/10 revealed under, Exercise Rights: Each resident will be able to exercise his/her rights as a resident in this facility and as a citizen of the United States. 11. To participate in his/her total care plan preparation and implementation . An observation and interview with Resident #80 on 5/27/25 at 10:06 AM revealed she was lying in bed and stated she was bed bound and did not attend her care plan meetings because she did not leave her room. The resident explained she had never been invited to a meeting, and the facility had not mentioned anything about having one and confirmed that her family was not involved with her care. An interview with Social Services (SS) #1 on 5/27/25 at 2:12 PM revealed the facility has care plan meetings every Thursday. She explained that she notifies the residents of their upcoming care plan meeting when she goes into their rooms to do their Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) and mood assessment. She stated the resident's son-in-law came to the first couple of care plan meetings but has not come in quite a while. SS #1 stated the resident prefers not to come out of her room and confirmed the team did not accommodate for the resident by holding the meeting in her room. She acknowledged the resident should be involved and make decisions regarding her care. An interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 5/29/25 at 8:12 AM confirmed the staff should involve Resident #80 in care plan meetings and explained the resident should have a direct voice regarding how her care was managed. Record review of the Record of Admission revealed the facility admitted Resident #80 on 10/31/23 with medical diagnoses that included Seizures and Unspecified Sequelae of Nontraumatic Subarachnoid Hemorrhage. Record review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 3/24/25 revealed under section C, a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) summary score of 15, which indicated Resident #80 was cognitively intact.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0561 (Tag F0561)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**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 allow a r...

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 allow a resident the opportunity to make important care-related decisions for one (1) of 21 sampled residents. Resident #87 Findings Include: Review of the Resident Rights Policy with a revision date of 9/06/10 revealed under, Exercise Rights: Each resident will be able to exercise his/her rights as a resident in this facility and as a citizen of the United States. An observation and interview with Resident #87 on 5/27/25 at 10:56 AM revealed she was sitting in her wheelchair in her room and stated that she did not sleep well last night and explained that they made her get up early this morning. She revealed, I told them I would rather not get up, and I wanted to sleep in. The resident stated that they made her get up anyway. An interview with Resident #87 on 5/28/25 at 9:50 AM revealed she was [AGE] years old, and depending on how she felt, she might not want to get up early every morning. The resident stated she would like to make those care decisions for herself. An interview with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #2 on 5/28/25 at 10:02 AM revealed Resident #87 was on the get-up list for the 11-7 shift to get her up. She explained that the night shift started getting the residents up around 5:30 AM and confirmed the resident did voice at times she did not want to get up early, but the daughter wanted her up for all meals. LPN #2 acknowledged it was the residents' right to make care choices, and the facility should honor that request. An interview with the Director of Nursing on 5/29/25 at 8:12 AM confirmed Resident #87 should be able to make decisions regarding her care that were important to her, such as sleeping in late if she wanted to. Record review of the Record of Admission revealed the facility admitted Resident #87 on 5/03/24 with a medical diagnosis that included Mixed Anxiety Disorder. Record review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 4/04/25 revealed under section C, a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) summary score of 10, which indicated Resident #87 was moderately cognitively impaired.
CONCERN (D)

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

Assessment Accuracy (Tag F0641)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on staff interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to accurately complete Section K of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) for a resident with significant weight loss for...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on staff interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to accurately complete Section K of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) for a resident with significant weight loss for one (1) of 21 sampled residents. Resident #48 Findings Include: Review of the facility policy titled Resident Assessment Instrument Policy (RAI) with a revision date of 5/19/15 revealed, It is the policy of this facility that the RAI will be done as follows: According to the guideline specified by CMS (Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services) . Record review of the Weights Detail Report for Resident #48 revealed the following recorded weights: 3/27/25 237.1 4/29/25 230.3 Record review of the readmission Assessment for Resident #48 dated 5/07/25 revealed a weight of 206.6, which was a significant weight loss of 10.29% (percent) from the last documented weight on 4/29/25. Record review of the Admit 5-day Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 5/13/25 revealed under section K0300, a weight loss of 5% or more in the last month was not marked. An interview with the Minimum Data Set (MDS) Nurse on 5/29/25 at 8:56 AM confirmed Resident #48 had weight loss that should have been captured on the 5-day MDS assessment. She stated, It just got missed. She revealed the information submitted in the assessment must be accurate to develop the resident's care that is needed. An interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 5/29/25 at 9:09 AM revealed her expectations were for the MDS staff to accurately reflect the resident's status at the time the assessment was completed. Record review of the Record of Admission revealed the facility admitted Resident #48 on 8/12/24 with a medical diagnoses that included Chronic Kidney Disease, stage 3, and Chronic Systolic Congestive Heart Failure. Record review of the MDS with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 5/23/25 revealed under section C, a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) summary score of 3, which indicated Resident #48 was severely cognitively impaired.
Nov 2023 4 deficiencies
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Free from Abuse/Neglect (Tag F0600)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on staff interviews, record review and facility policy review the facility failed to ensure that one (1) of 24 sampled res...

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 ensure that one (1) of 24 sampled residents was protected from verbal abuse. Resident #268 Findings Include: Record review of the Facility's Abuse, Neglect, or Exploitation Policy with revised date of November 21, 2017, documented, It is the policy of this facility that all residents will be free from abuse, neglect, and exploitation following the guidelines in the Vulnerable Adult Act . On 11/28/23 at 12:40 PM, an interview with Director of Nursing (DON), revealed that on 10/30/23, it was reported to her that Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #1 had spoken inappropriately to a resident. She revealed that it was told to her that CNA #1 and CNA #2 were in Resident #268's room helping her pack up her personal items for resident to be moved into a different room, due to resident testing positive for covid. The DON revealed that while conducting the investigation, it was revealed to her that while the two CNAs were packing up resident's personal items, the resident had asked for a pillow and CNA #1 responded with Shut the F*** (explicit language) up. DON revealed that upon interview with CNA #2, she revealed that she knew this should be reported and went to the supervisor immediately after she finished taking care of the resident. The DON revealed that Resident #268 called the Director of Rehabilitation (DOR), and immediately reported the incident. The DON revealed that the DOR went straight to the Registered Nurse (RN) Supervisor, reported it and by the time CNA #2 finished up with the resident and made it to administration, the RN Supervisor was already in the room interviewing with resident. The DON revealed that she and the Administrator (ADM) interviewed CNA #2 to get her account of the incident and she confirmed that CNA #1 had in fact said what resident reported she said. The DON revealed that CNA #1 was called in for questioning and denied the accusation; but, due to being heard and reported by Resident #268 and witnessed by CNA #2, CNA #1 was terminated, and she left the building immediately. DON revealed that she reported the incident to the State Agency and to the Attorney General's Office. On 11/28/23 at 2:50 PM, an interview with Director of Rehabilitation (DOR), revealed that she had known Resident #268 for years prior to resident coming to the facility and she (resident) felt comfortable talking to her. DOR revealed that on 10/30/23, Resident #268 was being moved from one room to another due to testing positive for Covid and that she (DOR) was called by this resident to come to her room. The DOR revealed that the resident reported to her (DOR) that a CNA had told her to shut the 'F***' (explicit language) up and that the resident said it back to her. DOR revealed that the resident had told her that CNA #1 was at the head of the bed and CNA #2 was towards the foot of the bed to the side and they were moving bed and all into the other room. DOR revealed that she went straight to the RN Supervisor, reported it, and she (DOR) stated, We don't tolerate that. DOR revealed that they immediately started investigating, interviewing and that CNA #1 was terminated that same day. On 11/29/23 at 9:00 AM, an interview with CNA #2, revealed that on 10/30/23, she (CNA #2) and CNA #1 were getting Resident #268's personal things together to get her moved into another room because she had tested positive for COVID. CNA #2 revealed that Resident #268 had hip issues, was lying in her bed and they were moving bed and all to the other room. She revealed that Resident #268 had asked for her pillow which was near CNA #1, and she told her no. CNA #2 revealed that Resident #268 asked repeatedly for her pillow and then CNA #1 said to resident, Just shut the f**** (explicit language) up! She revealed that the resident heard what she had said and repeated back to her with, you shut the f*** up and CNA #1 still didn't get the pillow resident had asked for. CNA #2 revealed that the resident seemed mad, and the way CNA #1 had talked to her was disrespectful and rude and stated, I was shocked that she said it. CNA #2 revealed that CNA #1 could come across as rude sometimes, but she had never witnessed anything like this with her. CNA #2 revealed that CNA #1 left the room after this, and she continued to provide care to the resident making sure she was comfortable in bed and that she had what she needed. CNA #2 revealed that when she left Resident #268's room, she went to report the incident. CNA #2 revealed that Resident #268 had called the DOR to her room and told her what happened immediately after she left her and before she was able to find her supervisor. On 11/29/23 at 9:30 AM, an interview with the RN Supervisor revealed that he was working on 10/30/23 when the alleged verbal abuse by CNA #1 to Resident #268 occurred. He revealed that Resident #268 called the Director of Rehabilitation, reported that CNA #1 had cursed her and that she had cursed her (CNA #1) back. RN Supervisor revealed that he spoke with CNA #1, and she denied the allegation. RN Supervisor revealed that he went with CNA #1 into Resident #268's room, and she denied saying it yet again. RN Supervisor revealed that he then spoke with CNA #2 who was a witness to the incident, and she confirmed that CNA #1 had cursed the resident. RN Supervisor revealed that he had never seen this kind of behavior with CNA #1 and that she no longer worked here. On 11/30/23 at 9:45 AM, an interview with Director of Nursing (DON) revealed that CNA #1 was terminated due to verbal abuse towards Resident #268. She revealed that verbal abuse included talking down to residents, raising voices to others, and cursing residents. She revealed that CNA #1 denied the allegation; but, DON stated, It was witnessed by the resident and another CNA. The DON revealed that she knew that they were responsible for everyone working under them and knew that it was their job to make sure these residents were taken care of. Record review of the facility investigation completed by the DON documented that on 10/30/23 at 12:00 PM, that CNA #1 and CNA #2 were in Resident #268's room helping pack up her personal items for resident to be moved into a different room due to resident testing positive for covid. Upon interviews during investigation process, while the CNAs were packing personal items, Resident #268 asked for a pillow and CNA #1 responded to resident with Shut the 'F' (explicit language) up. Interview with CNA #2 revealed that she knew this was a reportable incident and had intentions of coming out to meet with supervisor after she completed care for resident; but, due to the flow and quick time frame of awareness made to administration, supervisor was already in room interviewing with resident by this time. Resident #268 called DOR to her room and reported a statement made to her by CNA #1 and DOR reported said statement to RN Supervisor. Upon interview with CNA #1 with Resident #268 present and resident representative, CNA #1 denied telling Resident #268 to shut the 'F' (explicit language) up. RN Supervisor reported the incident to Administrator and DON, who called CNA #2 into the office to get her account of the incident. CNA #2 confirmed that CNA #1 did say what Resident #268 reported she said. DON then called in CNA #1, and she denied saying said statement to Resident #268. DON told CNA #1 that Resident #268 reported it, CNA #2 confirmed witnessing her saying what was reported by resident, so her employment would be terminated. DON reviewed the policy and expectations of how to care for and treat residents and made CNA #1 aware of the severity of what she had done and how she could have handled things differently. DON reported this incident to the State Agency on 10/30/23 around 1:10 PM and online report was sent to Attorney General's (AG) office at 1:57 PM. Record review of statement written and signed by DOR, documented that she was called to Resident #268's room and was told that the CNA #1 told her to shut the f*** up. DOR revealed that she went and told the RN Supervisor, they (DOR and RN Supervisor) interviewed CNA #1, and she denied the accusation. CNA #2, who witnessed the incident, was then interviewed and she said that CNA #1 told patient to shut the f up and that she had witnessed her telling the patient those exact words. Record review of the written statement completed and signed by CNA #2 on 10/30/23 documented that CNA #2 and CNA #1 went into Resident #268's room to move the patient to room [ROOM NUMBER]. During the move, the patient was asking for a pillow, CNA #1 told the patient No we have to wait until we get to your room. The patient asked nicely twice if she could have her pillow and CNA #1 got frustrated and told her to shut the F up. The patient heard CNA #1 and replied saying 'no you shut the f*** up.' After that the conversation was over and they continued to move the patient to room [ROOM NUMBER] and then left. Record review of the written statement completed and signed by RN Supervisor on 10/30/23 documented that he was notified about Resident #268 complaint that a CNA told her to shut the 'F***' (explicit language) up. RN Supervisor spoke with resident who verified which CNA spoke to her in that manner. CNA #1 was brought into the room with Resident #268, was questioned, and she denied saying those words. RN Supervisor revealed that CNA #2 was present and had witnessed the incident and during interview with her, she verified that CNA #1 did use those exact words in which Resident #268 indicated she said. He revealed that the DON called CNA #1 into her office in which appropriate disciplinary action was taken. Record review of Resident #268's Record of Admission revealed an admission date of 10/13/2023. Record review of Resident #268's Minimum Data Set (MDS) with Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 10/19/23 under Section C was documented a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) Score of 14 which indicated that resident was cognitively intact. Record review of Resident #268's History and Physical (H&P) completed by the Nurse Practitioner documented that resident had the following diagnoses to include: Fracture of Unspecified part of Left Femur, History of falling, Difficulty in Walking, Presence of Left Artificial hip joint, Parkinson's Disease, Chronic Kidney Disease, and Weakness.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0645 (Tag F0645)

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 accurately complete a Pre-admission Sc...

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 accurately complete a Pre-admission Screening (PAS) for a resident with a mental disorder for one (1) of two (2) resident PASSARs (Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review) reviewed. Resident #35 Findings Include: Review of the facility policy titled, Resident Assessment-Coordination with PASARR Program with an implementation date of 07/10/23 revealed under the Policy: This facility coordinates assessments with pre-admission screening and resident review (PASARR) program under Medicaid to ensure that individuals with a mental disorder, intellectual disability, or a related condition receives care and services in the most integrated setting appropriate to their needs . Record review of Resident #35's Record of Admission revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Record review of Resident #35's History and Physical (Proper name of Health Services) dated 3/6/23 revealed the resident had a medical diagnoses history on admission of Bipolar Disorder. Record review of Resident #35's Pre-admission Screening that was completed on 3/21/23 indicated the resident did not have any history of a mental illness. An interview on 11/29/23 at 2:00PM with Case Manager Nurse revealed that residents are discussed in their morning meetings regarding behaviors or new diagnoses. She stated that Resident #35 had a diagnosis of Bipolar Disorder when the Pre-admission Screening was completed and the question regarding if the resident had a mental disorder should have been marked yes on the PAS that was completed on 3/21/23. She revealed that back in July of this year they had a staff meeting and discussed looking at these harder than we were, because it was a bigger deal than we thought. An interview on 11/29/23 at 2:30 PM, with the Quality Assurance Nurse (QA) confirmed that the resident had a diagnosis of Bipolar Disorder when the residents PAS was completed, and the form was not filled out correctly because it indicated the resident did not have a mental disorder. Record review of Resident #35's Minimum Data Set with an Assessment Reference Date of 09/03/23 revealed in Section C a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, which indicates the resident is cognitively intact and in Section I that the resident had a diagnosis of Bipolar Disorder.
CONCERN (D)

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

Medication Errors (Tag F0758)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on staff interview and record review the facility failed to have a stop date on an As Needed (PRN) psychotropic medication...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on staff interview and record review the facility failed to have a stop date on an As Needed (PRN) psychotropic medication for one (1) of three (3) residents reviewed for the use of psychotropic medications. Resident #58 Findings Include: Review of the typed statement on facility letterhead (undated) revealed the facility did not have a policy regarding a stop date for psychotropic medications and was signed by the Administrator. Record review of Resident #58's Physician's Orders revealed the following: Order dated 7/20/23-Lorazepam oral concentrate 2mg (milligrams)/1ml (milliliter) give 1ml every 2 (two) hours as needed for anxiety oral. An interview on 11/30/23 at 10:25 AM, with the Consultant Pharmacist revealed that any psychotropic medication that is PRN should have a stop date and that he had indicated on his 8/11/23 Medication Regimen Review for Resident #58 that he had relayed to the QA (Quality Assurance) nurse to check and make sure a stop date was on the PRN Ativan order that was written on 7/20/23. An interview and record review on 11/30/23 at 10:30 AM, with Registered Nurse (RN) #1 revealed she is Resident #58's nurse and that she does have behaviors sometimes with increased anxiety. She confirmed that the resident had an order for Ativan scheduled one time per day and Ativan every 2 hours PRN. An interview on 11/30/23 at 10:47 AM, with the Director of Nurses (DON) confirmed that PRN psychotropic medications should have a stop date, because it may not be something they continue needing. She stated that if the PRN psychotropic medication was continued without a stop date, then it could cause the resident to be a fall risk. She confirmed that Resident #58's PRN Ativan order written on 7/20/23 did not have a stop date and that the Consultant Pharmacist's report from 8/2023 indicated that he had relayed to the QA nurse for her to check and make sure a stop date was put on that order. An interview on 11/20/23 at 11:00 AM with Family Nurse Practitioner (FNP) confirmed that she wrote the order for PRN Ativan on 7/20/23 and did not put a stop date on the order. She stated that she thought that with the resident being on hospice and her writing that she wanted the resident on the PRN Ativan indefinitely was ok. She revealed she understands that they need a stop date and review, and she would take care of that now. Record review of Resident #58's Record of Admission revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Record review of the History and Physical for Resident #58 dated 6/15/23 revealed medical diagnoses that included Dementia .with mood disturbance, Generalized Anxiety Disorder and Major Depressive Disorder. Record review of Resident #58's Minimum Data Set with an Assessment Reference Date of 09/08/23 revealed in Section C a Brief Interview of Mental Status score of 07, which indicates the resident was severely cognitively impaired.
MINOR (B)

Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact

MDS Data Transmission (Tag F0640)

Minor procedural issue · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on staff interviews, record reviews, and facility policy reviews the facility failed to transmit Annual and Quarterly Mini...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on staff interviews, record reviews, and facility policy reviews the facility failed to transmit Annual and Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessments accurately and timely for two (2) of two (2) residents reviewed for MDS assessments. Resident #76 and Resident #101 Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, CH 5: Submission and Correction of the MDS Assessments dated October 2023 revealed, When the transmission file is received by iQIES (Internet Quality Improvement and Evaluation System), the system performs a series of validation edits to evaluate whether or not the data submitted meet the required standards .All error and warning messages are detailed and explained in the Error Messages guide .5.2 Timeliness Criteria .Encoding Data: .For a comprehensive assessment ( .Annual ., encoding must occur within 7 days after the Care Plan Completion Date (V0200C2 + 7 days). For a Quarterly, Significant Correction to prior Quarterly, Discharge, or PPS assessment, encoding must occur within 7 days after the MDS Completion Date (Z0500B + 7 days) . A record review of the MDS 3.0 NH Final Validation Report for Resident #76 with a target date of 10/10/2023 revealed that the annual assessment had been rejected due to invalid skip patterns. The dates rejected were 10-24-2023, 10/30/2023, and 11/01/2023. A record review of the MDS 3.0 NH Final Validation Report for Resident #101 with a target date of 10/20/2023 revealed that the quarterly assessment had been rejected due to invalid skip patterns for dates of 10/30/2023 and 11/01/2023. An interview on 11/30/23 at 09:06 AM, the MDS nurse revealed that the annual MDS assessment for Resident #76 had an Assessment reference date (ARD) of 10/10/23 and was submitted on 10/24/23. She revealed the annual assessment was rejected because of Section D inaccuracy and the annual assessment was unlocked and fixed and re-submitted on 10/30/23 the assessment was rejected again because of Section D inaccuracy. She revealed on 11/1/23 the annual was once again unlocked and fixed and at that time it was rejected because of Section O. She revealed at this time it is still rejected and she has not fixed and re-submitted. The MDS nurse revealed Resident #101's quarterly assessment was rejected because the residents Social Security number was put in inaccurately. She revealed it was a typo but now we are making sure we slow down when adding information to prevent that from happening again. She revealed a modification was submitted on 11/1/23 but was rejected due to inaccuracy again. She confirmed it is still not corrected and both Resident #76 and Resident #101 are on her to-do list for Monday. She revealed when an MDS is rejected she or the other MDS nurses look at the validation report. She confirmed the validation report identified the errors that were made on each submission. She confirmed they were not submitted accurately. She revealed the purpose of the MDS assessment is for reimbursement to the facility and to determine the development of clinical care plans based on interdisciplinary team assessments. A record review of the facility Record of admission for Resident #76 revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. A record review of the facility Record of admission for Resident #101 revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE].
Aug 2022 2 deficiencies 1 IJ
CRITICAL (J)

Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation

Respiratory Care (Tag F0695)

Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, staff interview, facility policy review, Mississippi (MS) State Board of Nursing website review, and the N...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, staff interview, facility policy review, Mississippi (MS) State Board of Nursing website review, and the Nurse Practice Act, the facility failed to ensure a Registered Nurse (RN) and/or Respiratory Therapist (RT) were scheduled for each shift to provide consistent respiratory care services, 24 hours each day to deep suction the tracheostomy (trach), if needed and /or provide other emergency care related to the trach, to a resident with a tracheostomy, for one (1) of 1 resident reviewed with a tracheostomy, Resident #26. During a review of the facility Staffing Grid, the facility did not have RN or RT coverage for the 11-7 shift on 08/05/2022 and there was not an RN assigned on the 3-11 shift and the 11-7 shift on 08/06/2022. Resident #26 had a diagnosis of Anoxic Brain Damage with a tracheostomy tube, with orders to suction the tube as needed for excessive secretions. Resident #26 was diagnosed with an Acute Upper Respiratory Infection requiring antibiotics and nebulizer treatments on 08/04/2022. The facility's failure to provide 24 hour per day services of an RN and/or RT, for possible deep suctioning and other emergency care of the tracheostomy tube was likely to cause serious harm, serious injury, serious impairment, or death to Resident #26. The SA identified an Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) and Substandard Quality of Care (SQC) on 08/10/2022, which began on 08/05/2022, when the facility failed to ensure qualified staff, a RN and/or RT, were present 24 hours per day to perform deep suctioning of a Tracheostomy and other emergency procedures if needed, for Resident #26. The SA notified the Administrator on 08/10/2022 of the IJ and SQC. The facility submitted an acceptable Removal Plan on 08/11/2022, in which the facility alleged all corrective actions were completed on 08/10/2022, and the IJ was removed as of 08/11/2022. The SA validated the Removal Plan on 08/12/2022 and determined the IJ was removed prior to exit. The scope and severity for the IJ at CFR 483.25(i) Respiratory care, including tracheostomy care and tracheal suctioning, was lowered to a D level, while the facility develops and implements a Plan of Correction (POC) and monitors the effectiveness of the systemic changes to ensure the facility sustains compliance with the regulatory requirements. Findings include: Record review of the facility policy titled, Suctioning Policy, revised May 28, 2018, revealed, It is the policy of this facility to ensure that standards of best practice are consistent when upper airway suctioning is performed to remove secretions from the oropharynx, nasopharynx, or trachea . Procedure . 10. Tracheal suctioning . d. If suctioning catheter needs to be inserted beyond the end of the tracheotomy tube (deep suctioning) this will be performed by an RN. Review of the Mississippi (MS) State Board of Nursing Laws and Rules Administrative Code Part 2830 Practice of Nursing Title 30: Professions and Occupations Chapter 2, Functions of the Licensed Practical Nurse, (LPN) revealed: Rule 2.1 LPN Supervision, The LPN gives nursing care which does not require the specialized skill, judgement, and knowledge required of an RN, Advanced Practice Registered Nurse (APRN), Licensed Physician, or Licensed Dentist. Review of the MS State Board of Nursing (BON) website revealed frequently asked questions (FAQ's). The BON's statement regarding the LPN's scope of practice with Tracheostomy care revealed: It is within the scope of practice of the LPN to perform Trach care and suction secretions from the Trach tube. However, it is not within the scope of practice for the LPN to perform deep right main stem suctioning. If deep suctioning is required for a patient, a Registered Nurse (RN) must perform the procedure. Record review of the assessment of Resident #26, completed by the Nurse Practitioner (NP) on 08/10/22, revealed, He is currently being treated for Upper Respiratory Infection with Clindamycin 300mg (milligrams), four times daily since 8/4/22. A chest x-ray was obtained on 8/4/22 due to increased congestion, fever, and cough. In addition to the mentioned antibiotics, he routinely receives DuoNeb every six (6) hours (hr), scheduled, for congestion due to impaired respiratory function, Lasix 40mg twice daily for secretions, Zyrtec 10mg daily for secretions, Guaifenesin 100mg/5mg #20 milliliters (ml) every (q) 4hrs for secretions and Acetylcyteine 20% twice daily and as needed (PRN) for secretions. He has not required an as needed dose of Acetylcyteine since 8/4/22. He has an as needed order for Lasix 20mg intramuscular (IM) and received an as needed dose on 8/4/22, 8/7/222, and 8/9/22. He receives routine trach care and suctioning every shift and as needed. He has required as needed trach suctioning 8/4/22, 8/6/22, 8/8/22, and twice on 8/9/22 this month. Nurse report that his secretions have improved from green to yellow since receiving antibiotics. He has not required deep suctioning. No reports of apnea or labored breathing. He is afebrile and is no longer coughing. On 8/9/22, review of the Staffing Grid revealed there was not a RN assigned to the 11-7 shift on 8/5/22 and there was not a RN assigned on the 3-11 shift and the 11-7 shift on 8/6/22. An observation on 08/08/2022 at 12:30 PM, of Resident #26 revealed his tracheostomy with no visible secretions, the trach gauze was clean and secured at the base of the tracheostomy inner cannula. The observation revealed Resident #26 was receiving humidified air via trach collar, from a humidified air compressor. There was a covered suction machine and nebulizer set-up in the room. No visible signs of respiratory distress were noted. There were no audible breath sounds that would possibly indicate complications of breathing, and he was easily aroused by low tones. Record review of the Record of Admission revealed Resident #26 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that included Quadriplegia, Unspecified, Anoxic Brain Damage, Not Elsewhere Classified, Persistent Vegetative State, and Encounter for Attention to Tracheostomy. Record review of Resident #26's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 05/18/2022, revealed Section C was not completed, due to question B0100, Comatose, of Section B of the MDS being answered, yes, indicating, persistent vegetative state/no discernible consciousness. On 08/09/2022 at 11:15 AM, a record review and an interview with the Administrator confirmed the Staffing Grid reflected there was not an RN assignment on the 11-7 shift on 08/05/2022 and there was no RN assignment on the 11-7 shift and the 3-11 shift on 08/06/2022. The Administrator revealed respiratory therapists are not employed in the nursing facility. The Administrator revealed the Nurse Practitioner (NP) was on call, as back-up RN coverage, for evenings, nights, and weekends, that she lived 5 minutes away from the nursing facility, and she could be called to come to the facility, in case of emergent tracheostomy care needs for Resident #26. The Administrator also revealed that she and the Director of Nursing (DON) were responsible for nurse scheduling. The Administrator confirmed she was aware of the need to have 24-hour a day RN coverage to ensure Resident #26 had qualified staff available, to reform deep suctioning or emergent trach care if the need should arise. An interview with the DON on 08/09/2022 at 11:30 AM, revealed she and the Administrator are responsible for nurse scheduling and that she normally had enough RNs to work every shift. She confirmed there was no RN coverage for the 11-7 shift on 08/05/2022 and on 08/06/2022. She also confirmed there was no RN coverage on the 3-11 shift on 08/06/2022. The DON also revealed the shifts were not covered on 08/05/2022 and 08/06/2022 because the assigned RN for the three (3) shifts called in on 08/05/2022 and 08/06/2022. She was unable to get the part-time RN to come to work, and could not find any other RN on staff to cover the shifts. The DON revealed she was responsible to come in and work an RN shift if she was not successful in finding other RN coverage. She did not come in to work the 3 shifts because it was an oversight on her part. The DON revealed back-up RN coverage assistance, for Resident #26, was available from the Nurse Practitioner, who was on call and could have been called from home if Resident #26 needed RN assistance for tracheostomy care on 08/05/2022 and 08/06/2022. She also stated the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) was used as back-up RN coverage when there was no staff RN to cover a shift. The DON revealed she had been having some scheduling conflicts, but not having 24-hour a day RN coverage was not a frequent occurrence. The DON confirmed she was aware that a resident with a tracheostomy required either an RN or an RT for deep suctioning. An interview with the ADON on 08/09/2022 at 12:45 PM, revealed she was not aware there was not 24-hour RN coverage on the nurse schedule for the 11-7 shift on 08/05/2022 and the 3-11 and the 11-7 shifts on 08/06/2022. She stated she was not available to cover the 3 shifts. The ADON confirmed she was one of the back-up RNs, if there was no staff RN available to work a scheduled evening, night, or weekend shift, but was always informed by the DON when she needed to work to ensure an RN was in the building 24-hours a day. In an interview with the DON on 08/09/2022 at 3:15 PM, she stated, I am working with the RNs to try to provide 24-hour a day coverage. Scheduling has been hard. I can't get the day shift RNs to agree to work night shift and I have already worked a lot of extra shifts. Resident #26 has not had any respiratory problems in years and had not required deep suctioning in a very long time. He is stable and if he had any problems at night, the Licensed Practical Nurses, (LPNs) could call 911 and call me for help. On 08/10/2022 at 03:00 PM, an interview and a record review of the Payroll Detail sheets, with the Administrator, which documented all clock hour for RNs from 08/01/2021 through 08/07/2022, confirmed 24-hour RN coverage was not available in the nursing facility for 52 shifts. The Administrator stated she was not aware there had not been 24-hour a day RN coverage for this time period. An interview with the NP on 08/11/2022 at 09:30 AM, confirmed she was on call, for back-up RN coverage, when there was not an RN covering a shift on the weekends. She revealed she lived 10 minutes away from the nursing facility, and would come and clock in at the facility if she was called to work a shift. NP noted she had never been contacted by the DON or ADON to come and cover a shift other than for 08/05/2022 and 08/06/2022. She stated she was out of town on those days and was not able to come to the facility. The NP revealed she was only aware of the nursing facility's increased staffing issues with 24-hour a day RN coverage for the past two weeks. She agreed to be one of the back-up coverage RNs, for Resident #26, a long while ago, but could not remember exactly when she made the agreement with the Administrator and DON. In an interview with the NP on 08/12/22 at 09:30 AM, she stated, The resident is responding well to the antibiotics and other medications ordered for his Upper Respiratory Infection. Record review of the Physician Orders for Resident #26 revealed an order for Clindamycin Hydrochloride 300 milligrams (MG), four (4) times a day (QID) for (x) 10 days for an Upper Respiratory Infection and Congestion, with an order date of 08/04/2022 and a discontinue date (d/c) of 08/14/2022, Lasix 40 MG, at 12 noon, due to (D/T) Congestion, with an order date of 05/16/2018, Lasix 40 MG one tablet daily for congestion, with an order date of 5/16/2018, Zyrtec 10 MG Tablet, at 4 PM for Rhinitis/Secretions, with an order date of 5/16/2018, Guaifenesin 100 MG/5ML every 4 hours D/T thickened secretions, with an order date of 07/07/2022, Acetylcysteine 20% Solution Nebulizer Inhalation twice a day (BID) for secretions, with an order date 08/08/2022, Ipratropium Bromide-Albuterol Sulfate 3 MG/ 3 ML - 0.5 MG / 3 ML Inhalation every six hours (6), for Shortness of Breath (SOB) and Congestion Secondary to Impaired Respiratory Function, with an order date of 07/13/2021, Acetylcysteine 20% Solution one (1) ML everyday as needed (PRN), for increased secretions, with an order dated of 4/28/2022, and an order to suction tracheostomy PRN , dated 2/25/2020. Removal Plan: The facility submitted an acceptable Removal Plan on 08/11/2022 at 10:00 AM, in which the facility alleged all corrective actions were completed 08/10/2022 and the IJ was removed on 08/11/2022. The SA validated the Removal Plan on 08/12/2022 and determined the IJ was removed on 08/12/2022, prior to exit. Review of the facility's Removal Plan revealed the facility took the following corrective actions to remove the IJ prior to exit: The SA identified an Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) and Substandard Quality of Care (SQC), on 08/10/22, when the facility failed to ensure qualified staff were present 24 hours per day to perform deep suctioning of a Tracheostomy and other emergency procedures if needed, for Resident #26. The facility Executive Director, the Administrator, the Director of Nursing, and the Assistant Director of Nursing were notified 8/10/2022 at 05:00 PM of Immediate Jeopardy (IJ)and Substandard Quality of Care (SQC) due to the facility failure to have a Registered Nurse or Respiratory Therapist available 24 hours per day, 7 days per week to provide deep suctioning in the event emergency care was needed. Resident #26 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a tracheostomy. This placed Resident #26 at risk for serious injury, harm, impairment, or death. He was identified as the only resident with a tracheostomy. During the period of August 2021-August 2022 the staffing schedule and timecards revealed 52 days without 24 hour Registered Nurse or Respiratory Therapist coverage for the 3 PM -11 PM and 11 PM-7 PM shifts during the time frame of August 1, 2021 through August 7, 2022. Facility Actions: Upon identification of a lack of Registered Nurse coverage on 08/10/2022 by the State Agency (SA), the Director of Nursing immediately verified Registered Nurse coverage for 08/10/2022 and going forward for each shift for tracheostomy needs for Resident #26. 1. The Administrator discussed deficient findings with the Director of Nursing on 8/9/22 at 10:00 AM and verified lapse in coverage on specific shifts. The Director of Nursing immediately verified Registered Nurse coverage for 8/10/22 and going forward for each shift for deep suctioning and emergent tracheostomy care, if needed for Resident #26. 2. The Medical Director, who is also the Attending Physician, was notified on 8/10/22 at 5:48 PM, of the Immediate Jeopardy, and the need for 24-hour coverage by a Registered Nurse or Respiratory Therapist by the Administrator. 3. Resident #26 was fully assessed by the Nurse Practitioner on 8/10/22 and documentation signed off at 7:42 PM with no acute findings or evidence of respiratory distress. 4. The comprehensive care plan and Physician Order for Resident #26 was reviewed and verified by the Director of Nursing to reflect the Registered Nurse will provide deep suctioning to the tracheostomy if needed per Physician orders on 8/10/22 at 7:45 PM. 5. An emergency Quality Assurance (QA) Committee meeting was held on 8/10/22 at 6:00 PM, to review and revise, if needed, the facility policy for tracheostomy suctioning which states that all Licensed Nursing Personnel or per State Nurse Practice Act/Respiratory Therapist is to be followed regarding tracheostomy suctioning. Policy has been reviewed and approved as current policy states that deep suctioning must be done by Registered Nurse. No changes to current policy were made. In addition, discussion was held regarding the need for 24-hour Registered Nurse or Respiratory Therapist coverage 7 days per week. Administration reemphasized the need for admission personnel to coordinate with the Administrator and/or Director of Nursing prior to the admission of a new resident who requires care exclusively by a Registered Nurse. The Director of Nursing will be responsible for ensuring 24-hour Registered Nurse or Respiratory Therapist coverage 7 days per week. Attendees: Owner, Administrator, Medical Director (via phone call), Director of Nursing, Nurse Practitioner, Assistant Director of Nursing, Education Coordinator (via phone call), Business office manager, Director of Social Services, Rehabilitation Social Worker, Receptionist, Rehabilitation Coordinator, 3 QA nurses, Clinical Nurse, Rehabilitation Director, Admission Coordinator, Minimum Data Set Coordinator, Minimum Data Set Nurse, Wound Nurse, Dietician, Dietary Manager. 6. In-service education was initiated on 8/10/22 at 6:45 PM, by the Administrator and Nurse Practitioner, with all licensed Nursing Staff, regarding the need for a Registered Nurse or Respiratory Therapist coverage 24-hours per day 7 days per week as long as there is a tracheostomy resident in the facility. The Administrator and Director of Nursing emphasized the importance of working the full shift scheduled and not leaving early as this may cause a lapse in 24-hour coverage. The Director of Nursing is to be immediately notified of any schedule change to ensure coverage. No licensed nurse will be allowed to work until in-service education is completed to include new hires also. In-service will continue until all nursing staff has been educated on Suctioning policy and scope of practice for Licensed Practical Nurse and Registered Nurse. The facility policy for tracheostomy suctioning was reviewed as part of the in-service and education to ensure licensed staff understand the Mississippi Nurse Practice Act which requires deep suctioning to be performed only by a Registered Nurse or Respiratory Therapist. One-on-one in-service was held on 8/10/22 at 7:30 PM by the Administrator with the Director of Nursing and Assistant Director of Nursing who are responsible for scheduling all nursing personnel. The requirement for 24-hour Registered Nurse coverage for tracheostomy deep suctioning was thoroughly discussed and emphasized the importance of notifying the Administrator if there is a lapse in coverage. Validation: The SA validated the facility's Removal Plan on 08/12/2022: Facility Actions: 1. The SA validated by record review and interview, the Registered Nurse coverage on 08/09/2022, which the Director of Nursing implemented, for the Registered Nurse coverage for 08/09/2022 and going forward for each shift for tracheostomy needs for Resident #26. 2. The SA validated by record review and interview, the Medical Director was notified on 8/10/2022 at 06:00 PM of the need for 24-hour coverage by Registered Nurse or Respiratory Therapist by the Administrator. The SA validated by record review and interview, the Medical Director and Attending Physician for Resident #26 was notified of the Immediate Jeopardy and Substandard Quality of Care at 06:00 PM on 08/10/2022 by the Administrator. 3. The SA validated by record review, the comprehensive care plan for Resident #26 was reviewed and reflected the Registered Nurse will provide deep suctioning to the tracheostomy if needed per MD orders by the Director of Nursing on 08/09/2022 at 3:15 PM. 4. The SA validated by interview and record review, Resident #26 was fully assessed by the Nurse Practitioner on 08/10/2022 and documentation signed off at 7:42 PM with no acute findings or evidence of respiratory distress. 5. The SA validated by record review and interview; an emergency Quality Assurance Committee meeting was held 08/10/2022 at 06:00 PM to review the facility policy for tracheostomy suctioning which stated if suctioning catheter needs to be inserted beyond the end of the tracheotomy tube (deep suctioning) this will be performed by an RN. In addition, discussion was held regarding the need for 24 hour Registered Nurse coverage 7 days per week. The Director of Nursing will be responsible for ensuring 24 hours Registered Nurse or Respiratory Therapist coverage 7 days per week. Attendees: Owner, Administrator, Medical Director (via phone call), Director of Nursing, Nurse Practitioner, Assistant Director of Nursing, Education Coordinator (via phone call), Business office manager, Director of Social Services, Rehabilitation Social Worker, Receptionist, Rehabilitation Coordinator, 3 QA nurses, Clinical Nurse, Rehabilitation Director, admission Coordinator, Minimum Data Set Coordinator, Minimum Data Set Nurse, Wound Nurse, Dietician, Dietary Manager. 6. The SA validated by record review and interview, in-service education was initiated on 08/10/2022 by the Nurse Practitioner with all licensed staff regarding the need for a Registered Nurse or Respiratory Therapy coverage 24 hours per day 7 days per week as long as there is a tracheostomy resident in the facility. The Director of Nursing is to be immediately notified of any schedule change to ensure coverage. No licensed nurse will be allowed to work until in-service education is completed to include new hires. The facility policy for tracheostomy suctioning was reviewed, as part of the in-service, to ensure licensed staff understood the Mississippi Nurse Practice Act which restricts deep right main stem suctioning to be performed only by a Registered Nurse or Respiratory Therapist. One-on-one in-service was held on 8/10/22 at 7:30 PM by the Administrator with the Director of Nursing and Assistant Director of Nursing who are responsible for scheduling all nursing personnel. The requirement for 24-hour Registered Nurse coverage for tracheostomy deep suctioning was thoroughly discussed and emphasized the importance of notifying the Administrator if there is a lapse in coverage. The SA validated all corrective actions were taken by the facility and the actions were completed as of 08/10/2022 and the IJ was removed on 08/11/2022, prior to exit on 08/12/22.
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** Cross Reference F695 Based on observation, staff interview, record review, Mississippi Board of Nursing Laws and Rules and facil...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Cross Reference F695 Based on observation, staff interview, record review, Mississippi Board of Nursing Laws and Rules and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide qualified staff, a Registered Nurse (RN) and/or Respiratory Therapist (RT), 24 hours each day for 52 shifts from 08/26/2021 through 08/06/2022 to deep suction the tracheostomy (trach), if needed and/or provide other emergency care to render respiratory care services to a resident with a tracheostomy, for one (1) of 1 resident reviewed with a tracheostomy, Resident #26. Findings include: Record review of the facility policy titled, Suctioning Policy, revised May 28, 2018, revealed, It is the policy of this facility to ensure that standards of best practice are consistent when upper airway suctioning is performed to remove secretions from the oropharynx, nasopharynx, or trachea . Procedure . 10. Tracheal suctioning . d. If suctioning catheter needs to be inserted beyond the end of the tracheotomy tube (deep suctioning) this will be performed by an RN. Review of the Mississippi (MS) State Board of Nursing Laws and Rules Administrative Code Part 2830 Practice of Nursing Title 30: Professions and Occupations Chapter 2, Functions of the Licensed Practical Nurse, (LPN) revealed: Rule 2.1 LPN Supervision, The LPN gives nursing care which does not require the specialized skill, judgement, and knowledge required of an RN, Advanced Practice Registered Nurse (APRN), Licensed Physician, or Licensed Dentist. Review of the MS State Board of Nursing (BON) website revealed frequently asked questions (FAQ's). The BON's statement regarding the LPN's scope of practice with Tracheostomy care revealed: It is within the scope of practice of the LPN to perform Trach care and suction secretions from the Trach tube. However, it is not within the scope of practice for the LPN to perform deep right main stem suctioning. If deep suctioning is required for a patient, a Registered Nurse (RN) must perform the procedure. An observation on 08/08/2022 at 12:30 PM, of Resident #26 revealed the resident had a tracheostomy with no visible secretions, the trach gauze was clean and secured at the base of the tracheostomy inner cannula. Resident #26 was receiving humidified air via trach collar, from a humidified air compressor, there was a covered suction machine and nebulizer set-up in the room, there were no visible signs of respiratory distress, there were no audible breath sounds that would possibly indicate complications of breathing, and he was easily aroused by low tones. Record review of the Record of Admission revealed Resident #26 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that included Quadriplegia, Unspecified, Anoxic Brain Damage, Not Elsewhere Classified, Persistent Vegetative State, and Encounter for Attention to Tracheostomy. Record review of Resident #26's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 05/18/2022, revealed Section C was not completed, due to question B0100, Comatose, of Section B of the MDS being answered, yes, indicating, persistent vegetative state/no discernible consciousness. Record review of the Physician Orders for Resident #26 revealed an order to suction tracheostomy PRN (as needed), dated 2/25/2020. On 8/9/22, record review of the Staffing Grid revealed there was not an RN assigned to the 11-7 shift on 08/05/2022 and there was not an RN assigned on the 3-11 shift and the 11-7 shift on 08/06/2022. On 08/09/2022 at 11:15 AM, a review of the Staffing Grid and interview with the Administrator confirmed the Staffing Grid reflected there was not an RN assignment on the 11-7 shift on 08/05/2022 and there was no RN assignment on the 11-7 shift and the 3-11 shift on 08/06/2022. The Administrator stated that she and the Director of Nursing (DON) were responsible for nurse scheduling and there were no respiratory therapists employed by the nursing facility. The Administrator revealed the Nurse Practitioner (NP) was on call, as back-up RN coverage, for evenings, nights, and weekends, that she lived 5 minutes away from the nursing facility, and she could be called to come to the facility, in case of emergent tracheostomy care needs for Resident #26. The Administrator confirmed she was aware of the need to have 24-hour a day RN coverage, to ensure Resident #26 had qualified staff available, to perform deep suctioning or emergent trach care if the need should arise. On 08/09/2022 at 3:15 PM, in an interview with the DON she stated, I am working with the RNs to try to provide 24-hour a day coverage. Scheduling has been hard. I can't get the day shift RNs to agree to work night shift and I have already worked a lot of extra shifts. An interview on 08/11/22 at 09:30 AM with the NP revealed she was only aware of the nursing facility's increased staffing issues with 24-hour a day RN coverage for the past two weeks. NP revealed she agreed to be one of the back-up coverage RNs, for Resident #26, a long while ago, but could not remember exactly when she made the agreement with the Administrator and DON. A record review of the facility ' s Payroll Detail sheets from 08/01/2021 through 08/07/2022 confirmed RN coverage was not available in the nursing facility for 52 shifts from 08/01/2021 through 08/06/2022. An interview on 08/10/22 at 3:00 PM with the Administrator revealed she was not aware there had not been RN coverage for that many shifts in the past year.
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Life-Threatening (Immediate Jeopardy)
J - Isolated K - Pattern L - Widespread
Actual Harm
G - Isolated H - Pattern I - Widespread
Potential for Harm
D - Isolated E - Pattern F - Widespread
No Harm (Minor)
A - Isolated B - Pattern C - Widespread

Questions to Ask on Your Visit

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

Our Honest Assessment

Strengths
  • • No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Mississippi facilities.
  • • 42% turnover. Below Mississippi's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
Concerns
  • • Multiple safety concerns identified: 1 life-threatening violation(s). Review inspection reports carefully.
  • • 10 deficiencies on record, including 1 critical (life-threatening) violation. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
Bottom line: Mixed indicators with Trust Score of 68/100. Visit in person and ask pointed questions.

About This Facility

What is Daniel Health Care Inc Dba The Meadows's CMS Rating?

CMS assigns DANIEL HEALTH CARE INC DBA THE MEADOWS an overall rating of 4 out of 5 stars, which is considered above average nationally. Within Mississippi, this rating places the facility higher than 99% of the state's 100 nursing homes. This rating reflects solid performance across the metrics CMS uses to evaluate nursing home quality.

How is Daniel Health Care Inc Dba The Meadows Staffed?

CMS rates DANIEL HEALTH CARE INC DBA THE MEADOWS's staffing level at 4 out of 5 stars, which is above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 42%, compared to the Mississippi average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.

What Have Inspectors Found at Daniel Health Care Inc Dba The Meadows?

State health inspectors documented 10 deficiencies at DANIEL HEALTH CARE INC DBA THE MEADOWS during 2022 to 2025. These included: 1 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death), 8 with potential for harm, and 1 minor or isolated issues. Immediate Jeopardy findings are rare and represent the most serious regulatory concerns. They require immediate corrective action.

Who Owns and Operates Daniel Health Care Inc Dba The Meadows?

DANIEL HEALTH CARE INC DBA THE MEADOWS is owned by a for-profit company. For-profit facilities operate as businesses with obligations to shareholders or private owners. The facility operates independently rather than as part of a larger chain. With 130 certified beds and approximately 119 residents (about 92% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in FULTON, Mississippi.

How Does Daniel Health Care Inc Dba The Meadows Compare to Other Mississippi Nursing Homes?

Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Mississippi, DANIEL HEALTH CARE INC DBA THE MEADOWS's overall rating (4 stars) is above the state average of 2.6, staff turnover (42%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (4 stars) is above the national benchmark.

What Should Families Ask When Visiting Daniel Health Care Inc Dba The Meadows?

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

Is Daniel Health Care Inc Dba The Meadows Safe?

Based on CMS inspection data, DANIEL HEALTH CARE INC DBA THE MEADOWS has documented safety concerns. Inspectors have issued 1 Immediate Jeopardy citation (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death). The facility has a 4-star overall rating and ranks #1 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 Daniel Health Care Inc Dba The Meadows Stick Around?

DANIEL HEALTH CARE INC DBA THE MEADOWS has a staff turnover rate of 42%, which is about average for Mississippi nursing homes (state average: 46%). Moderate turnover is common in nursing homes, but families should still ask about staff tenure and how the facility maintains care continuity when employees leave.

Was Daniel Health Care Inc Dba The Meadows Ever Fined?

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

Is Daniel Health Care Inc Dba The Meadows on Any Federal Watch List?

DANIEL HEALTH CARE INC DBA THE MEADOWS 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.