PICAYUNE REHABILITATION AND HEALTHCARE CENTER

1620 READ ROAD, PICAYUNE, MS 39466 (601) 798-1811
For profit - Corporation 120 Beds NEXION HEALTH Data: November 2025 2 Immediate Jeopardy citations
Trust Grade
27/100
#81 of 200 in MS
Last Inspection: March 2025

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

Overview

Picayune Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center has received a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns and a poor reputation for care. Ranking #81 out of 200 facilities in Mississippi places them in the top half, while being #2 of 3 in Pearl River County suggests only one local competitor is slightly better. Unfortunately, the facility is worsening, with issues increasing from 3 in 2023 to 8 in 2025. Staffing is a strength here, with an excellent 5/5 star rating and a turnover rate of only 28%, which is well below the state average. However, the facility has faced critical incidents, including a staff member verbally abusing a resident and failing to report this abuse promptly, which could put residents at risk. Additionally, some residents had call lights out of reach, limiting their ability to seek assistance when needed.

Trust Score
F
27/100
In Mississippi
#81/200
Top 40%
Safety Record
High Risk
Review needed
Inspections
Getting Worse
3 → 8 violations
Staff Stability
✓ Good
28% annual turnover. Excellent stability, 20 points below Mississippi's 48% average. Staff who stay learn residents' needs.
Penalties
✓ Good
$8,281 in fines. Lower than most Mississippi facilities. Relatively clean record.
Skilled Nurses
○ Average
Each resident gets 31 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — about average for Mississippi. RNs are the most trained staff who monitor for health changes.
Violations
⚠ Watch
15 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
★★★☆☆
3.0
Overall Rating
★★★★★
5.0
Staff Levels
★★☆☆☆
2.0
Care Quality
★★☆☆☆
2.0
Inspection Score
Stable
2023: 3 issues
2025: 8 issues

The Good

  • 5-Star Staffing Rating · Excellent nurse staffing levels
  • Low Staff Turnover (28%) · Staff stability means consistent care
  • Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
  • No fines on record
  • Staff turnover is low (28%)

    20 points below Mississippi average of 48%

Facility shows strength in staffing levels, staff retention, fire safety.

The Bad

3-Star Overall Rating

Near Mississippi average (2.6)

Meets federal standards, typical of most facilities

Federal Fines: $8,281

Below median ($33,413)

Minor penalties assessed

Chain: NEXION HEALTH

Part of a multi-facility chain

Ask about local staffing decisions and management

The Ugly 15 deficiencies on record

2 life-threatening
Mar 2025 8 deficiencies 2 IJ
CRITICAL (J) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation

Free from Abuse/Neglect (Tag F0600)

Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident

Based on interviews, record review, job description review and facility policy review, the facility failed to protect the residents' right to be free from verbal abuse from a staff member for one (1) ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interviews, record review, job description review and facility policy review, the facility failed to protect the residents' right to be free from verbal abuse from a staff member for one (1) of 21 sampled residents. (Resident #17) Resident #17 was verbally abused and threatened on 2/8/25 when Certified Nursing Aide (CNA) #1 used profanity in an argument and aimed a spray bottle of chemical cleaner toward him. The facility's failure to protect Resident #17 resulted in his reporting he felt nervous and afraid. Additionally, the facility's failure to immediately remove CNA #1 from the facility placed this resident and other residents at risk for similar abuse. The situation was determined to be Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) and Substandard Quality of Care (SQC). The State Agency (SA) notified the Administrator of the IJ and SQC on 3/12/25 at 2:15 PM and provided an IJ Template. Based on the facility's implementation of corrective actions on 02/12/25, the SA determined the IJ and SQC to be Past-Non-Compliance (PNC) and the IJ was removed on 02/13/25 prior to the SA's entrance on 03/11/25. Findings include: A review of the facility's, Abuse Prohibition Policy, dated 5/17/24, revealed, Intent .Each resident has the right to be free from abuse, mistreatment .Policy: 1. The facility will prohibit neglect, mental or physical abuse .of residents .Definitions .Verbal abuse is defined as the use of, oral, written or gestured language that willfully includes disparaging or derogatory terms to residents .within their hearing distance .Examples of verbal/mental abuse include .cursing, yelling, saying things to frighten a resident . A record review of the facility's Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) Job Description dated March 2017, revealed, .Function: Cares for Residents under the direction and supervision of a registered nurse or a licensed practical/vocational nurse .Knows how to respond to Residents' behaviors .Demonstrates a basic understanding of behavior treats Residents with dignity and respect . A record review of the facility's investigation, dated 02/15/25, revealed On Saturday, February 8, 2025, Certified Nursing Assistant (proper name) was entering the dining room and encountered (Resident proper name) .(Resident proper name) began yelling expletives at (CNA proper name) .(CNA proper name) began arguing back with the resident using profanity .(Resident proper name) was interviewed and stated he was speaking with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) proper name) in the dining area when (CNA proper name) entered. He began cursing and calling CNA names and (CNA proper name) became argumentative and also used profanity. He stated that Nurse (proper name) took him back to his room and calmed him down .(CNA proper name) was interviewed. CNA stated (Resident proper name) began screaming swear words at her and then proceeded to roll his wheelchair towards her threatening to slap her in the face. Employee said this made her feel scared so she picked up a spray bottle and told him not to come any closer LPN (proper name) was interviewed. Nurse stated that her and (Resident proper name) were indeed having a conversation in the dining area when (CNA proper name) entered. Nurse stated that (Resident proper name)began cursing at (CNA proper name) and the employee began arguing back. Both (CNA proper name) and (Resident proper name) were using profanity. (CNA proper name) then picked up a spray bottle and pointed towards (Resident proper name) but did not spray the bottle. The resident was then taken back to his room .Life rounds were completed and residents with a BIMS (Brief Interview of Mental Status) of 12 or higher. One resident stated that CNA (proper name) had a smart mouth and another resident stated that he hears her being loud and using profanity in the hallway. Life rounds completed with staff with no issues noted. In services initiated with staff on Resident Rights, Vulnerable Adult, Abuse, Neglect and Customer Service. Currently, the facility decided to terminate employee (proper name) due to multiple policy violations . A record review of the time sheet for CNA #1 revealed on 2/8/25 she worked from 7:31 AM to 6:45 PM. On 2/9/25 she worked from 8:20 AM to 7:26 PM, and on 2/12/25 she worked from 7:56 AM to 11:30 AM, which was after the abuse occurred on 2/8/25. On 03/11/25 at 9:00 AM, during an interview Resident #17 confirmed that he and CNA #1 had a disagreement that occurred during the smoke break on 2/7/25. He stated that the CNA had refused to go back into the facility to get his cigarettes. The resident reported that on 2/8/25, he and LPN #1 were in the dining area talking, when CNA #1 entered the dining area. The resident stated he was still upset about the incident from the smoke break and stated to LPN #1 that CNA #1 was a lazy (expletive). CNA #1 then approached him and started using profanity toward him, and she then grabbed a bottle containing cleaning solution, that was sitting on a housekeeping cart and pointed it toward him. Resident #17 stated she did not spray it on him, but he was nervous and afraid because he thought she might spray him. On 03/11/25 at 10:03 AM, during an interview with the Risk Manager (RM) she acknowledged that she was made aware of the incident on 2/12/25 by the Administrator, which was four (4) days after the abuse occurred. The RM stated she and the Administrator called CNA #1 in for an interview, and she was then suspended. The RM stated CNA #1 fully admitted the details of the incident as reported by Resident #17 and LPN #1. On 03/11/25 at 3:40 PM, during an interview, LPN #1 stated that on 2/8/25, while walking down the hall, she encountered Resident #17, who looked toward CNA #1 and said, Go hit that (expletive) in the back of the head. LPN #1 stated she initially thought the resident was joking, as he is typically pleasant. As they continued speaking, CNA #1 approached and confronted the resident, saying, Are you talking about me? You better keep my name out of your mouth. LPN #1 stated the resident then called CNA #1 a lazy (expletive), and CNA #1 walked away, but the resident followed her and the two continued yelling at each other. CNA #1 then asked LPN #1 if she was going to intervene to de-escalate the situation. LPN #1 reported that CNA #1 grabbed a spray bottle from a housekeeping cart, pointed it at the resident, and yelled, Back the (expletive) up, back the (expletive) up! I'm going to get [another resident] to come down here to beat you in the head. LPN #1 stated the resident backed away and CNA #1 walked off. LPN #1 reported the incident to LPN #2, the Charge Nurse. Shortly afterward, LPN #3 informed LPN #1 and LPN #2 that CNA #1 had also reported the incident to her. LPN #1 stated that as LPN #3 was preparing to call the Director of Nursing (DON), CNA #1 approached them and began yelling about what should be done to Resident #17. LPN #3 escorted CNA #1 back to her unit and called the Director of Nursing (DON), who later spoke with LPN #2 and advised that he would handle the incident on Monday. LPN #1 stated she was not instructed to send CNA #1 home and did not tell CNA #1 to leave out of fear the hostility might escalate. LPN #1 acknowledged she was aware that Resident #17 was being verbally abused and threatened by CNA #1. She stated she believed reporting the incident to the Charge Nurse fulfilled her obligation but admitted she should have removed the resident once the situation escalated. LPN #1 confirmed that CNA #1 completed her shift on 2/8/25 and was still working at the facility when LPN #1 returned on 2/12/25. She also confirmed she had not been contacted by the DON for a statement prior to meeting with the Administrator on 2/12/25. LPN #1 stated that staff receive frequent in-service training on abuse prevention through computer-based modules, which include topics on de-escalation and resident safety. On 03/11/25 at 4:15 PM, during an interview, the DON stated that on 2/8/25 at approximately 10:00 AM, he received a phone call from LPN #3 reporting that Resident #17 had directed profanity toward CNA #1. The DON stated that he instructed LPN #3 to ensure that CNA #1 did not assist Resident #17 with smoke breaks moving forward. The DON further explained that around 12:00 PM that same day, he contacted LPN #2 and was informed that CNA #1 had raised her voice at Resident #17 and had been separated from the resident. The DON reported that based on the information provided at the time, he did not view the incident as abuse and, therefore, did not instruct staff to send CNA #1 home. On 03/11/25 at 4:33 PM, during an interview, LPN #2 confirmed that on 2/8/25, LPN #1 approached her at the nurse's station and informed her about the incident between Resident #17 and CNA #1. Shortly after, LPN #3 arrived from the other unit to inquire about what had occurred. LPN #2 stated that CNA #1 then came to the nurse's station, visibly agitated and upset, and said, Who the (expletive) are you sending home? LPN #2 reported that LPN #3 subsequently escorted CNA #1 back to the other unit and placed a call to the DON to report the situation. LPN #2 stated that when the DON called her later that day, she relayed what LPN #1 had reported, and suggested that the DON follow up directly with LPN #1. LPN #2 confirmed that she specifically informed the DON that CNA #1 had verbally retaliated against Resident #17, stating, Who the (expletive) are you talking to? Who the (expletive) are you calling a (expletive)? LPN #2 also reported that she told the DON about the allegation that CNA #1 had aimed a chemical-filled spray bottle at the resident and threatened to recruit another resident to physically harm him. LPN #2 stated that the DON responded that he would handle the situation on Monday. LPN #2 explained that she did not send CNA #1 home that day, as she was waiting for direct instructions from the DON. On 3/12/25 at 10:02 AM, during a phone interview, CNA #1 stated that on 2/8/25, she was in the dining area when she noticed Resident #17 speaking with his nurse (LPN#1). CNA #1 reported that she approached them and asked, Is there something you need to tell me? According to CNA #1, Resident #17 began using profanity toward her. CNA #1 stated she turned to the nurse and asked, Are you going to intervene with your resident? CNA #1 reported that Resident #17 then threatened to slap her. In response, she stated that she grabbed a spray bottle of cleaning solution from a nearby cart, aimed it at the resident, and told him not to put his hands on her. CNA #1 said she did not view pointing the spray bottle at the resident as a threatening act but rather as a defensive measure. CNA #1 acknowledged that the facility regularly provides abuse prevention training, which includes guidance on appropriate responses to escalating situations. On 03/12/25 at 12:15 PM, during an interview, LPN #3 stated that she did not personally witness the incident involving CNA #1 and Resident #17 on 2/8/25. She reported that CNA #1 informed her that Resident #17 had cursed at her, and in response, she cursed back and aimed a spray bottle of cleaning fluid at him. LPN #3 stated that CNA #1 was frustrated because LPN #1 had been standing next to the resident during the incident and did not intervene. LPN #3 explained that she went to the Unit 2 nurse's station to discuss the matter with LPN #1 and LPN #2. According to LPN #3, LPN #2 instructed her to notify the DON. LPN #3 stated that she contacted the DON and informed him that CNA #1 admitted to cursing at Resident #17 and pointing a spray bottle of cleaner at him. LPN #3 reported that the DON instructed her to document a statement and assured her that he would address the issue on Monday. LPN #3 added that she also reminded the DON about CNA #1's responsibility for taking residents to their scheduled smoke breaks. On 03/12/25 at 12:51 PM, during an interview, the Administrator stated she became aware of the incident from 2/8/25 when CNA #4 approached her on 2/12/25 and asked if she had been made aware of what had occurred. The Administrator explained that, following this, she immediately spoke with Resident #17, the DON, the involved nurses, and CNA #1. The Administrator reported that CNA #1 admitted to the incident as described and was subsequently sent home on 2/12/25. She further stated that in-services were held with all staff to reinforce how to identify and report abuse, which included drills and refresher training. The Administrator confirmed that all staff are regularly trained on appropriate actions in response to allegations or incidents of abuse. She acknowledged that the nursing staff did not follow the facility's abuse policy and protocol, specifically stating that CNA #1 should have been removed from duty immediately. A record review of the admission Record revealed the facility admitted Resident #17 on 7/15/24 with diagnoses including Anxiety Disorder. A record review of the Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 01/16/25 revealed Resident #17 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, which indicated he was cognitively intact. A review of Section E revealed the resident had not exhibited any verbal behavioral symptoms directed toward others (e.g., threatening others, screaming at others, cursing at others). Facility Corrective Action Plan: On 03/12/2025 at 3:15 PM State Agency (SA) notified facility Administrator of Immediate Jeopardy (IJ). State Agency Surveyor provided the facility with the Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) templates. Facility respectfully submits this corrective action plan. Brief Summary of Events On 02/12/2025 at 10:45AM the Administrator was notified of allegation of verbal abuse involving Resident #17 and CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant) #1. On 02/08/2025 CNA #1 was delivering a resident tray when she overheard Resident #17 and staff member laughing. The CNA #1 questioned the contents of their conversation. Resident #17 started using profanity directed at her. CNA #1 picked up a spray bottle pointing it in the direction of Resident # 17. CNA # I was using profanity as she was walking away from Resident # 17. CNA #1continued to work in facility in separate care area until allegation was reported to administration on 2/12/2025. Corrective Actions 1. On 02/12/2025 at 9:30am. The Treatment Nurse conducted a routine head-to-toe body assessment on Resident #17 to review for any skin abnormalities or concerns. Resident #17 had no negative skin issues or concerns. 2. On 02/12/2025 at 10:55am The Director of Nursing and Administrator interviewed Resident #17 regarding the allegation of abuse. Resident #17 provided statement of events. 3. On 2/12/2025 at 1130am, CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant) #1 was interviewed, statement obtained and suspended pending investigation by the Administrator. CNA #1 was subsequently terminated. 4. On 02/12/2025 at approximately 11:30am an allegation of abuse involving Resident #17 was reported to the State Agency (SA) by the Facility Risk Manager. 5. On 02/12/2025 at approximately 1140am an allegation of abuse involving Resident #17 was submitted to the Attorney General (AG) complaint website by the Risk Manager regarding allegation of abuse. 6. On 2/12/2025 at 11:40am, Referral was sent to Psychologist Nurse Practitioner by the Director of Nursing for evaluation and follow up. 7. On 2/12/2025 at 11:40am, The Medical Director was notified of the allegation by the Administrator. 8. 02/12/2025 at 12:00pm The Administrator notified ombudsman with no answer and left message. 9. On 2/12/2025 at 12:14pm, The DON conducted Trauma Assessment on Resident #17 with no negative findings. 10. On 2/12/2025 at 12:30pm, The Risk Manager initiated Life satisfaction rounds on with residents with BIMS (Brief Interview of Mental Status} of 12 or higher regarding Abuse and Safety in the facility. two negative findings on unprofessional behavior resulted with a report of being rude and loud. No allegations of abuse resulted. 11. On 2/12/2025 at 1:30pm, Peer reviews initiated by Risk Manager regarding Abuse and Safety in the facility involving CNA #1. One finding resulted in witnessing the allegation involving Resident #17. On 2/12/2025 at 1:30-1:45pm, An Abuse Drill Evaluation completed with Station I and II by the DON and Administrator as part of an ongoing monitoring plan. Life satisfaction rounds with two residents having a BIMS of twelve or higher will be completed by the Administrator/DON or Risk Manager weekly times four weeks, every other week times eight and monthly thereafter for three months. The QAPI committee will evaluate additional action based on results. The DON will conduct two random interviews on residents with BIMS of twelve or higher for any allegations of abuse or neglect weekly times four weeks, every other week times eight weeks and monthly times three months thereafter. The DON, Assistant Director of Nursing, or Risk Manager will conduct two random body audits on residents with BIMS below twelve for any indicators of abuse or neglect weekly times four weeks, every other week for eight weeks and monthly times three months thereafter. The QAPI committee will evaluate additional action based on results. The QAPI Committee will review potential trends and patterns and provide recommendations as needed. 12. On 2/12/2025 at 2:30pm, an in-service initiated by Risk Manager/ DON/ADM on Abuse and Neglect, Resident Rights, Vulnerable Adult, along with the reporting guidelines including how to address if abuse is noted. No staff was allowed to return to work prior to completion. 13. On 2/12/2025 at 3:00pm, QAPI Committee held a Quality Assurance Meeting to include Medical Director, Director of Nursing, Assistant Director of Nursing, Risk Manager/Infection Preventionist, Medical Records, Director of Rehabilitation, [NAME] Office Manager, Activity Director and Minimum Data Set Nurse to discuss allegations of abuse along with corrective action and monitoring in place. Policies were reviewed with no revisions needed. 14. On 3/12/2025 at 3:15pm. State Agency (SA) notified the Administrator of Immediate Jeopardy with past noncompliance of 02/12/2025. The State Agency (SA) provided the facility with the Immediate Jeopardy templates. 15. Facility is alleging that all activities to remove the Immediate Jeopardy were completed as of 02/12/2025 and the Immediate Jeopardy was removed 02/13/2025. Validation: The SA validated on 3/13/2025, through interview and record review that all corrective actions had been implemented as of 2/12/25, and the facility was in compliance as of 2/13/25, prior to the SA's entrance on 3/11/2025.
CRITICAL (J) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation

Report Alleged Abuse (Tag F0609)

Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident

Based on interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to report an allegation of abuse within the required two (2) hour timeframe for one (1) of 21 sampled residents. Res...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to report an allegation of abuse within the required two (2) hour timeframe for one (1) of 21 sampled residents. Resident #17. Resident #17 was verbally abused and threatened on 2/8/25 when Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) #1 used profanity in an argument and aimed a spray bottle of chemical cleaner toward him. This was witnessed by Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #1. This occurred on 02/08/25, however, the facility did not report it to the State Agency (SA) until 02/12/25, delaying the facility's ability to protect the resident from further mistreatment. The facility's failure to ensure immediate reporting increased the risk of harm which left Resident #17 and other residents in a situation that was likely to cause serious injury, serious harm, serious impairment, or death. The situation was determined to be Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) and Substandard Quality of Care (SQC). The State Agency (SA) notified the Administrator of the IJ and SQC on 03/12/25 at 2:15 PM and provided an IJ Template. Based on the facility's implementation of corrective actions on 02/12/25, the SA determined the IJ and SQC to be Past-Non-Compliance (PNC) and the IJ was removed on 02/13/25 prior to the SA's entrance on 03/11/25. Findings include: A review of the facility's, Abuse Prohibition Policy, dated 5/17/24, revealed, Intent .Each resident has the right to be free from abuse, mistreatment .Policy: 1. The facility will prohibit neglect, mental or physical abuse .of residents .Definitions .Verbal abuse is defined as the use of, oral, written or gestured language that willfully includes disparaging or derogatory terms to residents .within their hearing distance .Examples of verbal/mental abuse include .cursing, yelling, saying things to frighten a resident . The facility will report all allegations and substantiated occurrences of abuse .to the state agency and to all other agencies as required by law .The Abuse Coordinator will report all allegations of abuse .immediately or within 2 hours of the allegation . A record review of the facility's investigation, dated 02/15/25, revealed On Saturday, February 8, 2025, Certified Nursing Assistant (proper name) was entering the dining room and encountered Resident (proper name) .(Resident proper name) began yelling expletives at (CNA proper name) .(CNA proper name) began arguing back with the resident using profanity .(Resident proper name was interviewed and stated he was speaking with (Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) (proper name) in the dining area when (CNA proper name) entered. He began cussing and calling CNA names and (CNA proper name) became argumentative and also used profanity. He stated that Nurse (proper name) took him back to his room and calmed him down .CNA (proper name was interviewed. CNA stated (Resident proper name) began screaming swear words at her and then proceeded to roll his wheelchair towards her threatening to slap her in the face. Employee said this made her feel scared so she picked up a spray bottle and told him not to come any closer LPN, (proper name) was interviewed. Nurse stated that her and (Resident proper name) were indeed having a conversation in the dining area when (CNA proper name) entered. Nurse stated that (Resident proper name began cursing at (CNA proper name) and the employee began arguing back. Both (CNA proper name) and (Resident proper name) were using profanity. (CNA proper name) then picked up a spray bottle and pointed towards (Resident proper name) but did not spray the bottle. The resident was then taken back to his room .Life rounds were completed and residents with a BIMS of 12 or higher. One resident stated that CNA (proper name) had a smart mouth and another resident stated that he hears her being loud and using profanity in the hallway. Life rounds completed with staff with no issues noted. In services initiated with staff on Resident Rights, Vulnerable Adult, Abuse, Neglect and Customer Service. Currently, the facility decided to terminate employee (proper name) due to multiple policy violations . During an interview on 03/11/25 at 9:00 AM, an interview with Resident #17 revealed that he and CNA #1 got into an argument on 2/8/25 when he was in the dining area talking to LPN #1. Resident #17 admitted that he called CNA #1 a lazy (expletive) and then CNA #1 approached him, using profanity, and grabbed a bottle of cleaning spray and pointed it toward him. He stated he was nervous and afraid that the CNA was going to spray him. He confirmed that LPN #1 witnessed the altercation. During an interview on 03/11/25 at 10:03 AM, the Risk Manager (RM) revealed she was made aware of the incident on 2/12/25 by the Administrator. The RM stated she and the Administrator called CNA #1 in for an interview on 2/12/25 and she was then suspended. The RM stated CNA #1 fully admitted the details of the incident as reported by the resident and LPN #1. During an interview on 03/11/25 at 3:40 PM, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #1 explained that on 2/8/25 she witnessed a verbal altercation between Resident #17 and CNA #1. LPN #1 reported the incident to LPN #2, who was the Charge Nurse at the time. Shortly after, LPN #3 approached both LPN #1 and LPN #2 to inform them that CNA #1 had also reported the incident to her. LPN #1 stated that LPN #3 was the one who contacted the Director of Nursing (DON) regarding the situation. LPN #1 confirmed she was not given instructions to send CNA #1 home and admitted that she did not direct CNA #1 to leave because she was concerned the situation could escalate further. LPN #1 acknowledged that she was aware CNA #1 verbally abused and threatened Resident #17 and believed she followed protocol by reporting the incident to the Charge Nurse. LPN #1 also stated she should have immediately removed the resident from the escalating situation. She further noted that she was not contacted by the DON to provide a statement about the incident until 2/12/25. During an interview on 03/11/25 at 4:15 PM, the DON revealed he received a phone call from LPN #3 at 10:00 AM on 2/8/25 to inform him that Resident #17 has cursed the CNA. The DON stated he instructed LPN #3 to not have CNA #1 assist the resident with smoke breaks. The DON stated that at 12:00 PM on 2/8/25 he called LPN #2 and was told that CNA #1 got loud with Resident #17 and was separated from Resident #17. The DON stated he did not report the incident to the State Agency on 2/8/25 because he did not feel the incident was an abuse situation from the information he had been told by the nurses. During an interview on 03/11/25 at 4:33 PM, LPN #2 explained that on 2/8/25, LPN #1 approached her at the nursing station and reported the incident involving Resident #17 and CNA #1. LPN #2 stated that CNA #1 then came to the nursing station, visibly aggravated and upset, and stated, Who the (expletive) are you sending home? LPN #2 reported that LPN #3 then escorted CNA #1 back to the other unit and called the DON to report the incident. LPN #2 explained that when the DON called her directly, she relayed what LPN #1 had reported and recommended that the DON speak directly with LPN #1 for further details. LPN #2 stated she specifically informed the DON that CNA #1 had retaliated against the resident by yelling, Who the (expletive) are you talking to? Who the (expletive) are you calling a (expletive)? LPN #2 further reported that she told the DON about CNA #1 aiming a spray bottle containing cleaning chemicals at Resident #17 and threatening to enlist another resident to physically harm him. LPN #2 stated the DON informed her that he would address the situation on Monday. LPN #2 acknowledged that she did not send CNA #1 home because she was waiting for direction from the DON. She stated that during a meeting with the Administrator on the following Wednesday, she was asked why she had not contacted the Administrator directly. LPN #2 explained that she believed notifying the DON was the appropriate course of action. During an interview on 03/12/25 at 12:15 PM, LPN #3 stated that she did not personally witness the incident involving CNA #1 and Resident #17 on 2/8/25. LPN #3 stated that she contacted the DON and informed him that CNA #1 admitted to cursing at Resident #17 and pointing a spray bottle of cleaner at him. LPN #3 reported that the DON instructed her to document a statement and assured her that he would address the issue on Monday. During an interview on 03/12/25 at 12:30 PM, in a follow up interview with the RM she explained the DON was questioned as to why he did not report the incident on 2/8/25, the day he was informed about the verbal abuse and threats made to Resident #17 by CNA #1. The RM reported the DON stated he felt the incident was downplayed when it was reported to him and the resident was safe. During an interview on 03/12/25 at 12:51 PM, the Administrator stated she became aware of the incident that occurred on 2/8/25 when CNA #4 approached her on 2/12/25 and asked if she had been made aware of the incident. The Administrator explained that, following this, she immediately spoke with Resident #17, the DON, the involved nurses, and CNA #1. The Administrator reported that CNA #1 admitted to the incident as described and was subsequently sent home on 2/12/25. She acknowledged that the nursing staff did not follow the facility's abuse policy and protocol, specifically stating that CNA #1 should have been removed from duty immediately. A record review of the admission Record revealed the facility admitted Resident #17 on 7/15/24 with diagnoses including Anxiety Disorder. Facility Corrective Action Plan: On 03/12/2025 at 3:15PM State Agency (SA) notified facility Administrator of Immediate Jeopardy (IJ). State Agency Surveyor provided the facility with the Immediate Jeopardy (IJ} templates. Facility respectfully submits this corrective action plan. Brief Summary of Events On 02/12/2025 at 10:45AM the Administrator was notified of allegation of verbal abuse involving Resident #17 and CNA(Certified Nursing Assistant) #1. On 02/08/2025 CNA #1 was delivering a resident tray when she overheard Resident #17 and staff member laughing. The CNA #1 questioned the contents of their conversation. Resident #17 started using profanity directed at her. CNA #1 picked up a spray bottle pointing it in the direction of Resident # 17. CNA # 1 was using profanity as she was walking away from Resident # 17. CNA #1 continued to work in facility in separate care area until allegation was reported to administration on 2/12/2025. Corrective Actions 1. On 02/12/2025 at 9:30am. The Treatment Nurse conducted a routine head-to-toe body assessment on Resident #17 to review for any skin abnormalities or concerns. Resident #17 had no negative skin issues or concerns. 2. On 02/12/2025 at 10:55am The Director of Nursing and Administrator interviewed Resident #17 regarding the allegation of abuse. Resident #17 provided statement of events. 3. On 2/12/2025 at 1130am, CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant) #1 was interviewed, statement obtained and suspended pending investigation by the Administrator. CNA #1 was subsequently terminated. 4. On 02/12/2025 at approximately 11:30am an allegation of abuse involving Resident #17 was reported to the State Agency (SA) by the Facility Risk Manager. 5. On 02/12/2025 at approximately 1140am an allegation of abuse involving Resident #17 was submitted to the Attorney General (AG) complaint website by the Risk Manager regarding allegation of abuse. 6. On 2/12/2025 at 11:40am, Referral was sent to Psychologist Nurse Practitioner by the Director of Nursing for evaluation and follow up. 7. On 2/12/2025 at 11:40am, The Medical Director was notified of the allegation by the Administrator. 8. 02/12/2025 at 12:00pm The Administrator notified ombudsman with no answer and left message. 9. On 2/12/2025 at 12:14pm, The DON conducted Trauma Assessment on Resident #17 with no negative findings. 10. On 2/12/2025 at 12:30pm, The Risk Manager initiated Life satisfaction rounds on with residents with BIMS (Brief Interview of Mental Status) of 12 or higher regarding Abuse and Safety in the facility. two negative findings on unprofessional behavior resulted with a report of being rude and loud. No allegations of abuse resulted. 11. On 2/12/2025 at 1:30pm, Peer reviews initiated by Risk Manager regarding Abuse and Safety in the facility involving CNA #1. One finding resulted in witnessing the allegation involving Resident #17. On 2/12/2025 at 1:30-1:45pm, An Abuse Drill Evaluation completed with Station I and II by the DON and Administrator as part of an ongoing monitoring plan. Life satisfaction rounds with two residents having a BIMS of twelve or higher will be completed by the Administrator/DON or Risk Manager weekly times four weeks, every other week times eight and monthly thereafter for three months. The QAPI committee will evaluate additional action based on results. The DON will conduct two random interviews on residents with BIMS of twelve or higher for any allegations of abuse or neglect weekly times four weeks, every other week times eight weeks and monthly times three months thereafter. The DON, Assistant Director of Nursing, or Risk Manager will conduct two random body audits on residents with BIMS below twelve for any indicators of abuse or neglect weekly times four weeks, every other week for eight weeks and monthly times three months thereafter. The QAPI committee will evaluate additional action based on results. The QAPI Committee will review potential trends and patterns and provide recommendations as needed. 12. On 2/12/2025 at 2:30pm, an in-service initiated by Risk Manager/ DON/ADM on Abuse and Neglect, Resident Rights, Vulnerable Adult, along with the reporting guidelines including how to address if abuse is noted. No staff was allowed to return to work prior to completion. 13. On 2/12/2025 at 3:00pm, QAPI Committee held a Quality Assurance Meeting to include Medical Director, Director of Nursing, Assistant Director of Nursing, Risk Manager/Infection Preventionist, Medical Records, Director of Rehabilitation, [NAME] Office Manager, Activity Director and Minimum Data Set Nurse to discuss allegations of abuse along with corrective action and monitoring in place. Policies were reviewed with no revisions needed. 14. On 3/12/2025 at 3:15pm. State Agency (SA) notified the Administrator of Immediate Jeopardy with past noncompliance of 02/12/2025. The State Agency (SA) provided the facility with the Immediate Jeopardy templates. 15. Facility is alleging that all activities to remove the Immediate Jeopardy were completed as of 02/12/2025 and the Immediate Jeopardy was removed 02/13/2025. Validation: The SA validated on 3/13/2025, through interview and record review that all corrective actions had been implemented as of 2/12/25, and the facility was in compliance as of 2/13/25, prior to the SA's entrance on 3/11/2025.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0657 (Tag F0657)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, staff interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to revise the comprehensive care plan to include the use of zinc oxide, as per a physician's orde...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, staff interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to revise the comprehensive care plan to include the use of zinc oxide, as per a physician's order for one (1) of 21 care plans reviewed. (Resident #22) Findings included: A review of the facility's Care Plans, Comprehensive Person-Centered dated 2/24/25, revealed, .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. Policy Interpretation and Implementation .13. Assessments of residents are ongoing and care plans are revised as information about the residents and the residents' conditions change . On 03/11/2025 at 12:56 PM, during an observation of incontinence care, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #8 applied zinc oxide to the resident's buttocks after providing perineal care. A record review of Resident #22's Comprehensive Care Plan revealed, I have potential for impairment of my skin integrity related to weakness, decreased mobility, bowel and bladder incontinence, severe protein-calorie malnutrition . There were no interventions in place to address applying zinc oxide. A record review of the Order Summary Report with active orders as of 3/13/25 revealed Resident #22 had a physician's order, dated 02/15/2025 for Redness: Apply zinc barrier cream to sacrum every day shift. On 03/13/2025 at 12:56 PM, during an interview, the Director of Nursing (DON) explained that the Care Plan Nurse is responsible for updating the care plan daily by reviewing the physician's orders. The DON confirmed the care plan was not updated to include the application of zinc oxide to Resident #22's buttocks. On 03/13/2025 at 1:07 PM, during an interview, the Administrator stated that she expects staff to follow the facility's policies and standards of practice. The Administrator further stated she expects staff to update residents' care plans according to facility policy. On 03/13/2025 at 1:11 PM, during an interview, Registered Nurse (RN) #1 confirmed that the care plan was not updated to reflect the use of zinc oxide. RN #1 stated that she had not yet had a chance to update the care plan and that care plans are updated according to physicians' orders. RN #1 explained that the care plan is used to direct the care of the resident and to assign responsibilities according to staff job descriptions and training. A record review of the admission Record revealed the facility admitted Resident #22 on 09/10/2024 with diagnoses including Acute and Chronic Respiratory Failure with Hypoxia. A record review of the Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 12/18/2024 revealed Resident #22 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, which indicated the resident was cognitively intact. Section GG revealed Resident #22 was incontinent of bowel and bladder and required partial to moderate assistance for bathing, toileting, and personal hygiene.
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 the facility's Certified Nurse Assistant (CNA) job description review, the facility failed to ensure professional standards practices were mai...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, staff interview, record review, and the facility's Certified Nurse Assistant (CNA) job description review, the facility failed to ensure professional standards practices were maintained when a CNA applied a medicated cream to a resident during one (1) of two (2) incontinent resident care observations. (Resident #22) Findings Include: A record review of the facility's Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) Job Description dated March 2017, revealed, .Function: Cares for Residents under the direction and supervision of a registered nurse or a licensed practical/vocational nurse . A record review of a letter from the State Board of Nursing, dated 7/15/2005, revealed, .medication administration may only be delegated to another registered nurse or licensed practical nurse and not an unlicensed person. This would include medicated ointments, lotions and protective barriers, regardless of skin integrity . In an observation of incontinence care on 3/11/25 at 12:56 PM, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #7/MDS Nurse gave CNA #8 zinc oxide cream to put on the resident's buttocks. CNA #8 applied the zinc oxide to the resident's sacrum after completing incontinence care. A record review of the Order Summary Report with active orders as of 3/13/25, revealed Resident #22 had Physician's Order, dated 02/15/2025, for Redness: Apply zinc barrier cream to sacrum every day shift. On 03/13/25 at 12:32 PM, in an interview, LPN #7 confirmed she gave CNA #8 the cream to apply to Resident #22's buttocks. She acknowledged that the facility does not allow CNA's to apply medicated creams such as zinc oxide to the residents because CNA's cannot administer medications. During an interview on 03/13/25 at 12:56 PM, with the Director of Nursing (DON), he stated the facility does not allow the CNAs to apply zinc oxide to the residents and that CNA's do not administer medications. The DON also said both the nurse and CNA have been trained that CNA's cannot administer medications. During an interview on 03/13/25 01:07 PM, the Administrator stated she expects the staff to follow the facility policies and standards of practice and confirmed the facility does not allow CNAs to administer medications. A record review of the admission Record revealed the facility admitted Resident #22 on 09/10/2024 with diagnoses including Acute and Chronic Respiratory Failure with Hypoxia. A record review of the Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 12/18/2024 revealed Resident #22 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, which indicated the resident was cognitively intact. Section GG revealed Resident #22 was incontinent of bowel and bladder and required partial to moderate assistance for bathing, toileting, and personal hygiene.
CONCERN (D)

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

Food Safety (Tag F0812)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure food items in the cooler and freezer were wrapped, covered, and dated and ensure serving bowls were cle...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure food items in the cooler and freezer were wrapped, covered, and dated and ensure serving bowls were cleaned appropriately for one (1) of three (3) days of survey. Findings included: A review of the facility's policy titled Food Storage: Cold Foods dated 02/2023 revealed, .All Time/Temperature Control for Safety (TCS) foods, frozen and refrigerated, will be appropriately stored . Procedures . 5. All foods will be stored wrapped or covered in containers, labeled and dated . A review of the facility's policy titled Ware Washing, dated 02/2023 revealed, .All dishware, serviceware, and utensils will be cleaned and sanitized after each use . On 03/11/2025 at 8:43 AM, during an observation of the kitchen and interview with Dietary Manager (DM) #1 revealed: Walk-In Cooler #1, there was an opened cheesecake box, which did not indicate the date opened, and the cheesecake was not fully wrapped or covered in the container. In Freezer #1, an opened frozen mixed vegetables container and an opened box of beef patties were not fully wrapped or covered in the containers and were exposed. Dried and stuck-on food residue was observed on serving bowls that were considered washed. The DM stated that these dishes were washed and stacked by the night shift. On 03/12/2025 at 12:35 PM, during an interview, Dietary Aide (DA) #4 confirmed the importance of ensuring plates and dishes are cleaned and sanitized to prevent residents from becoming sick. On 03/13/2025 at 2:40 PM, during an interview, the Administrator stated that her expectation is that kitchen staff prepare, store, label, and date foods according to facility policy.
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, interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to maintain proper infection control practices by failing to prevent cross-contamination of perineal wi...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to maintain proper infection control practices by failing to prevent cross-contamination of perineal wipes during perineal care for one (1) of four (4) residents observed. Resident #58. Findings included: A review of the facility's policy titled Perineal Care, revised 04/16/2024, revealed, .The purposes of this procedure are to provide cleanliness and comfort to the resident . to prevent infections and skin irritation . On 03/13/2025 at 9:18 AM, during an observation of perineal care of Resident #58, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA)#3, assisted by CNA #5, gathered supplies, sanitized her hands, and donned gloves. CNA #3 removed six (6) premoistened wipes from the pack and used the wipes to clean the front area of the resident. The resident was assisted to her left side and then CNA #3 pulled six (6) additional wipes from the pack, touching the package with contaminated gloves, and then continued perineal care in the buttocks area. Resident #58 had a bowel movement during care and CNA #3's gloves were visibly soiled with feces. CNA #3 pulled six (6) more wipes from the pack, touching the package with visibly soiled gloves. CNA #3 then removed her soiled gloves, sanitized hands, applied clean gloves, and then pulled more wipes from the pack to continue cleaning the resident. On 03/13/2025 at 9:33 AM, during an interview, CNA #3 stated she improperly removed wipes during care. She confirmed she contaminated the wipes container by pulling more wipes from the pack with soiled gloves. On 03/13/2025 at 11:36 AM, during an interview, the Risk Manager (RM)/Infection Preventionist (IP) stated that CNA #3 contaminated the wipes each time she pulled them from the pack with dirty gloves on. On 03/13/2025 at 1:57 PM, during an interview, the Director of Nursing (DON) stated CNA #3 should have pulled enough wipes from the container before beginning care. The DON confirmed there was potential for contamination and possible infection. A record review of the admission Record revealed the facility admitted Resident #58 on 11/02/2021 with diagnoses including Unspecified Dementia. A record review of the Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 01/28/2025 revealed Resident #58 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, which indicated the resident was cognitively intact. Section GG revealed the resident requires partial to moderate assistance with toileting. A record review of the facility's Perineal Care Check List, dated 8/22/24, revealed CNA #3 received training and performed a return demonstration regarding perineal care.
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0558 (Tag F0558)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure the resident's right to reasonable accommodation as evidenced by a call light that was not wit...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure the resident's right to reasonable accommodation as evidenced by a call light that was not within reach for one (1) of twenty-one (21) sampled residents, Resident #39. Findings included: A review of the facility's policy titled Resident Call System, dated 3/28/23, revealed, . Residents are provided with a means to call staff for assistance . Policy Interpretation and Implementation 1. Each resident is provided with a means to call staff directly for assistance . On 03/11/2025 at 11:38 AM, during an observation, Resident #39's call light was observed draped over a shelf and out of reach. Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) #1 confirmed the call light was not within reach of Resident #39. On 03/12/2025 at 10:08 AM, during an interview, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #1 stated that call lights are supposed to be left within reach of the resident after each visit, and that CNAs are expected to make rounds every two (2) hours. On 03/13/2025 at 8:51 AM, during an interview, CNA #2 stated that on every visit to a resident's room, CNAs are trained to ensure the resident is comfortable, the call light is within reach, and that the resident does not need anything else. CNA #2 further explained the importance of answering call lights quickly to ensure residents receive the help they need. On 03/13/2025 at 2:40 PM, during an interview, the Administrator stated that staff are expected to have the call light within reach and to answer call lights in a timely manner. On 03/13/2025 at 2:45 PM, during an interview, the CNA Supervisor stated that staff completed in-services in February 2025 and that call light procedures are reviewed at orientation, quarterly, and as needed. The CNA Supervisor confirmed that CNAs are expected to leave call lights within reach of residents before exiting the room. On 03/13/2025 at 3:21 PM, during an interview, the Director of Nursing (DON) stated that CNAs are expected to leave call lights within reach of residents upon exiting the room and to answer call lights in a timely manner. A record review of the admission Record revealed the facility admitted Resident #39 on 12/12/2021 and he had current diagnoses including Hemiplegia and Hemiparesis Following Cerebral Infarction Affecting Right Dominant Side. A record review of Resident #39's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 12/27/2024 revealed the resident required a staff interview to assess cognition and his cognition was severely impaired. A review of the facility's In-service Training with a subject of answering call lights in a timely manner, dated 02/27/2025 revealed the facility staff received education to . Make sure call lights are always within reach of your Residents every time you enter and exit the room .
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Safe Environment (Tag F0584)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

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

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure the residents' right to a comfortable, homelike environment related to the facility being an uncomfortably cold temperature for five (5) of 21 sampled residents, with the potential to affect all 99 residents in the facility. Residents #82, Resident #43, Resident #45, Resident #5, and Resident # 34. Findings included: A review of the facility's policy titled Resident Rights, revised April 2017, revealed, .Residents shall .r. Live in a physical environment which ensures their physical and emotional security and well-being . Resident #82 On 03/11/2025 at 9:30 AM, during an interview and observation, the room was cold and Resident #82 stated that it is always cold in her room. She was observed wearing long sleeves, a blouse, a jacket, and was covered with a blanket. A record review of the admission Record revealed the facility admitted Resident #82 on 06/07/2024 with current diagnoses including Alzheimer's Disease with Late Onset. A record review of the Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 01/13/2025 revealed Resident #82 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, which indicated the resident was cognitively intact. Resident #43 On 03/11/2025 at 10:48 AM, during an observation and interview, Resident #43 complained about the cold temperature in his room. The resident had two blankets on his bed, while two additional blankets were folded on his roommate's bed. Resident #43 stated it was always too cold in his room. On 03/11/2025 at 2:35 PM, Resident #43's family member confirmed that his father consistently complains about being cold, and that both his father and the roommate have jackets and extra blankets. A record review of the admission Record revealed the facility admitted Resident #43 on 06/10/2024 with current diagnoses including Chronic Diastolic (Congestive) Heart Failure. A record review of the Quarterly MDS with an ARD of 12/18/2024 revealed Resident #43 had a BIMS score of 3, which indicated severe cognitive impairment. Resident #45 On 03/11/2025 at 9:41 AM, Resident #45 was observed sitting in the hallway wearing a jacket. Resident #45 reported that his room is always too cold, which is why he wears his jacket and stays in the hallway. A record review of the admission Record revealed the facility admitted Resident #45 on 11/18/2021 with current diagnoses including Peripheral Vascular Disease. A record review of the Quarterly MDS with an ARD of 11/29/24 revealed Resident #45 had a BIMS score of 15, which indicated the resident was cognitively intact. Resident #5 On 03/11/2025 at 2:25 PM, in an observation and interview, Resident #5 reported that her room is cold. She was observed wearing a gown and a thick robe near the window and the room was cold. A record review of the admission Record revealed the facility admitted Resident #5 on 05/11/2022 with current diagnoses including Unspecified Dementia. A record review of the Quarterly MDS, with an ARD of 12/16/2024 revealed Resident #5 had a BIMS score of 9, which indicated moderate cognitive impairment. Resident #34 On 03/11/2025 at 11:18 AM, during an observation and interview, Resident #34's room was cold. The resident had placed a sheet in the window to block the draft and reported that his room is normally cold, especially after showers. The resident stated that staff informed him the facility has to remain cold. A record review of the admission Record revealed the facility admitted Resident #34 on 10/18/2024 with current diagnoses including Acute and Chronic Respiratory Failure with Hypoxia. A record review of the Quarterly MDS with an ARD of 1/17/2025 revealed Resident #34 had a BIMS score of 15, which indicated the resident was cognitively intact. On 03/11/2025 at 3:12 PM, temperatures were checked in multiple rooms after residents complained about feeling cold. The following temperatures were observed: Resident #5's room at 3:15 PM measured 67.5 degrees (°) Fahrenheit (F); Resident #82's room at 3:20 PM measured 69°F; Resident #34's room at 3:23 PM measured 65°F; Resident #43 and Resident #45's room at 3:26 PM measured 65.5°F. The Maintenance Director confirmed that thermostats were set at 72°F on the cool setting. On 03/11/2025 3:30 PM, during an interview, the Maintenance Director stated that he typically keeps the thermostats set at 72°F, but adjustments are made based on resident complaints. He explained that maintaining consistent temperatures is difficult due to varying preferences, building layout, and vent placement. He also mentioned that an igniter malfunctioned in January 2025 on one of the halls and took three days to repair. On 03/12/2025 10:50 AM, during an interview the Administrator stated that she believed the facility usually meets the federal requirement of 71°F but acknowledged that the building's age, traffic patterns, and vent placements can affect room temperatures. On 03/12/2025 at 3:00 PM, during an interview, Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) #10 stated that rooms 34, 35, 36, and 37 are always cold and that blankets are placed in the windows to block the cold air. CNA #10 confirmed that residents frequently complain about the cold and that staff provide extra blankets. On 03/12/2025 at 3:45 PM, during an interview, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #1 stated that rooms near doors throughout the facility have always been colder than other rooms. LPN #1 confirmed that residents frequently complain, and that staff provide extra blankets and block window drafts with blankets. She confirmed that maintenance and management have been informed of the issue. On 03/12/2025 at 3:50 PM, during an interview with LPN #2 revealed that about one (1) or two (2) residents on each hall occasionally complain about the cold, but staff typically notify maintenance and provide residents with extra blankets or jackets. On 03/12/2025, at 3:55 PM, during an interview with CNA #9 revealed that some residents occasionally complain about cold rooms, but maintenance usually addresses complaints within approximately 30 minutes, and staff provide extra blankets as needed. On 03/13/2025 at 10:47 AM, the Maintenance Director verified room temperatures again. The temperatures were as follows: Resident #5's room was measured at 70.5°F; Resident #82's room at 71°F; Resident #43 and Resident #45's room at 70°F; Resident #34's room measured 70.5°F by the door and 67.5°F by the window; room [ROOM NUMBER] measured 69.5°F. Thermostats were set at 74°F on the cool setting.
Aug 2023 3 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0558 (Tag F0558)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, interviews, record review, and facility policy review the facility failed to ensure a call light was accessible to a resident in her room for one (1) of 25 sampled residents. Res...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interviews, record review, and facility policy review the facility failed to ensure a call light was accessible to a resident in her room for one (1) of 25 sampled residents. Resident #47 Findings include: A record review of the facility's policy Answering the Call Light, revised September 2022, revealed The purpose of this procedure is to ensure timely responses to the resident's requests and needs. General Guidelines . 5. Ensure that the call light is accessible to the resident when in bed, from the toilet, from the shower or bathing facility and from the floor . On 08/28/2023 at 10:58 AM, during an observation, Certified Nurse Aide #3 (CNA) pushed Resident #47, who was sitting in a shower chair, into her room and explained to the resident that she would go get her CNA and they would be right back. CNA #3 instructed Resident #47 to not try to get up and she left the room. Resident #47 was covered with a shower blanket while sitting in the shower chair near the bed. The call light was on the resident's bed but was out of reach for the resident and the resident was unable to move the shower chair to be able to access the call light. After three (3) minutes, CNA #1 entered the resident's room and explained to Resident #47 that she was going to assist her because her assigned CNA was occupied. On 08/29/23 at 03:23 PM, during an interview with Resident # 47, she explained that every time she received a shower, the CNA pushed her back to her room and left her on the shower chair for several minutes until her aide was able to transfer her off the shower chair. She confirmed that because she was covered up with the shower blanket, she could not reach the call light and that sometimes she was in the room by herself. On 08/30/23 at 02:00 PM, during an interview with CNA #2, she explained she was the CNA assigned to Resident #47 on 08/28/2023. She confirmed Resident #47 received a shower from the shower aid. She stated the process is that the shower aide completed the showers for the residents and once the shower was completed, the shower aid assisted the residents back to their room and notified the CNA assigned to the resident that the resident was back in their room. She confirmed the shower aid left residents in their room on the shower chair, covered with a blanket after each shower most of the time, and that sometimes it would take a few minutes for the assigned CNA to assist the resident if she was busy with another resident. On 08/30/23 at 02:20 PM, during an interview with CNA #3, she explained she was the shower aid and worked Monday through Friday and every other Saturday. She confirmed that on 08/28/2023, when Resident #47's shower was completed, the resident was left in her room on the shower chair, covered with two shower blankets with no staff present, and the call light was not within the resident's reach. She confirmed that because the resident was wrapped with the shower blankets, Resident #47 could not access the call light that was located on her bed. On 08/31/23 at 10:53 AM, during an interview the Director of Nursing (DON), he explained that he expected the staff to always have a resident's call light within reach and not to leave a resident unattended on a shower chair. On 08/31/23 at 11:00 AM, during an interview with the Administrator, she explained she expected the staff to not leave a resident unattended on a shower chair and to always have call lights within reach. A record review of the admission Record revealed the facility admitted Resident #47 on 12/14/2021 with diagnoses that included Chronic Diastolic (Congestive) Heart Failure, Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation, and Muscle Weakness. A record review of the Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 08/03/23, revealed Resident #47 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14, which indicated she was cognitively intact. Further review of the MDS revealed she required assistance from staff with transferring and bathing.
CONCERN (D)

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

Comprehensive Care Plan (Tag F0656)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

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

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, resident and staff interviews, record reviews, and the facility policy review the facility failed to implement a care plan to ensure the call light was within reach for (1) of 25 sampled residents. Resident #47 Findings include: A review of the facility's policy, Care Plans, Comprehensive Person-Centered with a reviewed date of January 2023, revealed A comprehensive, person-centered care plan . to meet the resident's physical, psychosocial and functional needs is .implemented for each resident . A record review of the Comprehensive Care Plan, undated, revealed Focus: I am at risk for falls .Interventions/Tasks .Be sure my call light is within reach . During an observation on 08/28/2023 at 10:58 AM, Certified Nurse Aide #3 (CNA) pushed Resident #47, who was sitting in a shower chair, into her room. The call light was on the resident's bed but was out of reach for the resident and the resident was unable to move the shower chair to be able to access the call light. After three (3) minutes, CNA #1 entered the resident's room and explained to Resident #47 that she was going to assist her because her assigned CNA was occupied. In an interview with CNA #3 on 08/30/2023 at 02:20 PM, she confirmed that on 08/28/2023, when Resident #47's shower was completed, the resident was left in her room on the shower chair, covered with two shower blankets with no staff present, and the call light was not within the resident's reach. She confirmed that because the resident was wrapped with the shower blankets, Resident #47 could not access the call light that was located on her bed. On 08/31/2023 at 10:53 AM, during an interview the Director of Nursing (DON), he explained that he expected staff to always follow a resident's care plan and that all care plans can be viewed on the CNA's [NAME]. On 08/31/2023 at 11:10 AM, during an interview with Registered Nurse (RN) #1/Care Plan Nurse, she explained the purpose of the care plan was for staff to know how to care for the residents. She stated that all residents' care plans are available on the computer and on the [NAME] for the CNA to assess. She expressed that as the care plan nurse, she expected facility staff to follow the care plan for resident care. A record review of the admission Record revealed the facility admitted Resident #47 on 12/14/2021 with diagnoses including Chronic Diastolic (Congestive) Heart Failure, Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation, and Muscle Weakness.
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0578 (Tag F0578)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to document in the medical record discu...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to document in the medical record discussions regarding a resident's decision to accept or decline assistance with formulating an Advanced Directive (AD) for five (5) of 25 resident records reviewed. Resident #6, Resident #34, Resident #90, Resident #93, and Resident #96. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy, Advance Directives, revised 09/2022, revealed, The resident has the right to formulate an advance directive .If the Resident does not have an Advance Directive 1. If the resident or representative indicates that he or she has not established advance directives, the facility staff will offer assistance in establishing advance directives. a. The resident or representative is given the option to accept or decline assistance .b. Nursing staff will document in the medical record the offer to assist and the residents decision to accept or decline assistance . A review of the medical record for Resident #6, Resident #34, Resident #90, Resident #93, and Resident #96 revealed there was no documentation indicating the resident's decision to accept or decline assistance with formulating an AD. On 08/29/23 at 09:15 AM, during an interview with the Director of Nursing (DON), he stated that the facility discussed ADs with the resident and family upon admission and completed the Baseline Care plan based upon those discussions. He explained that the facility offers to assist with formulating an AD if the resident does not have one, however, he confirmed that the facility does not document those discussions in the medical record as per the facility policy. He stated that nursing staff should document in the medical record the offer to assist and the decision the resident makes to accept or decline assistance. On 08/31/2023 at 11:50 AM, in an interview with the Administrator, she confirmed the required documentation regarding assistance with formulating ADs were absent in the medical records of the residents. Record review of the admission Record revealed the facility admitted Resident #6 on 6/24/2017 with diagnoses that included Osteomyelitis. Record review of the admission Record revealed Resident #34 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included Unspecified Dementia. Record review of the admission Record revealed Resident #90 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included Cognitive communication deficit and muscle weakness. Record review of the admission Record revealed Resident #93 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included End Stage Renal Disease. Record review of the admission Record revealed Resident #96 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included Cerebral Infarction and Adult failure to thrive.
Jan 2020 4 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0558 (Tag F0558)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, staff interviews and the facility policy review, the facility failed to accommodate Resident #87's needs in creating an individualized, home-like environment, as evidenced by not...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, staff interviews and the facility policy review, the facility failed to accommodate Resident #87's needs in creating an individualized, home-like environment, as evidenced by not providing him access to his room and bathroom for one (1) of four (4) days of observations. Findings include Review of the facility's policy titled, Resident Rights, no date, revealed residents will be treated with consideration, respect, and full recognition of his dignity, and individuality, including privacy in treatment and in care for his personal needs. During the initial tour of the facility, on 1/6/2020 at 10:26 AM, an observation revealed Resident #87 was in a wheel chair, trying to propel himself into his room. The door to the resident's room would only open approximately eight (8) inches due to the door was being blocked by the end of the D bed that was positioned closest to the room door. During an interview, on 1/6/2020 at 10:28 AM, Resident #87 confirmed he was having a problem not being able to get back into his room. Resident #87 stated, It happens all the time. Resident #87 also revealed he can't always get to his bed or go to the bathroom when he needs to, because when the Certified Nursing Assistants (CNAs) go in to check on or help his roommate, they forget to move the bed back, so that it doesn't block the door. During an interview, on 1/6/2020 at 11:31 AM, CNA #2 stated the resident in the D bed or the bed next to the door has a low bed, and for it to be moved back in place, it must be in the lowest position. CNA #2 stated that forgetting to re-position the D bed after providing care, has happened, but she was not sure how many times. CNA #2 stated she thinks Resident #87 pushes on the bed when he goes in and out of the room and this causes the door to be blocked. During a follow-up interview, on 1/8/2020 at 9:36 AM, Resident #87 stated he was continuing to have a problem with the door being blocked. Resident #87 stated the previous night, he was again unable to go back into his room, because they had not put his roommate's bed back. Resident #87 stated he had to wait until he could get someone's attention to move his roommate's bed before he could go into his room. Review of the Face Sheet revealed Resident #87 was admitted by the facility, on 4/14/2018, with diagnoses to include Cerebral Infarction and Hemiplegia and Hemiparesis following unspecified Cerebrovascular Disease affecting the left (L) dominant side. Review of the Resident's most recent Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 12/12/2019, revealed Resident #87 has a Brief Interview Mental Status (BIMS) score of fifteen (15), indicating intact cognition.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0583 (Tag F0583)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, staff interview, record review and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide privacy for Resident #34, during an invasive procedure, for one (1) of three (3) residen...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, staff interview, record review and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide privacy for Resident #34, during an invasive procedure, for one (1) of three (3) resident blood draw observations. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Resident Rights, no date, revealed residents will be treated with consideration, respect, and full recognition of his dignity, and individuality, including privacy in treatment and in care for his personal needs. During an observation, on 1/6/2020 at 10:06 AM, it was revealed Resident #34 was sitting in his wheel chair next to his bed having his blood drawn, by the Phlebotomist, with the privacy curtain open. Resident #34's roommate was on his side of the room, but able to view the Phlebotomist perform the blood draw on Resident #34. During an interview, on 1/6/2020 at 10:16 AM, Resident #34 stated that he wanted the curtain pulled between him and his roommate while he was getting his blood drawn. Resident #34 stated he would have appreciated having privacy. During an interview, on 1/8/2020 at 1:55 PM, the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON), revealed the facility had called the Phlebotomist back to the facility and provided an in-service on Resident Rights, specifically about performing blood draws in a resident's room. The ADON stated the Phlebotomist signed and dated the form titled, Inservice Training. Review of the facility's Inservice Training documentation, dated 1/6/2020, revealed that an in-service on the topics of Infection Control, Privacy, Blood Draws, and Resident Rights was provided by Registered Nurse (RN) #1, and received by the Phlebotomist serving the facility on 1/6/2020. Review of the Face Sheet revealed Resident #34 was admitted by the facility, on 5/13/2019, with diagnoses to include Spinal Stenosis, Lumbar region and Muscle Weakness, Review of the Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 11/03/2019, revealed Resident #34 had a Brief Interview Mental Status (BIMS) score of fifteen (15), indicating intact cognition.
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 interview, record review and facility policy review, the facility failed to document accurate information on the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) for Resident #28, for one (1) of 21 MDS...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on staff interview, record review and facility policy review, the facility failed to document accurate information on the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) for Resident #28, for one (1) of 21 MDSs reviewed. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Resident Assessment Instrument, revised September 2010, revealed all persons who have completed any portions of the MDS Resident Assessment Form must sign such document attesting to the accuracy of such information. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS), under Preadmission Screening and Resident Review, Section A1500, revealed the question, Is the resident currently considered by the state level II process to have serious mental illness and/or intellectual disability or a related condition? and No was answered. Under Active Diagnoses, Section I , the diagnoses that were checked included Schizophrenia, Non-Alzheimer's Dementia, and Depression. Review of the Medical Diagnosis from admission, on 10/23/19, for Resident #28 revealed diagnoses included Schizophrenia, Depression, Parkinson's Disease and Dementia with Behavioral Disturbance. On 01/09/2020 at 11:57 AM, in an interview with the Minimum Data Set (MDS) Nurse/Registered Nurse (RN) #1, she confirmed the admission MDS for Resident # 28 revealed under section A1500 the question, Is the resident currently considered by the state level II process to have serious mental illness and/or intellectual disability or a related condition? and No was marked. She confirmed Section I revealed the diagnoses that included Schizophrenia, Non-Alzheimer's Dementia and Depression were checked. She confirmed the information was incorrect and should have been marked for serious mental illness because she has diagnoses of Schizophrenia and Depression. Review of the admission Record revealed the facility admitted Resident #28, on 10/23/19, with the included diagnoses of Dementia with Behaviors, Parkinson's Disease, Depression and Schizophrenia.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0645 (Tag F0645)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on staff interview and record review, the facility failed to complete the Level I Pre-admission Screening Application for Long Term Care (PASARR) for Resident #28, for one (1) of 21 resident PAS...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on staff interview and record review, the facility failed to complete the Level I Pre-admission Screening Application for Long Term Care (PASARR) for Resident #28, for one (1) of 21 resident PASARRs reviewed. Findings include: Review of the facility's typed statement, signed and dated by the Administrator on 1/9/2020, revealed the facility follows the state regulations regarding the PASSAR. On 01/09/2020 at 11:01 AM, in an interview with the Director of Business Development/Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #1, she stated she was responsible for completing the Pre-admission Screening Application for Long Term Care (PASSAR) on new admissions only and confirmed she marked No for Resident # 28 when asked if they have a diagnosis of Mental Illness and stated she has Schizophrenia. LPN #1 confirmed Resident # 28 has not had a Level II screening since admission and confirmed the Level I was not complete. LPN #1 stated, It's plain as day, I messed up and confirmed the Level I PASSAR screen was incomplete. Review of the admission Record revealed the facility admitted Resident #28, on 10/23/19, with the included diagnoses of Parkinson's Disease, Dementia with Behaviors, Depression and Schizophrenia.
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Life-Threatening (Immediate Jeopardy)
J - Isolated K - Pattern L - Widespread
Actual Harm
G - Isolated H - Pattern I - Widespread
Potential for Harm
D - Isolated E - Pattern F - Widespread
No Harm (Minor)
A - Isolated B - Pattern C - Widespread

Questions to Ask on Your Visit

  • "What changes have you made since the serious inspection findings?"
  • "What safeguards are in place to prevent abuse and neglect?"
  • "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
  • "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"

Our Honest Assessment

Strengths
  • • 28% annual turnover. Excellent stability, 20 points below Mississippi's 48% average. Staff who stay learn residents' needs.
Concerns
  • • Multiple safety concerns identified: Federal abuse finding, 2 life-threatening violation(s). Review inspection reports carefully.
  • • 15 deficiencies on record, including 2 critical (life-threatening) violations. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
  • • Grade F (27/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
Bottom line: This facility has a substantiated abuse finding. Extreme caution advised. Explore alternatives.

About This Facility

What is Picayune Rehabilitation And Healthcare Center's CMS Rating?

CMS assigns PICAYUNE REHABILITATION AND HEALTHCARE CENTER an overall rating of 3 out of 5 stars, which is considered average nationally. Within Mississippi, this rating places the facility higher than 99% of the state's 100 nursing homes. This mid-range rating indicates the facility meets federal standards but may have areas for improvement.

How is Picayune Rehabilitation And Healthcare Center Staffed?

CMS rates PICAYUNE REHABILITATION AND HEALTHCARE CENTER's staffing level at 5 out of 5 stars, which is much above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 28%, compared to the Mississippi average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.

What Have Inspectors Found at Picayune Rehabilitation And Healthcare Center?

State health inspectors documented 15 deficiencies at PICAYUNE REHABILITATION AND HEALTHCARE CENTER during 2020 to 2025. These included: 2 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death) and 13 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 Picayune Rehabilitation And Healthcare Center?

PICAYUNE REHABILITATION AND HEALTHCARE CENTER is owned by a for-profit company. For-profit facilities operate as businesses with obligations to shareholders or private owners. The facility is operated by NEXION HEALTH, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 120 certified beds and approximately 104 residents (about 87% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in PICAYUNE, Mississippi.

How Does Picayune Rehabilitation And Healthcare Center Compare to Other Mississippi Nursing Homes?

Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Mississippi, PICAYUNE REHABILITATION AND HEALTHCARE CENTER's overall rating (3 stars) is above the state average of 2.6, staff turnover (28%) is significantly lower than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (2 stars) is below the national benchmark.

What Should Families Ask When Visiting Picayune Rehabilitation And Healthcare Center?

Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "What changes have been made since the serious inspection findings, and how are you preventing similar issues?" "What safeguards and monitoring systems are in place to protect residents from abuse or neglect?" "Can I visit during a mealtime to observe dining assistance and food quality?" "How do you handle medical emergencies, and what is your hospital transfer rate?" These questions are particularly relevant given the facility's Immediate Jeopardy citations and the substantiated abuse finding on record.

Is Picayune Rehabilitation And Healthcare Center Safe?

Based on CMS inspection data, PICAYUNE REHABILITATION AND HEALTHCARE CENTER has documented safety concerns. The facility has 1 substantiated abuse finding (meaning confirmed case of resident harm by staff or other residents). Inspectors have issued 2 Immediate Jeopardy citations (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death). The facility has a 3-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 Picayune Rehabilitation And Healthcare Center Stick Around?

Staff at PICAYUNE REHABILITATION AND HEALTHCARE CENTER tend to stick around. With a turnover rate of 28%, the facility is 18 percentage points below the Mississippi average of 46%. Low turnover is a positive sign. It means caregivers have time to learn each resident's needs, medications, and personal preferences. Consistent staff also notice subtle changes in a resident's condition more quickly. Registered Nurse turnover is also low at 9%, meaning experienced RNs are available to handle complex medical needs.

Was Picayune Rehabilitation And Healthcare Center Ever Fined?

PICAYUNE REHABILITATION AND HEALTHCARE CENTER has been fined $8,281 across 1 penalty action. This is below the Mississippi average of $33,162. While any fine indicates a compliance issue, fines under $50,000 are relatively common and typically reflect isolated problems that were subsequently corrected. Families should ask what specific issues led to these fines and confirm they've been resolved.

Is Picayune Rehabilitation And Healthcare Center on Any Federal Watch List?

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