GROVE AT KIRKWOOD, THE

711 SOUTH KIRKWOOD ROAD, KIRKWOOD, MO 63122 (314) 965-0864
Non profit - Corporation 117 Beds Independent Data: November 2025
Trust Grade
65/100
#79 of 479 in MO
Last Inspection: May 2024

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

Overview

The Grove at Kirkwood has a Trust Grade of C+, indicating it is slightly above average but not exceptional. With a state rank of #79 out of 479 in Missouri, the facility is in the top half, and it ranks #14 out of 69 in St. Louis County, meaning only 13 local options are better. The facility is improving, having reduced issues from 6 in 2024 to just 2 in 2025, which is a positive trend. While staffing is relatively stable with a turnover rate of 0%, indicating staff remain long-term, they have less RN coverage than 77% of Missouri facilities, which could impact care quality. There were some concerning findings, such as outdated food being stored improperly and a lack of proper infection control during food preparation, as well as issues with managing residents' petty cash accounts. This suggests a need for improvement in food safety and financial management, even as the overall environment seems to be getting better.

Trust Score
C+
65/100
In Missouri
#79/479
Top 16%
Safety Record
Moderate
Needs review
Inspections
Getting Better
6 → 2 violations
Staff Stability
○ Average
Turnover data not reported for this facility.
Penalties
✓ Good
No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Missouri facilities.
Skilled Nurses
○ Average
Each resident gets 31 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — about average for Missouri. RNs are the most trained staff who monitor for health changes.
Violations
⚠ Watch
23 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
★★★★☆
4.0
Overall Rating
★★★☆☆
3.0
Staff Levels
★★☆☆☆
2.0
Care Quality
★★★★☆
4.0
Inspection Score
Stable
2024: 6 issues
2025: 2 issues

The Good

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

Facility shows strength in fire safety.

The Bad

No Significant Concerns Identified

This facility shows no red flags. Among Missouri's 100 nursing homes, only 0% achieve this.

The Ugly 23 deficiencies on record

1 actual harm
Jul 2025 1 deficiency
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Resident Rights (Tag F0550)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were treated with respect and dignity when Certifi...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were treated with respect and dignity when Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) B was rough and mean to a resident during peri-care (Resident #1) and told a resident he/she did not take his/her religion seriously because he/she refused to go to church service (Resident #2). CNA B had a history of complaints from residents about being rough, bossy and intimidating. The census was 91.Review of the facility's Resident Rights policy, revised 6/16/25, showed:-The resident has the right to a dignified existence, self-determination, and communication with and access to persons and services inside and outside the facility;-The resident has the right to exercise his/her rights as a resident of the facility;-The resident has the right to be free of interference, coercion, discrimination, and reprisal from the facility in exercising his/her rights and to be supported by the facility in the exercise of his/her rights;-The resident has a right to be treated with respect and dignity;-The resident has a right to choose activities, schedules including sleeping and waking times;-The resident has the right to make choices about aspects of his or her life in the facility;-The resident has a right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment,including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely;-The resident has the right to voice grievances to the facility without discrimination or reprisal. 1. Review of CNA B's employee file, showed:-Disciplinary action written warning form, signed and dated 8/16/11:-Violation of safety rules: Negligence could have jeopardized the welfare of a resident;-Summary: The resident's care plan listed him/her as a Hoyer lift (a mechanical device designed to safely lift and transfer individuals with limited mobility). CNA B did not follow the care plan and transferred the resident with a gait belt (a safety device used to assist individuals with limited mobility during transfers and walking). The resident had linear bruising under his/her breast and around his/her left side and left arm;-Action taken: Unpaid suspension for one day;-Code of conduct policy, signed and dated 9/5/12, acknowledging he/she understood all facility employees would treat residents with dignity, consideration, courtesy and respect;-Performance appraisal, dated 7/2014:-Category: Attitude/interpersonal relationships;-Rating: Three out of five;-Comments: Occasionally residents said he/she was bossy and did not listen to them; -Record of counseling interview (verbal warning), dated 12/1/14:-Participants: CNA B;-Reason for conference: A resident filed a complaint and said CNA B gave him/her a dirty look and was being rough with him/her during peri care. Other residents complained in the past about CNA being bossy. Another resident complained about CNA B being discourteous during activities of daily living (ADLs) on 10/13/14;-Summary of discussion: CNA B was read the contents of the complaint. He/She denied feeling stressed and did not want to pursue Employee Assistance Program ([NAME]) counseling. He/She said, it's not me, it's the residents. He/She was urged to work on another unit as the complaints were from short term rehab residents;-Response/reaction from employee: CNA B did not want to discuss strategies for avoiding resident complaints about his/her approach;-Steps taken: CNA B was advised further complaints would result in disciplinary action;-Performance appraisal, dated 7/2015:-Category: Attitude/interpersonal relationships;-Rating: Three out of five;-Goals: Encouraged to continue working on using a positive, encouraging manner with his/her residents. Encouraged to seek knowledge of residents preferences and to offer them choices to create a home like environment;-Record of counseling interview (verbal warning), dated 7/14/15:-Participants: CNA B;-Reason for conference: A resident filed a complaint and said CNA B refused to take care of him/her. CNA B was physically rough when he/she moved the resident. CNA B pushed and jerked the resident. CNA B's tone was rough and not gentle. The resident was frightened and intimidated by it. This was the third time in 90 days an alert, rehab resident had complained about CNA B being rough, bossy and using intimidating language;-Summary of discussion: The nurse told CNA B he/she must change and watch his/her tone and body language. The nurse said if he/she received another complaint about CNA B, he/she would receive a written warning;-Response/reaction from employee: CNA B was not willing to discuss the matter further. He/She said he/she would lie to residents to make them comfortable;-Steps taken: CNA B said he/she did not know how to make the residents feel comfortable with his/her approach. He/She was encouraged to make extra trips into the residents rooms and ask if they needed anything;-Note to file, dated 9/4/15: A short-term rehab resident complained CNA B was physically rough during transfers and spoke to him/her in a bossy, intimidating way. CNA B said he/she was asked to lie to residents. CNA B was reminded his/her job is to make the residents feel safe and comfortable. CNA B refused to give suggestions on how he/she could change his/her approach with residents. CNA B agreed to go to [NAME] counseling. CNA B was reassigned to another unit;-Performance appraisal, dated 7/2018:-Category: Attitude/interpersonal relationships-Rating: Four out of five;-Comments: He/She was a little direct, fair, but firm;Record of counseling interview (verbal warning), dated 10/14/19:-Participants: CNA B;-Reason for conference: Failure to honor resident rights. CNA B was off the clock and noticed a bruise on a resident's hand. He/She did not report the bruise;-Summary of discussion: CNA B should not have been working when off the clock. He/She should have reported the bruise or asked the oncoming CNA to report it. -Response/reaction from employee: CNA B understood the process and agreed to follow it;-Steps taken: CNA B would report any injury or abuse to the nurse immediately;-Performance appraisal, dated 7/17/2023:-Category: Attitude/interpersonal relationships;-Rating: Four out of five;-Comments: Encouraged to work on his/her approach with others and watch his/her body language;-CNA B completed resident rights training upon hire, on 6/13/23 and 4/14/25. 2. Review of Resident #1's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS), a federally mandated assessment instrument completed by facility staff, dated 7/10/25, showed the following:-Moderate cognitive impairment;-No behaviors;-Diagnoses included dementia (decline in mental ability, severe enough to interfere with daily life, encompassing memory, thinking, and reasoning), unspecified severity, without behavioral disturbance, psychotic disturbance, and mood disturbance, anxiety and adult failure to thrive (a syndrome characterized by a decline in an older adult's physical and mental state). Review of the resident's care plan, in use during the survey, showed:-Problem: The resident experienced some memory recall issues due to mild dementia;-Goal: The resident will not sustain serious injury due to memory/recall deficit;-Intervention: Staff redirected or cued the resident if he/she became forgetful;-Problem: The resident has complained of chronic lower back pain;-Goals: The resident will verbalize reduction in pain;-Interventions: Staff acknowledged his/her pain is unique and believable, gave medication as needed, assessed past effective and ineffective pain relief measures; encouraged him/her to discuss feelings about pain, and monitored and recorded any complaints of pain. Review of the resident's behavior analysis report, showed:-On 7/1/25 at 11:57 A.M., CNA B documented he/she gave the resident a shower. The resident complained of the water being too hot, then too cold. He/She complained CNA B rubbed his/her head too hard. CNA B said he/she rubbed the resident's head with an open hand. The resident complained CNA B was putting water in his/her ears. CNA B said he/she bent the resident's ears forward and rinsed the back of the resident's ears. Review of the grievance report, dated 7/18/25, showed:-Assigned to Director of Nurses (DON);-Details: A staff member reported the resident woke up at approximately 3:45 A.M. He/She was sweating, in tears and very afraid. The resident said CNA B was rough and mean to him/her. CNA B scrubbed his/her private area hard with green wipes and did not listen to him/her. The staff member reported the information to the charge nurse. The resident was afraid to repeat the information to the charge nurse;-Resolution: Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) A interviewed the resident, and he/she was confused, but said CNA B was always rough with him/her. LPN A moved CNA B to another unit for three days, then moved him/her back to the resident's unit. CNA B was not assigned to the resident. During an interview on 7/22/25 at 11:27 A.M., the resident was confused and only wanted to talk about his/her family and turning 100. 3. Resident #2's admission MDS, dated [DATE], showed:-Moderate cognitive impairment;-No behaviors;-Diagnoses included anxiety disorder (mental health condition characterized by excessive and persistent worry, fear, and unease which interferes with daily life), major depressive disorder (a serious mental health condition characterized by persistent feelings of sadness, loss of interest in activities, and a lack of pleasure, significantly impacting daily functioning), arthritis and peripheral artery disease (the narrowing of arteries, typically in the limbs, due to the buildup of plaque). Review of the resident's care plan, in use during the survey, showed no documentation related to the resident's psychosocial well-being. Review of the grievance report, dated 7/14/25, showed:-Assigned to LPN A;-Details: On 7/10/25, time unknown, CNA B asked the resident if he/she was going to mass. The resident said no. CNA B asked, why not, you are dressed. The resident again said he/she did not want to go. CNA B said he/she took his/her religion serious, and he/she would never ask the resident about anything else. On 7/14/25 during lunch, the resident received a cold hot dog. He/She pressed his/her call light to have it warmed up. Another staff member answered the resident's call light and warmed up the hot dog but did not turn off the call light. CNA B entered the resident's room and said staff must feed the residents in the dining room and do not pay attention to the call lights. The resident felt CNA B gave him/her the cold shoulder. The resident asked to be assigned to a different aide;-Resolution: Resident #2 was removed from CNA B's assignment. If the issued continued, CNA B would be moved to another hall. Review of the resident's behavior analysis report, showed on 7/16/15 at 4:39 A.M., the resident was tearful and told another aide, CNA B treated him/her badly. During an interview on 7/29/25 at 11:25 A.M., the resident said he/she has had a few issues with a staff member, but it was handled. When asked to elaborate, he/she said refer to the complaint he/she filed. The aide has not been assigned to him/her since the incidents. 4. During an interview on 7/29/25 at 1:04 P.M., CNA B said he/she has worked at the facility for 14 years. He/She assists residents with ADLs. He/She tried to encourage Resident #2 to go to church service, because he/she is usually not up early. Resident #2 took it as an insult. CNA B said he/she did not say he/she took religion seriously. He/She said some people take religion seriously. Regarding the hot dog, CNA B said he/she went into the resident's room because his/her call light was on. Resident #2 told him/her the light was already answered. Resident #2 told CNA B he/she needed to work on answering call lights during lunch service. CNA B was made aware of Resident #1's complaint on 7/28/25. He/She was told he/she scratched Resident #1. He/She was not told where he/she scratched Resident #1. No one talked to CNA B about being rough with Resident #1. CNA B said Resident #1 says everyone is rough with him/her. CNA B said Resident #1 complained he/she was rough during a shower. He/She did not think he/she was being rough. CNA B is still assigned to Resident #1's and Resident #2's unit. Resident #1 and Resident #2 were removed from his/her assignment. CNA B was not aware of any past complaints against him/her about being rough and intimidating towards residents. He/She said he/she has never received a written or verbal warning. He/She was in-serviced on resident rights in April, 2025. He/She is aware residents have the right to choose their own schedule, refuse care and be treated with respect. 5. During an interview on 7/29/25 at 2:06 P.M., LPN A said he/she did not investigate Resident #2's grievance. He/She only investigated Resident #1's grievance. Resident #1's answers were not consistent with the staff member who reported the incident statement. Resident #1 did not remember waking up in the middle of the night. He/She did recall CNA B. Resident #1 has some forgetfulness. He/She assessed Resident #1 and did not notice any redness on his/her bottom. LPN A could not determine if the incident happened. CNA B did not work on 7/18/25. CNA B returned to work on 7/19/25. The night supervisor was supposed to talk to the CNA about the incident with Resident #1. LPN A and the DON made the decision to move CNA B to a different floor. LPN A was not aware of the complaint filed by Resident #2. He/She was not aware CNA B had a history of resident complaints about him/her being rough, bossy and intimidating. He/She is the unit manager and has worked with CNA B for three years. Staff have complained about CNA B encouraging the residents too much. He/She has never witnessed or heard of CNA B being too rough with residents. He/She is not sure if the social worker met with Resident #1 and Resident #2. 6. During an interview on 7/29/25 at 2:37 P.M., the DON said LPN A investigated both grievances. She and LPN A made the decision to remove Resident #1 and Resident #2 from CNA B's assignment. She found out about CNA B's history of complaints from residents after Resident #1 and Resident #2 filed grievances. The DON said CNA B is supposed to slow down and be gentle with the residents. She was in the process of starting in-depth abuse/neglect and resident rights in-services. CNA B completed resident rights training in April, 2025. The social worker is on vacation. She is not sure if he/she met with Resident #1 and Resident #2. 7. During an interview on 7/29/25 at 2:47 P.M., the Administrator said the corrective measures put in place up to now are not working. They need to hold CNA B accountable. They need to do more monitoring on the floor and follow up to break established patterns. He thinks the social worker met with Resident #1 and Resident #2. 2566289
Feb 2025 1 deficiency
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

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 observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents had complete, accurate and individual...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents had complete, accurate and individualized care plans, to address the specific needs of the residents, for three of three sampled residents in certified beds (Residents #2, #3 and #4) who were at increased risk of bleeding due to receiving anticoagulant treatment. The census was 82 with 33 in certified beds. Review of the facility's Care Plan policy, dated 2/20/25, showed it is the policy of this facility to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, consistent with resident rights, that includes measurable objectives and time frames to meet a residents medical, nursing, mental and psychosocial needs; and all services that are identified in their comprehensive assessment and meet professional standards of quality. 1. Review of Resident #2's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS), a federally mandated assessment instrument completed by facility staff, dated 11/25/24, showed: -Moderate cognitive impairment; -Diagnoses of atrial fibrillation (irregular heartbeat), coronary artery disease (blood vessels that supply blood to the heart are narrow or blocked), high blood pressure, high cholesterol, dementia, and Parkinson's disease (a movement disorder of the nervous system); -High-risk drug classes: Is taking anticoagulant (blood thinner) and antiplatelet (blood thinner). Review of the resident's electronic Physician Order Sheet (POS), showed: -An order dated 10/19/24 for clopidogrel (antiplatelet) 75 milligrams (mg) one time daily; -An order dated 10/19/24 for Eliquis (blood thinner) 5 mg two times a day. Review of the resident's care plan, dated 1/14/25, showed no problem identified for increased chance of bruising and bleeding, and no intervention to reduce or prevent bruising and bleeding. Observation on 2/20/25 at 1:25 P.M., showed the resident sat in the TV area. There were no visible bruises to his/her hands. 2. Review of Resident #3's quarterly MDS, dated [DATE], showed: -Severe cognitive impairment; -Diagnoses of high blood pressure, dementia, Parkinson's disease, and history of pulmonary embolus (blood clot in the lungs); -High-risk drug classes: Is taking anticoagulant. Review of the resident's electronic POS, showed an order, dated 7/2/24, for Eliquis 5 mg twice a day after completing 10 mg x 4 days. Review of the resident's care plan, dated 10/24/24 and in use during the survey, showed no problem identified for increased chance of bruising and bleeding, and no intervention to reduce or prevent bruising and bleeding. Observation on 2/20/25 at 1:21 P.M., showed the resident in his/her room. He/She wore a long sleeve shirt. There were no visible bruises to his/her hands. 3. Review of Resident #4's quarterly MDS, dated [DATE], showed: -Moderate cognitive impairment; -Diagnoses of stroke, heart failure, high blood pressure, high cholesterol, dementia, and depression; -High-risk drug classes: Is taking anticoagulant. Review of the resident's care plan, dated 1/14/25, showed no problem identified for increased chance of bruising and bleeding, and no intervention to reduce or prevent bruising and bleeding. Observation on 2/20/25 at 1:32 P.M., showed the resident wore a long sleeve shirt, with no bruises visible. 4. During an interview on 2/20/25 at 2:10 P.M., Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) F said all residents in the facility should have a care plan that reflects the resident's needs. He/She did not always create a care plan intervention for those residents who are receiving medications that cause bruising or bleeding. The interventions that could be used for those residents who are at risk of bleeding and bruising include Tubi-grip (sleeves placed on resident's extremities to be reduce and prevent injuries to the residents' skin) and bolsters (elevated bed edges to prevent accidental rolling out of bed). 5. During an interview on 2/20/25 at 2:48 P.M., the Director of Nursing said she expected all residents to have a complete, accurate and individualized care plan, to address the specific needs of the residents. The Administrator said he expected the nursing department to follow the facility's care plan policy. MO00249740
May 2024 6 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

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

Unnecessary Medications (Tag F0759)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a medication error rate of less than 5%. Out of 28 opportunities observed, 2 errors occurred, resulting in a 7.14% erro...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a medication error rate of less than 5%. Out of 28 opportunities observed, 2 errors occurred, resulting in a 7.14% error rate (Resident #19). The census was 81 with 38 residents in certified beds. Review of the facility's Administering Medications policy and procedure dated, 11/17/2023: -Policy statement: medications shall be administered in a safe and timely manner, and as prescribed; -Insulin pens containing multiple doses of insulin are for single resident use only. Changing the needle does not make it safe to use insulin pens for more than one resident; -Insulin pens will be clearly labeled with the resident's name or other identifying information. Prior to administering insulin with an insulin pen, the Nurse will verify that the correct pen is used for that resident; -Policy did not address priming the pen prior to resident dose administration. Review of Manufacture How to Use Your Lantus (long-acting insulin) Pen, dated 2022: -Perform a safety test; -Dial a test dose of 2 units; -Hold pen with the needle pointing up and lightly tap the insulin reservoir so the air bubbles rise to the top of the needle. This will help you get the most accurate dose. Review of Resident #19's medical record, showed: -Diagnoses included epilepsy (seizure disorder), type 2 diabetes with polyneuropathy (nerve damage), and chronic kidney disease, -An order, dated 3/22/2024, for Lantus Solostar injection pen (glargine, long-acting insulin) 100 units/3 milliliters (ml), administer 10 units subcutaneous (under the skin) at 8:00 A.M. daily. Observation on 5/3/24 at 7:37 at A.M., showed Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) G set the resident's insulin to deliver 1 unit of insulin and primed the pen. He/She then set the pen to 10 units of Lantus and administered the insulin to the resident. LPN G failed to prime the insulin pen with 2 units per manufacturer's recommendation. Observation on 5/6/24 at 7:25 A.M., showed LPN C set the insulin pen to deliver 10 units of Lantus. He/She did not prime the insulin pen before he/she administered 10 units of Lantus to the resident. During an interview on 5/7/24 at 9:51 A.M., with the Director of Nursing (DON), Administrator, and Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON). The DON said insulin pens should be primed with 2 units, per manufacture recommendations, prior to administering the resident's prescribed dose.
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0568 (Tag F0568)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to reconcile the petty cash (a small amount of cash that is kept in a facility's business office to dispense to residents who hav...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to reconcile the petty cash (a small amount of cash that is kept in a facility's business office to dispense to residents who have a resident trust account) on a monthly basis. The facility also failed to maintain enough funds in the resident trust to cover all residents with a resident trust for three months. The facility held funds for five residents. The census was 81 with 38 residents in certified beds. Review of the facility's Resident Rights policy, dated 1/10/24, showed: -Manage you money: You have the right to manage your own money or to choose someone you trust to do this for you; -In addition, if you deposit your money with the nursing home or ask them to hold or account for your money, you must sign a written statement saying you want them to do this; -The nursing home must allow you access to your bank accounts, cash, and other financial records; -The nursing home must have a system that ensures full accounting for your funds and cannot combine your funds with nursing home's funds; -The nursing home must protect your funds from any loss by providing an acceptable protection, such as buying a surety bond; -If a resident with a fund dies, the nursing home must return the funds with a final accounting to the person or court handling the resident's estate within 30 days. 1. Review of the monthly accounts for the months of April 2023 through March 2024, showed the absence of documentation of the ending balances for petty cash. During an interview on 5/6/24 at 12:51 P.M. and 5/7/24 at 12:12 P.M., Accounting Coordinator V said the petty cash was funded from the resident trust account. Observation and interview on 5/7/24 at 12:16 P.M., showed Accounting Coordinator V counted the petty cash. There was a total of $150.00 in the petty cash box. Accounting Coordinator V said the petty cash was not on the reconciliation because it was petty cash. They kept a total of $200.00 in petty cash. He/She confirmed the monthly balance report contained the total amount of all resident money and the petty cash was on there. He/She wrote $4944.52 + 200 =$5144.52 on the March 2024 ending balance report. He/She said the $200 represented petty cash. It was not on the reconciliation sheet because it was cash. The reconciliation included only funds at the bank and the petty cash was separate. At the end of the month, he/she would go to the bank and balance the petty cash by adding money to get it back to $200.00. It could not be under $200.00. 2. Review of the facility's January 2024 monthly ledger report, showed: -Ending balance report, dated 1/31/24, showed a resident trust account total of $3,350.37 for all residents; -Monthly Bank statement balance showed an end of the month balance of $3,229.07; -$6,270.18 was transferred from the resident trust account to another account; -The monthly bank statement's ending balance showed the balance was $121.30 less than the ending balance report. Review of the facility's February 2024 monthly ledger report, showed: -Ending balance report, dated 2/29/24, showed a resident trust account total of $4,312.44 for all residents; -Monthly bank statement balance showed an end of the month balance of $4,161.14; -$6,270.18 was transferred from the resident trust account to another account; -The monthly bank statement's ending balance showed the balance was $151.30 less than the ending balance report. Review of the facility's March 2024 monthly ledger report, showed: -Ending balance report, dated 3/31/24, showed a resident trust account total of $5,144.52 for all residents; -Monthly bank statement balance showed an end of the month balance of $4,973.22; -$6,300.18 was transferred from the resident trust account to another account; -The monthly bank statement's ending balance showed the balance was $171.30 less than the ending balance report. During an interview on 5/6/24 at 12:51 P.M. and 5/7/24 at 12:12 P.M., Accounting Coordinator V said the money that was transferred from the resident trust account was transferred to the facility's corporate account. There was enough money in the resident trust account to cover all the residents who held funds. Accounting Coordinator V was asked how would they ensure they had enough money to cover the resident's balances if they wanted to close their resident trust account. He/She said it would never happen, but if there was not enough money in the account, they would give the resident cash. 3. During an interview on 5/7/20 at 12:50 P.M., the Administrator said she would expect the resident trust to be accurately reconciled every month. The Administrator believed the petty cash was company funded, but would have to check. She would expect it to be corporate money. She would expect the total balances to be correct and accurate to cover residents who had money in the trust account with the facility.
CONCERN (E)

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

Abuse Prevention Policies (Tag F0607)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to check for a federal indicator (identifies when an employee who has ever held a Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) certificate has ever been found t...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to check for a federal indicator (identifies when an employee who has ever held a Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) certificate has ever been found to have abused, neglected, or misappropriated resident property) through the state Nurse Aide (NA) registry prior to hiring a new employee. In addition, the facility's policy failed to direct staff to check the NA registry on all employees prior to hire for three of five employees files reviewed. The census was 81 with 38 in certified beds. Review of the facility's undated Background Screening Investigation policy, showed: -Policy: Facility conducts employment background screening checks, reference checks and criminal conviction investigation checks on individuals making application for employment; -Procedure: The Staffing Coordinator, or other designee, conducts employment background checks, reference checks and criminal conviction checks on persons making application for employment with facility. Such investigations are completed prior to offer of employment; -For any individual applying for a position as a Certified Nursing Assistant, the state nurse aide registry is contacted to determine if any findings of abuse, neglect, mistreatment of individuals, and/or theft of property have been entered into the applicant's file; -For any licensed professional applying for a position that may involve direct contact with residents, his/her respective licensing board is contacted to determine if any sanctions have been assessed against the applicant's license; -The policy failed to direct the facility to check the nurse aide registry on all staff. 1. Review of Dietary Aide U's employee file, showed: -Date of hire 8/18/23; -No documentation of the NA registry federal indicator check. 2. Review of Registered Nurse (RN) T's employee file, showed: -Date of hire 5/2/23; -No documentation of the NA registry federal indicator check. 3. Review of Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) G's employee file, showed: -Date of hire 1/30/24; -No documentation of the NA registry federal indicator check. 4. During an interview on 5/7/24 at 12:50 P.M., the Administrator confirmed the NA registry was only checked for certified nursing assistants. She would expect the NA registry to be checked for all new hires.
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0730 (Tag F0730)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to have a tracking system to ensure 10 of 10 randomly selected Certified Nurse Aides (CNAs) received the required annual 12-hour resident care...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to have a tracking system to ensure 10 of 10 randomly selected Certified Nurse Aides (CNAs) received the required annual 12-hour resident care training, tracked and calculated by hire date. The census was 81 with 38 residents in certified beds. Review of the facility assessment, showed: -Staff training and competencies: Abuse, neglect, exploitation and reporting; -Resident rights; -Pressure ulcer prevention; -Medication administration; -Dementia care and abuse prevention; -Care for persons with cognitive impairment; -Care for persons with mental and psychosocial disorder as well as history of trauma/Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD, a disorder in which a person has difficulty recovering after experiencing or witnessing a terrifying event); -Implementing non-pharmacological interventions; -Falls; -Exercise and ambulation; -Range of motion; -Positioning residents; -Lifting and transfers; -Feeding assistance training; -Required in-services done yearly for all staff; -Nursing rounds/supervision done involving floor staff to monitor or proficiency and see to all resident needs are met. Review of the CNA individual in-service records, showed: -CNA I hired 11/5/98, with 8 hours of in-service education; -CNA J hired 2/7/07, with 8 hours of in-service education; -CNA K hired 6/4/08, with 34 minutes of in-service education; -CNA L hired on 8/26/09, with 8 hours of in-service education; -CNA M hired on 3/29/18, with 7 hours and 15 min of in-service education; -CNA N hired on 9/30/20, with 7 hours and 45 min of in-service education; -CNA O hired on 10/7/20, with 3 hours and 30 minutes of in-service education; -CNA P hired on 2/8/22, with 2 hours and 45 minutes of in-service education; -CNA Q hired on 3/22/23, with 58 minutes of in-service education; -CNA R hired on 9/2/20, with 89 minutes of in-service education. During an interview on 5/3/24 at 2:05 P.M., the Administrator said the previous Minimum Data Set (MDS) coordinator was responsible for education; however, he/she left two weeks ago. They are currently looking for a new educator. They are attempting to find the number of hours for the in-service training and sign in sheets with dates of the education events. Review of the facility's in-service sign sheet, received on 5/3/24, showed no documentation of the amount of time of each in-service or education. Several staff signatures on the form, not tracked by staff. Review of the facility's education events sheet, received on 5/3/24, showed: -Annual Health Fair: 1.5 hours; -911 in-service: 30 minutes; -Dementia training: 30 minutes; -Change in condition overview: 1 hour; -Small group behavior tracking/log: 20 minutes; -Professionalism in the workplace, a focus on customer service: 30 minutes; -The facility provided no tracking documentation of the CNAs that received education or the date of the education event. During an interview on 5/7/24 at 12:50 P.M., the Administrator said the staff that was responsible for tracking the hours left. She would expect there to be a system in place to track the education hours. There are three nurse managers that are now responsible for tracking the in-service education. Moving forward, the education will be tracked through payroll. The Administrator will be in charge of initiating it and nurse managers will track the clinical information.
CONCERN (E)

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

Infection Control (Tag F0880)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to follow acceptable standards of practice for infection prevention and control for three residents (Residents #9, #20, and #28)....

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to follow acceptable standards of practice for infection prevention and control for three residents (Residents #9, #20, and #28). The facility failed to ensure the tubing for an indwelling urinary catheter (flexible tubing used to carry urine from the bladder into a drainage bag) did not drag on the floor. The facility identified two residents as having urinary catheters. Of those two, two were included in the sample and issues were identified with one (Resident #9). In addition, the facility failed to clean shared medical equipment between resident use, for two residents observed to be transferred with a mechanical lift (Residents #20 and #28). The census was 81 with 38 residents in certified beds. The sample was 12. 1. Review of the facility's Indwelling External and Suprapubic Catheter (flexible tubing inserted through the abdomen to carry urine from the bladder) policy, not dated, showed: -It is the facility's mission to allow residents comfort and dignity through the use of assistive technology such as catheters. We partner with physicians to ensure that quality of care; -The policy failed to direct the staff on the proper positioning of the catheter tubing. Review of the Resident #9's medical record, showed diagnoses included kidney disease stage three, chronic kidney disease, and fracture of the sacrum (tail bone). Review of the resident's electronic physician order sheet (ePOS), showed: -An order dated 8/9/23, for urinary catheter care every shift (day, evening, night); -An order dated 8/9/23, to obtain urinary catheter output every shift (day, evening, night); -An order dated 1/11/24, to change the urinary catheter, 16 French (diameter size of tubing) with 10 milliliter (ml) balloon (inflated to hold urine catheter in bladder), replace leg bag (urine drainage bag attached to leg), stat lock (urinary tube locking device attached to the leg), dressing to site and drainage bag on the 28th of the month. Review of the resident's care pan, revised 4/17/24, showed: -Urinary Incontinence Category, resident requires a urinary catheter related to urinary -Goal; Resident will have urinary catheter care managed appropriately -Interventions included: -Assess the drainage (no frequency), record the amount, type, color, odor. Observe for leakage; -Manipulate tubing as little as possible during care; -Report complications/urinary tract infection (UTI), foul odor, concentrated urine, blood in urine, obstruction, dislodgement, trauma. Observations on 5/2/24 at 9:55 A.M., showed the resident self-propelled in a wheelchair with the urinary catheter tubing and drainage bag attached under the seat of the wheelchair and dragged on floor while the resident passed Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) H. At 12:44 P.M., the resident sat in his/her wheelchair, the urinary catheter tubing and bag attached under the seat, and dragged on the floor while he/she passed Certified Medical Technician (CMT) D. No staff assisted the resident to reposition the catheter tubing to prevent dragging on the floor. Observation on 5/6/24 at 10:18 A.M., showed the resident sat in a wheelchair in his/her room with his/her urinary catheter tubing and bag attached under the seat of the wheelchair. The resident stepped on the urinary catheter tubing and tried to untangle his/her feet from the tubing. Certified Nurse Assistant (CNA) B and CMT D walked by the resident's room. The resident was able to untangle his/her feet independently. The urinary catheter tubing and bag were attached under the wheelchair seat, positioned on the floor. At 11:43 A.M., the resident sat in the dining room in his/her wheelchair. The urinary tubing and bag were attached underneath the seat of the wheelchair and positioned on the floor. CNA F, CMT D, CNA A, and two kitchen staff were present in the dining room. At 12:19 P.M., the resident self-propelled in the wheelchair out of the dining room with the urinary catheter tubing and bag attached under the wheelchair seat, and dragged on the floor. CNA B assisted the resident out of the doorway. The resident propelled past CNA F, CMT D, LPN C, and Logistics Coordinator E. At 12:31 P.M., LPN C propelled another resident behind Resident #9 and passed Resident #9 in the hall. Resident #9's urinary catheter tubing and bag, attached under the wheelchair seat, dragged on the floor while the resident self-propelled down the hall. The resident stopped the wheelchair in the hall and CNA B and CMT D passed the resident. No staff assisted the resident to reposition the catheter tubing and bag to prevent dragging on the floor. During interview on 5/7/24 at 9:51 A.M., with the Director of Nursing (DON), Administrator, and Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON), the DON said the facility staff shall maintain proper infection control for residents with urinary catheters by keeping tubing and urine drainage bag positioned below the bladder and off the floor. 2. Review of the facility's Equipment Cleaning and Disinfection Shared Medical Equipment policy and procedures, dated 3/7/20, showed: -The purpose: To ensure that shared medial equipment and or electronic devices will be cleaned/disinfected to prevent the transmission of pathogens. -The Procedure for Employees: -After the use of any shared equipment, it should be cleaned according to the manufactures' recommendations if the manufactures' recommendations are not available, then it will be cleaned with a bleach wipe; -All surface areas that come into contact with or have the potential of coming into contact with blood or body fluids must be wiped down after each use. The area must be allowed to air dry for a sufficient amount of time (per manufacturer guidelines) as it allows the chemical to perform the disinfected action it is intended for and to prevent the device from being used while still damp. Review of Resident #20's medical record, showed: -Diagnosis included Alzheimer's disease, falls, inflammatory polyneuropathy (numbness or weakness of many nerves that provide feeling), and seizures; -The resident's care plan, revised, 3/14/24, showed activities of daily living (ADLs) functional status problem, resident requires use of a Hoyer lift (full body mechanical lift) with at least two staff members for transfers. Review of the Resident #28's medical record, showed: -Diagnoses included hemiplegia and hemiparesis (unable to move one side of body) and stroke. -An order dated 12/11/22, for Broda chair (medical reclining chair) for comfort; -No order for Hoyer lift. -The resident's care plan, revised 4/24/24, showed limited ability to transfer: -Goal: The Resident will self-transfer with use of Hoyer lift and two staff. -Approach Hoyer lift assistance for transferring. Observation on 5/6/24 at 12:41 P.M., showed CNA B and CMT D retrieved the Hoyer lift from the hall and proceeded to Resident #28's room to transfer the resident from the Broda chair to bed. Directly after completing the transfer, at 12:55 P.M., CNA B and CMT D proceeded to Resident #20's room and used same Hoyer lift that had not been sanitized to transfer the resident from the Broda chair to the bed. CNA B and CMT D then returned the Hoyer lift to the hall. CNA B and CMT D did not disinfect Hoyer lift prior to, between, or after resident transfers. During interview on 5/7/24 at 9:51 A.M., with the DON, Administrator, and ADON, the DON said it is the policy of the facility to clean all shared equipment between resident care and as needed with an antiseptic wipe.
CONCERN (F)

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

Food Safety (Tag F0812)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to discard outdated food and label, date, and cover food. Also, facility staff performed improper infection control practices while he/she prepa...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to discard outdated food and label, date, and cover food. Also, facility staff performed improper infection control practices while he/she prepared puree dishes and poured the food into plates. In addition, the facility also failed to ensure kitchen equipment was clean and in working condition. These deficient practices had the potential to affect all residents who consumed food from the facility kitchen. The census was 81 with 38 residents in certified beds. 1. Observations on 5/2/24 at 9:17 A.M., 5/3/24 at 7:15 A.M., 5/4/24 at 3:04 P.M., showed the following: -Storage room: -A large can of potato salad, with a best buy date of 12/23 and 12/23/19 written on the outside of the can; -A large can of Campbells soup, with an expiration date of 3/26/23 and 12/30 written on the outside of the can; -A large can of V8 original drink mix with an expiration date of 2/13/23; -A large can of cherry pie filling with a best by date of 10/22; -Cooler: -A container of bread and butter slices without a date; -A container of kosher dill pickle spears without a date; -A container of slaw dressing without a date. Observations of the freezer on 5/2/24 at 3:22 P.M., 5/3/24 at 7:15 A.M., and 5/6/24 at 3:04 P.M., showed the following: -A plastic bag that contained bratwursts ripped open with a hole in it, opened and exposed to air, without a date; -A plastic bag that contained burritos, without a date; -A plastic bag that contained fish sticks with zip tie closure, without a date; -An unidentified meat in plastic, without a date; -An opened box that contained an opened package of beef patties, opened and exposed to air; -An opened box that contained an opened package of Salisbury patties, opened and exposed to air; During an interview on 5/7/24 at 12:07 P.M., the Dietary Manager (DM) said the shelf life for the food on the shelves is 90 days. Her method for using items on the shelves was to use the first in and first out method. If food was left over, it went into food storage containers, plastic wrap, or Ziploc bags, and then it was dated with the name on it. All staff were responsible to ensure expired food was thrown out. She also had an afternoon aide who came in at 12:00 P.M., who completed daily checks to make sure everything had been dated or thrown away if expired or not dated. Everyone in the kitchen, dietary staff, was responsible to ensure all food was properly labeled, dated, and stored. It was her expectation that all food was properly labeled, dated, stored and that all expired food was thrown out. 2. Observation on 5/3/24 at 10:55 A.M., showed [NAME] S pureed vegetables with gloves on his/her hands. He/she poured the mixture into five divided plates. [NAME] S then used his/her left hand to scrape the remainder of the mixture into two of the divided plates. He/She placed the food processor in the sink and rinsed it out then rinsed his/her gloves off. [NAME] S then went to the fryer and removed the fish and used his/her gloved hands to place more fish in the fryer. [NAME] S then took his/her gloves off and discarded them. During an interview on 5/7/24 at 12:07 P.M., the DM said she would expect for proper infection control practices to be followed. This included using gloves, tongs, spoodles, proper handwashing, and gloves changed. 3. Observations on 5/2/24 at 3:22 P.M., 5/3/24 at 7:15 A.M., and 5/6/24 at 3:04 P.M., of the kitchen, showed the following: -The stove: -Heavy caked-on stains on the stove burners; -Heavy caked-on stains along the top and front of the stove; -Heavy, blackened charcoal colored sticky looking matter on the bottom of the oven; -The stand alone double oven: -Caked-on stains on the tray racks; -Caked-on stains on the inside on the oven doors; -Caked on stains on the bottoms of the ovens. During an interview on 5/7/24 at 12:07 P.M., the DM said obviously, the stove and ovens were not cleaned. They were supposed to be cleaned and wiped down if they got dirty. Her expectation was that all the equipment be cleaned and sanitized after each use as well as deep cleaned once a month. It was the DM's and her assistant's responsibility to ensure that the kitchen equipment was clean and sanitized.
Aug 2023 1 deficiency
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Accident Prevention (Tag F0689)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the resident environment remained as free of accident hazards as possible when staff failed to follow proper procedures...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the resident environment remained as free of accident hazards as possible when staff failed to follow proper procedures during a mechanical lift transfer. An agency staff who was not trained on the facility's policies and procedures for a mechanical lift transfer, transferred a resident (Resident #1) and did not follow facility protocol, resulting in the resident falling out of a Hoyer Lift (full body mechanical lift). The sample size was three. The census was 98. Review of the facility's Hoyer Lift Transfer Procedure, revised 8/4/23, showed: -All Hoyer Lift transfers must be performed with two persons; -Open the base of the Hoyer to widest position and place base under the bed; -Make sure one of the employees is monitoring the residents head and protect the head from being bumped with the arms of the Hoyer; -Transport the resident slowly, keeping resident within the base of the Hoyer to prevent tipping; -After reaching destination, center resident and lower them by use of the down arrow on the hand control mechanism. Review of the facility's Standards and Guidelines that must be followed while on duty at the facility for agency staff, showed: -Your signatures states that you have read this notice and agree to follow all policies, procedures, and standards while on duty at the facility; -You are required to read and sign this notice upon your first shift here: -All Hoyer lifts must be done with two people providing direct hands-on care during the transfer; -Not opening the legs of the lift is improper use of the lift and will lead to tilting; -There is a paper care plan form on the back of every resident door. These are updated on an as needed basis for changes in condition and periodically to ensure they are legible; -No signed copy for Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) M. Review of the facility's investigation, dated 8/16/23, showed: -CNA M was attempting to transfer resident using a Hoyer lift from bed to wheelchair. CNA M stated the Hoyer lift begin to tilt forward pulling the resident to the floor in a sitting position against his/her wheelchair with the Hoyer lift leaning against the resident; -Spoke with agency director and he/she agreed to in-service staff regarding proper transferring techniques; -We will continue to in-service facility and agency staff on proper transferring techniques. Review of Resident #1's care plan, in use at the time of the survey, showed: -Problem: Resident at risk for developing pressure ulcer (injury to the skin caused by pressure or friction) related to diagnosis of dementia, mobility issues and need for Hoyer lift for transfers and urinary incontinence; -Approach: Keep linens clean, dry, and wrinkle free. Keep skin as clean and dry as possible. Minimize skin exposure to moisture. Review of the resident's medical record, showed diagnoses included Alzheimer's disease and generalized anxiety disorder. Review of point of care (POC) responses, dated 8/16/23 at 6:42 A.M., showed: -Question: How did the resident transfer: -Response: Total dependence; -Question: Staff support provided for transferring: -Response: 2 plus person physical assist; -Question: What appliances or assistive devices were used for transferring: -Response: Lifted mechanically. Review of the resident's physician orders, showed an order start date 9/20/21, for Hoyer lift for transfers. Review of the resident's progress note, dated 8/16/23 at 2:23 P.M., showed Nurse N observed the resident lying on his/her back on the floor with the Hoyer pad under him/her and being assisted by Certified Medication Technician (CMT) G and CNA M. CNA M stated to Nurse N that he/she was attempting to transfer the resident from the bed to the wheelchair when the lift tilted over and fell on the resident and he/she landed on top of the lift and the resident with the wheelchair blocking some of the fall. During an interview on 8/28/23 at 10:48 A.M., the resident said he/she was getting out of bed when he/she fell but did not remember what happened. He/She did not hit his/her head but his/her leg was sore for a couple of days. He/She did not remember going to the hospital. Observation showed the resident's nursing care plan located on the back of his/her room door. During an interview on 8/28/23 at 12:45 P.M., the Maintenance Supervisor the Hoyer lift was removed from the floor after the resident fell to check for safety. He/She could not find anything wrong with the Hoyer lift and said it was human error. He/She though the legs on the Hoyer lift were not spread apart far enough and because CNA M used the Hoyer lift alone, was the cause of the resident's fall. During an interview on 8/28/23 at 12:56 P.M., CMT G said CNA M asked him/her to help get the resident up from the floor. He/She said the resident told him/her that he/she was hurt. When he/she got to the room, the Hoyer lift was on top of the resident, the resident leaned on the locked wheelchair, and after he/she and CNA M stood the lift back up, the lift was in its highest position. He/She helped CNA M sit the resident up on the floor and waited for the nurse to assess the resident. CNA M told him/her that he/she had been getting the resident up by himself/herself all the time. CMT G said the fall happened after lunch and CNA M said he/she used the lift to get the resident in bed to clean him/her up. After CNA M was done, he/she put the resident in the Hoyer lift to get him/her back to the wheelchair but the lift tilted, the resident fell to the floor and the lift fell on top of the resident. CMT G said when he/she asked CNA G how the lift got so high, he/she said he/she did not know, it just got that way. During an interview on 8/28/23 at 12:53 P.M., CNA F said CMT G asked him to help pull the resident up in the chair. The resident was already in the wheelchair when he/she got to the resident's room. He/She helped pull the resident up in the wheelchair. He/She had training on the Hoyer lift, it took two staff to operate it every time, and there was enough staff to help him/her when using the Hoyer lift. During an interview on 8/28/23 at 10:07 A.M., Nurse K said there should always be two staff when using the Hoyer lift and he/she had training on how to use it. Staff can look on the back of any resident's room door and look at the nursing care plan to know how to transfer that resident and what type of care he/she may need. There was enough staff to help with the Hoyer lift. During an interview on 8/28/23 at 10:14 A.M., Nurse L said staff can look in the medical record for residents' mode of transfer. All staff should be reading resident information and signing within that system whatever care was provided and equipment used. There was enough staff to help with the Hoyer lift and it always takes two people to use it. That is the standard of care across the facility. During an interview on 8/28/23 at 10:40 A.M., CNA H said he/she was agency staff and he/she had not received any training from the facility. He/She knew how to use the Hoyer lift because of training from another position. It always takes two people to operate the lift During an interview on 8/28/23 at 12:39 P.M., the DON said she absolutely expected staff to have two people when using the Hoyer lift and to follow the facility's transfer policy and procedure. She expected staff to ask for help when using the Hoyer lift and to follow the resident's care plan on the back of his/her room door. During an interview on 8/28/23 at 3:22 P.M., the Administrator said she expected staff to use two people when transferring residents with the Hoyer lift and expected staff to follow the transfer policy and procedure. She expected staff to follow the resident's care plan on the back of his/her door and ask other staff for help when using the lift or for other care needs. Both Administrator and DON said they entrusted the training and education of agency staff to his/her staffing agency and they expected agency staff to be trained on transfers and how to use the Hoyer lift. Both said they expected all staff to follow the physician orders.
Nov 2022 7 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

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

Quality of Care (Tag F0684)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, record review and facility's policy, the facility failed to ensure, for one of one resident (Re...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, record review and facility's policy, the facility failed to ensure, for one of one resident (Resident (R) 153), observed for blood glucose [sugar] via fingerstick that the resident had a physician's order for the task and, for one of one resident (R100) observed for intramuscular (IM) injection, the medication vial was not cleaned with an alcohol pad (prior to withdrawal of R100's medication into the syringe). The facility's deficient practice increased R153's risk of complications of adverse medication reaction and R100's risk of infection. Findings include: 1. Review of Specimen Collection for Glucose Monitoring under Chapter 52 located in book titled Fundamentals for Nursing with a copyright date of 2019 revealed Monitoring blood glucose levels is an essential component in the care of clients who have diabetes mellitus . check the client's record and prescription . Frequency and type of test vary based on the goals of management and the complexity of the client's hypoglycemic medication schedule . Review of R153's undated Face Sheet located on her Electronic Medical Record revealed R153 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with multiple diagnoses to include diabetes with other circulatory complications. Review of R153's Physician's Orders November 2022 under Orders tab located on his/her EMR revealed . insulin lispro insulin pen; 100 units/mL [milliliter] Amount to Administer: Per Sliding Scale . Before Meals . and no order for blood glucose via fingerstick. Review of R153's Medications Administration History 11/01/22-11/17/22, under the Reports tab located on her EMR revealed . insulin lispro insulin pen; 100 units/mL [milliliter] Amount to Administer: Per Sliding Scale . Before Meals . and no order for blood glucose via fingerstick. Review of R153's Care Plan located under Care Plan tab located on his/her EMR revealed no intervention for blood glucose via fingerstick. During an observation on 11/16/22 at 5:04 PM of Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) 2 performing R153's blood sugar via fingerstick, it was revealed LPN 2 performed the procedure without a physician's order on R153's Medication Administration Record (MAR). LPN2 verified R153 did not have a physician's order on her MAR for the procedure. LPN2 stated the sliding scale was his/her indication to perform the procedure. During an interview on 11/17/22 at 6:10 PM, the Medical Director confirmed residents at the facility with sliding scale insulin should have a physician's order for blood sugar via fingerstick and he expected the facility's staff to follow the resident's physician's order. 2. Review of IM Injection located under chapter I on facility-provided Lippincott book with copy right date of 2013 revealed . For single-dose or multi dose vials . Wipe the stopper of the medication vial with an alcohol, pad, and then draw up the prescribed amount of medication . Review of R100's undated Face Sheet located on her EMR revealed he/she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with multiple diagnoses to include fracture of pelvis and chronic kidney disease. Review of R100's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 11/03/22 located in the resident's EMR under the MDS tab revealed Brief Interview Mental Status (BIMS) score was 14 out of 15 indicating he/she was cognitively intact and received injections 2 out of 7 days. Review of R100's Physician Orders November 2022 under Orders tab located on her EMR revealed . cyanocobalamin (vitamin B-12) solution; 1,000 mcg/mL [micrograms per milliliter]; amt [amount]: 1,000 mcg/ml; injection Once A Day on Thu 08:00 AM . dated 11/03/22. Review of R100's Medications Administration History 11/01/22-11/17/22 under the Reports tab located on his/her EMR revealed . cyanocobalamin (vitamin B-12) solution; 1,000 mcg/mL; Amount to Administer: 1,000 mcg/ml; injection Order Once A Day on Thu . dated 11/03/2022 -11/17/2022 with RN1's initials entered on 11/17/22. During an observation on 11/17/22 at 9:29 AM of Registered Nurse (RN) 1 was prepping R100's medication for administration via intramuscular injection revealed RN1 did not wipe the stopper of the medication vial with an alcohol pad prior to withdrawing the prescribed medication into the syringe. During an interview on 11/17/22 at 2:50 PM, RN1 stated she was unsure if she cleaned the top of the vial with an alcohol wipe prior to inserting the needle into the vial (to withdraw medication). RN1 stated she should have cleaned the top off but was unsure if she did. RN1 stated the importance of cleaning the lid was for infection control purposes. During an interview on 11/17/22 10:00 AM, the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) confirmed her expectation for the facility nursing staff preparing residents medication for IM injection, was to clean the top of the medication vial with alcohol prep prior to withdrawing residents' medication for administration for infection control purpose.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0688 (Tag F0688)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

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

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure one of one sampled resident (Resident (R) 12) reviewed for limited Range of Motion (ROM) was provided treatment/services to maintain/increase range of motion of his/her bilateral hands. The facility's deficient practice increased R12's risk of range of motion decline of his/her hands and contractures. Findings include: Review of Medical Surgical Nursing copyright 2022 under chapter 2 of the book titled Lippincott CoursePoint Enhanced revealed . Each joint of the body has a normal range of motion; if the range is limited, the functions of the joint and the muscles that move the joint are impaired, and painful deformities may develop . assess, plan and intervene to prevent complications of immobility . Deformities and contractures can often be prevented by proper positioning . At times, a splint (eg.,wrist or hand) may be made by the occupational therapist to support a joint and prevent deformity . Range-of-motion exercise and specific therapeutic exercises . included in the . care plan . Range of motion involves moving a joint through its full range . To maintain or increase the motion of a joint, range-of-motion exercises are initiated . Therapeutic exercises are prescribed by the primary provider and performed with the assistance and guidance of the physical therapist . Review of facility-provided undated policy titled Restorative Services Goals and Objectives revealed . Specialized rehabilitative service goals and objectives are developed for problems identified through resident assessments. Restorative is a nursing service offered after resident is seen by Physical Therapy and has been assigned to restorative . During a brief interview on 11/17/22 at 1:51 PM, Minimum Data Set Coordinator (MDSC) stated the facility used Lippincott procedure manual for the policy and procedures of for the staff to reference. During a brief interview on 11/17/22 on 2:47 PM, the Administrator stated the facility did not have a policy for assisted devices/braces because the facility followed the therapy directrices for assisted devices after the nursing staff assessed resident's problems and requested therapy. The Administrator confirmed she expected resident EMR to have physician's order for Physical Therapy (PT) and Occupational Therapy (OT) for limited range of motion and contractures. Review of R12's Face Sheet located on his/her electronic medical record EMR revealed he/she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with multiple diagnoses to include Parkinson's disease, dementia, Alzheimer's disease, seizures, anemia, schizophrenia (08/31/22), colostomy and acute kidney failure. Review of R12's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 06/10/22 located in the resident's EMR under the MDS tab revealed Brief Interview Mental Status (BIMS) score was 05 out of 15 indicating severely moderately cognitively and no upper extremity functional limitation/impairment range of motion. Review of R12's Physician's Orders November 2022 under Orders tab located on his/her EMR revealed no order for ROM exercises, positioning, or splints/braces for her hands. Review of R12's Care Plan located under Care Plan tab located on his/her EMR revealed no problem list with limited ROM/contractures to her hands and no intervention for ROM exercises, positioning, splints, or braces for his/her hands. Review of R12's Observations History from 05/01/22 to 11/17/22 located under Observations tab revealed no information regarding therapy (including restorative) for limited range of motion of R12's hands. During an observation on 11/14/22 at 11:41 AM, R12's deformed hands were 95 percent closed. R12 stated yes, his/her hands hurt. R12 did not have braces or splints on his/her hands. R12 stated he/she used to have braces for hands but did not anymore. R12 confirmed he/she could not open her hands and staff did not provide exercises or braces for his/her hands. During a second observation on 11/15/22 12:02 PM, R12 did not have splints or braces on his/her hands. R12's hand was closed into fists and was laying on his/her lap. During a third observation on 11/16/22 at 10:40 AM with Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) 1 of R12 hands; CNA1 verified both of R12's hands were contracted and had limited movement. R12 stated his/her hands hurt him/ her all the time and he/she did not have a splint or brace anymore. During a fourth observation and brief interview on 11/16/22 at 3:50 PM of R12; Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) 3 confirmed R12 did not have braces or splints on his/her hands. LPN3 verified both of R12's hands were contracted and had limited movement. R12 stated his/her hands did hurt sometimes. R12 stated he/she used to have splints, but he/she was unsure where they were now. During an interview on 11/16/22 at 3:17 PM, LPN 3 stated she was unsure if the facility provided R12 with a range of motion exercise. LPN3 verified R12 did not have interventions on his/ her care plan for ROM exercise or splints for his/her hands. During an interview on 11/17/22 at 10:20 AM, the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) confirmed R12's hands had limited range of motion and were contracted. The ADON confirmed the facility had restorative staff (Physical Therapy Assistant (PTA) that performed a range of motion exercises for the facility's residents. The ADON confirmed R12's care plan should include interventions forr his/her limited range of motion/contractures and did not. During a brief interview on 11/17/22 at 10:32 AM, PTA confirmed she was not and had not provided R12 ROM exercises. The PTA stated she worked in the facility restorative program for fifteen years and had not provided R12 services for his/her hands. During an interview on 11/17/22 at 5:49 PM, the Medical Director stated positioning was very important for residents with limited range of motion and contractures. The Medical Director confirmed residents with contractures should have care plans to include interventions to decrease the risk of advancement of the contracture and stop any further issues. The Medical Director confirmed he expected the facility to provide care to residents with a limited range of motion and contractures including PT and OT involvement.
CONCERN (D)

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

Incontinence Care (Tag F0690)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, record review, and facility policy, the facility failed to ensure an indwelling catheter was ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, record review, and facility policy, the facility failed to ensure an indwelling catheter was anchored to prevent excessive tension on the catheter and the catheter was not routinely (monthly) changed for one of one resident (Resident (R) 41) reviewed for catheter cares. The facility's deficient practice increased R41's risk of urethral tears, dislodgement of the catheter, and urinary tract infections. Findings include: Review of Management of Patient's with Urinary Disorders under tab Chapter 49 located in Lippincott Course Point Enhanced 15th edition with copy date of 2022, revealed Patients at high risk for CAUTI [catheter acquired urinary tract infection] need to be identified and monitored carefully . The catheter is an object foreign to the body and produces a reaction in the urethral mucosa with some urethral discharge . The catheter is anchored as securely as possible to prevent it from moving the urethra . Special care should be taken to ensure that any patient is confused does not remove the catheter with the retention balloon still inflated, because this could cause bleeding and considerable injury to the urethra . Ensure a free flow of urine to prevent infections. Improper drainage occurs when the tubing is kinked or twisted, allowing pools of urine to collect in the tubing loops . Evaluate the benefit of placing an indwelling urinary catheter versus the risk of the patient developing a catheter-associated urinary tract infection . Review of facility-provided policy titled Urinary Incontinence-Clinical Protocol revealed . As part of the initial assessment, the physician will help identify individuals with impaired urinary continence; ie reduced ability to maintain urine in a socially appropriate manner . For example, review of a hospital discharge summary may reveal that the individual was incontinent with or without catheter placement during a recent hospitalization . If a resident is admitted from the hospital with a newly placed indwelling catheter, the attending physician and staff will evaluate the potential for removing it, depending on the current condition and the rationale for its original placement . Virtually all individuals with indwelling urinary catheters eventually have bacteriuria. Asymptomatic bacteriuria in catheterized individuals should generally not be treated with antibiotics . Review of R41's undated Face Sheet located on her electronic medical record (EMR) revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with readmission [DATE] with multiple diagnoses to include uninhibited neuropathic bladder [Characterized by urge incontinence, frequency, enuresis, and recurrent urinary tract infections. The diagnosis can only be made by a thorough urologic investigation.], encounter for fitting and adjustment of urinary device-Foley catheter use, and history of urinary tract infections-chronic. Review of R41's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 07/16/22 located in the resident's EMR under the MDS tab revealed Brief Interview Mental Status (BIMS) score was 03 out of 15, indicating she was severely cognitively impaired, and she had a diagnosis of neurogenic bladder with an indwelling catheter (indicating R41 had an indwelling catheter for 4 months) without a trial of a toileting programs attempted. Review of R41's Physician's Orders November 2022 under Orders tab located on her EMR revealed . Change Foley catheter (16 fr [French]) on the 6th of each month: supplies located in room, box on top of closet. Place stat lock on leg to secure tubing . Review of R41's Nursing Treatments Administration History 11/01/22-11/17/22 under Reports tab located on her EMR revealed . Change foley catheter . on the 6th of each month . Place stat lock on leg to secure tubing . dated 10/22/22 initialed by facility staff on 11/06/22, indicating procedure was performed. Review of R41's Care Plan under Care Plan tab located on her EMR revealed . Staff to change foley catheter per MD [medical doctor] orders . and without intervention for stat lock or catheter tubing anchor. During an observation/interview on 11/16/22 at 3:48 PM with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) 3 of R 41's sitting on broda chair (tilt-in-space positioning chair) in her room awake and alert. R41 did not have an anchor on either upper leg, securing R41's catheter tubing. LPN3 confirmed R41 did not have a leg strap or anchor to secure her indwelling tubing in place on either upper leg. LPN3 confirmed R41 should have a catheter tubing anchor on one of her upper legs. During an interview on 11/16/22 at 11:12 AM Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) 2 confirmed the facility expected residents with indwelling catheters to have a leg strap to hold catheter tubing in place and avoid the catheter tubing from becoming dislodged or pulled. CNA2 confirmed catheter tubing pulled out may injure the resident. During an interview on 11/16/22 at 2:57 PM, LPN3 confirmed R41 had an indwelling catheter. LPN3 confirmed R41 should have a stat lock or anchor to hold the indwelling catheter tubing to ensure the catheter tubing does not pull. LPN3 confirmed R41's catheter tubing pulling could cause friction in her urethra and lead to a urinary tract infection (UTI) or the tubing could dislodge and injure R 41's urethra. LPN3 stated R41's urine stayed cloudy, no matter how much she drank and had sediment. LPN3 stated she was unsure why R41 had an indwelling catheter. LPN3 stated R41 had a UTI a couple of weeks ago and was administered antibiotics. During an interview on 11/17/22 at 9:19 AM, Registered Nurse (RN) 1 confirmed it was best practice to have a leg strap or anchor on the resident's leg to secure the indwelling catheter tubing. RN1 confirmed not having an anchor/leg strap holding tubing the residents indwelling catheter tubing could injure the resident from the tubing pulling. During an interview on 11/17/22 at 10:01 AM, the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) confirmed all the residents with indwelling catheters should have a catheter strap or anchor on their leg securing the catheter tubing. The ADON confirmed unsecured indwelling catheter tubing could injure resident's ureter by causing erosion, rupture of urethra or blockage of ureter.
CONCERN (D)

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

Drug Regimen Review (Tag F0756)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, interviews, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure each resident's drug regimen wa...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, interviews, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure each resident's drug regimen was reviewed at least once a month by a licensed pharmacist for two of five residents (Resident (R) 2 and R7) reviewed for unnecessary medications. Additionally, the facility failed to ensure documented rationale for the physician's response was available for R7. Findings include: Review of facility-provided undated policy titled Psychotropic Drug Policy revealed . along with Physicians and mid-level providers will use psychotropic medications appropriately working with the interdisciplinary team to ensure appropriate use, evaluation and monitoring . facility to include regular review for continued need, appropriate dosage, side effects, risk and /or benefits . Efforts to reduce dosage or discontinue of psychopharmacological medications will be ongoing, as appropriate, for the clinical situation . Psychotropic medications include: anti-anxiety/hypnotic, antipsychotic and antidepressant classes of drugs . Attempt a gradual dose reduction (GDR) decrease or discontinuation of psychotropic medications . Gradual dose reductions much be attempted for 2 separate quarters (with at least one month between attempts). Gradual dose reduction must be attempted annually thereafter or as the resident's clinical condition warrants . consulting pharmacist . Monitors psychotropic drug use in the facility to ensure that medications are not used in excessive doses or for excessive duration . Notifies the physician . whenever a psychotropic medication is past due for review . Medical Director . Monitors the overall use of these medications in the facility . Review of facility-provided undated policy titled Medication Regimen Reviews revealed . The Consultant Pharmacist reviews the medication regimen of each resident at least monthly . Check for psychoactive drug reductions . documents his/her findings and recommendations on the monthly drug/medication regimen review report . Sends them to the Attending Physician for response . These responses are noted . filed in the resident chart . 1. Review of R7's Face Sheet located on the electronic medical record (EMR) revealed R7 admitted on [DATE] with multiple diagnosis including personal history of pulmonary embolism; edema, unspecified; chronic tension-type headache, intractable; and chronic kidney disease, unspecified. Review of R7's Physician Orders under the Orders tab located in the EMR revealed, Zoloft (sertraline) tablet; 25 mg twice daily [BID]; Amount to Administer: 25 MG; oral, started 11/02/21; Buspirone 5 mg tablet Three Times A Day for anxiety, started February 2020. Review of R7's Care Plan under Care Plan tab located in the EMR dated 08/25/22 revealed, Category: Psychotropic Drug Use I may be at risk for adverse reactions from use of psychotropic/antipsychotic medication increasing my risk for injury and falls with a goal of, I will not exhibit signs of drug related sedation, hypotension, or anticholinergic symptoms or experience any falls r/t [related to] medication use through my next review. Category: Psychosocial Well-Being I have a dx [diagnoses] of schizophrenia and bipolar depression and prefer to spend time in my room instead of being around others placing me at risk for social isolation. I have began to be more social and sit in the common area with other residents. Review of R7's MMR (Monthly Medication Review) under Residents Documents located in the EMR for January 2021 through November 2022 revealed the following four reviews. No additional MMR were found in the medical record or provided by the facility upon request. On 02/18/21, Buspar 5 mg twice daily since February 2020. Please evaluate the current dose and consider a dose reduction. Reply reveals Resident with good response, maintain current dose. On 01/30/22, This resident has been taking Buspar 5 mg twice daily since February 2020. Please evaluate the current dose and consider a dose reduction A handwritten note by the Nurse Practitioner, dated 02/07/22 No, previous reductions dose failed. On 04/29/22, This resident has been taking the antidepressant Zoloft 50 mg BID since 11/2/21. Please evaluate the current dose and consider a dose reduction'' Reply Resident with good response, maintain the current dose. Next section Important Please add resident specific documentation to support the above action or check. Reply, See physician progress note for clinical rationale. On 06/27/22, This resident has been taking the antidepressant Zoloft 50 mg BID since 11/2/21. Please evaluate the current dose and consider a dose reduction Reply, condition stable: attempt dose reduction of Zoloft to 25 mg BID. Outcome/Response decline with rationale, noted 8/3/22 Review of R7's medical record did not include evidence of previous failed dose reductions or documented clinical rationale by the physician or nurse practitioner for decline of the pharmacist's recommendations. Additional information was requested from the facility, none was provided. During an interview on 11/17/22 at 5:49 PM, the Medical Director confirmed psychotropic GDRs was the facility's attempt to eliminate the use of resident's psychotropic medications. The Medical Director confirmed the facility had a pharmacy group making psychotropic medication recommendations for the need of dose reductions to the provider and facility. The Medical Director stated the provider/physician should respond to the pharmacy's recommendations for GDR within a 4-week time frame. The Medical Director confirmed physician/providers response to residents' pharmacy medication recommendations over 4 weeks was excessive amount of time and too long. During a phone interview on 11/17/22 at 4:28 PM, the Pharmacy Consultant (PC) confirmed resident's medication record reviews were performed every month. The PC confirmed the report was sent to the facility monthly. PC confirmed resident's GDR for psychotropic medications were completed with new orders, after 6 months of administration of psychotropic medications. PC confirmed a psychotropic medication was recommended for a dose reduction after six months of use and again at the year mark of the resident's administration of the psychotropic medication. PC confirmed her expectation was for the provider to provide a written response to the recommendation and adjust the medication accordingly. 2. Review of R2's Face Sheet located on her EMR revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with multiple diagnoses to include dementia, major depressive disorder and bipolar, anxiety disorder and drug induced subacute dyskinesia (08/19/21). Review of R2 's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 08/20/22 located in the resident's EMR under the MDS tab revealed Brief Interview Mental Status (BIMS) score was 12 out of 15 indicating she was moderately cognitively impaired, with feeling down, depressed , or hopeless mood, had diagnoses of anxiety disorder, depression (other than bipolar) and manic depression (bipolar disease) and was administered antipsychotic medications 7 out of 7 days and antidepressant 7 out of 7 days. Review of R 2's Physician Orders under Orders tab located on her EMR revealed . a. Cymbalta (duloxetine) [Cymbalta belongs to antidepressant drug class- Serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors and may have the potential to cause drug-induced movement disorders, confusion and high blood pressure and should be used cautiously especially in elderly] capsule, delayed release (DR/EC); 60 mg; amt: 60 mg; oral At Bedtime 08:00 PM 1/19/22 fibromyalgia agent . View Safety Alert Acknowledgements . Cymbalta (Duloxetine) Oral Capsule, Delayed Release (DR/EC), 60 Mg - Safety Alerts . This medication order contains safety alerts that were acknowledged on 01/19/2022 03:51 PM NP [Nurse Practitioner], with the following override reasons. Contraindicated Alert Type: Duplicate Drug Alert Alert: There is 1 existing order for a branded or generic form of duloxetine oral capsule, delayed release (DR/EC). Override Reason: Prescriber is aware of this potential risk, the resident's condition will be monitored b. duloxetine capsule [Cymbalta], delayed release (DR/EC); 60 mg; amt: 60 mg; oral Once A Day 08:00 AM 10/26/21 fibromyalgia agent . Review of R2's Note to Attending Physician/Prescriber 12/30/21 located under documents tab on her EMR revealed . The resident has been taking antidepressant Cymbalta 30 mg HS [bedtime] for MDD [major depressive disorder] since 06/21/21. Please evaluate the current dose and consider a dose reduction . , the document was incomplete without a response from physician/prescriber or signature and revealed no GDR was attempted in over a year's time frame. Review of R2's Care Plan under Care Plan tab located on her EMR revealed . Problem: I take psychiatric medications such as antidepressants, anxiolytics, and antipsychotics . Start Date 08/30/2022 Last Reviewed/Revised 08/30/2022 12:33 PM Goal(s) [R2] will be closely monitored by providers r/t [related to] appropriateness of medications . Approach: Nursing staff will notify providers when GDR [gradual dose recommendations] recommendations are received . During a phone interview on 11/17/22 at 4:28 PM, the Pharmacy Consultant (PC) confirmed the physician/provider did not respond to R2's medication review recommendation, Note to Attending Physician/Prescriber 12/30/21 noted above, and indicated the document was incomplete and not signed by physician/prescriber for gradual dose reduction or discontinuation for R2's medication and should have been.
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 record review, interviews, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure behavior monitoring for psychot...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, interviews, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure behavior monitoring for psychotropic medications was in place to maintain the resident's highest practicable mental, physical, and psychosocial well-being for one resident of five residents (Resident (R) 7) reviewed for unnecessary medications. Findings include: Review of facility-provided undated policy titled Psychotropic Drug Policy revealed . along with Physicians and mid-level providers will use psychotropic medications appropriately working with the interdisciplinary team to ensure appropriate use, evaluation and monitoring . facility to include regular review for continued need, appropriate dosage, side effects, risk and /or benefits . Efforts to reduce dosage or discontinue of psychopharmacological medications will be ongoing, as appropriate, for the clinical situation . Psychotropic medications include: anti-anxiety/hypnotic, antipsychotic and antidepressant classes of drugs . Monitors psychotropic drug use in the facility to ensure that medications are not used in excessive doses or for excessive duration . Medical Director . Monitors the overall use of these medications in the facility . Review of R7's Face Sheet located on the electronic medical record (EMR) revealed R7 was admitted on [DATE] with multiple diagnosis including anemia in chronic kidney disease; vitamin B deficiency; chronic tension-type headache, intractable; hypothyroidism, unspecified, and chronic kidney disease, unspecified. Review of R7's Physician Orders under the Orders tab located in the EMR revealed the following orders for psychotropic medications, Zoloft (sertraline) tablet; 25 mg twice daily [BID]; Amount to Administer: 25 MG; oral, started 11/02/21; Buspirone 5 mg tablet Three Times A Day for anxiety, started February 2020. Review of R7's Care Plan under Care Plan tab located in the EMR dated 08/25/22 revealed, Category: Psychotropic Drug Use I may be at risk for adverse reactions from use of psychotropic/antipsychotic medication increasing my risk for injury and falls with a goal of, I will not exhibit signs of drug related sedation, hypotension, or anticholinergic symptoms or experience any falls r/t [related to] medication use through my next review. Category: Psychosocial Well-Being I have a dx [diagnoses] of schizophrenia and bipolar depression and prefer to spend time in my room instead of being around others placing me at risk for social isolation. I have began [sic] to be more social and sit in the common area with other residents. The care plan did not address monitoring for behaviors to assess the effectiveness of the psychotropic medications. Review of R7's EMR did not reveal evidence of monitoring for behaviors or sides effects of medications. Review of R7's Psychiatric Notes, dated 10/25/22 at 12:04 PM and located under the Resident Documents located in the EMR revealed, Insight: poor insight. Mental Status: normal mood and affect and alert and confused. Orientation: not oriented to time and place and to person. Memory: recent memory abnormal and remote memory abnormal. No other psychiatric notes were located in the medical record. During an interview on 11/17/22 at 4:05 PM with the with the Administrator and Director of Nursing (DON), when asking the DON to assist in locating R7's documentation for behavior and monitoring for her psychotropic medications, the DON replied, We only do the documentation with the doctors order of the psychotropic medications with the doctors' orders. During an interview on 11/17/22 at 5:49 PM, the Medical Director confirmed he expected the nursing staff to monitor the residents with psychotropic medications for their behaviors and monitor for medications adverse side effects.
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Deficiency F0582 (Tag F0582)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, policy review and staff interview, the facility failed to complete the Centers for Medicaid and Medicare...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, policy review and staff interview, the facility failed to complete the Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services (CMS) Form CMS-10055 Skilled Nursing Facility Advanced Beneficiary Notice (SNFABN) four of four residents (Resident (R) R151, R149, R99, and R102) reviewed for advanced beneficiary notices. Failure to provide the form could result in the resident or their responsible party not being aware of the reason services were ending or of the options and cost to continue to receive services. Findings include: Review of facility-provided undated policy titled ADVANCE BENEFICIARY NOTICE revealed To insure an Advance Beneficiary Notice (ABN) is obtained from Medicare beneficiaries when . wishes to bill for . services that may not be covered by CMS . Advance Beneficiary Notice (ABN): An ABN is a written notice given to a Medicare Beneficiary . when . believes that Medicare will not pay for some or all of the services . and wishes to bill the patient for the provided services . The information in the ABN will assist the beneficiary in making an informed decision whether or not to receive the service and be financially responsible for the payment . If . expects payment for services to be denied by Medicare . employee will advice the beneficiary before services are furnished that, in our opinion, the beneficiary will personally and fully responsible for the payment . If . does not provide a proper ABN in situations where one is required, . will be held liable for the loss of payment if Medicare denies the claim . Patients must be notified well enough in advance of receiving a medical service so the patient can make a rational, informed decision . The ABN will clearly identify the following . Description of services (s) that may be denied, including procedure name, price . Reason why the service may be denied . Patient's or guarantor's signature and date . Witness signature and date . 1. Review of R151's undated Face Sheet located on his EMR revealed he/she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and remained at the facility with multiple diagnoses to include dementia, chronic kidney disease, and aortic stenosis. Review of R151's facility-provided document titled SNF Beneficiary Protection Notification Review revealed Last covered day of Part A . 10/31/22 . Other . managed care initiated discharge . ABN, Form CMS-10055 provided to the resident? . No . The resident was discharged from the facility and did not receive non-covered services . indicating the resident or family member did not receive form ABN-10055 and the form was incorrect due to resident continued to reside at the facility. Review of R151's Progress Notes under Progress Notes tab located on R 151's EMR revealed . 11/01/2022 Social Services . 2:39PM Late Entry: This social worker received a call yesterday regarding the discharge of [R 151] . [R151's Family Member] stated that she could not take him/her home and provide 24-hour care. She said she has a call out to the primary care doctor and VA [Veteran's Affairs] to try and get him more therapy coverage. It was explained to her that it does not usually work that way. He was given a last covered day from insurance. She was made aware of the right to appeal, and she did not want to do so. She asked for records to be sent to the VA so that the [sic] can aide in the process of placement for him. This social worker made her aware that he would need to be moved of the rehab wing into a private pay bed. She was given options and prices of rooms over the phone because she stated she would not be able to make it in until later in the evening. She was made aware that paperwork would need to be filled out for the respite stay . He was moved into a semiprivate room . documented by SSD and indicated facility did provide a written notice to the Patients/Family Member well enough in advance of receiving a medical service so the patient/family could make a rational, informed decision but did not provide resident or family written notices of charge or prices. Review of R151's Care Plan under Care Plan tab located on his EMR revealed no discharge information was entered and his care plan was blank. During an interview on 11/16/22 at 12:51 PM, the Social Services Director (SSD) confirmed she completed R151's beneficiary notice review. SSD stated R151, or his family member was not provided the ABN form CMS-10055 because he was not receiving any non-covered services as far as therapy. SSD verified R151 was receiving skilled services from 10/20/22 through 10/31/22. SSD confirmed R151 was not discharged from the facility as indicated on the beneficiary notice review form regarding ABN notice. SSD stated she was unsure what the ABN/CMS-10055 form was. SSD confirmed she answered the question wrong with no because R151 was not discharged from the facility. SSD stated the facility moved R151 from skilled care to a respite care room. SSD stated she informed R151's Family Member verbally how much his room stay would cost her and she was responsible for a five-hundred-dollar deposit for respite care room. SSD stated she was unsure if she had documentation to verify the information, she provided to R151's family member. SSD verified she documented R151's progress note on 11/01/22. 2. Review of R149's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 10/04/22 located in the resident's EMR under the MDS tab revealed Brief Interview Mental Status (BIMS) score was 08 out of 15 indicating moderately cognitively impaired with no behaviors of delirium. Review of R149's discharge assessment Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 10/24/22 located in the resident's EMR under the MDS tab revealed Brief Interview Mental Status (BIMS) score was 08 out of 15 and this was a planned discharge to the community. Review of R149's Progress Note dated 10/24/22 indicated R149 being discharged home under his/her daughter's care. Review of R149's Notice of Medicare Non-Coverage (NOMNC) dated 10/19/2022 provided by Social Services Director (SSD), confirmed the form's information was relayed over the phone to R149's Family Member (F149). The handwritten note on the form indicated F149 was informed of Medicare services ending on 10/23/2022 and the appeal process. The handwritten note also indicated that a copy of the NOMNC was emailed to the RP, but no documentation of receival of the email was available. There was not documentation that R149 or her representative were given Form CMS-10055. 3. Review of R99's Skill Nursing Facility (SNF) Beneficiary Protection Notification Review completed by the facility Social Services Director (SSD) revealed that Medicare Part A Skilled Services Episode Start Date was 10/18/22 and Last covered date of Part A Service was 11/13/22 . Other . managed care-initiated discharge. Continued review revealed R99 remained in the facility and a CMS-10123 Form: Notice of Medicare Provider Non-Coverage (NOMNC) was given on 11/10/22; however, no evidence that the CMS-10055 was provided to the resident and/or the resident representative. The SSD had indicated on the form the CMS-10055 was only required when the resident and/or resident representative filed an appeal. 4. Review of R102's Skill Nursing Facility (SNF) Beneficiary Protection Notification Review, completed by the facility SSD revealed that Medicare Part A Skilled Services Episode Start Date was 11/01/22 and Last covered date of Part A Service was 11/13/22 . Other . managed care initiated discharge. Continued review revealed R102 remained in the facility and a CMS-10123 Form: Notice of Medicare Provider Non-Coverage (NOMNC) was given on 11/10/22; however, under the section stating, Was an SNF ABN, Form CMS-10055 provided to the resident? Revealed no the resident was discharged from the facility and did not receive non-coverage services. This resident was still in the facility. During an interview on 11/16/22 at 1:12 PM with the SSD, revealed it was her understanding that unless an appeal was being filed they did not have to provide the CMS-10055 to the residents. The information on the cost was presented verbally to the residents, there are different pricing depending on the room they chose. During an interview on 11/17/22 at 4:05 PM with the Administrator, revealed, After looking into the CMS-10055, we understand we have failed to provide that form to residents and it will be corrected immediately. MO00174510
MINOR (C)

Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact

Staffing Information (Tag F0732)

Minor procedural issue · This affected most or all residents

Based on observations and interviews, the facility failed to ensure staffing information was complete and accurate and posted in a prominent place, in a readable format and readily available to reside...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observations and interviews, the facility failed to ensure staffing information was complete and accurate and posted in a prominent place, in a readable format and readily available to residents and visitors. There were 46 residents residing at the facility. Findings include: During an observation/review on 11/14/22 at 9:45 AM of an untitled and undated document, located on the right side of the wall behind a plastic cover in the facility lobby, revealed the following information was excluded: a. resident census b. the total number of staff c. actual hours worked by the categories of licensed and unlicensed nursing staff directly responsible for resident care per shift. During an observation/review on 11/15/22 at 12:00 PM of an untitled and undated document, located on the right side of the wall behind a plastic cover in the activities room, revealed the following information was excluded: a. resident census b. the total number of staff c. actual hours worked by the categories of licensed and unlicensed nursing staff directly responsible for resident care per shift. During an observation/review on 11/16/22 at 10:30 AM of an untitled and undated document, located on the right side of the wall behind a plastic cover on the rehabilitation wing, revealed the following information was excluded: a. resident census b. the total number of staff c. actual hours worked by the categories of licensed and unlicensed nursing staff directly responsible for resident care per shift. During an interview on 11/15/22 at 4:42 PM, the Nurse Pers Coordinator (NPC) revealed when asked for the weekly staffing and postings, the NPC provided surveyor with staff list of the actual staff who works per shift. During an interview on 11/17/22 at 1:44 PM, the Administrator and NPC, revealed when asked about the daily staffing posting, the NPC replied you did not miss it, they are not posted in the building. We will start to do them, the last administrator stopped us from postings. No policy and/or procedure was provided.
Apr 2019 7 deficiencies 1 Harm
SERIOUS (G)

Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures

Accident Prevention (Tag F0689)

A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 3. Review of the facilities stand up lift usage policy and procedure, dated 7/27/08, showed to use the stand up lift the residen...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 3. Review of the facilities stand up lift usage policy and procedure, dated 7/27/08, showed to use the stand up lift the resident must be able to partially bear weight and follow simple directions and must be able to hold on to the hand bars of the lifts. The stand up lift may be used by one person. Staff are directed to: -Inform the resident what they will be doing; -Have the resident's chair in positron and locked; -Place the resident on the edge of the bed; -Place the lift in front of the resident and place the resident's feet on the foot board; -Place waist strap around the resident and buckle into place. Pull strap until it is snug; -Make sure the resident's legs are against the leg rest and place the Velcro strap around the resident's calves; -Ask the resdient to place their hands on the hand bar; -Once the resident is positioned over the chair staff may press the down arrow on the hand control mechanism and lower the resident to the chair. 4. Review of Resident #44's quarterly MDS, dated [DATE], showed staff assessed the resident as the following: -Severe cognitive impairment for daily decision making; -Dependent on two or more staff for transfers; -Dependent on one staff for bed mobility, dressing, eating, toileting, personal hygiene, and bathing; -Incontinent of bowel and bladder; -Received as needed pain medication. Review of the resident's comprehensive care plan, last updated 3/1/19, showed staff assessed the resident as at risk for falling related to compromised mobility and need for assistance with transfers, the use of antibiotics, and cognitive impairment. The resdient fell on 9/29/18. Facility staff were directed to: -Use hoyer lifts for transfers; -Assess for adverse reactions to psychotropic medication; -Explain transfer procedure use hoyer lift during transfers to ensure the resident feels safe and secure; -Provide toileting assistance; -Staff will use wedge cushion for positioning when in bed. Review of the resident's nursing care plan, last updated 3/7/19, showed staff assessed the resident as oriented to self only and was a fall risk. Staff were directed to: -Assist with two staff using the hoyer lift for transfers; -Use a wedge cushion in bed for positioning; -Provide toileting every two hours; -Provide a puree no concentrated sweets diet with honey thickened liquids; -Use aspiration precautions; -Turn from right to left to back. Review of the resident's nurse's notes, dated 9/28/18, showed facility staff documented the nurse entered the shower room and observed the resident on the floor with the hoyer lift under him/her. The two CNAs stated the resident slid out of the toileting sling that they had on the lift. The resident complained of his/her head hurting. The resident had a 5 centimeter (cm) by 4 cm lump to the left side of his/her head, abrasions to his/her left thigh, middle of the back, and abrasions with bruising to several areas on his/her head. The physician was notified and the resident was sent to the emergency room for evaluation and treatment. Observation on 4/3/19 at 01:41 P.M., showed CNA H and L tucked and positioned the hoyer pad under the resident, turning the resident side to side. CNA H lifted the resident with the remote and pulled the resident with the machine away from the bed. CNA L guided the resident with his/her feet to his/her wheelchair. The CNA did not provide support behind or under the resident while transferring the resident to the wheelchair. CNA H lowered the resident into his/her wheelchair and CNA L propelled the resident out of the room. 5. Review of Resident #54's annual MDS, dated [DATE], showed staff assessed the resident as the following: -Severe cognitive impairment; -Requires extensive assistance of one staff for bed mobility, transfers, dressing, toileting, personal hygiene, and bathing; -Has limited range of motion (ROM) to one side of the upper extremity; -Always incontinent of bowel and bladder. Review of the resident's comprehensive care plan, last updated 3/17/19, showed the resident requires extensive assistance with activities of daily living (ADLs) and requires the use of a stand up lift for transfers. The resident has a history of an ileus (a painful obstruction of the ileum or other part of the intestine) and may have two bowel movements in a 24 hour period. Staff were directed to: -Ensure the resident is positioned properly in the stand up lift and explain proper procedure as they are lifting him/her; -Staff will use proper transfer techniques to reduces the risk of skin tears; -Ensure resident is allowed extra time in the restroom when needing to have a bowel movement; -Staff will provide toileting assistance every two hours and as needed. Review of the resident's nursing care plan, review date 3/7/19, showed staff were directed to: -Limit sitting on toilet to 15 minutes; -Stand up lift with one assist; -Broda chair; -Must have two bowel movements per 24 hours, monitor and report to nurse; -Toilet every two hours. Observation on 04/02/19 at 01:49 P.M., showed CNA M positioned the resdient over the toilet removed his/her wet brief and lowered the resident onto the toilet. Observation showed the CNA left the resident unattended attached to the stand up lift in the restroom, while stating, It'll take around 15 minutes for him/her to go to the bathroom. The resident continued to repeat help me. Observation showed CNA M entered the restroom at 1:55 P.M. The CNA lifted the resident off the toilet with the sit to stand and transferred the resdient to his/her Broda chair. 6. Review of Resident #57's significant change MDS, dated [DATE], showed facility staff assessed the resident as the following: -Severe cognitive impairment for daily decision making; -Dependent on one staff for bed mobility, dressing, toileting, eating, personal hygiene, and bathing; -Dependent on two or more staff for transfers; -Always incontinent of bowel and bladder. Review of the resident's comprehensive care plan, dated 3/20/19, showed the resident required total assistance to complete all ADL's related to the diagnosis of dementia, general weakness and compromised mobility. The resident required the use of a hoyer lift for transfers. Staff are directed to use a hoyer lift when transferring the resident, ensure he/she is properly positioned in the lift prior to the transfer, and explain the procedure as they are transferring the resident. Observation on 4/3/19 at 2:00 P.M., showed the resident sat up in his/her Broda chair. CNA M attached the hoyer pad loops to the hoyer lift and CNA N began to lift the resident. CNA N guided the machine over to the bed, while CNA M held onto the resident's feet. CNA M did not provide support to the resident by holding unto the resident's sling or under the resident. 7. Review of Resident #48's quarterly MDS, dated [DATE], showed staff assessed the resident as follows: -Minimal cognitive impairment; -Requires extensive assistance of one staff for bed mobility, transferring, dressing, toileting, and bathing; -Requires limited assistance of one staff for personal hygiene; -Frequently incontinent of bowel and bladder; -Limited range of motion to one side of the upper and lower extremities; -Had one non-injury fall. Review of the resident's comprehensive care plan, dated 3/8/19, showed the resident has left sided hemiplegia (total or partial paralysis on one side to the body). The resident fell on [DATE]. The resident requires limited to extensive assist of one to complete ADL's such as transfers, toileting, transfers, and dressing. The resident will continue to use a stand up lift for transfers. Staff are directed to: -Remind the resdient not to transfer without staff assistance; -Offer toileting every two hours and as needed; -Instruct the resident in proper transfer techniques using the stand up lift. Observation on 04/02/19 at 09:27 A.M., showed CNA M assisted the resident into a sitting position. The CNA assisted the resident in dressing his/her upper body and placed the stand up lift sling around the resident's torso, connecting the sling to the machine. The resident was only able to hold on with his/her right hand. Observation showed the resident only had his/her right foot on the stand up lift base. The resident's left foot was dragging on the ground as the CNA transferred the resdient to his/her wheelchair from the bed. The CNA continued to transfer the resident to his/her wheelchair lowering the resident into the wheelchair and unattached the sling from the lift. The resident was unable to hold onto the lift with his/her left hand and the CNA did not ensure the resident's left foot was positioned onto the lift. 8. During an interview on 04/05/19 at 11:20 A.M., CNA A said during a hoyer lift transfer staff are to use two people, the right size sling, and ensure the battery is charged. The CNA said one staff controls the lift and one staff guides the resident. Staff are to make sure the resident's feet do not hit. Staff are not supposed to guide the resident by their feet, but with their hands on the resident's back. 9. During an interview on 04/05/19 at 11:25 A.M., CNA M said when transferring a resident using a hoyer lift staff are expected to use two people. Both staff are supposed to help guide the resident to ensure they do not hit anything. Staff should be holding onto the resident, one holding onto the sling on the back of the resident to help guide them. CNA A said staff should not guide the resident using their feet. When transferring a resident using a stand up lift, one staff can transfer the resident. Staff are to cue the resident and ensure the resident has a hold of the lift with both hands and both feet are on the lift base before transferring. 10. During an interview on 04/05/19 at 11:59 A.M., LPN C said staff are to ensure safety with lift transfers. Staff are to lock the wheelchair, move foot pedals, move to closest position, secure hoyer - two staff for hoyer lift and one to two staff for the stand up lift, depending on the resident. Apply the belt/sling for the stand up lift, ensuring that it is tight enough, have the resident hold onto the hand rail, and stand up with the lift. For the hoyer lift, have the resident cross their arms, open the lifts legs, approach wheelchair during transport with the hoyer. One staff is responsible to ensure the feet are going the right direction, one controls the lift movement. Staff should guide the resident at the feet - so they don't bump into anything. 11. During an interview on 04/05/19 at 01:54 P.M., the DON said, the stand up lift only requires one staff per the facility policy and the hoyer lift requires two staff for transfers. During a hoyer lift transfer one staff should be at the resident's side or back to guide the resident and the other staff should be guiding the machine. Staff should protect the feet from getting hit, but staff should be normally be on the back side of the resident to help guide and align them. 12. Observation on 4/01/19 at 2:31 P.M., on 4/2/19 at 3:43 P.M., on 4/3/19 at 9:12 P.M., and on 4/4/19 at 10:06 A.M., showed the medication cart on the 200 hall had a plastic container that contained lancets and insulin (a medication used to treat high blood glucose) pen needles. Observation showed the plastic container did not have a lock and was unattended. 13. Observation on 4/1/19 at 1:30 P.M., on 4/2/19 at 10:00 A.M., on 4/3/19 at 1:46 P.M., and on 4/4/19 at 10:27 A.M. showed the medication cart on the Medicare hall had a plastic box that contained lancets and insulin pen needles. Observation showed the box did not have a lock, was easily opened, and was unattended. 14. During an interview on 4/5/19 at 11:59 A.M., LPN C said sharps should be kept locked in the medication cart or medication room at all times. LPN C said the insulin supplies are in a plastic box kept on top of the medication cart unlocked. 15. During an interview on 4/5/19 at 1:54 P.M., the DON said the insulin supplies are kept on top of the medication cart in a closed container. The DON said the insulin supplies have lancets that could cause injury in them. Based on observation, interview, and record review, facility staff failed to ensure one resident (Resident #9) who had a history of falls received adequate care and supervision to prevent an accident in which the resident fell and sustained a broken hip, and failed to ensure one resident's (Resident #25) environment remained as free of accident hazards as possible due to the resident's history of falls and risk for choking. Facility staff failed to ensure staff transferred four residents (Residents #44, #48, #54, and #57) during mechanical lift transfers, safely and effectively. Facility staff also failed to ensure the resident environment remained free of accident hazards by failing to ensure sharps were not accessible to residents. The facility census was 100 with 45 residents in certified beds. 1. Review of Resident #9's Minimum Data Set (MDS), a federally mandated assessment tool, dated 12/20/18, showed the following staff assessment: -Severely impaired cognitive impairment; -Able to make him/herself understood; -Able to understand others; -Extensive assistance by one staff for bed mobility, transfers, dressing, toilet use, and hygiene; -Limited assistance by one staff for walking in his/her room; -Used a walker. Review of the resident's plan of care, showed a plan addressing the resident's fall risk, last reviewed/revised 2/19/19, where staff noted the resident was at risk for falls related to dementia, compromised mobility with the need for assistance with transfers related to unsteady gait and use of psychotropic medications that may have adverse effects such as increased confusion, dizziness, and lethargy. Staff documented the resident fell on 2/11/19 and 2/13/19. The approaches for care to address the resident's fall risk directed staff to: -Assess for adverse reactions to psychotropic medication use such as increased confusion, dizziness and lethargy and report to the physician for followup (dated 12/21/18); -Assure the resident is wearing eyeglasses; Assure eyeglasses are clean and in good repair; -Assure the floor is free of glare, liquids, foreign objects (dated 12/21/18); -Encourage the resident to use environmental devices such as hand grips, hand rails, etc. (dated 12/21/18); -Give the resident verbal reminders not to ambulate/transfer without assistance (dated 12/21/18); -Keep call light in reach at all times (dated 12/21/18); -Keep personal items and frequently used items within reach (dated 12/21/18); -Obtain physical therapy consult for strength training, toning, positioning, transfer training, gait training, mobility devices, etc per physician's orders (dated 12/21/18); -Occupy the resident with meaningful distraction such as activities, one on one conversation, music, etc (dated 12/21/18); -Provide the resident an environment free of clutter (dated 12/21/18); -Provide proper, well-maintained footwear (dated 12/21/18); -Provide toileting assistance every two hours and as needed (dated 12/21/18). Review of the plan showed staff did not update the plan after the resident's falls on 2/11/19 and 2/13/19, except to add the date of the falls. Review showed staff did not update the care plan to specifically address any determined causal factors related to the falls and any revised interventions after the two falls. During an interview on 4/18/19 at 10:00 A.M., MDS Coordinator K said the resident's most recent care plan is his/her admission care plan, dated 12/27/18 (care plan conference date). Review of a progress note dated 2/11/19 at 9:01 P.M. showed staff observed the resident on the floor. The resident was alert and oriented times two (knows who he/she is and where he/she is but unable to determine time). The resident was assessed, physician notified, and message left for his/her spouse. Staff did not note any change to the resident's care plan to prevent further falls. Review of a progress note dated 2/13/19 at 7:33 P.M. showed the resident was noted on the floor in his/her room next to the bed. The resident's wheelchair was noted behind the resident, the resident was lying on his/her back, was alert and oriented times two. The resident was unable to state what happened. Staff noted they assessed the resident who denied complaints of pain or discomfort, and assisted the resident to bed. Staff noted a faint light green/purple bruising to right buttock. The physician was notified. Staff did not note any change to the resident's care to prevent further falls. Observation on 4/1/19 at 3:03 P.M., showed the resident stood at the sink in his/her room alone, holding onto the sink. Observation showed Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) B entered the room and assisted the resident to walk to the restroom. Observation on 4/4/19 at 10:30 A.M. showed the resident sat in his/her wheelchair in his/her room, facing his/her television, which was off. The resident occasionally looked off to the right to his/her roommate's television, which was on. The resident's call light was not in reach at this time. Continued observation on 11:04 A.M. showed the resident continued to sit in his/her wheelchair looking ahead at his/her mirror or television that was off, and occasionally looked far to the right to his roommate's television that was on. The resident's call light continued to be out of reach. Observation on 4/4/19 at 3:35 P.M. showed the resident lay in bed. The resident said he/she hurt his/her leg, but couldn't describe what had happened. Review of a progress note dated 4/4/19 showed staff documented the resident was attempting to get up from his/her wheelchair and fell onto the floor on his/her bottom. The resident was assessed and stated he/she had pain of three out 10 in the left hip. The resident was able to move both lower extremities within normal limits with no added pain. The resident was assisted from the floor with assistance by two staff. The resident was alert and oriented times three. The physician was notified and an X-ray was ordered. Family was also notified. The resident was educated on the need to use the call light when assistance is needed to further prevent fall and possible injuries. Review of a progress note dated 4/4/19 at 3:27 P.M. showed staff documented they spoke with the resident's spouse, updated him/her on the resident's fall and complaints of left hip pain, informed her that X-ray had been ordered and staff would notify him/her of results. Staff noted they asked the resident's spouse for approval to use a personal safety alarm on a trial basis, as the resident could not recall what he/she was attempting to do before he/she fell. Staff noted the resident complained of left hip pain with passive range of motion. Review of an X-ray of the resident's left hip, unilateral with pelvis, dated 4/4/19, showed: -A fracture through the femoral neck is identified. Minimal displacement is identified. Inferior angulation is noted. The fracture does not involve the articular surface. The femoral head is well-seated within the acetabulum. Moderate degenerative changes are noted. The surrounding soft tissues are normal. -Impression: Femoral neck fracture, as detailed above. Clinical correlation and follow-up are recommended. Review of a physicians order, dated 4/4/19 showed an order directing staff to send the resident to the emergency room for evaluation and treatment. During an interview on 4/5/19 at 11:20 A.M., CNA A said the resident hasn't fallen a lot. The CNA said he/she makes sure his/her leg rests are on the wheelchair, and ensure the resident has his/her fall alarm in place. When asked to clarify if the resident had a fall alarm prior to his/her fall the day before, the CNA said he/she thought the resident had a fall alarm in use prior to the fall and should've had it on. The CNA did not see the fall occur the day before, but staff told him/her the resident tried to scoot him/herself to the sink and stand up. The CNA said he/she had assisted the resident to the toilet after lunch and before the resident's fall. During an interview on 4/5/19 at 11:59 A.M., Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) C said the resident has Parkinson's so his/her gait is very unsteady. The resident used to walk with a walker before he/she developed the wounds, but uses a wheelchair now until the wounds heal. The resident does occasionally try to get up and walk on his/her own. After the fall yesterday, staff discussed with the resident's spouse, trialing a period with a personal body alarm for the resident's wheelchair. Staff were unable to figure out why the resident was trying to get up yesterday, but his/her guess was the resident tripped over his/her foot pedals. The resident said he/she didn't remember what he/she was trying to do. The resident had been toileted right before the fall and the call light was in reach. The LPN said the resident doesn't use the call light very often. He/she did not have a personal alarm prior to the fall yesterday. During an interview on 4/5/19 at 11:59 A.M., LPN C said any nurse can update the care plan, but the MDS coordinator, social service director, and the DON update the care plan when things change with the resident, quarterly. LPN C said staff should update the care plans with new interventions if needed after a fall. During an interview on 4/5/19 at 1:54 P.M., the Director of Nurses (DON) said any nurse can update a resident's care plan. The nurses and supervisors update the care plan on the resident's door and the MDS Coordinators update the care plan in the computer. Care plans should be updated at least quarterly, and with any status change, transfer change, or if the resident has a fall. After a resident falls, staff should document on the care plan that the resident had an actual fall and the date of the fall, whether or not the resident had any injury, and what happened, for example if the resident slipped in water. Staff should analyze the fall and then add interventions as needed, typically try to update the care plan within 24 hours. If staff review a resident's care plan after a fall and no new interventions are needed, it would be documented in the nurses notes. The DON said she was not sure of the resident's fall interventions, but staff should follow his/her plan of care. 2. Review of Resident #25's most recent MDS, dated [DATE], showed staff assessed the resident: -Had severe cognitive impairment; -Required extensive assistance from staff for bed mobility, transfers, dressing, toilet use, and personal hygiene; -Did not walk; -Fell since the prior assessment; -Had one fall with no injury; -Had one fall with injury (not major). Review of the resident's plan of care addressing his/her risk for falls, last reviewed/revised 3/16/19, showed the following: -Staff noted the resident was at risk for falls related to impaired mobility secondary to poor safety awareness and dementia. -The resident is a retired social worker and likes to stay busy. Nursing can usually keep the resident busy with papers doing paper work. -The plan directed staff to place the resident's bed in the lowest position with a fall mat in place while the resident is in bed. -The plan showed the resident fell once on 3/14/19. Review of the resident's care plan showed no plan to direct staff of the resident's potential for choking, due to the resident putting non-edible items in his/her mouth. Review of the resident's physician's order sheet showed the following physician orders: -CHOKING HAZARD!!!! RESIDENT PUTS NON-EDIBLE ITEMS IN MOUTH; PLEASE KEEP OUT OF HIS/HER REACH (CRAYONS, PAPER, PUZZLES, ETC); -Low bed with mat for poor safety awareness; -PSA (Personal Safety Alarm) in wheelchair for safety. Review of the resident's record showed on 12/20/18, staff documented the resident was found in his/her room on the floor mat. The resident was found in urine, sitting up and trying to put on his/her gown; no injury noted. Review of the resident's record showed on 1/21/19, staff documented the resident was observed putting non-edible items in his/her mouth such as wooden puzzles, wedding ring, paper, crayons etc; Staff were made aware of the resident's choking risk. The resident's physician and responsible party were updated. The resident's wedding rings were removed and the spouse was asked to pick up the rings. Review of the resident's record showed on 2/2/19, staff documented the resident was observed standing from his/her wheelchair, lost his/her balance and fell to the floor onto his/her left side. Review of the resident's record showed on 3/14/19, an LPN documented he/she found the resident up from his/her wheelchair, walking and pushing an office chair. The resident's PSA was on his/her wheelchair, the string was detached and the alarm sounded. Before the LPN was able to reach the resident, he/she lost his/her balance and fell to the floor hitting his/her right hip and right side of his/her head against the wall. Observation on 4/3/19 on 9:18 P.M. showed the resident lay in his/her low bed. The bed was pushed against the wall on one side, and a fall mat lay beside the other side of the resident's bed on the floor. Observation on 4/3/19 at 10:28 P.M., showed Certified Medication Technician (CMT) G and CNA H checked the resident for incontinence while the resident lay in bed. After the CNAs provided incontinence care, they lowered the resident's bed and placed the fall mat next to the bed. CMT G then placed the resident's bedside table completely on top of the fall mat across from the resident's head and upper body, at a point that if the resident were to fall out of bed, he/she could fall directly onto the legs/wheels of the bedside table. Observation on 4/3/19 at 10:58 P.M. showed LPN I and the night shift charge nurse made rounds through the hallway and residents' rooms prior to LPN I leaving for the evening. The night shift nurse entered the resident's room to check on the resident; the charge nurse did not move the bedside table off of the fall mat and away from the resident's head and upper body in case of a fall to the mat. Observation on 4/4/2019 at 12:18 P.M., showed the resident sat at the dining room table. The resident tore his/her napkin apart and put a piece in his/her mouth, put the rest down and took a drink. Observation showed CNA A sat at the same table feeding another resident. During an interview on 4/5/19 at 11:20 A.M., CNA A said he/she was not aware the resident had any risk for choking hazards. The CNA said she was not aware that the resident puts things in his/her mouth that are not food. However, the CNA said once, the resident did put a Lego in his/her mouth, but this was not an every day thing. The CNA said he/she did not notice the resident took a bite of his/her napkin at lunch yesterday. The CNA said it would never be a good idea to put a bedside table up against a bed for residents with low bed and fall mat because they are at risk for falls and could fall off the bed and and hit the table. During an interview on 4/5/19 at 11:59 A.M., LPN C said for a resident with a low bed and fall mat, staff should not put a bedside table on top of a fall mat next to the resident while in bed. During an interview on 4/5/19 at 1:54 P.M., the DON said a resident should not have a bedside table on top of the fall mat next to their bed.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0657 (Tag F0657)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 3. Review of Resident #58's MDS, dated [DATE], showed staff assessed the resident as: -Moderate cognitive impairment; -Required...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 3. Review of Resident #58's MDS, dated [DATE], showed staff assessed the resident as: -Moderate cognitive impairment; -Required extensive assistance of one staff for bed mobility, locomotion on unit, dressing, and personal hygiene; -Required total assistance of two or more staff for transfers; -Had two or more falls with no injures. Review of the resident's nurses notes, dated 10/19/18, showed staff documented the resident received a new tilt in space wheelchair (wheelchair that tilts backwards to help with positioning) to prevent leaning. Staff documented the resident was still pulling or grabbing things and was redirected with a newspaper. Keep the resident's bed in lowest position when in he/she is in the bed. Review of the resident's nurses notes, dated 11/2/18, showed staff documented the physician recommended to check with the resident's family about the resident's favorite hobbies, activities, and try to involve the resident around afternoon time when he/she becomes agitated and restless. Staff documented the resident's spouse said he/she liked gardening, reading, watching television, exercises and enjoyed music and old tunes. Staff documented they suggested the spouse bring headphones with an ipod to record the residents favorite music so he/she could have it in the afternoon to help with agitation and restlessness. Review of the resident's nurses notes, dated 11/27/19, showed staff documented the resident was found lying on the mat next to his/her bed. The resident stated that he/she wanted a drink of water. No injuries noted. Review of the resident's nurses notes, dated 1/26/19, showed staff documented the resident was found on the floor in his/her room. Staff noted the resident was sitting on the floor mat next to his/her bed and the resident was unable to explain what happened and no injuries noted. Frequent visual checks will be done and call light is in reach. Review of the resident's nurses notes, dated 2/8/19, showed staff documented the resident climbed out of his/her low bed onto the mat that was along the side of the bed. The resident then moved him/her self off the mat. Staff noted the resident was on the floor lying on his/her side. No injuries noted and placed back in low bed. Review of the resident's nurses notes, dated 2/24/19, showed staff documented the resident was found on the floor in his/her room. Staff documented the resident's top of forehead was red and both left and right knees are red at this time. Staff documented when asked how the resident ended up on the floor the resident stated, he/she got as close to the side of his/her bed and pushed down on the mattress and fell. Staff documented the resident was transferred to his/her wheelchair and sat at the nurses station to monitor. Review of the resident's nurses notes, dated 2/27/19, showed staff documented the resident was observed on the floor with no injuries noted. Review of the resident's nurses notes, dated 3/16/19, showed staff documented the resident fell while trying to transfer him/her self to bed. No injuries noted. Review of the resident's care plan, last updated 3/27/19, showed the resident had a history of falls from self-transfers and continued to be at risk for falls due to Parkinson's disease (a disorder of the central nervous system that affects movement often including tremors), dementia with poor safety awareness, and use of psychotropic drugs and compromised mobility. The resident fell on [DATE], 11/27/18, 2/8/19, 2/27/19, and 3/16/19. Staff are directed to do the following interventions to prevent falls: -Analyze falls to determine pattern/trend; -Assure personal safety alarm is on wheelchair and functioning properly; -Give verbal reminders not to ambulate/transfer without assistance; -Keep bed in lowest position with mat and with brakes locked; -Keep call light in reach at all times; -Observe frequently and place in supervised area when out of bed; -Occupy he resident with meaningful distractions; -Provide toileting assistance every two hours and as needed. Further review of the resident's care plan, last updated 3/27/19, showed staff did not update the care plan with the tilt in space wheelchair or the physicians recommendations on 11/2/18. Further review showed facility staff did not update the resident's care plan with individualized interventions to prevent future falls after the resident's multiple falls. During an interview on 4/5/19 at 11:20 A.M., CNA A said the resident has had multiple falls. CNA A said the interventions in place to prevent the resident from falling are getting the resident up on night shift, mat at bedside, positioning wedges, personal alarm on wheelchair, and a tilt in space wheelchair. During an interview on 4/5/19 at 11:59 A.M., LPN C said the resident has had multiple falls and staff have started getting the resident up on the night shift, low bed with a mat, personal alarm in wheelchair, offer more snacks and one on ones to prevent the resident from falling. LPN C said those should be on his/her care plan. During an interview on 4/5/19 at 1:54 P.M., the DON said he/she wasn't sure what interventions were in place for the resident without looking at his/her medical record, but he/she would expect staff to have a fall mat, low bed, meet the resident's needs before putting he resident in bed, and to round frequently in place for the resident on his/her care plan. 4. During an interview on 4/5/19 at 11:59 A.M., LPN C said any nurse can update the care plan, but the MDS coordinator, social service director, and the DON update the care plan when things changes with the resident, quarterly. LPN C said staff should update the care plans with new interventions if needed after a fall. 5. During an interview on 4/5/19 at 1:54 P.M., the DON said care plans are updated and reviewed after falls and a new interventions should be put in place. If staff review a resident's care plan after a fall and no new interventions are needed, it would be documented in the nurses notes. Based on observation, interview, and record review, facility staff failed to review and revise three residents' (Residents #9, #25, and #58) plans of care to ensure the plan accurately reflected the residents' needs. The facility census was 100 with 45 residents in certified beds. 1. Review of Resident #9's Minimum Data Set (MDS), a federally mandated assessment tool, dated 12/20/18, showed the following staff assessment: -Severely impaired cognitive impairment; -Able to make him/herself understood; -Able to understand others; -Extensive assistance by one staff for bed mobility, transfers, dressing, toilet use, and hygiene; -Limited assistance by one staff for walking in his/her room; -Used a walker; -Frequently incontinent of bowel and bladder; -Not at risk for pressure ulcers. Review of the resident's plan of care, showed the following: -A plan addressing the resident's activities of daily living (ADL) functional/rehabilitation potential, last reviewed/revised 12/27/18, showed staff noted a goal that the resident would continue to ambulate with standby assistance using a wheeled walker. Staff did not update the plan to address a physician's order, dated 2/6/19, to ensure the resident did not ambulate until the wound to the left heel was resolved; -A plan for pressure ulcers, last reviewed/revised 12/21/18, showed the resident was at risk for developing pressure ulcers. Staff did not update the plan to address the resident's current left heel and left lateral foot pressure ulcer; -A plan addressing the resident's fall risk, last reviewed/revised 2/19/19, where staff noted the resident was at risk for falls related to dementia, compromised mobility with the need for assistance with transfers related to unsteady gait and use of psychotropic medications that may have adverse effects such as increased confusion, dizziness, and lethargy. Staff documented the resident fell on 2/11/19 and 2/13/19. The approaches for care to address the resident's fall risk directed staff to: -Assess for adverse reactions to psychotropic medication use such as increased confusion, dizziness and lethargy and report to the physician for followup (dated 12/21/18); -Ensure the resident is wearing eyeglasses; Ensure eyeglasses are clean and in good repair; -Ensure the floor is free of glare, liquids, foreign objects (dated 12/21/18); -Encourage the resident to use environmental devices such as hand grips, hand rails, etc. (dated 12/21/18); -Give the resident verbal reminders not to ambulate/transfer without assistance (dated 12/21/18); -Keep call light in reach at all times (dated 12/21/18); -Keep personal items and frequently used items within reach (dated 12/21/18); -Obtain physical therapy consult for strength training, toning, positioning, transfer training, gait training, mobility devices, etc. per physician's orders (dated 12/21/18); -Occupy the resident with meaningful distraction such as activities, one on one conversation, music, etc. (dated 12/21/18); -Provide the resident an environment free of clutter (dated 12/21/18); -Provide proper, well-maintained footwear (dated 12/21/18); -Provide toileting assistance every two hours and as needed (dated 12/21/18). Review of the plan showed staff did not update the plan after the resident's falls on 2/11/19 and 2/13/19, except to add the date of the falls. Review showed staff did not update the care plan to specifically address any determined causal factors related to the falls and any revised interventions after the two falls. Review of the resident's progress notes showed staff documented the following: -On 12/10/18, the resident was admitted to the facility; an admission note shows all skin intact; -On 1/4/2019, staff noted a ruptured blister to the left heel, 2.0 centimeters (cm) x 2.8 cm, unable to determine depth, wound bed is partially (approximately 25% of surface) purple/blue discolored; possible deep tissue injury, no drainage; tissue surrounding the skin is dry and scaly, no signs or symptoms of infection; physician aware and treatment obtained; -On 1/10/19, staff noted a wound condition change as evidenced by the wound bed was wet, covered with yellow-brown slough, moderate amount of serous drainage, no odor, surrounding skin clear, no signs or symptoms of infection. Physician and spouse updated and dry dressing applied per order; -On 1/22/19, staff documented the resident complained the wound was painful when he/she walked, noted unsteady gait when ambulating with walker, suggested for resident to use his/her wheelchair for time being until wound improves; Review of a wound note, dated 1/24/19 (for 1/23/19), showed the wound company assessed the wound to the left heel, Stage III (Full thickness tissue loss. Subcutaneous fat may be visible but bone, tendon or muscle is not exposed. Slough may be present but does not obscure the depth of tissue loss. May include undermining and tunneling). Blister has opened, wound bed 80% granulation tissue (newly formed tissue) and 20% slough, moderate amount of serosanguinous (yellowish fluid with small amount of blood) drainage noted, no odor, slight discomfort noted with treatment. Treatment changed to include Santyl (a sterile, enzymatic debriding ointment) ointment daily. Recommendations included: to not ambulate at this time to prevent further pressure on heel, no shoes or socks other than soft shoes or soft boots. Review of a physician's order, dated 2/6/19, showed staff were directed to ensure the resident did not ambulate until the wound to the left heel was resolved. Review of a progress note, dated 2/11/19 at 9:01 P.M., showed staff observed the resident on the floor. The resident was alert and oriented times two. Staff assessed the resident, notified the physician, and left a message for his/her spouse. Staff did not note any change to the resident's care to prevent further falls. Review of a progress note dated 2/13/19 at 7:33 P.M., showed the resident was noted on the floor in his/her room next to the bed. The wheelchair was behind the resident, the resident was lying on his/her back, was alert and oriented times two. The resident was unable to state what happened. Staff noted they assessed the resident, who denied complaints of pain or discomfort, and assisted the resident to bed. Staff noted a faint light green/purple bruising to right buttock. The physician was notified. Staff did not note any change to the resident's care to prevent further falls. Review of a wound note, dated 2/19/19, showed the wound company assessed and treated the wound to the left heel, with improvement noted; measures 1.5 cm x 2.0 cm x 0.1 cm; 10% slough tissue to wound bed 90% granulation tissue to wound bed. Small amount of serosanguinous drainage noted. Staff noted a new unstageable (Wound not stageable due to coverage of wound bed by slough and/or eschar (dead tissue)) wound to the left lateral foot, 100% necrotic (dry, dead) tissue, black, no odor, no drainage, measured 1.2 cm x 1.4 cm, no depth could be measured, small dry scab to left great toe. Review of a wound note, dated 4/2/19, showed the wound company assessed and treated the wounds to the left heel and left lateral foot. The wound company staff documented left heel stage 3, improvement noted, measured 0.2 cm x 0.2 cm x 0.1 cm no exudate, wound bed 100% granulation tissue present, no odor, no complaints of pain with treatment. Treatment changed to xeroform gauze and dry dressing. Left lateral foot, unstageable, improvement noted, 100% slough tissue present to wound bed, no odor, moderate amount of serosanguinous drainage noted, complaints of pain with debridement to wound. No change in treatment. Observation on 4/1/19 at 3:03 P.M., showed the resident stood at the sink in his/her room alone holding onto the sink. Observation showed Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) B entered the room and assisted the resident to walk to and from the restroom without obtaining a wheelchair. During an interview on 4/3/19 at 2:39 P.M., an anonymous visitor said the resident developed a wound on his/her heel. The resident used to use a walker for ambulation but is now confined to a wheelchair due to the wound. The visitor said he/she was told the resident is not supposed to walk until the wound is healed, but when he/she visited one day, a staff member was walking the resident down the hall. Observation on 4/3/19 at 3:53 P.M., showed Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) I and LPN C provided wound care for the resident. Observation showed a small open area on the heel with granulation tissue present around the remaining open area and the left lateral foot wound with some slough and pink tissue and minimal drainage. Observation on 4/4/19 at 10:30 A.M., showed the resident sat in his/her wheelchair in his/her room, facing his/her television, which was off. The resident occasionally looked off to the right to his/her roommate's television, which was on. The resident's call light was not in reach at this time. Continued observation on 11:04 A.M., showed the resident continued to sit in his/her wheelchair looking ahead at his/her mirror or television that was off, and occasionally looked far to the right to his roommate's television that was on. The resident's call light continued to be out of reach. Observation on 4/4/19 at 3:35 P.M., showed the resident lay in bed. The resident said he/she hurt his/her leg, but couldn't describe what had happened. Review of a progress note, dated 4/4/19, showed staff documented the resident attempted to get up from his/her wheelchair and fell onto the floor on his/her bottom. The resident was assessed and stated he/she had pain of three out 10 in the left hip. The resident was able to move both lower extremities within normal limits with no added pain. The resident was assisted from the floor with assistance by two staff. The resident was alert and oriented times three. The physician was notified and an X-ray was ordered. Family was also notified. The resident was educated on the need to use the call light when assistance is needed to further prevent fall and possible injuries. Review of a progress note, dated 4/4/19 at 3:27 P.M., showed staff documented they spoke with the resident's spouse, updated him/her on the resident's fall and complaints of left hip pain, informed her that X-ray had been ordered and staff would notify him/her of results. Staff noted they asked the resident's spouse for approval to use a personal safety alarm on a trial basis, as the resident could not recall what he/she was attempting to do before he/she fell. Staff noted the resident complained of left hip pain with passive range of motion. Review of an X-ray of the resident's left hip, unilateral with pelvis, dated 4/4/19, showed: -A fracture through the femoral neck was identified (hip fracture). Minimal displacement is identified. Inferior angulation is noted. The fracture does not involve the articular surface. The femoral head is well-seated within the acetabulum. Moderate degenerative changes are noted. The surrounding soft tissues are normal; -Impression: Femoral neck fracture, as detailed above. Clinical correlation and follow-up are recommended. Review of a physicians order, dated 4/4/19, showed an order directing staff to send the resident to the emergency room for evaluation and treatment. During an interview on 4/5/19 at 1:54 P.M., the Director of Nurses (DON) said any nurse can update a resident's care plan. The nurses and supervisors update the care plan on the resident's door and the MDS Coordinators update the care plan in the computer. Care plans should be updated at least quarterly, and with any status change, transfer change, or if the resident has a fall. After a resident falls, staff should document on the care plan that the resident had an actual fall and the date of the fall, whether or not the resident had any injury, and what happened, for example if the resident slipped in water. Staff should analyze the fall and then add interventions as needed, typically try to update the care plan within 24 hours. The DON said she was not sure of the resident's fall interventions, but staff should follow his/her plan of care. During an interview on 4/18/19 at 10:00 A.M., MDS Coordinator K said the resident's most recent care plan is his/her admission care plan, dated 12/27/18 (care plan conference date). 2. Review of Resident #25's admission MDS, dated [DATE], showed staff assessed the resident as: -Severely cognitively impaired; -Required extensive assistance from staff for bed mobility, transfers, dressing, toilet use, and personal hygiene; -It was very important to the resident to go outside and get fresh air when the weather was good; -It was somewhat important to the resident to have books, newspapers and magazines to read, listen to music, be around animals and pets, keep up with the news, and do things with groups of people. Review of a progress note, dated 11/15/18, showed staff received a call from the resident's spouse the day before stating he/she wouldn't have time to attend the care plan meeting but talked with the staff member over the phone. The resident's spouse expressed that the resident liked to watch sports, and the national geographic and travel channels and it would be helpful if the nurse turned that on for him/her in the resident's room. Review of the resident's plan of care addressing activities, last reviewed/revised 1/29/19, showed staff noted the resident's memory had declined and he/she preferred activities that identified with his/her prior lifestyle. The plan showed the following: -Directed staff to encourage the resident to become involved with activities that promoted his/her memory; -Did not direct staff in any specific approaches to help promote the resident's memory. The plan did not direct staff on providing large group activities, small group activities, or one on one visits; -The plan for a risk of falls (last reviewed/revised 3/16/19) showed the resident was a retired social worker and liked to stay busy. Nursing can usually keep him/her busy with papers doing paper work; -The plan for a risk of falls showed the resident liked to watch national geographic channels, sports and travel channels at home and his/her spouse would like for staff to try playing these channels for the resident in his/her room. Review of the resident's care plan showed no plan to direct staff of the resident's potential for choking, due to the resident putting non-edible items in his/her mouth. Review of the resident's physician's order sheet showed the following physician orders: -CHOKING HAZARD!!!! RESIDENT PUTS NON-EDIBLE ITEMS IN MOUTH; PLEASE KEEP OUT OF HIS/HER REACH (CRAYONS, PAPER, PUZZLES, ETC); Review of the resident's record showed on 1/21/19, staff documented the resident was observed putting non-edible items in his/her mouth such as wooden puzzles, wedding ring, paper, crayons etc. Staff were made aware of the resident's choking risk. The resident's physician and responsible party were updated. The resident's wedding rings were removed and the spouse was asked to pick up the rings. Review of the resident's Activities Participation log, dated March, 2019, showed staff did not document the resident participated in any activities on the 2nd, 6th, 7th, 13th, 14th, 21st, 24th, 25th, and 30th. Observation on 4/2/19 1:49 P.M., showed the resident sat in his/her wheelchair in the 2nd floor nurses station (a separate room off of the corridor). The resident sat up against the nurse's desk, facing the wall with nothing in front of him/her to keep him/her busy. The charge nurse sat next to resident working on a computer. Observation on 4/2/19 at 2:32 P.M., showed the resident sat in his/her wheelchair in the nurses station, facing the wall. Observation showed no staff in the nurses station. Observation on 4/2/19 at 3:59 P.M., showed the resident sat in his/her wheelchair in the nurses station, facing the wall. The charge nurse sat next to the resident working on a computer. Observation on 4/3/19 at 2:30 P.M., showed the resident sat in his/her wheelchair in the nurses station, up against the desk and facing the wall. The resident had papers in front of him/her with nursing instruction regarding a resident's medications. The charge nurse sat next to resident, looking at a computer. Observation on 4/3/19 3:14 P.M., showed the resident sat in his/her wheelchair in the nurses station, facing the wall. A staff member sat at back of the room and talked on his/her cell phone. Observation on 4/3/19 at 4:10 P.M., showed the resident sat in his/her wheelchair in the nurses station, facing the wall. Certified Medication Technician (CMT) gave the resident his/her medications. Observation showed the resident had started to rip the papers and had torn a piece off of one of the papers. The CMT told the resident he/she would take those papers from the resident. The CMT gave the resident his/her activity board. The CMT told the surveyor the resident should not have paper per his/her care plan, because he/she will start chewing on it. The CMT said the charge nurse once saw the resident chewing on his/her wedding ring. The CMT said staff are to watch the resident. Observation at this time showed multiple dependent residents sat in the TV area on 2nd floor and staff and a family member sat and conversed with the residents. Staff did not assist Resident #25 to attend this activity. Observation on 4/3/19 at 4:34 P.M., showed the resident remained at the nurses desk facing the wall. The resident didn't touch the activity mat in front of him/her. Two staff walked in and out of the room but did not interact with the resident. One staff member sat to work on the computer next to the resident but didn't acknowledge the resident. Observation on 4/4/19 at 11:00 A.M., showed staff wheeled the resident from the shower room after a shower, to the nurses station room. At 11:08 A.M., the resident sat at the nurses station against the desk, and facing the wall. The resident had nothing in front of him/her to look at or work on. There was no music. Two staff members sat in back of the room, documenting notes and talking with each other. Observation on 4/4/19 at 12:54 P.M., showed staff wheeled the resident in his/her wheelchair from the dining room after lunch and to the nurses station. Staff placed the resident in his/her wheelchair facing the desk and wall. Staff did not provide any time of activity or music. Observation on 4/4/19 at 3:30 P.M., showed the resident sat in his/her wheelchair at the nurses station, pushed up to the desk and facing the wall. An activity pad sat in front of him/her. Observation on 4/4/2019 at 12:18 P.M., showed the resident sat at the dining room table. The resident tore his/her napkin apart and put a piece in his/her mouth, put the rest down and took a drink. Observation showed CNA A sat at the same table feeding another resident. Observation on 4/5/19 at 10:35 A.M., showed the resident sat in his/her wheelchair at the nurses station up against the desk and facing the wall. An activity mat was folded up in front of him/her. Staff sat next to the resident, working on the computer. Observation on 4/5/19 at 10:50 A.M., showed the resident remained in the wheelchair at the nurses station, no music played, and no facility staff were in the room. During an interview on 4/5/19 at 11:20 A.M., CNA A said he/she was not aware the resident had any risk for choking hazards. The CNA said she was not aware that the resident puts things in his/her mouth that are not food. However, the CNA said once, the resident did put a Lego in his/her mouth, but this was not an every day thing. The CNA said he/she did not notice the resident took a bite of his/her napkin at lunch yesterday. During an interview on 4/5/19 at 11:59 A.M., LPN C said the resident likes to tear paper or put things in his/her mouth that he/she shouldn't, so staff give him/her activities pads. Staff have to be present when the resident has paper.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0658 (Tag F0658)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. Review of the facility's Hydration-Clinical Protocol, dated 09/2012, showed staff will provide supportive measures such as pr...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. Review of the facility's Hydration-Clinical Protocol, dated 09/2012, showed staff will provide supportive measures such as providing fluids and adjusting environmental temperature. 3. Review of Resident #57's significant change MDS, date 3/15/19, showed staff assessed the resident as: -Severe cognitive impairment for daily decision making; -Dependent on two or more staff for transferring and toileting; -Dependent on one staff for bed mobility, dressing, personal hygiene, bathing, and eating; -Always incontinent of bowel and bladder; -No signs or symptoms of possible swallowing disorder; -No weight loss or gain; -Diagnosis of Alzheimer's; -Receives Hospice care. Review of the resident's care plan, dated 3/21/19, showed the resident at risk for compromised nutritional status related to decline in health with weight loss and receiving hospice services. The resident was on a pureed diet with nectar thickened liquids related to pocketing food and swallowing difficulties. The resident had difficulties making him/herself understood related to advanced dementia with aphasia (loss of ability to understand or express speech). Staff are directed to: -Encourage oral intake of food and fluids; -Monitor and record intake of food; -Offer pureed diet with nectar thickened liquids; -Provide 100% assistance for meals; -Encourage fluid intake to help keep urinary pH normal; -Observe for non-verbal signs of distress, provide liquids/food as needed; -Staff will offer him/her snacks and fluids upon request and as needed. Review of the resident's nursing care plan, dated 3/7/19, showed staff were directed to: -Provide a regular diet; -Assist the resident with eating; -Do not leave paper products within reach; -Do not leave wipes or gloves on the night stand. Review of the resident's physician order sheet (POS), dated 3/1/19-4/4/19, showed the resident's physician ordered staff to provide nectar thickened liquids and a pureed diet on 3/12/19. Review of the resident's nurse's notes, dated 3/12/19, showed staff documented new orders received for comfort medications and resident diet changed to pureed/nectar thick liquid, daughter made aware of all new orders by hospice nurse. Observation on 4/1/19 at 2:00 P.M., showed the resident did not have fluids at his/her bedside or on the bedside table. Further observation showed staff did not offer the resident a drink. Observation on 4/2/19 from 2:15 P.M. to 4:30 P.M., showed the resident did not have fluids at his/her bedside or on the bedside table. Further observation showed staff did not offer the resident a drink. Observation 4/3/19 at 9:22 A.M., showed the resident did not have fluids at his/her bedside and staff did not enter the resident's room to offer fluids to the resident. Observation on 4/3/19 at 1:49 P.M., showed the resident sat up in his/her Broda chair by his/her bed. Observation showed the resident did not have fluids within reach or at his/her bedside or on his/her bedside table. Observation on 4/3/19 at 2:00 P.M., showed CNA M and N provided pericare to the resident retrieving care items out of the resident's top drawer of the night stand. Observation showed the resident did not have fluids at his/her bedside and staff did not offer a drink to the resident before or after care. Observation on 4/3/19 at 3:15 P.M., showed LPN F provided wound care to the resident. Further observation showed the LPN did not offer fluids to the resident before or after the treatment. Observation showed the resident did not have fluids at his/her bedside. Observation on 04/04/19 at 11:17 A.M., showed LPN F and CNA M entered the room, pulled the privacy curtain, and turned the resident from his/her right to left side. Staff did not offer the resident a drink of fluids, and left the room. Observation showed the resident did not have fluids at his/her bedside. 4. Review of Resident #44's quarterly MDS, dated [DATE], showed staff assessed the resident as the following: -Severely impaired cognitive skills for daily decision making; -Dependent on one staff for bed mobility, dressing, eating, toilet use, personal hygiene, and bathing; -Dependent on two or more staff for transferring; -Always incontinent of bowel and bladder; -Diagnosis of aphasia; -Receives a mechanically altered diet; -Coughing or choking during meals or when swallowing medications. Review of the resident's care plan, dated 3/1/19, showed the resident required total assistance to complete ADLs that include bed mobility, transfers, dressing, personal hygiene, locomotion, toilet use, and eating related to late effects of a CVA (cerebral vascular accident-stroke), general weakness, and compromised mobility. The resident required pureed, honey thick liquids. Staff are directed to anticipate and carry out ADLs for the resident on a daily basis. Review of the resident's nursing care plan, dated 3/7/19, showed staff were directed to: -Follow aspiration (breathing in foreign matter into the lungs) precautions; -Assist with eating and drinking; -Provide honey thickened liquids with a pureed, no concentrated sweets diet. Observation on 4/1/19 at 2:17 P.M., showed the resident lay in bed with no fluids at bedside. Observation showed the resident had a sign on the closet door Honey Thickened Liquids Only. Observation on 04/02/19 from 02:15 P.M. to 4:30 P.M., showed the resident lay on his/her back in bed. Observation showed no staff entered the room and no fluids were at the resident's bedside. Observation on 4/3/19 at 1:41 P.M., showed CNA L and H provided pericare to the resident. Further observation showed the resident did not have fluids at the bedside and staff did not offer fluids to the resident before or after care. During an interview on 4/5/19 at 11:20 A.M., LPN F said staff should offer fluids during meals, between meals, anytime they step into the room, and as needed. For residents that receive thickened liquids, the liquids are kept in the residents' drawers, refrigerators, and CMTs keep them on their cart. Resident #44 and #57 should have them at the bedside in their bedside table. During an interview on 4/5/19 at 11:25 A.M., CNA M said staff should offer fluids to residents anytime they walk into a room. Residents on thickened liquids should have them in their rooms and the liquids should be offered to the residents. During an interview on 4/5/19 at 1:54 P.M., the DON said fluids should be offered at meal times; there are hydration stations at the nurses stations, and water pitchers in the residents' rooms. Residents that receive special liquids should be offered fluids throughout the day. Every time staff go into a resident's room, staff are expected to offer the resident fluids. Based on observation, interview and record review, facility staff failed to follow physician's orders for one resident (Resident #9 and failed to offer and ensure fluids were assessable to two residents (Resident's #44 and #57) before, between, and/or after care. The facility census was 100 with 45 residents in certified beds. 1. Review of Resident #9's Minimum Data Set (MDS), a federally mandated assessment tool, dated 12/20/18, showed staff assessed the resident as: -Severely cognitively impaired; -Able to make him/herself understood; -Able to understand others; -Extensive assistance by one staff for bed mobility, transfers, dressing, toilet use, and hygiene; -Limited assistance by one staff for walking in his/her room; -Used a walker; -Frequently incontinent of bowel and bladder; -Not at risk for pressure ulcers. Review of the resident's plan of care, showed the following: -A plan addressing the resident's activities of daily living (ADL) functional/rehabilitation potential, last reviewed/revised 12/27/18, showed staff noted a goal that the resident would continue to ambulate with standby assistance using a wheeled walker. Staff did not update the plan to address a physician's order, dated 2/6/19, to ensure the resident did not ambulate until the wound to the left heel was resolved; -A plan for pressure ulcers, last reviewed/revised 12/21/18, showed the resident was at risk for developing pressure ulcers. Staff did not update the plan to address the resident's current left heel and left lateral foot pressure ulcer. During an interview on 4/18/19 at 10:00 A.M., MDS Coordinator K said the resident's most recent care plan is his/her admission care plan, dated 12/27/18 (care plan conference date). Review of the resident's progress notes showed staff documented the following: -On 12/10/18, the resident was admitted to the facility; an admission note shows all skin intact; -On 1/4/2019, staff noted a ruptured blister to the left heel, 2.0 centimeters (cm) x 2.8 cm, unable to determine depth, wound bed is partially (approximately. 25% of surface) purple/blue discolored; possible deep tissue injury, no drainage; tissue surrounding the skin is dry and scaly, no signs or symptoms of infection; physician aware and treatment obtained; -On 1/10/19, staff noted a wound condition change as evidenced by the wound bed was wet, covered with yellow-brown slough, moderate amount of serous drainage, no odor, surrounding skin clear, no signs or symptoms of infection. Physician and spouse updated and dry dressing applied per order; -On 1/22/19, staff documented the resident complained the wound is painful when he/she walks, noted unsteady gait when ambulating with walker. Suggested for resident to use his/her wheelchair for time being until wound improves. Review of a wound note, dated 1/24/19 (for 1/23/19), showed the wound company assessed the wound to the left heel, Stage III (Full thickness tissue loss. Subcutaneous fat may be visible but bone, tendon or muscle is not exposed. Slough may be present but does not obscure the depth of tissue loss. May include undermining and tunneling), Blister has opened, wound bed 80% granulation tissue (newly formed tissue) and 20% slough, moderate amount of serosanguinous (yellowish fluid with small amount of blood) drainage, no odor, slight discomfort noted with treatment, treatment changed to include Santyl (a sterile, enzymatic debriding ointment) ointment daily. Recommendations include: to not ambulate at this time to prevent further pressure on heel, no shoes or socks other than soft shoes or soft boots. Review of a physician's order, dated 2/6/19, showed staff were directed to ensure the resident did not ambulate until the wound to the left heel was resolved. Review of a wound note, dated 2/19/19, showed the wound company assessed and treated the wound to the left heel, with improvement noted; measured 1.5 cm x 2.0 cm x 0.1 cm; 10% slough tissue to wound bed 90% granulation tissue to wound bed, small amount of serosanguinous drainage. Staff noted a new unstageable (wound not stageable due to coverage of wound bed by slough and/or eschar (dead tissue)) wound to the left lateral foot, 100% necrotic (dry, dead) tissue noted, black, no odor, no drainage noted, measured 1.2 cm x 1.4 cm, no depth could be measured, small dry scab noted to left great toe. Review of a wound note, dated 4/2/19, showed the wound company assessed and treated the wounds to the left heel and left lateral foot. Left heel stage 3, improvement noted, measures 0.2 cm x 0.2 cm x 0.1 cm no exudate, wound bed 100% granulation tissue present, no odor, no complaints of pain with treatment. Treatment changed to xeroform gauze and dry dressing. Left lateral foot, unstageable improvement noted 100% slough tissue present to wound bed, no odor, moderate amount of serosanguinous drainage noted, complained of pain with debridement to wound. No change in treatment. Observation on 4/1/19 at 3:03 P.M., showed the resident stood at the sink in his/her room alone holding onto the sink. Observation showed Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) B entered the room and assisted the resident to walk to and from the restroom without obtaining a wheelchair. During an interview on 4/3/19 at 2:39 P.M., an anonymous visitor said the resident developed a wound on his/her heel. The resident used to use a walker for ambulation but is now confined to a wheelchair due to the wound. The visitor said he/she was told the resident is not supposed to walk until the wound is healed, but when he/she visited one day, a staff member was walking the resident down the hall. Observation on 4/3/19 at 3:53 P.M., showed Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) I and LPN C provided wound care for the resident. Observation showed a small open area on the heel with granulation tissue present around the remaining open area and the left lateral foot wound with some slough and pink tissue and minimal drainage. During an interview on 4/5/19 at 11:20 A.M., CNA A said the resident does not currently walk because he/she has a wound on the bottom of his/her foot. During an interview on 4/5/19 at 11:59 A.M., LPN C said the resident used to walk with a walker before he/she developed the wounds, but uses a wheelchair now until the wounds heal. Staff should not be walking the resident at this time. During an interview on 4/5/19 at 1:54 P.M., the Director of Nurses (DON) said staff should follow physician's orders. Staff should ensure they keep the resident from walking on his/her foot and perform pivot transfers when assisting him/her to transfer.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0679 (Tag F0679)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 3. Review of Resident #36's MDS, dated [DATE], showed staff assessed the resident as: -Severe cognitive impairment; -Required ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 3. Review of Resident #36's MDS, dated [DATE], showed staff assessed the resident as: -Severe cognitive impairment; -Required extensive assistance of one staff for bed mobility, transfers, dressing, toileting, and personal hygiene; -Very important activities are music, favorite activities, outside activities; -Somewhat important activities are religious activities. Review of the resident's Initial assessment/Annual update Activity assessment, dated 9/5/18, showed the resident was Catholic and enjoyed sewing, dogs, birthday/holiday parties, comedies on television and soft easy listening music. Review of the resident's care plan, dated 11/28/18, showed staff were directed to do the following: -Required extensive assist of one staff to total assist to complete activities of daily living (ADLs); -Occupy with meaningful distractions such as music, television, one on one, and taken to activities on a daily basis; -One on one visits from activity department on weekly basis; -Group activities in passive manner at least one time daily and five times weekly; -Help to and from group activities on a daily basis; -Encourage to participate in group activities. Review of the resident's Activities participation log, dated January 2019, showed the resident did not attend activities on the 3rd, 17th, 21st, and 26th. Review of the resident's Activities participation log, dated February 2019, showed the resident did not attend activities on the 2nd, 7th, 9th, 10th, 14th, 24th, and 27th. Review of the resident's Activities participation log, dated March 2019, showed the resident did not attend activities on the 13th, 14th, 19th, and 21st. Observation on 4/1/19 at 2:19 P.M., showed the resident sat in his/her wheelchair in the television room with his/her head down fidgeting with his/her wheelchair. Observation on 4/2/19 at 9:02 A.M., showed the resident sat in his/her wheelchair in the television room with his/her head down and eyes closed. Observation on 4/2/19 at 1:36 P.M., showed the resident sat in his/her wheelchair in the television room with his/her eyes closed and head down. Observation on 4/2/19 at 2:54 P.M., showed the resident sat in his/her wheelchair in the television room with his/her head down. Observation on 4/2/19 at 3:46 P.M., showed the resident sat in his/her wheelchair in the television room with his/her head down. Observation on 4/3/19 at 1:39 P.M., showed the resident sat in his/her room with his/her head down. Observation showed the resident did not have a television or music on. Observation on 4/3/19 at 2:48 P.M., showed the resident sat in the television room with his/her head down. Observation on 4/3/19 at 6:42 P.M., showed the resident sat in the television room with his/her head down. Observation on 4/4/19 at 10:04 A.M., showed the resident sat in the television room with his/her head down. Observation on 4/4/19 at 3:12 P.M., showed the resident sat in the television room with his/her head down. 4. Review of Resident #58's MDS, dated [DATE], showed staff assessed the residents as: -Moderate cognitive impairment; -Required extensive assistance of one staff for bed mobility, locomotion on unit, dressing, and personal hygiene. Review of the resident's MDS, dated [DATE], showed staff assessed the resident as follows: -Moderate cognitive impairment; -Required extensive assistance of one staff for bed mobility, locomotion on unit, and personal hygiene; -Very important activities are books, animals, news, favorite activities, and outside activities; -Somewhat important activity was music. Review of the resident's care plan, dated 2/21/19, showed staff were directed to do the following: -Required extensive to total assist to complete activities of daily living; -Invite to all activities or provide diversion activities as needed when he/she becomes agitated; -Provide one on one time when he/she is agitated. Review of the resident's Activities participation log, dated January 2019, showed the resident did not attend activities on the 1st, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 7th, 10th, 11th, 12th,13th, 14th, 15th, 16th, 17th, 18th, 19th, 20th, 21st, 23rd, 24th, 25th, 26th, 27th, 28th, 29th, 30th, and 31st. Review of the resident's medical record, from January 1-31, 2019, showed staff documented the resident had a one on one visit on the 5th, 12th, 19th, and 27th, Review of the resident's Activities participation log, dated February 2019, showed the resident did not attend activities on the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 10th, 11th, 12th, 13th, 14th, 15th, 16th,18th, 19th, 20th, 21st, 22nd, 24th, 25th 26th, 27th, and 28th. Review of the resident's medical record, from February 1-28, 2019, showed staff documented the resident had a one on one visit on the 2nd, 9th, 23rd, and 24th. Review of the resident's Activities participation log, dated March 2019, showed the resident did not attend activities on the 1st, 2nd. 3rd, 7th, 8th, 9th, 11th, 13th,15th, 18th, 21st, 23rd, 25th, and 28th. Review of the resident's medical record, from March 1-31, 2019, showed staff documented the resident had a one on one visit one day each weekend on the 3rd, 10th, 16th, 23rd and 30th. Observation on 4/1/19 at 2:11 P.M., showed the resident in his/her wheelchair at the nurses station facing the window. Observation on 4/2/19 at 9:05 A.M., showed the resident in his/her wheelchair in his/her room with the television on but the resident did not face the television. Observation on 4/2/19 at 3:40 P.M., showed the resident in his/her wheelchair in his/her room. Observation showed the resident rocking back and forth in wheelchair. Observation on 4/3/19 at 1:42 P.M., showed the resident in his/her wheelchair in his/her room. Observation showed the resident's television was on, but the resident was not facing the television and had his/her feet on the ground trying to move the wheelchair forward. Observation on 4/4/19 at 10:46 A.M., showed Certified Nurse Assistant (CNA) A entered the resident's room and repositioned the resident in his/her wheelchair and then left the room. Observation showed the resident did not have television or music on. Observation on 4/4/19 at 3:16 P.M., showed the resident in his/her room in bed. Observation showed the resident did not have television or music on. 5. During an interview on 4/5/19 at 11:08 A.M., Activity Aide D said the following: -Staff are to provide games, entertainment, music, exercise and trivia activities for dependent residents; -The Activities Director should document on the chart sheet what activities are done for the residents; -Resident # 36 should be invited to activities and he/she does trivia, and is passive in exercise; -Resident #58 participates in exercise, and would participate in most activities; -Resident #25 is brought to trivia and exercise. 6. During an interview on 4/5/19 at 11:20 A.M., CNA A said the following: -Staff should talk with and provide one on one activities for dependent residents; -Staff should try to make Resident #36 laugh, provide location and have conversations with him/her for activities; -Staff should provide Resident #58 with news papers, magazines, or turn on the news channel for him/her; -For Resident #25 try to keep the resident from being anxious. He/She enjoys playing go fish; -Activities staff document if the residents go to activities. 7. During an interview on 4/5/19 at 11:59 A.M., Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) C said the following: -Staff should try to get residents involved in activities, but the activities they offer each residents is different some like to sit and watch television; -Resident # 25 likes to tear paper or put things in his/her mouth that he/she shouldn't so staff give him/her activities pads, she watches I love [NAME], and listens to music. Staff have tried to have the resident fold things, but he/she pushes them away. He/She likes to answer the phone or have paper, but staff have to be present when the resident has paper; -Resident #36 goes to passive activities. He/She likes to have a stuffed animal, talks to people that others cannot see, and he/she likes to watch people. He/She is a passive participant in trivia and exercises; -Resident #58 likes to watch baseball/sports and old movies on television and will occasionally look at a magazine. He/She also likes to talk with staff and wheel him/her self up and down the hallway; -Activities staff document on their log when residents participate in activities. 8. During an interview on 4/5/19 at 1:54 P.M., the Director of Nursing said the following: -Nursing staff and activities staff should work together to invite and bring residents to activities; -Activities staff document activities being done, but not sure where they document it at; -Staff should invite all the residents to activities they prefer. 9. During an interview on 4/5/19 at 2:28 P.M., the Activity Director said the following: -Staff should document if a dependent resident participated actively or passively in group activities; -For residents who are on Hospice, bedridden, or cognitively impaired and cannot participate group activities, staff develop a one on one program for those residents; -One on one activities include hand/arm massage, reading to the resident, music, show picture books, task orientated activities, and talk to the resident; -One on one activities are documented in the medical record under observation; -The staff person executing the one on one activity is responsible for documenting it; -Resident #36's program includes talking to the resident, picture books, and massages for one on one activities. The resident participates in group activities and should receive one on one activities once a week; -Resident #58 participates in active and passive group activities depending on his/her cognition. The resident's one on one activities are most often sitting and talking with the resident and he/she should receive one on one activities once a week; -Resident #25's one on one activities should be matching games and task oriented activities. Based on observation, interview, and record review, facility staff failed to provide an ongoing program of activities designed to meet the resident's interests for three sampled residents (Residents #25, #36, #58). The facility census was 100 with 45 residents in certified beds. 1. Review of the facility's upstairs Activity calendar, dated April 1-5, 2019, showed the facility had the following activities scheduled: -4/1/19: 10:30 A.M. exercise, 10:45 A.M. current events, 11 A.M. toss 'ums, 2 P.M. bingo (downstairs), 4 P.M. IN2L (computer fun); -4/2/19: 10:30 A.M. Bible study (downstairs), 2 P.M. birds and [NAME], 4 P.M. visitation with residents; -4/3/19: 10:30 A.M. exercise, 10:45 A.M. current events, 11 A.M. basketball, 2 P.M. bingo (downstairs), 4 P.M. reminisce; -4/4/19: 9:30 A.M. Catholic service (downstairs), 10:15 A.M. APA dog visits (downstairs), 2 P.M. Cardinal day opener game party in activity room (downstairs), 4 P.M. visitation with residents; -4/5/19: 10 A.M. coffee klatch, 10:30 A.M. exercise, 10:45 A.M. current events, 10:45 A.M. musical DVD (downstairs), 11 A.M. horse shoes, 2 P.M. bingo (downstairs), 4 P.M. relaxation, music, and hand massages. 2. Review of Resident #25's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS), a federally mandated assessment tool, dated 11/5/18, showed staff assessed the resident as: -Had severe cognitive impairment; -Required extensive assistance from staff for bed mobility, transfers, dressing, toilet use, and personal hygiene; -It was very important to the resident to go outside and get fresh air when the weather was good; -It was somewhat important to the resident to have books, newspapers and magazines to read, listen to music, be around animals and pets, keep up with the news, and do things with groups of people. Review of the resident's most recent quarterly MDS, dated [DATE], showed staff assessed the resident: -Did not walk; -Had one fall with no injury; -Had one fall with injury (not major). Review of a progress note, dated 11/15/18, showed staff received a call from the resident's spouse the day before stating he/she wouldn't have time to attend the care plan meeting but talked with the staff member over the phone. The resident's spouse expressed that the resident likes to watch sports, and the national geographic and travel channels and it would be helpful if the nurse turned that on for him/her in the resident's room. Review of the resident's plan of care addressing activities, last reviewed/revised 1/29/19, showed staff noted the resident's memory had declined and he/she preferred activities that identified with his/her prior lifestyle. The plan showed the following: -Directed staff to encourage the resident to become involved with activities that promoted his/her memory; -Did not direct staff in any specific approaches to help promote the resident's memory. The plan did not direct staff on providing large group activities, small group activities, or one on one visits; -The plan for a risk of falls showed the resident was a retired social worker and liked to stay busy. Nursing can usually keep him/her busy with papers doing paper work; -The plan for a risk of falls showed the resident liked to watch national geographic channels, sports and travel channels at home and his/her spouse would like for staff to try playing these channels for the resident in his/her room. Review of the resident's Activities Participation log, dated March, 2019, showed staff did not document the resident participated in any activities on the 6th, 7th, 13th, 14th, 21st, 24th, and the 25th. Observation on 4/2/19 1:49 P.M., showed the resident sat in his/her wheelchair in the 2nd floor nurses station (a separate room off of the corridor). The resident sat up against the nurse's desk, facing the wall with nothing in front of him/her to keep him/her busy. The charge nurse sat next to resident working on a computer. Observation on 4/2/19 at 2:32 P.M., showed the resident sat in his/her wheelchair in the nurses station, facing the wall. Observation showed no staff in the nurses station. Observation on 4/2/19 at 3:59 P.M., showed the resident sat in his/her wheelchair in the nurses station, facing the wall. The charge nurse sat next to the resident working on a computer. Observation on 4/3/19 at 2:30 P.M., showed the resident sat in his/her wheelchair in the nurses station, up against the desk and facing the wall. The resident had papers in front of him/her with nursing instructions regarding a resident's medications. The charge nurse sat next to resident, looking at a computer. Observation on 4/3/19 3:14 P.M., showed the resident sat in his/her wheelchair in the nurses station, facing the wall. A staff member sat at back of the room and talked on his/her cell phone. Observation on 4/3/19 at 4:10 P.M., showed the resident sat in his/her wheelchair in the nurses station, facing the wall. Certified Medication Technician (CMT) gave the resident his/her medications. Observation showed the resident had started to rip the papers and had torn a piece off of one of the papers. The CMT told the resident he/she would take those papers from the resident. The CMT gave the resident his/her activity board. The CMT told the surveyor the resident should not have paper per his/her care plan, because he/she will start chewing on it. The CMT said the charge nurse once saw the resident chewing on his/her wedding ring. The CMT said staff are to watch the resident. Observation at this time showed multiple dependent residents sat in the TV area on 2nd floor and staff and a family member sat and conversed with the residents. Staff did not assist Resident #25 to attend this activity. Observation on 4/3/19 at 4:34 P.M., showed the resident remained at the nurses desk facing the wall. The resident didn't touch the activity mat in front of him/her. Two staff walk in and out of the room but did not interact with the resident. One staff member sat next to the resident and worked on the computer but did not acknowledge the resident. Observation on 4/4/19 at 11:00 A.M., showed staff wheeled the resident from the shower room after a shower, to the nurses station room. At 11:08 A.M., the resident sat at the nurses station against the desk, and facing the wall. The resident had nothing in front of him/her for the resident to look at or work on. There was no music. Two staff members sat in back of the room, documenting notes and talking with each other. Observation on 4/4/19 at 12:54 P.M., showed staff wheeled the resident in his/her wheelchair from the dining room after lunch and to the nurses station. Staff placed the resident in his/her wheelchair facing the desk and wall. Staff did not provide any time of activity or music. Observation on 4/4/19 at 3:30 P.M., showed the resident sat in his/her wheelchair at the nurses station, pushed up to the desk and facing the wall. An activity pad sat in front of him/her. Observation on 4/5/19 at 10:35 A.M., showed the resident sat in his/her wheelchair at the nurses station up against the desk and facing the wall. An activity mat was folded up in front of him/her. Staff sat next to the resident, working on the computer. Observation on 4/5/19 at 10:50 A.M. showed the resident remained in the wheelchair at the nurses station. No music played. No facility staff were in the room.
CONCERN (D)

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

Medication Errors (Tag F0758)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

2. Review of Resident #47's record showed a physician's order, dated 3/7/19, for Ativan (lorazepam intensol-an antianxiety medication) 2 mg/milliliter (ml) 0.25 ml sublingual (applied under the tongue...

Read full inspector narrative →
2. Review of Resident #47's record showed a physician's order, dated 3/7/19, for Ativan (lorazepam intensol-an antianxiety medication) 2 mg/milliliter (ml) 0.25 ml sublingual (applied under the tongue) every four hours as needed for agitation PRN (as needed). Review showed the order was open-ended (no stop date). Review of a medication regimen review, dated 4/4/19, showed when conducting the monthly review of the resident's medications, the pharmacist noted the resident was currently taking the antianxiety medication Lorazepam, PRN. The pharmacist noted a PRN psychotropic order cannot exceed 14 days with the exception that the prescriber documents their rationale in the resident's medical record and indicates the duration for the PRN order. The pharmacist's note to the resident's physician showed: Please consider discontinuing the PRN lorazepam, provide a new order for the PRN medication including the duration and rationale, or adjust the medication to a routine order. Review of the resident's MAR, dated 3/1/19-3/31/19, showed staff documented they administered the resident's PRN Lorazepam eight times within the 14 days after the PRN psychotropic medication was ordered. Further review showed staff did not obtain a new physician's order. Review of the resident's nurses notes, dated 4/2/19, showed staff documented a medication record review was completed, see recommendations. 3. Review of Resident #57's record showed a physician's order, dated 3/12/19, for Ativan (lorazepam -an antianxiety medication) 0.5 mg oral tablet every six hours PRN (as needed). Review showed the order was open-ended (no stop date). Review of a medication regimen review, dated 4/4/19, showed when conducting the monthly review of the resident's medications, the pharmacist noted the resident was currently taking the antianxiety medication Lorazepam, PRN. The pharmacist noted a PRN psychotropic order cannot exceed 14 days with the exception that the prescriber documents their rationale in the resident's medical record and indicates the duration for the PRN order. The pharmacist's note to the resident's physician showed: Please consider discontinuing the PRN lorazepam, provide a new order for the PRN medication including the duration and rationale, or adjust the medication to a routine order. Review of the resident's MAR, dated 3/1/19-3/31/19, showed staff did not document the administration of the resident's PRN Lorazepam within the 14 days after the PRN psychotropic medication was ordered. Further review showed staff had not obtained a new physician's order to continue or discontinue the medication. 4. During an interview on 4/5/19 at 2:00 P.M., Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) F said his/her supervisor gives him/her copies of the pharmacy recommendations each month. The charge nurse is responsible to review the recommendation, follow up on any recommendations and call the resident's physician if needed to obtain any new orders, document the results of the review of the pharmacy recommendations, and give the sheets back to his/her supervisor. The charge nurse said he/she took care of the recommendation for Resident #61 today and obtained a new order for the medication. The charge nurse said he/she was not aware of the limit of 14 days for a PRN psychotropic medication. 5. During an interview on 4/5/19 at 1:54 P.M., the Director of Nurses (DON) said PRN psychotropic medications should have a 14 day stop date. Based on interview and record review, facility staff failed to ensure PRN (as needed) orders for psychotropic medications were limited to 14 days for three residents (Residents #47, #57, and #61). The facility census was 100 with 45 residents in certified beds. 1. Review of Resident #61's record showed a physician's order, dated 2/16/19, for Xanax (alprazolam-an antianxiety medication) 0.25 milligrams (mg) by mouth twice daily PRN (as needed). Review showed the order was open-ended (no stop date). Review of a medication regimen review, dated 3/6/19, showed when conducting the monthly review of the resident's medications, the pharmacist noted the resident was currently taking the antianxiety medication Xanax, PRN. The pharmacist noted a PRN psychotropic order cannot exceed 14 days with the exception that the prescriber documents their rationale in the resident's medical record and indicates the duration for the PRN order. The pharmacist's note to the resident's physician showed: Please consider discontinuing the PRN Xanax, provide a new order for the PRN medication including the duration and rationale, or adjust the medication to a routine order. Further review showed the resident's physician checked a box next to I agree with this recommendation, signed and dated the review 3/15/19, and wrote a note to facility staff indicating to discontinue the medication if not used in the last 14 days and to please let him/her know if the medication is used in order to obtain a continuation order. Review of the resident's medication administration record (MAR), dated 3/1/19-3/31/19, showed staff documented they administered the resident's PRN Xanax six times within the 14 days prior to the physician's response, and 11 times after the physician's response to either discontinue the medication or notify him/her if a new order was needed. Further review showed staff did not obtain a new physician's order. Review of the resident's MAR, dated 4/1/19-4/4/19, showed staff documented they administered the resident's PRN Xanax four times after the physician's response to either discontinue the medication or notify him/her if a new order was needed. Further review showed staff did not obtain a new physician's order. Review of a nursing summary report, dated 4/4/19, showed the pharmacy company again noted the resident's Xanax order and documented the physician had responded to this recommendation stating to discontinue it if unused. The pharmacy noted the resident used this medication, and directed facility staff to contact the physician to obtain a stop date for the medication.
CONCERN (E)

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

MDS Data Transmission (Tag F0640)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 9. Review of the CMS MDS database showed the facility did not submit an admission MDS for Resident #58. Review of the facility's...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 9. Review of the CMS MDS database showed the facility did not submit an admission MDS for Resident #58. Review of the facility's MDS status Report, dated 9/1/18 through 4/9/19, showed the resident had an admission MDS with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 10/7/18 completed, not accepted. During an interview on 4/5/19 at 1:35 P.M., MDS Coordinator J said the resident was first admitted to a non-certified bed when he/she got to the facility. Facility staff completed an admission MDS but it was not submitted because he/she was in a non-certified bed. The MDS Coordinator said the resident moved to a certified bed shortly after and the facility staff did an entry but not a new admission assessment or transmit the first admission assessment. 10. During an interview on 4/5/19 at 1:54 P.M. the Director of Nursing (DON) said he/she expects staff to complete and submit the residents' MDS per the RAI guidelines. Based on interview and record review, facility staff failed to transmit required Minimum Data Set (MDS), a federally mandated assessment tool, for six residents (Residents #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, and #58). The facility census was 100 with 45 residents in certified beds. 1. Review of the Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) Manual, dated 10/1/17, showed assessments are to be submitted as follows: -Comprehensive assessments must be transmitted electronically within 14 days of the Care Plan Completion Date (V0200C2 + 14 days); -All other MDS assessments must be submitted within 14 days of the MDS Completion Date (Z0500B + 14 days); -Transmitting Data: Submission files are transmitted to the QIES ASAP system using the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) wide area network. Providers must transmit all sections of the MDS 3.0 required for their State-specific instrument, including the Care Area Assessment (CAA) Summary (Section V) and all tracking or correction information. Transmission requirements apply to all MDS 3.0 records used to meet both federal and state requirements. Care plans are not required to be transmitted; - Assessment Transmission: Comprehensive assessments must be transmitted electronically within 14 days of the Care Plan Completion Date (V0200C2 + 14 days). All other MDS assessments must be submitted within 14 days of the MDS Completion Date (Z0500B + 14 days); - Tracking Information Transmission: For Entry and Death in Facility tracking records, information must be transmitted within 14 days of the Event Date (A1600 + 14 days for Entry records and A2000 + 14 days for Death in Facility records); -Submission Confirmation Page: The initial feedback generated by the CMS MDS Assessment Submission and Processing System (ASAP) after an MDS data file is electronically submitted. This page acknowledges receipt of the submission file, but does not examine the file for any warnings and/or errors. Warnings and/or errors are provided on the Final Validation Report; -Final Validation Report (FVR): A report generated after the successful submission of MDS 3.0 assessment data. This report lists all of the residents for whom assessments have been submitted in a particular submission batch, and displays all errors and/or warnings that occurred during the validation process. An FVR with a submission type of production is a facility's documentation for successful file submission. An individual record listed on the FVR marked as accepted is documentation for successful record submission. 2. Further review of the RAI manual showed, Transmittal requirements. Within 14 days after a facility completes a resident's assessment, a facility must electronically transmit encoded, accurate, and complete MDS data to the CMS System, including the following: -admission assessment; -Annual assessment; -Significant change in status assessment; -Significant correction of prior full assessment; -Significant correction of prior quarterly assessment; -Quarterly review; -A subset of items upon a resident's transfer, reentry, discharge, and death; -Background (face-sheet) information, for an initial transmission of MDS data on resident that does not have an admission assessment. 3. Review of the CMS MDS database showed Resident #1 had an MDS that was over 120 days overdue. Review showed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Staff submitted an Entry Tracking MDS dated [DATE], an admission MDS dated [DATE], and a PPS (Prospective Payment System) 14 day assessment dated [DATE]. Review showed the resident was discharged from the facility but staff did not complete/transmit an OBRA (Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act) Discharge assessment for the resident. 4. Review of the CMS MDS database showed Resident #2 had an MDS that was over 120 days overdue. Review showed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Staff submitted an Entry Tracking MDS dated [DATE], an admission MDS dated [DATE], a PPS 14 day assessment dated [DATE] and a PPS 30 day assessment dated [DATE]. Review showed the resident was discharged from the facility but staff did not complete/transmit an OBRA Discharge assessment for the resident. 5. Review of the CMS MDS database showed Resident #3 had an MDS that was over 120 days overdue. Review showed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Staff submitted an Entry Tracking MDS dated [DATE], an admission MDS dated [DATE], and a Skilled Nursing Facility Part A Discharge assessment dated [DATE]. Review showed that although the resident discharged from a Medicare bed and moved to a state licensed facility bed where he/she currently resided, facility staff did not complete/transmit an OBRA Discharge assessment for the resident. 6. Review of the CMS MDS database showed Resident #4 had an MDS that was over 120 days overdue. Review showed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Staff submitted an Entry Tracking MDS dated [DATE], an admission MDS dated [DATE], and a PPS 14 day assessment dated [DATE]. Review showed that although the resident discharged from a Medicare bed and moved to a state licensed facility bed where he/she currently resided, facility staff did not complete/transmit an OBRA Discharge assessment for the resident. 7. Review of the CMS MDS database showed Resident #5 had an MDS that was over 120 days overdue. Review showed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Staff submitted an Entry Tracking MDS dated [DATE], an admission MDS dated [DATE], a PPS 14 day assessment dated [DATE] and a SNF Part A Discharge assessment dated [DATE]. Review showed the resident was discharged from the facility but staff did not complete/transmit an OBRA Discharge assessment for the resident. 8. During an interview on 4/5/19 at 10:00 A.M., MDS Coordinator J said the previous MDS Coordinator must have missed some of these assessments. Residents #1 and #2 had Discharge assessments that had not been transmitted. Resident #3 was on Medicare but transferred to a state licensed bed. Resident #4 had an incorrect date on his/her assessment, so the MDS Coordinator would correct that on the Discharge assessment and resubmit the assessment. The MDS Coordinator said Resident #5's assessment was a Discharge assessment (however review showed this was not the case).
CONCERN (E)

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

Infection Control (Tag F0880)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on observation, interview, and record review facility staff failed to change gloves and wash hands while providing incontinence care for four residents (Residents #19, #47, #48, #57, and #58) an...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and record review facility staff failed to change gloves and wash hands while providing incontinence care for four residents (Residents #19, #47, #48, #57, and #58) and failed to provide incontinence care for one resident (Resident #19) in a manner which prevented potential contamination and infection. The facility census was 100 with 45 residents in certified beds. 1. Review of the facility's policy Peri Care for Female, revised date 2/16, showed direction for staff which included the following (and in the following order): -Expose the peri area; Gently wash the thighs, hips and entire outer peri area; -Change your cloth and gently open the skin folds and wash the inner aspect of the labia from front to back; Use a clean area of the cloth with every stroke; -Wash and rinse the buttock, anal area, and back of thighs. 2. Review of the facility's policy Standard Precautions, not dated, showed the following: -Standard Precautions are used at Manor Grove in the care of all residents regardless of their diagnoses, or suspected or confirmed infection status. Standard Precautions presume that all blood, body fluids, secretions, and excretions (except sweat), non-intact skin and mucous membranes may contain transmissible infectious agents. -Standard Precautions include the following practices: -Hand hygiene refers to hand washing with soap and water OR using alcohol-based hand rubs (gels, foams, rinses) that do not require access to water. -Gloves are worn when direct contact with blood, body fluids, mucous membranes, non-intact skin, and other potentially infected material is anticipated; and when handling or touching resident-care equipment that is visibly soiled or potentially contaminated with blood, body fluids, or infectious organisms. -Gloves are changed, as necessary, during the care of a resident to prevent cross-contamination from one body site to another (when moving from a dirty site to a clean one). -Gloves are removed promptly after use, before touching non-contaminated items and environmental surfaces, and before going to another resident. Hand hygiene is performed immediately to avoid transfer of microorganisms to other residents or environments. 3. Observation on 04/02/19 at 09:27 A.M., showed Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) M entered Resident #48's room and applied gloves without washing his/her hands. The CNA placed the resident's pants, socks, and shoes onto his/her lower extremities and positioned the resident to a sitting position on the side of the bed. The CNA assisted the resident in dressing his/her upper body and placed the stand up lift sling around the resident's torso, connecting the sling to the machine, lifted the resident and pulled away from the bed, and unfastened his/her incontinence brief. Observation showed the brief was saturated with urine. The CNA removed the brief, provided pericare, and placed a clean brief without changing gloves or washing his/her hands between dirty to clean tasks. The CNA pulled up the resident's pants and pushed the button on the stand up lift to lower the resident into his/her wheelchair with the same soiled gloves. The CNA detached the sling from the lift and removed his/her soiled gloves and left the resident's room with the lift without washing his/her hands. 4. Observation on 04/03/19 at 02:00 P.M., showed Resident #57 in his/her Broda chair in his/her room. CNA M and N attached hoyer lift loops to the hoyer lift, lifted the resident out of the chair and transferred the resident to his/her bed. CNA M applied gloves without washing his/her hands. The CNAs turned the resident to his/her side. CNA N provided pericare and the resident had another bowel movement. CNA M attempted to cleanse the resident while CNA N washed his/her hands. CNA M did not remove his/her gloves or wash his/her hands when CNA N returned. The CNAs completed pericare. CNA M opened the resident's closet with the same soiled gloves and grabbed a clean incontinence pad for the resident. The CNAs positioned the resident. CNA M removed his/her gloves without washing his/her hands and took the soiled linens to the soiled utility room. 5. Observation on 4/3/19 at 9:28 P.M., showed CNA E entered Resident #58's room. Observation showed the CNA applied two pair of gloves to each hand. CNA E removed the resident's soiled brief and provided frontal perineal care to the resident. CNA E removed one pair of gloves and turned the resident onto his/her side and cleansed his/her buttock. CNA E used the same soiled gloves to touch the resident, bed controls and open a drawer in the residents room. CNA E removed both pairs of gloves and left the room without washing his/her hands. CNA E entered the resident's room again and applied two pairs of gloves to each hand without washing his/her hands. CNA E applied a barrier cream (a cream to help prevent moisture from causing the skin to break down), removed one pair of gloves and applied a new brief to the resident, emptied the resident's catheter and left the resident's room without washing or sanitizing his/her hands. 6. Observation on 04/03/19 at 9:57 P.M., showed Resident #47 lay in bed. CNA O enter the room, and without washing his/her hands, applied gloves. The CNA asked the resident to turn to his/her right side. Observation showed the resident had a small bowel movement. The CNA cleansed the resident's buttock with wipes, removed the soiled gloves, put on new gloves without sanitizing or washing his/her hands, and placed a new brief. The CNA did not provide frontal pericare, or wash his/her hands between glove changes. The CNA bagged up the trash and soiled linens and left the resident's room without washing his/her hands. 7. Observation on 4/2/19 at 1:55 P.M. showed CNA A and CNA B provided Resident #19 with perineal cleansing after incontinence. The CNAs removed the resident's disposable incontinence brief, which was soiled with urine and fecal material and turned the resident to his/her side in bed. CNA B used disposable wet wipes to cleanse the resident's buttocks and rectal area, wiping fecal material with each swipe. The CNAs turned the resident to his/her back, and CNA B then used the same wipes and wiped down the resident's front perineal area toward the urethra, presenting the risk of contamination and infection. 8. During an interview on 4/5/19 at 11:20 A.M., CNA A said staff should wash or sanitize their hands and change gloves after completing care, between glove changes, between dirty and clean tasks, and when visibly soiled. CNA A said when staff use two pairs of gloves on each hand they should remove both pairs of gloves each time and wash or sanitize their hands. CNA A said when providing perineal care, staff should use one wipe, one swipe, and wipe front to back. Staff should clean between the resident's creases and folds, from front to back. 9. During an interview on 04/5/19 at 11:25 A.M., CNA M said staff should wash their hands when they enter a room, before putting on gloves, before and after getting through with pericare, with glove changes, when going from a dirty to a clean task such as pulling up a resident's pants, and before they leave the room. Staff can also use sanitizer between glove changes. 10. During an interview on 4/5/19 at 11:59 A.M., Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) C said staff should wash or sanitize their hands when they enter or exit a resident's room, between dirty and clean tasks, and when soiled. LPN C said if staff use two pairs of gloves on each hand they should remove both pairs of gloves each time and wash or sanitize their hands. LPN C said when providing perineal cleansing, staff should wipe a female resident from front to back, cleansing each area of the front skin folds, disposing the cloth after each, then rolling the resident to the side and cleansing from the front perineum toward the buttocks. 11. During an interview on 4/5/19 at 1:54 P.M., the Director of Nursing (DON) said staff should wash their hands and change gloves before care, when visibly soiled, and between dirty and clean tasks. The DON said he/she was not sure if staff should use more than one pair of gloves when providing care to a resident. He/She would have to look at the facility policy.
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

  • "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 Missouri facilities.
Concerns
  • • 23 deficiencies on record, including 1 serious (caused harm) violation. Ask about corrective actions taken.
Bottom line: Mixed indicators with Trust Score of 65/100. Visit in person and ask pointed questions.

About This Facility

What is Grove At Kirkwood, The's CMS Rating?

CMS assigns GROVE AT KIRKWOOD, THE an overall rating of 4 out of 5 stars, which is considered above average nationally. Within Missouri, 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 Grove At Kirkwood, The Staffed?

CMS rates GROVE AT KIRKWOOD, THE's staffing level at 3 out of 5 stars, which is average compared to other nursing homes.

What Have Inspectors Found at Grove At Kirkwood, The?

State health inspectors documented 23 deficiencies at GROVE AT KIRKWOOD, THE during 2019 to 2025. These included: 1 that caused actual resident harm, 21 with potential for harm, and 1 minor or isolated issues. Deficiencies causing actual harm indicate documented cases where residents experienced negative health consequences.

Who Owns and Operates Grove At Kirkwood, The?

GROVE AT KIRKWOOD, THE is owned by a non-profit organization. Non-profit facilities reinvest revenue into operations rather than distributing to shareholders. The facility operates independently rather than as part of a larger chain. With 117 certified beds and approximately 47 residents (about 40% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in KIRKWOOD, Missouri.

How Does Grove At Kirkwood, The Compare to Other Missouri Nursing Homes?

Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Missouri, GROVE AT KIRKWOOD, THE's overall rating (4 stars) is above the state average of 2.5 and health inspection rating (4 stars) is above the national benchmark.

What Should Families Ask When Visiting Grove At Kirkwood, The?

Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "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?"

Is Grove At Kirkwood, The Safe?

Based on CMS inspection data, GROVE AT KIRKWOOD, THE has a clean safety record: no substantiated abuse findings (meaning no confirmed cases of resident harm), no Immediate Jeopardy citations (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death), and is not on the Special Focus Facility watch list (a federal program monitoring the lowest-performing 1% of nursing homes). The facility has a 4-star overall rating and ranks #1 of 100 nursing homes in Missouri. While no facility is perfect, families should still ask about staff-to-resident ratios and recent inspection results during their visit.

Do Nurses at Grove At Kirkwood, The Stick Around?

GROVE AT KIRKWOOD, THE has not reported staff turnover data to CMS. Staff turnover matters because consistent caregivers learn residents' individual needs, medications, and preferences. When staff frequently change, this institutional knowledge is lost. Families should ask the facility directly about their staff retention rates and average employee tenure.

Was Grove At Kirkwood, The Ever Fined?

GROVE AT KIRKWOOD, THE 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 Grove At Kirkwood, The on Any Federal Watch List?

GROVE AT KIRKWOOD, THE 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.