COTTAGES OF LAKE ST LOUIS

2885 TECHNOLOGY DRIVE, LAKE SAINT LOUIS, MO 63367 (636) 614-3510
For profit - Corporation 60 Beds Independent Data: November 2025 1 Immediate Jeopardy citation
Trust Grade
61/100
#61 of 479 in MO
Last Inspection: October 2023

Over 2 years since last inspection. Current conditions may differ from available data.

Overview

Cottages of Lake Saint Louis has a Trust Grade of C+, indicating it is slightly above average for nursing homes. It ranks #61 out of 479 facilities in Missouri, placing it in the top half, and is the top-rated home among 13 options in St. Charles County. The facility shows an improving trend, having reduced its issues from two in 2023 to one in 2025. Staffing is rated well at 4 out of 5 stars, with a turnover rate of 54%, which is slightly below the state average, suggesting that staff remain with the facility and know the residents well. However, there are concerns as well. The facility has faced fines totaling $17,696, which is average for Missouri, but it has also reported some serious incidents, including a critical finding where a resident exited the building unnoticed due to a malfunctioning door alarm, posing a severe risk. Additionally, there was a serious issue related to a resident's pressure ulcer care and concerns about food safety practices that could lead to food-borne illness among residents. Overall, while there are strengths in staffing and a favorable rank, the facility must address its safety and care practices to ensure residents are protected.

Trust Score
C+
61/100
In Missouri
#61/479
Top 12%
Safety Record
High Risk
Review needed
Inspections
Getting Better
2 → 1 violations
Staff Stability
⚠ Watch
54% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
Penalties
⚠ Watch
$17,696 in fines. Higher than 92% of Missouri facilities. Major compliance failures.
Skilled Nurses
○ Average
Each resident gets 40 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — about average for Missouri. RNs are the most trained staff who monitor for health changes.
Violations
⚠ Watch
11 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
★★★★☆
4.0
Overall Rating
★★★★☆
4.0
Staff Levels
★★☆☆☆
2.0
Care Quality
★★★★☆
4.0
Inspection Score
Stable
2023: 2 issues
2025: 1 issues

The Good

  • 4-Star Staffing Rating · Above-average nurse staffing levels
  • Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
  • No fines on record

Facility shows strength in staffing levels, fire safety.

The Bad

Staff Turnover: 54%

Near Missouri avg (46%)

Higher turnover may affect care consistency

Federal Fines: $17,696

Below median ($33,413)

Minor penalties assessed

The Ugly 11 deficiencies on record

1 life-threatening 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

Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure one resident (Resident #75) of 18 sampled residents and one additional resident (Resident #100), were treated in a manner to maintai...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure one resident (Resident #75) of 18 sampled residents and one additional resident (Resident #100), were treated in a manner to maintain dignity and respect. Resident #75 said the way staff treated him/her during cares made him/her feel disrespected and discouraged. The facility census was 49. Review of the facility's undated policy, Resident Rights, showed the following: -The community will inform the resident both orally and in writing, in a language that the resident understands, of his or her rights and all rules and regulations governing resident conduct and responsibilities during the stay in the community;-The community will ensure that all direct care and indirect care staff members, including contractors and volunteers, are educated on the rights of residents and the responsibility of the community to properly care for its residents. 1. Review of Resident #75's undated face sheet showed he/she had diagnoses that include congestive heart failure (a chronic condition in which the heart does not pump blood as well as it should). Review of the resident's care plan, dated 07/10/25 showed the following: -He/She had an activities of daily living (ADLs) self-care need;-He/She required limited assistance from one staff to turn and reposition in bed, with personal hygiene, for toileting, to move between surfaces and to walk. During an interview on 07/23/25 at 10:42 A.M., the resident said the following: -He/She was abruptly awakened by staff about 2:00 A.M on 07/23/25; -The staff blasted into his/her room, turned on the overhead light and was very loud and announced bed check time;-He/She went ahead and went to the restroom and the (unidentified) Certified Nurse Assistant (CNA) told the resident he/she needed to be using his/her legs more, insinuating the resident was not doing enough to help staff; -It was very disrespectful for this staff to barge into his/her room and treat the resident in this manner, the resident felt discouraged;-He/She had a rough day, was in significant pain due to a physician's appointment where his/her stitches were removed and x-rays taken, and it took him/her some time to fall asleep again. During an interview on 07/24/25 at 10:10 A.M., the resident said the following: -Last night was rough again;-The CNA was just as gruff and did not act like he/she had much patience;-He/She was not sure if it was the same staff as the night before;-It was not very respectful;-The way staff treated him/her the past two nights made him/her feel like a burden and it was very disheartening. 2. Review of Resident #100's face sheet showed he/she had diagnoses that include bilateral primary osteoarthritis of the knee (a type of arthritis that occurs when flexible tissue at the ends of the bones wears down causing pain in the joints). Review of the resident's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS), a federally mandated assessment instrument completed by the facility, dated 05/14/25, showed the following: -Cognitively intact;-Adequate hearing, makes self understood and understands others;-No behaviors or rejection of cares;-Dependent on staff for toileting hygiene;-Needs substantial/maximum staff assistance for rolling left to right, sit to lying, lying to sitting on the side of the bed, sit to stand, chair/bed-to-chair transfer and toilet transfer;-Occasionally incontinent of bladder. Review of the resident's care plan, dated 06/08/25, showed the following: -Extensive assistance by one staff for personal hygiene and transfers between surfaces;-Extensive assistance from two staff members for toilet use. During an interview on 05/20/25 at 9:15 A.M., the resident said the evening of 05/19/25 a caretaker, came into his/her room and threw the sheet off him/her and touched his/her private area. He/She asked the caretaker what he/she was doing, and the caretaker said, checking to see if you're wet. The resident told the caretaker to ask next time instead of just throwing the sheet off him/her. The resident did not feel like there was anything sexual about the incident and was not scared. The caretaker told the resident he/she did not want to wake the resident. During an interview on 07/24/25, at 3:49 P.M., the Director of Nursing (DON) said the following: -She would expect staff to speak to residents respectfully;-She would expect staff to treat residents with dignity and respect;-Bed check should be completed during the night by knocking lightly on the door, wake the resident up to provide needed care and not to scare or startle the resident; -During the night, the overhead light should not be flipped on, and staff should not announce themselves in a loud manner;-A resident should never be told by staff that they should be doing more than they are doing or be made to feel like they are not doing enough;-Covers should never be pulled back to do a bed check and a hand should never be placed on an incontinent product without telling the resident what was occurring;-Staff should not be gruff or short with a resident while providing care, the residents should always be treated with respect and kindness. During an interview on 07/24/25 at 4:06 P.M., the administrator said the following:-She would expect staff to speak to all residents with respect;-All residents should be treated with dignity and respect;-Bed check should be completed during the night with respect, dignity and with common decency;-The light should not be flipped on, and staff announce themselves in a manner that startled the resident during the middle of the night;-A resident should not be told they could be doing more, or be made to feel like they are not doing enough;-Covers should not be pulled back to do a bed check and a hand be placed on an incontinent product without tell the resident what is occurring;-Staff should never be gruff or short with a resident when providing care or during any interactions. 1779565
Oct 2023 2 deficiencies 1 Harm
SERIOUS (G) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures

Pressure Ulcer Prevention (Tag F0686)

A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. Review of R43's admission Record found in the Profile tab of the EMR, revealed he/she was initially admitted to the facility ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. Review of R43's admission Record found in the Profile tab of the EMR, revealed he/she was initially admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted from the hospital on [DATE], with diagnoses of type 2 diabetes mellitus with ketoacidosis without coma, acute kidney failure, pressure ulcer of right heel (unstageable), and abnormalities of mobility. Review of R43's quarterly MDS assessment located in the MDS tab of the EMR, with an ARD of 08/22/23, revealed he/she scored three out of 15 on the BIMS which indicated significant cognition impairment. He/She did not exhibit any behavioral symptoms. R43 was at risk for pressure ulcers and had one unstageable pressure ulcer. He/She received pressure-reducing devices for her chair and bed, nutritional interventions, and pressure ulcer care. R43 required extensive assistance by one staff member with bed mobility, transfers, toileting, and personal hygiene. Review of R43's EMR under Orders tab revealed a 05/15/23 physician order to float heels off bed to avoid pressure three times a day. Review of Nurse Practitioner (NP) Progress Note located under the Progress Note tab, dated 07/03/23, documented that R43 had an Unstageable pressure ulcer of right heel. Review of R43's Progress Note located under the Progress Notes tab, dated 07/06/23, prior to hospital discharge, documented Elder has pressure sore on right heel. There was no additional documentation noted. Review of R43's readmission Evaluation located under the Progress Notes tab, dated 07/14/23, revealed documentation: Right heel bandaged over black circular area that is opening at edges. Review of R43's Wound Evaluation located under the Assessments tab, dated 08/31/23, documented that the right heel wound dimensions were 2.23 cm x (by) 1.77 cm. Review of R43's Progress Note located under the Progress Notes tab, dated 09/07/23, revealed documentation Right heel has treatment order in place, appears to be healing, heels are off loaded while in bed to help with the healing process. No drainage noticed. No odor at site. Further review of the EMR revealed R43's Progress Note located under the Progress Notes tab, dated 09/14/23, documented that the resident's Pressure wound to right heel is being treated with Santyl and covered with a foam dressing, wound appearance has not changed. Review of R43's Wound Evaluation located under the Assessments tab, dated 09/15/23, documented that the stage four right heel wound dimensions were 2.15 cm x 1.83 cm. Review of R43's Wound Evaluation, dated 09/22/23, documented that the stage four right heel wound dimensions were 2.79 cm x 1.24 cm. Review of R43's Wound Evaluation, dated 09/29/23, documented that the stage four right heel wound dimensions were 3.58 cm x 2.64 cm. Review of R43's Progress Note located under the Progress Notes tab, dated 10/02/23, revealed documentation that Wound has green drainage and odor. Nurse contacting MD's office. Further review of the EMR revealed R43's Progress Note located under the Progress Notes tab, dated 10/02/23, documented that resident has foul smell and slough noted to heel with moderate purulent drainage no redness or warmth noted to R (right) heel. Review of NP Progress Note, dated 10/03/23, documented Wounds have worsened some odor and pink on edges. Keflex 500mg [milligrams] BID [twice daily] x seven days for wound with odor they will need to educate staff on showering residents with dressings on and get the Santyl in and off load heels. (sic) Review of the October 2023 Medication Administration Record (MAR) revealed a physician order on 10/03/23 for Keflex 500mg. Give one capsule by mouth two times a day for wound for seven days. Review of R43's Care Plan, located in the Care Plan tab of the EMR, dated 05/15/23, revealed I have an unstageable ulcer to R heel [was admitted with stage II]. It was last revised 09/06/23. The resident's goals were, My wound will show signs of healing by next review. The wound will remain stable. The interventions included: Elevate heels off the bed. Encourage good nutrition and hydration in order to promote healthier skin. Monitor for s/s [signs and symptoms] of infection. Pressure reducing boots to bilateral heels. Treat as ordered. Weekly treatment documentation to include measurement of each area of skin breakdown's width, length, depth, type of tissue and exudate and any other notable changes or observations. R43's Care Plan had not been updated with the appropriate identified stage four pressure ulcer on his/her right heel documented on his admission Record on 07/14/23, nor was the identified wound infection. Review of R43's Progress Note located under the Progress Notes tab, dated 10/12/23, revealed documentation that Resident's measurements are 3 x 5 approximately, slough improving, faint foul smell seems to have improved since tx (treatment) of abx (antibiotics), moderate drainage noted purulent with some blood-tinged exudate. An observation of R43 on 10/9/23 at 1:30 PM revealed the resident sleeping in bed. The resident's calves were observed resting on a pillow, and the feet were resting directly on the mattress, not floated. An observation of R43 on 10/10/23 at 2:10 PM revealed the resident sleeping in bed. The resident's feet were placed in Podus boots, resting on the mattress. An observation of wound care was completed with LPN1 on 10/12/23 at 10:10 AM. LPN1 stated the nurse from the night shift had changed the resident's dressing, but she had to redo it because it was not wrapped correctly. During the treatment R43 was noted to have his/her right heel wrapped in Kerlix, dated 10/12/23 7:00 AM, which he/she stated was not the treatment order. The wound was measured at 3.0 cm x 5.0 cm. LPN1 stated that R43 required antibiotic medication for the wound, because it had been infected. He/She stated that the wound appeared better, but there was still an odor. He/She said he/she would be communicating with the nurse practitioner who monitored the wounds. During an interview on 10/12/23 at 9:29 AM the CP1 stated the staff tried to float R43's heels when he/she was in bed and also had Podus boots to wear. CP1 said that R43 did not like to have his/her feet raised when in his/her wheelchair. He/She said the staff tried but the resident did not like it. CP1 stated that for the showers that were scheduled early in the day the Care Partners would have the nurse help undress wounds and then the nurse would help rebandage them afterwards. He/She stated nurses changed bandages daily. He/She stated that if a new skin concern was noted during the shower, they would inform the nurse. CP1 said that R43 had a foot wound after coming back from her last readmission from the hospital, and then went on to hospice care. He/She confirmed that some staff had not been removing the bandages from the heel wound on R43, but the staff had been reeducated. An interview on 10/12/23 at 11:25 AM with the Administrator confirmed the Infection Preventionist (IP) handled and tracked resident wounds. She stated the facility had a wound tracking program that took photos, and helped keep everyone on the same page with how a resident wound was doing. She stated that if a resident's wound was really bad they could send them out to a wound care company. An interview on 10/12/23 at 12:28 PM with the Medical Director revealed he had not been managing the right heel wound for R43, but that the Nurse Practitioner that worked with him was monitoring that. He stated that he had R43 on his list to see next week but was not currently familiar with his/her current right heel wound status. During an interview on 10/12/23 at 1:02 PM the IP stated the facility had a new Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) regarding wounds and ensuring residents had the right interventions in place, communicating the wound assessments with the physicians, and monitoring the weekly wound assessments. The IP stated that R43's right heel wound had deteriorated and had been on an antibiotic recently for an infection with it. She stated R43 had a physician order for calcium alginate if the wound was draining, which the IP said it was. The IP stated the wound was a few months old and was identified in September. The IP confirmed the wound was stage four. She stated that the facility staff had figured out that the Care Partners were keeping the wound wrapped during the showers. The IP stated they had discussed with the staff the proper way to do care. The IP confirmed that she believed a big part of the deterioration was at least in part because of the showering. She stated that during the next all staff mandatory training they would be going over those skills with care staff. The IP stated that the Medical Director had given informal oversight for the resident wounds in the facility to the Nurse Practitioner. She confirmed that LPN1 had requested a continuation of the antibiotic treatment for R43 and had reached out to the physician since the wound had not yet healed. During an interview on 10/12/23 at 1:13 PM the MDS Coordinator (MDSC)1 confirmed that R43 had a right heel wound and that they used Santyl with border foam dressing and calcium alginate if the wound had drainage. MDSC1 stated that R43 had recently finished a round of Keflex antibiotic. She stated the Medical Director used to handle the wounds at the facility, but they were now handled by the Nurse Practitioner (NP). MDSC1 stated that the facility was reviewing wound tracking in their Quality Assurance program, but the NP did not attend those meetings. On 10/12/23 at 2:03 PM the DON stated that she had spoken to the nurse that placed Kerlix on R43 in the morning to find out why it had been done. The DON said that the nurse informed her that the dressing on R43's heel had rolled up underneath, so the nurse had placed the Kerlix around the foot to protect the dressing. The DON stated she had reminded the nurse that it was not a part of the treatment orders for R43 and should not have been done. The DON stated that no resident should have received a shower with a dressing kept in place because it could make things worse. During an interview by phone on 10/12/23 at 2:40 PM the NP stated that she had more recently started doing the wound rounds at the facility, instead of the Medical Director. She stated she had been working with R43 since his/her July readmission. She stated she thought R43 had been admitted with the wound to the right heel from his/her last hospital stay. NP confirmed that the Care Partners had been reeducated because they had been showering R43 with her dressings in place. NP stated they did not think the wound looked very different but did confirm that R43 had been recently on a prescribed order of antibiotics for the right heel due to an infection. NP stated that she came out to the facility about once a month, and as requested by the facility. Based on observations, interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to conduct timely identification, assessment, and treatment of a wound for two of five residents (Residents (R) 47 and 43) reviewed for pressure sores out of a total sample of 21 residents resulting in the progression of the wound to advanced stages (stage IV - a deep wound reaching the muscles, ligaments, or bones which can cause pain, infection, invasive surgeries, or even death; or unstageable - a term that refers to an ulcer that has full thickness tissue loss but is covered by extensive necrotic (dead) tissue). This failure resulted in harm to R43 and R47 for the development and worsening of stage IV pressure ulcers to the heels. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Wound Treatment Management, with a revised date of December 2015, revealed To promote wound healing of various types of wounds, it is the policy of this community to provide evidence-based treatments in accordance with current standards of practice and physician orders. The policy further revealed a section for Pressure Injury Prevention and Management. The community is committed to the prevention of avoidable pressure injuries, unless clinically unavoidable, and to provide treatment and services to heel the pressure ulcer/injury, prevent infection and the development of additional pressure ulcers/injury. Review of the facility's policy titled, Pressure Injury Prevention and Management, with a revised date of December 2015, revealed This community is committed to the prevention of avoidable pressure injuries, unless clinically unavoidable, and to provide treatment and services to heal the pressure ulcer/injury, prevent infection and the development of additional pressure ulcers/injuries. Assessment of Pressure Injury risk revealed Licensed nurses will conduct a pressure injury risk assessment, using the Cottages Skin and Wound assessment, on all elders upon admission/re-admission, weekly x four weeks, then quarterly or whenever the elder's condition changes significantly. The policy further revealed Licensed nurses will conduct a full body skin assessment on all elders upon admission/readmission, weekly, and after any newly identified pressure injury. Findings will be documented in the medical record. Assessments of pressure injuries will be performed by a licensed nurse and documented on the Cottages Skin and Wound assessment. The staging of pressure injuries will be clearly identified to ensure correct coding on the MDS. Record review of the Interventions for Prevention and to Promote Healing section of the policy revealed Evidence-based interventions for prevention will be implemented for all elders who are assessed at risk or who have a pressure injury present. Basic or routine care interventions could include, but are not limited to: . Redistribute pressure (such as repositioning, protecting and/or offloading heels, etc.); Minimize exposure to moisture and keep skin clean, especially of fecal contamination; Provide appropriate, pressure-redistributing, support surfaces; Provide non-irritating surfaces; and maintain or improve nutrition and hydration status, where feasible . Review of the facility's policy titled, Skin Assessment, with a revised date of December 2015, revealed A full body, or head to toe, skin assessment will be conducted by a licensed or registered nurse upon admission/re-admission, daily for three days, and weekly thereafter. The assessment may also be performed after a change of condition or after any newly identified pressure injury. Review further revealed Documentation of skin assessment should Include date and time of the assessment, your name, and position title .Document observations (e.g., skin conditions, how the elder tolerated the procedure, etc.) . Document type of wound .Describe wound (measurements, color, type of tissue in wound bed, drainage, odor, pain) .Document if elder refused assessment and why .Document other information as indicated or appropriate. 1. Review of R47's admission Record, found in the Profile tab of the electronic medical record (EMR), revealed he/she was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses including unspecified fracture of lower end of right femur, subsequent encounter for closed fracture with routine healing, type 2 diabetes mellitus with diabetic peripheral angiopathy without gangrene, generalize muscle weakness, difficulty walking, unspecified lack of coordination, and pressure ulcer of sacral region, unspecified stage. Review of R47's Braden Scale located in the EMR under Assessments tab, dated 08/21/23, revealed a score of 16, which indicated the resident was at risk for skin breakdown. His/Her ability to walk was severely impaired and he/she was unable to bear his/her own weight. His/Her bed mobility was very limited and could only make occasional body positioning changes. Friction and Shearing required moderate to maximum assistance in moving. Complete lifting without sliding against sheets is impossible. Frequent sliding down in bed or chair, requiring frequent repositioning with maximum assistance. Review of R47's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment located in the MDS tab in the EMR, with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 08/28/23, revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) assessment with a score of 12 out of 15 which indicated moderately impaired cognition. R47 required extensive assistance from two staff with bed mobility and transfers and was unable to ambulate. R47 used a wheelchair for locomotion in his/her room and on the unit with set up help only. R47 had only one pressure ulcer on admission, and it was on a bony prominence. However, he/she was at risk of developing pressure ulcers. No deep tissue injury, arterial, or venous ulcers were present. He/She had a pressure reducing device for his/her chair and bed. Pressure ulcer triggered as a care area. Review of R47's Care Plan, located in the Care Plan tab of the EMR, dated 08/24/23, revealed Resident has the potential/actual impairment to skin integrity. The resident's goal was, The skin will remain intact with a target date of 10/31/2023. There were no interventions listed until they were added on 09/06/23. Review of R47's EMR under the Assessments tab revealed on 08/30/23 a Skin & Wound Evaluation was completed and there was no indication of any heel wounds. Record review of the EMR under Physician Orders revealed: -On 08/21/23 A hinged knee brace should be locked at 30 degrees at all times. -On 09/05/23 Prevalon boots to the right foot at all times, right heel offloading measures to heel float, and wound care including use of skin prep and foam dressing. Further review of the Care Plan revealed on 09/06/23 heels off the bed and monitor for signs and symptoms of infection were added as approaches. Another focus area was Physical mobility needs, the resident will remain free of complications related to immobility including contractures, thrombus formation, skin breakdown, falling related injury .The resident is NON-WEIGHT bearing (right) . Locomotion: The resident uses a manual wheelchair for locomotion. Another focus area was, I have ADL [activities of daily living] self-care need. The resident's goal was, The resident will improve current level of function in ADL's. One of the approaches was, BED MOBILITY: The resident requires extensive assistance by (2) staff to turn and reposition in bed. An additional focus area was added on 09/06/23, I have pressure ulcer to my bilateral heels. The resident's goal was, My heels will show signs of healing through next review. The approaches included: Prevalon boots for offloading and Administer treatments as ordered by MD. Record review of the EMR under Physician Orders revealed: -On 09/07/23 A Low Air Loss [LAL] mattress. -On 09/15/23 Weight-bearing status to increase to 50%. Review of R47's Skin & Wound Evaluation, dated 09/13/23, revealed a Stage 2 pressure sore with partial thickness skin loss with exposed dermis was on the left heel. The assessment revealed the pressure sore was in-house acquired. The evaluation revealed there was a right heel pressure ulcer that was in-house acquired. The area was 4.5 cm (centimeters) in length and 2.1 cm in width with an area of 8.9 centimeter squared [cm2]. Review of R47's additional Skin & Wound Evaluation, dated 09/13/23, revealed there was an unstageable in house acquired pressure area to the left heel with no measurements obtained. Review of R47's Skin & Wound Evaluation, dated 10/01/23, revealed a Stage 1: nonblanchable erythema of intact skin in-house acquired pressure area to the left heel. Area was 9.3 cm, length was 3.3 cm, width was 3.5 cm, and depth is 0.1 cm. Review of R47's Cottages Skin & Wound Total Body Assessment, dated 10/04/23, located in the EMR, under the Assessment tab, revealed a blister to left heel is minimal and closed with no open area to measure. Right heel is now a stage 2 wound as skin has broken. Covered with Xeroform gauze and bordered foam dressing. The area was 8.9 cm2, length was 4.5 cm, and width was 2.6 cm. Review of a fax from the physician to the facility revealed the physician saw the resident on 10/10/23 and documented there was a pressure injury to bilateral heels with darkened, well-defined border with each measuring 3x4 cm (centimeters). Physician orders for 10/03/23 revealed a consultation with Wound Care Plus was ordered. The treatment for the right heel was to cleanse the wound with wound cleanser, apply Xeroform gauze and cover with a bordered foam dressing. Physician orders for 10/10/23 revealed the treatment for the bilateral heels was to cleanse with the wound cleanser, apply Xeroform and cover with bordered foam dressing. Observation of R47 on 10/09/23 at 10:05 AM revealed he/she was sitting up in a wheelchair in the hall with a boot on the right foot. At 4:00 PM, the resident was sitting up in a wheelchair and asleep with a boot on the right foot. Review of R47's Skin & Wound Evaluation, dated 10/10/23, for the right heel, revealed a Stage 4: full thickness skin and tissue loss. The measurements were 11.5 cm2 for area, length was 5.0 cm, and width was 3.4 cm. Review further revealed the left heel was a stage one in-house acquired pressure sore. The measurements were 20.9 cm in area, 5.3 cm length, and 5.0 cm width. Observation of R47 on 10/10/23 at 10:37 AM revealed he/she was wheeling himself down the hall and stated he/she had a rash on both heels that he/she did not have before he/she arrived at the facility. R47 believed the rash was from the sheets lying against his/her feet. Observation of R47 on 10/10/23 at 4:30 PM revealed he/she was lying in bed on his/her back with the head of the bed up. Resident was lying on a LAL mattress. A Prevalon boot was on his/her right foot and the left foot was floated on a pillow. Interview on 10/11/23 at 10:21 AM with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN)2 revealed the areas on the heel were discovered in September. He/She revealed he/she took pictures of the bilateral heel wounds yesterday. He/She stated the right heel measured 11.5 cm for the area, 5.0 length, and 3.4 width. He/She stated the left heel was a blood blister and it burst. He/She stated the measurements were area 20.9 cm2, length 5.3 cm, and width 5.0 cm. He/She revealed they did the treatment once a day and weekly skin assessments. Interview on 10/12/2023 at 12:25 PM with LPN2, by phone, revealed on 09/06/23 a Care Partner (CP) informed him/her about the heels. He/She stated he/she assessed the heels and called the physician to get new orders. He/She stated the orders were skin prep and foam dressing. He/She stated his/her skin assessment was due that day. LPN2 stated R47 liked to sit in his/her wheelchair and used his/her feet to help propel the wheelchair. He/She stated he/she needed assistance of one to turn in bed. LPN2 revealed he/she did not think shearing was a factor in the pressure formation because the resident would help when staff pulled him/her up in bed. Interview on 10/12/2023 at 9:51 AM with CP11 revealed he/she had taken care of R47. He/She stated he/she was non-weight bearing when he/she first came in and he/she needed the assistance of two staff for mobility. He/She stated once he/she became 50% weight bearing he/she was able to do a lot more for himself/herself. He/She stated he/she wore a brace to the right knee all the time. CP11 stated R47 did not move much because it hurt him/her to move. He/She stated he/she had to have the assistance of two staff to turn over in bed at first. CP11 revealed he/she did not have any pressure areas to his/her heels on admission. He/She stated he/she went on vacation at the last of August and when he/she returned in September, he/she saw the heels and reported it to the nurse. He/She stated he/she was not sure why his/her heels broke down, but it was probably because he/she was not moving his/her right leg very much, however he/she could move the left leg. He/She revealed shearing was sliding back and forth on surfaces, but he/she did not think shearing was a factor in the formation of the wounds. He/She stated it was probably from the pressure of being in bed. During an interview on 10/12/23 at 12:08 PM the Director of Nursing (DON) reviewed the EMR and stated R47 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with no skin issues to the heels. She reviewed the 08/30/23 skin assessment and stated there was no documentation of any heel skin issues. The DON revealed on 09/06/23 documentation showed there were wounds to bilateral heels. Prevalon boots were ordered by the physician. She revealed there were no measurements taken on this skin assessment. The DON revealed from the documentation that the areas to the heels were deep tissue injuries, and it was an error in labeling the staging. She stated she reviewed the physician notes for that day, and he went in to see the resident. The DON stated a low air loss mattress was ordered and was received on 09/07/23. The DON continued to review the pressure assessment and revealed there were no measurements on the 09/13/23 skin assessments, only a picture which looked like a deep tissue injury. She reviewed the skin assessments on 09/27/23 and stated there were no measurements done, only pictures. The DON stated she was not sure if the nurses were supposed to put in measurements. She stated she did not see any skin assessments on 09/20/23. The DON revealed her expectations would have been that skin assessments be done weekly, and measurements should have been taken. But there were pictures. The DON revealed it put the resident at risk if skin assessments and measurements were not done because you could not tell if the wound was healing or worsening. The DON further revealed if skin assessments and measurements were not done you could not tell if the care and treatment was working. Interview with the DON on 10/12/23 at 3:13 PM revealed the initial care plan should have included nutrition and dietary interventions, proper hydration, head to toe assessments, turning and repositioning, pain management, and a low air loss mattress. She revealed R47 did not receive the mattress until 09/07/23 and he/she definitely needed it before that because he/she had a locked brace and would need heel intervention. She stated a low air mattress would have been beneficial sooner to not have the pressure points like a regular mattress did. The DON stated, As a nurse I would advocate for the air loss mattress to help prevent pressure on the heels. During an interview, by phone, on 10/12/23 at 1:54 PM the In-House Physician (PHY) revealed R47 had a pressure ulcer on the left heel and the right heel. He stated the right heel was the side he/she had surgery on. He stated R47 utilized a brace that was locked at 30 degrees, which made it extremely difficult to get the pressure off the heel. He stated the resident was also non weight bearing, for a time, and was up in a wheelchair and bed which contributed to his/her pressure ulcer. PHY stated the staff notified him of the worsening of the wounds, and he thought he ordered consult for him/her. PHY stated he ordered a LAL mattress. PHY stated everything was avoidable, but it was highly likely that he/she would develop pressure ulcers.
CONCERN (F) 📢 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

Food Safety (Tag F0812)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

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

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, record review, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure thawed foods were properly labeled and/or dated as required, failed to ensure the high-temperature dishwasher was monitored for effective sanitation, and failed to ensure food temperatures were properly monitored during meal preparation and service for 48 census residents who received meals from the individual kitchens in six of six cottages. These failures had the potential to lead to food-borne illness among all facility residents. Findings include: 1. Observations during the tour of the kitchen in [NAME] cottage on 10/10/23 at 10:00 AM revealed: -Five chocolate and two vanilla 4-ounce (oz.) Mighty Shakes thawed in the refrigerator. -The cartons documented, Store frozen. Thaw at/or below 40F [Fahrenheit]. Use thawed product within 14 days. Keep refrigerated. There was no thaw date on the cartons. Observations during the tour of the kitchen in [NAME] cottage on 10/10/23 at 10:10 AM revealed: -Ten chocolate Mighty Shakes thawed in the refrigerator in a plastic bag dated 09/05/23. -Nine strawberry and 13 vanilla Mighty Shakes thawed in the refrigerator in a plastic bag dated 09/12/23. -The cartons documented, Store frozen. Thaw at/or below 40F. Use thawed product within 14 days. Keep refrigerated. There was no thaw date on the cartons. In an interview on 10/10/23 at 10:15 AM, Care Partner (CP) 12 stated that the Mighty Shakes were placed into plastic bags for thawing in the refrigerators. He/She stated that the staff often reused these bags, so the dates written on them may not be accurate. He/She said each cottage had their own process for thawing shakes and was not aware of documenting thawed dates or how long the item could be refrigerated. On 10/11/23 at 9:50 AM the Dietary Manager (DM) stated that she received food shipments twice a week, and then distributed the necessary food items to each residential cottage so the meals could be prepared in each home. She stated that during this process she monitored each kitchen for expired foods, dating and labeling concerns, and would toss out anything that needed to be discarded. The DM said that all Care Partners had received training to provide a safe food service. 2. An observation on 10/11/23 at 11:35 AM in [NAME] cottage revealed the kitchen used a High-Temp Dishwasher. Per CP8, the facility staff rinsed the dishes off and then placed them into the dishwasher. She stated that they did not log the temperatures, but they just kept the dishes in the machine until they were done. The placard on the dishwasher instructed for hot water sanitizer the wash cycle should reach 150 degrees F (Fahrenheit), and the rinse 180 degrees F. The outer digital temperature display indicated the wash cycle reached 137 degrees F and the rinse 110 degrees F. An interview with the DM on 10/12/23 at 9:12 AM revealed that she took temperatures of each cottage high-temperature dishwasher a few times a month by placing a TempRite Dishwasher Temperature Test Strip in the machine. DM stated that she believed it was important for the high-temperature dishwashers to get to 170 degrees F for proper sanitizing but had not reviewed the guidance on the dish machine. An observation with the DM on 10/12/23 at 9:30 AM in [NAME] cottage revealed an identical dishwasher reached 158 degrees F for the wash cycle and 141 degrees F for the rinse. The DM placed the temperature strip into the machine, which indicated the internal temperature reached at least 160 degrees F yet did not match with the digital displays of the machines. She confirmed that there needed to be better temperature monitoring due to the fact the monitoring strips did not align with the digital displays of the dishwashers. A review of the Dish Machine Schedule revealed the TempRite Dishwasher Temperature Test Strips were used on 08/08/23, 08/09/23, 08/22/23, 08/23/23, 10/04/23, and 10/06/23. Actual digital temperatures were not documented. 3. Record review of food temperature monitoring revealed: -From 9/12/23 through 10/8/23 there were 41 missed meal temperatures documented out of 81 opportunities for [NAME] cottage. -From 9/12/23 through 10/8/23 there were 22 missed meal temperatures documented out of 81 opportunities for [NAME] cottage. -From 9/12/23 through 10/8/23 there were 31 missed meal temperatures documented out of 81 opportunities for [NAME] cottage. -From 9/12/23 through 10/8/23 there were 42 missed meal temperatures documented out of 81 opportunities for Grace cottage. -From 9/12/23 through 10/8/23 there were 25 missed meal temperatures documented out of 81 opportunities for [NAME] cottage. -from 9/12/23 through 10/8/23 there were 44 missed meal temperatures documented out of 81 opportunities for [NAME] cottage. -All meal temperature logs were developed to document only the main menu items such as protein, fruit, vegetables, and dessert. The temperature logs did not capture alternate menu items nor altered textures such as mechanical or puree prepared meals. Observations during lunch service in [NAME] cottage on 10/11/23 beginning at 11:00 AM revealed: -Lunch items on the menu were country fried steak, mashed potatoes, country gravy, and asparagus. -At 11:50 AM, CP8 recorded the temperature of the mashed potatoes, which were still on the stovetop, at 145 degrees F. The asparagus, still on the stovetop, was documented at 196 degrees F. CP8 stated that she took temperatures of the food right after it was done cooking, not before serving the items. -CP8 then mixed butter into the mashed potatoes and prepared to put it onto the resident plates. Upon a second temperature check, the mashed potatoes were noted to be at 128 degrees F. CP8 then added milk and placed the mashed potatoes back on the stovetop. At 12:06 PM, the mashed potatoes were noted at 150 F and placed on the countertop for service. -At 12:07 PM the country fried steak was removed from the oven, and recorded at 205 degrees F. CP8 cut up the steak into smaller pieces and took a second temperature that read 133 degrees F. The meat was then placed into a food processor to create a mechanical texture, which was then recorded at 98 degrees F. -At 12:15 PM the mashed potatoes and asparagus were plated on the counter. The gravy was left on the stovetop. At 12:23 PM the gravy was 115 degrees F. CP9 stated that to know what temperatures the food needed to be served at, they used a poster in the pantry that identified safe food temperatures. CP8, CP9, and CP10 were not aware of the recipe book on the counter recording expected serving temperatures. They confirmed that the food temperatures had dropped when broken down for altered textures and after adding cold items, but they were not documenting that. The recipes listed the mashed potatoes, gravy, and asparagus to Hold for service at 135F or above. The country fried steak had no hold temperatures on the recipe. During a concurrent interview with CP1 and CP10 on 10/12/23 at 9:15 AM they confirmed that they documented temperatures for each meal. CP1 stated that the staff usually documented the food items as they were finishing the cooking process, and that they did not recheck temperatures after adding items such as milk, nor when the food was broken down to a mechanical or pureed texture. Both CP1 and CP10 confirmed that the food temperature log that was used did not provide a place to properly document all food items. An interview with the DM on 10/12/23 at 9:23 AM confirmed that all prepared food items should be monitored for appropriate temperatures but was not aware of the need for also monitoring altered textures. She confirmed that additional training was necessary to ensure all items were properly documented for compliance. During an interview on 10/12/23 at 2:58 PM the Administrator stated that she was informed that not all cottages had stored, prepared, and served meals with the same service process. She said the DM was new to the role. The Administrator said that it was important that each cottage served the resident meals at the correct temperature and was not aware that not all meal textures were being monitored for the appropriate temperatures. The facility's undated Policy for Dietary Department documented The purpose of THE DIETARY DEPARTMENT is to provide nutritious well-balanced and palatable meals meeting each resident's nutritional needs in accordance with the physician's prescribed orders and the resident's personal preferences. Food is served under high standards of sanitation .Meals are prepared and served in accordance with the US DIETARY GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS set by the AMERICAN DIETETIC ASSOCIATION.
Dec 2019 1 deficiency
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, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure food items were discarded when expired and failed to store scoops outside the containers. The facility also failed to ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure food items were discarded when expired and failed to store scoops outside the containers. The facility also failed to ensure the bottoms of the freezers were clean and free of debris. The facility census was 57. 1. Observation on 12/11/19 at 9:09 A.M. in Grace's Cottage kitchen, showed a gallon container of mayonnaise with a use by date of 11/23 (no year); a quart bag with a white powdery substance dated 10/20/19; a quart bag of round meat product dated 12/05/19; and a 32-ounce carton of plain yogurt with use by date of 11/5/19 in the refrigerator in the kitchen area. The bottom of the freezer in the kitchen area was covered with dirt and food debris. Observation on 12/11/19 at 9:21 A.M. in Harper's Cottage kitchen, showed a gallon container of orange juice (1/3 full) with a use by date of 12/9/19 in the refrigerator in the kitchen. A scoop was stored in the sugar container in the pantry. The handle on the scoop was touching the sugar. The bottom of the freezer in the kitchen was covered with dirt and food debris. Observation on 12/11/19 at 9:32 A.M. in Ella's Cottage kitchen showed the refrigerator in the storage room had a quart container of coffee creamer with a use by date of 7/10/19. The refrigerator in the kitchen area had a gallon container (1/8 full) of orange juice with a use by date of 12/9/19. The bottom of the freezer in the kitchen area was covered with dirt and food debris. Observation on 12/11/19 at 9:40 A.M. in Ava's Cottage kitchen showed scoops were stored in a container of cereal and a container marked pancake mix. The scoop handles touched the contents in the containers. In the refrigerator in the kitchen area, there was a gallon container of orange juice (1/2 full) with a use by date of 12/9/19. The bottom of the refrigerator freezer in the kitchen area was covered with dirt and food debris. Observation on 12/11/19 at 9:47 A.M. in Betty's Cottage kitchen showed a 10 ounce bottle (3/4 full) of honey poppy seed dressing with a use by date of 10/4/19, a 12.1 ounce bottle of stir fry sauce with a use by date of 10/4/19, a 10.5 ounce bottle of tartar sauce with a use by date of 12/2/19, a 14 ounce bottle of ketchup with a use by date of 8/8/19, two 12 ounce bottles of mustard with use by dates of 8/8/19 and 10/04/19, a 16 ounce bottle of balsamic dressing with a use by date of 12/2/19, and a 16 ounce jar of dill pickle chips with a use by date of 12/2/19 located in the kitchen refrigerator. The bottom of the refrigerator freezer in the kitchen area was covered with dirt and food debris. Observation on 12/11/19 at 9:59 A.M. in Kris's cottage kitchen showed scoops were stored in a container of flour, a container of cream of wheat, a container of powered sugar, and a container of brown sugar. The scoop handles were in contact with the contents of the containers. In the refrigerator in the kitchen area, there was a 32 ounce carton of liquid egg product (1/2 full) with a use by date of 11/19. The bottom of the freezer in the kitchen area was covered with dirt and food debris. Record review on 12/11/19 at 11:58 A.M. of the cottage daily task list showed no documentation for staff to clean refrigerators or freezers. During interview on 12/11/19 at 10:58 A.M., the dietary manger said the cottage staff were responsible for cleaning the refrigerators and freezers. She expected staff to clean the refrigerators and freezers once a week or more often. The refrigerators and freezers should be free of spills and food debris. Cottage staff were also responsible for disposing of expired food. Staff are to remove food three days after opening except condiments and they are good for a month after opening. Foods should be discarded after the use by date. She was responsible to ensure the cottage staff cleaned the refrigerators and disposed of the expired food. Staff should not store scoops in the food containers. During interview on 12/12/19 at 7:55 A.M., the administrator said she expected staff to discard food by the use by date. Night shift staff should clean the refrigerators and freezers at least once a week. Staff should not store scoops in the food containers.
Oct 2018 7 deficiencies 1 IJ
CRITICAL (J)

Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation

Accident Prevention (Tag F0689)

Someone could have died · 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 provide protective oversight for two residents (Reside...

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 provide protective oversight for two residents (Resident #17 and #16) in a sample of 16 residents. The surveyor observed Resident #17 exit the facility in his/her wheelchair out of the southwest door activating a door alarm. No staff responded to the alarm and Resident #17 continued to propel him/herself towards a busy street. As no staff responded, the surveyor redirected Resident #17 away from the street and back into the facility. One staff member was on duty at the time providing cares to another resident, could not hear the door alarm and did not know Resident #17 exited. The facility failed to ensure all door alarms were audible from all areas of the facility and were functioning in all of the cottages comprising the facility. The facility also failed to prevent Resident #16 from wandering into other residents' rooms, invading their personal space/privacy and into the kitchen area while staff prepared food. The facility failed to identify residents at risk for elopement. The facility census 39. 1. During interview on 11/8/18 at 11:25 A.M., the administrator said the facility did not have a wandering policy in place at the time of survey. 2. Record review of the Resident #17's face sheet showed an admission date of 11/17/17. Review of the resident's wandering risk scale assessment dated [DATE] showed the resident was at risk to wander. Review of the resident's care plan, reviewed 3/11/18, showed the following: - I have impaired cognitive function. Interventions: staff to anticipate my needs as I do not always say what I am wanting or needing; -Potential for communication impairment. Interventions: monitor, document, report any changes; -The care plan did not address the resident's risk for wandering; -Diagnoses included rhabdomyolysis (a condition in which skeletal muscle breaks down rapidly. Symptoms include confusion) and kidney failure. Review of the resident's significant change, Minimum Data Set (MDS), a federally mandated assessment instrument completed by facility staff, dated 9/6/2018, showed the following: -Brief interview of mental status (BIMS) of eight indicating moderate cognitive impairment; -Adequate hearing and vision; -No wandering exhibited; -Required extensive assistance of one staff for transfers; -Required limited assistance of one staff for locomotion on the unit; -Required stand by assistance of one staff for locomotion off the unit; -Used a wheelchair and walker for mobility devices. Review of the resident's care plan revised 10/10/18 showed the resident wandered at times and staff were to check on the resident's location frequently and redirect the resident as needed. Review of the resident's electronic medical record from 11/27/17 to 10/23/18 showed the facility completed no elopement risk assessment on the resident. Observation on 10/23/18 at 4:30 P.M. showed the following: -The resident propelled him/herself around in his/her wheelchair inside the facility toward the front double doors; -The resident exited through the first door which was open that lead to the front door (closed); -The chief financial officer (CFO) and certified nursing assistant (CNA) N redirected the resident back inside the first open door and toward the dining room table; -The resident told staff , I want to go home, the CFO and CNA N told the resident, I know you do and redirected the resident to the dining room table. Observation on 10/23/18 from 4:55 P.M. to 4:58 P.M. showed the following: -The south side facility door alarm sounded and could be heard down the hall and in the main dining area; -No staff were present in the main dining area, TV area, kitchen or at the nurses station; -Resident #28 sat at the dining room table in the main dining area waiting for supper. He/she yelled for staff to help, because Resident #17 propelled him/herself out of the south exit door. Staff did not respond to Resident #28 yelling or to the alarms going off; -The resident propelled him/herself out the side door on the south back side of the building on the sidewalk toward a high traffic road with a speed limit of 35 miles per hour; -The surveyor jogged out to the resident to redirect the resident back into the building, as no staff responded to the alarm. With redirection the resident turned him/herself around and propelled him/herself back into the building. The resident repeatedly told the surveyor, I want to go home; -After approximately three minutes, CNA N came into the main area of the dining room and asked why the alarm was going off, what had happened; -The resident told CNA N repeatedly, I want to go home; -CNA N was the only staff in the building at the time the resident exited the building. During an interview on 10/23/18 at 4:59 P.M., CNA N said the following: -CNA O who was working in Ella's cottage with him/her and had gone over to the administrator's office (separate building) for an inservice; -He/she was the only staff in the building and was getting another resident up. He/she could not hear the door alarms going off while in the resident's room; -Resident#17 said earlier that he/she wanted to go home, but CNA N didn't think anything about it; -The resident always propelled him/herself in and out of the facility into the courtyard, but didn't normally try to get out the front or side door; -He/she had been in assisting another resident at the time Resident #17 left the cottage. Observation on 10/23/18 at 5:50 P.M. to 7:50 P.M., showed door alarms could not be heard in the residents' rooms with the room doors closed in each of the six cottages and showed the alarm did not work to the exit door on the spa side of Betty's cottage. Review of the resident's electronic medical record dated 10/23/18, showed no documentation of the resident's change in behavior, exit seeking behavior, or elopement along with any interventions to prevent further elopement. Review of the resident's wandering risk assessment dated [DATE] at 6:30 P.M. (after the resident exited the building without staff knowledge) showed the facility assessed the resident at low risk for wandering. Review of a list of residents at risk for wandering/elopement provided by the facility after the resident's elopement dated 10/23/18 showed the resident was not on the list as at risk. During an interview on 10/23/18 at 6:16 P.M., CNA N said the following: -Usually there were two CNAs in the cottage during the day and evening shift to help with cares for the residents; -He/she did not notify the licensed nurse or administrator of the resident's earlier change in behavior and exit seeking, the resident actually exiting the building, or of not being able to hear the alarm in the resident's room; -When CNA P came over to the cottage , he/she told him/her about the resident eloping out of south door in his/her wheelchair towards the road while he/she was in a resident's room and could not hear the alarm and CNA P reported it to the administrator; -The resident tried to get out earlier in the day, but he/she and the other staff redirected the resident; -The resident enjoyed being outside, but it was a change in behavior that the resident was trying to get out the front door and saying he/she wanted to go home. During and interview on 10/23/18 at 6:31 P.M., CNA O said the following: -He/she left Ella's cottage around 4:40 P.M. to go over to the administration office for an inservice; -He/she had worked by him/herself in the evenings at times and night shift always had one CNA working in each cottage; -He/she did not know if he/she could hear the door alarms while providing cares in a resident's room; -He/she was not familiar with the resident that eloped; -He/she was not aware of any residents that were an elopement risk in the cottage. During an interview on 10/23/18 at 6:42 P.M., CNA P said the following: -CNA N reported to him/her that the resident got out of the building; -He/she reported to the administrator about the incident around 5:15 P.M. to 5:30 P.M.; -The resident always wanders and was an elopement risk; -He/she had worked by him/herself during the evening at times and on nights there was always one CNA to care for the residents. During an interview on 10/23/18 at 5:40 P.M., Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) R said the following: -The resident propelled him/herself in and out of the building to the secured court yard as he/she desired; -He/she was not aware the resident had tried to get out the front doors of the facility or was saying he/she wanted to go home. This was a change in behavior for the resident; -He/she was in Ava's cottage passing medication and did not know there was only one CNA left in the building when the resident eloped. 3. Review of Resident #16's Wandering Risk Scale, dated 8/4/18, showed the resident was at a high risk to wander. Review of the resident's care plan, last revised 9/4/18, showed the following: -Diagnoses included Alzheimer's disease and dementia; -He/she wanders aimlessly and enters other residents' room at times; -Redirect the resident when he/she was entering a room other than his/her own; -The resident has impaired cognitive function/dementia or impaired thought processes related Alzheimer's disease, dementia; -Use the resident's preferred name. Identify yourself at each interaction. Face the resident when speaking and make eye contact, reduce any distractions-turn off television, radio close the door etc. The resident understands consistent, simple directive sentences, provide the resident with necessary cues. Stop and return if agitated; -The resident can be redirected easily with snacks; -Engage simple, structured activities that avoid overly demanding tasks; -Keep my routine consistent and try to provide consistent care givers as much as possible in order to decrease confusion; -He/she had a communication problem related to dementia and Alzheimer's disease; -Anticipate and meet the resident's needs; -He/she had little or no activity involvement . Review of the resident's quarterly MDS, dated [DATE], showed the following: -Short-term and long-term memory problems; -Sometimes makes self-understood and understands others; -Cognitive skills for daily decision making moderately impaired (the resident's ability to make decisions is poor, cues and supervision required); -Inattention continuously present; -Disorganized thinking, behavior present fluctuates, comes and goes, changes in severity; -Wandering or behavior of this type occurred four to six days over the seven-day look back period; -Used a walker to assist with ambulation. Review of the resident council meeting minutes from 9/7/18 showed the residents in attendance complained the resident wandered throughout the day. Review of the resident's nurse's note, dated 10/8/18 at 8:13 P.M., showed it was reported to this nurse, Resident #7 called his/her family member saying a confused resident had gone in his/her room at 1:00 A.M. Resident #7 reported Resident #16 got into bed with him/her and he/she was scared of a recurrence. The residents will both be visualized while in bed every hour or as often as tolerated. During interview on 10/22/18 at 2:57 P.M., Resident #7 said about about two weeks ago at 1:00 A.M., he/she woke up with Resident #16 on top of him/her in his/her bed. He/she tried to get Resident #16 off of him/her, but the resident wouldn't budge. He/she started yelling for help and staff came into his/her room to help remove the resident. During interview on 10/24/18 at 9:56 A.M., CNA I said the following: -On 10/8/18 around 3:30 A.M., he/she was assisting a resident get changed when he/she heard a resident yell out, Get out of here! He/she knew Resident #16 had probably gone into Resident #7's room, which was next door; -He/she finished providing care to the resident he/she was with, which took less than five minutes, and then went to Resident #7's room. Resident #16 stood at the foot of Resident #7's bed. Resident #7 seemed upset and told the CNA to get Resident #16 out of his/her room; -He/she was the only staff member in the cottage at the time of the incident; -The resident wandered and the facility was well aware of the issue. Record review of the resident's nurse's note, dated 10/10/18 at 2:31 P.M., showed the resident is alert and oriented to self at times. The resident has been wandering in and out of other residents' rooms, gravitates to room [ROOM NUMBER]. This is understandable due to the resident had equivalent room in another cottage. The resident will not enter room [ROOM NUMBER], which is the resident's new room. Review of the communication binder (a summary of the resident's behaviors during a shift for communication), completed by the CNAs, showed on 10/11/18 staff documented it was tough redirecting the resident this evening. He/she finally tired out, had a shower, and was in bed. Review of the resident's care plan, last revised 10/12/18, showed staff was to provide the resident with a distraction when he/she was wandering. He/she liked sweets and could be distracted with a snack at times or conversation. Review of the communication binder showed the following: -On the evening shift on 10/20/18, the resident was wandering around constantly; -On the night shift on 10/20/18, the resident was up wandering around 3:00 A.M. He/she was lost and confused, wandering the halls. Review of the resident's nurse's note, dated 10/21/18 at 6:30 A.M., showed the following: -The resident wandered into another resident's room and said he/she was trying to find his/her way home. The resident is alert and oriented to self only at times; -The resident is an elopement risk due to his/her confusion and exit seeking behaviors; -The resident was not aware other residents had concerns about him/her walking into their rooms and touching their possessions and other residents; -The resident is easily compliant with walking with a staff member to another area and follows instructions well, but is not easily redirected from exit seeking. Review of the resident's nurse's notes, dated 10/23/18 at 2:37 A.M., showed the following: -The resident was up wandering in the cottage and was entering another resident's room; -He/she was escorted back to bed. Observation on 10/23/18 at 9:15 A.M., showed the resident paced unattended in the hall and wandered into another resident's room. The resident (who resided in the room) lay in bed resting. The resident paced around briefly and walked back out of the room. There was no staff in the area. During interview on 10/22/18 at 2:44 P.M., Resident #39 said Resident #16 was in and out of other residents' rooms. Resident #39 had to position himself/herself in the doorway of his/her room to block Resident #16 from going into his/her room. During interview on 10/22/18 at 3:15 P.M., Resident #200 said the following: -He/she was discharging from the facility today and not returning, because of Resident #16. Resident #16 was in and out of residents' rooms day and night; -Recently, Resident #16 was in his/her room around 6:30 A.M. Resident #16 turned on his/her light and woke him/her up; -Resident #16 was in the kitchen area all the time and he/she was not supposed to be. During interview on 10/23/18 at 9:36 A.M., Resident #35 said the following: -Resident #16 wandered into his/her room last night throughout the night; -The resident wandered into his/her room day and night; -The resident had wandered into his/her room, even when he/she was going to the bathroom and that made him/her feel very uncomfortable; -It worried him/her a lot that the resident was in and out of his/her room all of the time. Observation on 10/23/18 at 11:32 A.M., showed the resident wandered with his/her wheeled walker through the kitchen area, where food was prepared. No staff was present in the area. Observation on 10/23/18 showed the following: -At 4:03 P.M., the resident walked into the kitchen area where food was cooked and prepared for meals. A staff person directed the resident to sit down and watch television in the dayroom. The resident sat briefly, stood back up, and walked down the hallway; -At 4:11 P.M., the resident paced down the hallway and was in and out of other residents' rooms as the staff prepared the supper meal. The resident was at the end of the hallway out of staff's view; -At 4:18 P.M., the resident wandered towards Resident #39 who sat at the entrance to his/her room visiting with Resident #35. Resident #16 was intrusive and stood directly in front of Resident #39 (approximately 2 feet away). Resident #39 firmly said, get back now. -At 4:19 P.M., CNA C responded to Resident #39 and redirected Resident #16 away from Resident #39 and into the dayroom to watch television. During interview on 10/23/18 at 4:20 P.M., CNA C said the following: -The resident wandered and was in other residents' personal space when the staff was busy; -Staff tried to redirect him/her when he/she wandered. Observation on 10/23/18 at 4:23 P.M. showed the resident immediately stood up from his/her seat in the dayroom and walked back to Resident #39's door and said, Can I go in there? Resident #16 pointed in the direction of Resident #39's room and was in Resident #39's personal space, directly in front of the resident (approximately 2 feet away). Resident #39 said firmly, No, go that way! Resident #16 walked down the hall and into another resident's room. The resident who resided in this room rested in his/her bed. Staff was in the kitchen preparing the supper meal and was not present in this area. During interview on 10/23/18 at 5:35 P.M., CNA C said the resident was able to walk and wandered about the facility. He/she had tried to open the doors to the facility before. The resident moved fast and was very time consuming. The resident had dementia and did not participate in any activities. Observation on 10/24/18 at 10:23 A.M. showed the following: -The resident exited the door of his/her room, walked to the opposite end of the hallway, and paced around inside of another resident's room. The resident, who resided in the room, rested in his/her bed. No staff was present in the area to redirect; -Resident #16 exited the resident's room, shut the door, and walked back up the hall and into the kitchen area where staff prepared food; -A dietary staff member redirected the resident out of the kitchen and gave the resident a drink of water; -The resident immediately walked back into the kitchen area. During interview on 10/24/18 at 11:45 A.M., LPN A said the following: -Resident #16 required more care then what they were able to provide; -The staff could not consistently monitor the resident, therefore, the resident wandered in and out of rooms and into other residents' spaces throughout the day; -The resident was very difficult to redirect. During an interview on 10/23/18 at 6:58 P.M. and on 10/25/18 at 3:05 P.M. the director of nursing (DON) said the following: -The wandering assessment did not show a true picture of Resident #17's elopement risk; -Resident #17's wandering assessment even after the elopement showed low risk for elopement which was inaccurate due to the resident's elopement; -Any resident who had dementia was at risk for elopement; -He/she wasn't sure the number of residents with a diagnosis of dementia or what residents were at risk for elopement; -The list of residents at risk for elopement that was given to the surveyor was not up to date and was missing residents at risk for elopement including Resident #16 and Resident #17; -One staff on night shift would not be enough to have one on one oversight of Resident #17 or any resident; -The alarms should alert the staff of anyone exiting the building; -She was not aware the alarms were not audible in the rooms while staff were providing care; -Resident #16 should not be in other residents' rooms; -The facility had received many complaints regarding Resident #16 due to his/her cognitive function. During an interview on 10/23/18 at 5:35 P.M. and on 11/1/18 at 1:29 P.M. the administrator said the following: -They were doing training with one of the CNAs from the facility and that left one CNA at Ella's Cottage; -She expected CNA N to have reported the incident to her immediately or at least call the licensed nurse from the other building; -CNA N reported he/she could not hear the door alarm going off; -She did not know if the door alarms were audible in resident rooms; -One staff worked the night shift in the cottages; -Resident #17 had declined recently, but propelled him/herself in and out of the facility courtyard on his/her own; -Staff did not report the Resident #17's earlier exit seeking behavior to her; -Resident #17's behavior was a change, she would have expected staff to notify her; -Resident #16 had been assessed and the facility does not feel they are able to provide the care the resident needs. NOTE: At the time of the survey, the violation was determined to be at the immediate and serious jeopardy level J. Based on observation, interview and record review completed during the onsite visit, it was determined the facility had implemented corrective action to address and lower the violation at the time. During the onsite visit, the owner installed alarms that were louder and could be heard in the resident rooms and bathrooms (as long as the bathroom doors were open), had a staff one on one with Resident #17 during the night while only one staff was working. Corrected the alarm in the cottage that was not working. Changed the elopement form, working on the policy and procedure for elopement, updated the resident elopement sheet and began inservices on residents at risk for elopement and what to do to prevent and in the event of elopement. The inservices on residents at risk for elopement and the procedure of what to do would continue until all staff were inserviced. The DON or delegated personnel would inservice all staff prior to working. The facility was still trying to figure out what alarm system to use and who would sit with the resident and provide one on one supervision for the resident to prevent further elopement. A final revisit will be conducted to determine if the facility is in substantial compliance with participation requirements. At the time of exit, the severity of the deficiency was lowered to the D level. This statement does not denote that the facility has complied with State law (Section 198.026.1 RSMo.) requiring that prompt remedial action be taken to address Class I violation(s).
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0661 (Tag F0661)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to complete a comprehensive discharge summary and recapitulation of stay for one resident (Resident #10) in a review of three closed records. ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to complete a comprehensive discharge summary and recapitulation of stay for one resident (Resident #10) in a review of three closed records. The facility census was 39. 1. Review of the facility's undated Discharge Summary and Plan policy showed the following: -Policy Statement: When a resident's discharge is anticipated, a discharge summary and post-discharge plan will be developed to assist the resident to adjust to his/her new living environment; -Policy Interpretation and Implementation: 1. When the facility anticipates a resident's discharge to a private residence, another nursing facility (i.e. skilled, intermediate care, ICF/IID, etc.), a discharge summary and a post-discharge plan will be developed which will assist the resident to adjust to his or her new living environment; 2. The discharge summary will include a recapitulation of the resident's stay at this facility and a final summary of the resident's status at the time of the discharge in accordance with established regulations governing release of resident information and as permitted by the resident. The discharge summary shall include a description of the resident's: a. Current diagnosis; b. Medical history (including any history of mental disorders and intellectual disabilities); c. Course of illness, treatment and/or therapy since entering the facility; d. Current laboratory, radiology, consultation, and diagnostic test results; e. Physical and mental functional status; f. Ability to perform activities of daily living including: -Bathing, dressing and grooming, transferring and ambulating, toilet use, eating, and using speech, language, and other communication systems; -The need for staff assistance and assistive devices or equipment to maintain or improve functional abilities; -The ability to form relationships, make decisions including health care decisions, and participate (to the extent physically able) in the day-to-day activities of the facility; g. Sensory and physical impairments (neurological, or muscular deficits; for example, a decrease in vision and hearing, paralysis, and bladder incontinence); h. Nutritional status and requirements: -Weight and height; -Nutritional intake; -Eating habits, preferences and dietary restrictions; i. Special treatments or procedures (treatments and procedures that are not part of basic services provided); j. Mental and psychosocial status (ability to deal with life, interpersonal relationships and goals, make health care decisions, and indicators of resident behavior and mood); k. Discharge potential (the expectation of discharging the resident from the facility within the next three months); l. Dental condition (the condition of the teeth, gums, and other structures of the oral cavity that may affect a resident's nutritional status, communication abilities, quality of life, and the need for and use of dentures or other dental appliances); m. Activities potential (the ability and desire to take part in activity pursuits which maintain or improve physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being); n. Rehabilitation potential (the ability to improve independence in functional status through restorative care programs); o. Cognitive status (the ability to problem solve, decide, remember, and be aware of and respond to safety hazards); p. Medication therapy (all prescription and over-the-counter medications taken by the resident including dosage, frequency of administration, and recognition of significant side effects that would be most likely to occur in the resident). 3. As part of the discharge summary, the nurse will reconcile all pre-discharge medications with the resident's post-discharge medications. The medication reconciliation will be documented; 4. Every resident will be evaluated for his/her discharge needs and will have an individualized post discharge plan; 5. The post-discharge plan will be developed by the care planning/interdisciplinary team (IDT) with the assistance of the resident and his/her family and will include: a. Where the resident plans to reside; b. Arrangements that have been made for follow up care and services; c. A description of the resident's stated discharge goals; d. The degree of caregiver/support person availability; e. How the IDT will support the resident's/resident's representative in the transition to post-discharge care; f. What a factors may make the resident's vulnerable to preventable readmission; g. How those factors will be addressed; 6. The discharge plan will be re-evaluated based on changes in the resident's condition or needs prior to discharge; 7. The resident's/resident's representative will be involved in post-discharge planning; 8. The staff will refer the resident/resident's representative to local agencies and support services that can assist in accommodating the resident post discharge; 9. If it is determined discharge is not feasible it will be documented reason; 10. Staff will assist in home health agency or other post-acute care providers applicable to the resident's goals of care and treatment; 11. The resident/resident representative should provide the facility with 72 hour notice of discharge to assure adequate discharge evaluation and plan for post discharge; 12. A member of IDT will evaluate the final post discharge plan with the resident/resident representative; 13. A copy of the following will be provided to the resident and a copy will be kept in the resident's medical record; a. An evaluation of the resident's discharge needs; b. The post discharge plan; c. The discharge summary. Review of Resident #10's face sheet showed the following: -admission date 9/25/18; -Diagnoses included orthopedic after care, anxiety, pneumonia, diabetes, fracture right lower leg, and rheumatoid arthritis; -Date of discharge 10/23/18. Review of the resident's progress notes dated 10/23/18 at 2:05 P.M. showed the following: -The resident went home on home health, with physical therapy and medications; -The resident was transported via stretcher; -The resident's belongings were collected by the resident's home health care provider and taken; -No signs and symptoms of distress noted upon discharge. Review of the resident's electronic medical record (EMR) 10/23/18 showed no discharge summary or recapitulation of care. During interview on 10/25/18 at 3:04 P.M. the Director of Nursing (DON) said the following: -The interdisciplinary team was responsible for completing the discharge summary; -She expected the social service director to lead a discharge of the resident to ensure the resident had everything needed prior to discharge; -She expected a discharge summary to be completed on all discharged residents; -She could not find a discharge summary for the resident.
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0565 (Tag F0565)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide a resolution regarding the residents' grievances filed in resident council. The resident council members filed grievances/complaint...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide a resolution regarding the residents' grievances filed in resident council. The resident council members filed grievances/complaints regarding missing items, activities, dietary, and sufficient staffing and did not receive a response from the facility regarding resolution of the grievances. The facility census was 39. 1. Review of the undated facility policy Resident Council showed the following: -This community supports residents' rights to organize and participate in the resident council; -The purpose of resident council is to provide a forum for residents, families, and resident representative to have input in the operation of the community; -Discussion of concerns and suggestions for improvement; -Consensus building and communication between residents and community staff; -Disseminating information and gathering feedback from interested residents; -All residents are eligible to participate in the resident council, the community staff encourages residents who are willing to participate; -The council is encouraged to elect a President or Chair to act as a liaison and facilitate communication between the council and a designated staff person who has been approved by the council. Staff, visitors or other guests may attend resident council meetings if invited by the respective resident group; -Council meetings are scheduled monthly or more frequently if requested by residents. The date, time and location of the meeting are noted in the activities calendar; -A resident council response form will be utilized to track issues and their resolution. The community department related to any issues will be responsible for addressing the item(s) of the concern; -The Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) Committee will review information and feedback from the Elder Council as part of their quality review. Issues documented on council response forms maybe referred to the QAPI Committee, if applicable (i.e., the issue is of serious nature or if there is pattern, etc.) Record review of the facility's Resident Council meeting minutes for Betty's Cottage dated 7/12/18, showed the following : -Activities: Poor system, need more help; -Music therapy needs new songs; -Dietary: There is a lot of breaded food; -Would like more veal parmesan; -Need more nutritious meals; -Dietary need directions and directions detailed; -Peas are in everything; -More fruit, fresh fruits that are in season; -Would like salad before dinner; -Would like fresh tomatoes; -Food is cold sometimes; -Some Certified Nurse Aides (CNAs) don't know how to cook; -CNAs: They are overworked; -Not enough CNAs; -CNAs always sitting at the breakfast bar; -Don't pay the residents any attention; -Would like a longer call cord; -No resident council response forms; -No documentation to show staff followed up on the residents' concerns from the meeting. Record review of the facility's Resident Council meeting minutes for Ella's Cottage dated 7/17/18, showed the following -Activities: Would like to play bingo with other Cottages; -CNAs: Think there should be more people helping; -Some CNAs are mean at times; -No resident council response forms; -No documentation to show staff followed up on the residents' concerns from the meeting. Record review of the facility's Resident Council meeting minutes for Betty's Cottage dated 8/4/18, showed the following: -Activities: They don't like the schedules and the CNAs don't follow it; -Food: Chicken sometimes is hard as a rock, couldn't pick it up with a fork (oriental chicken); -Green beans at every meal; -Food is mushy; -Food isn't up to standards; -Out of wheat bread all the time; -Bowls and plates are chipped; -Silverware looks dirty; -No resident council response forms; -No documentation to show staff followed up on the residents' concerns from the meeting. Record review of the facility's Resident Council meeting minutes for Ella's Cottage dated 8/4/18, showed the following: -Bed time is too early; -CNAs expect them to go to bed too early; -No resident council response forms; -No documentation to show staff followed up on the residents' concerns from the meeting. Record review of the facility's Resident Council meeting minutes for Grace's Cottage dated, 9/7/18, showed the following: -Some items disappeared in my room; -Resident messes up all the decorative pillows; -Beautician isn't all that great. Too much hair spray; -Dietary: Not that tasty; -Could be improved, not just the quality but would like more; -Food isn't equal portions; -No resident council response forms; -No documentation to show staff followed up on the residents' concerns from the meeting. Record review of the facility's Resident Council meeting minutes for Betty's Cottage dated 9/12/18, showed the following: -Overall noise level is high in the kitchen; -Activities: Would like a a movie list; -CNAs: Needs to wash hands properly; -They don't wear gloves when handing food; -Dietary: Not enough food to eat; -No resident council response forms; -No documentation to show staff followed up on the residents' concerns from the meeting. Record review of the facility's Resident Council meeting minutes for Ella's Cottage dated 9/25/18, showed the following: -Need more people at night; -Takes about 30 minutes or longer; -Residents aren't being put first when doing tasks; -Dislikes the bed, been sleeping in the recliner; -No resident council response forms; -No documentation to show staff followed up on the residents' concerns from the meeting. Record review of the facility's Resident Council meeting minutes for Betty's Cottage dated 10/19/18, showed the following: -Yesterday dinner was salty, and couldn't eat. Three residents complained. Residents had to find a substitute for dinner; -Kitchen should taste the food before serving; -CNAs need to dress appropriately for work (seeing their underwear); -Breakfast is served around 8:30 A.M. and residents are having to wait to eat; -The meat doesn't have any flavor; -Vegetables are horrible and being cooked down; -Would like one cook for each cottage; -The meal menu needs to be passed out in a timely fashion so they will know what they will be having. Prefer it to be Saturday morning; -Sometimes the activities aren't being done; -The residents would like to have a exercise video for the exercise groups in the morning; -No resident council response forms; -No documentation to show staff followed up on the residents' concerns from the meeting. Record review of the facility's Resident Council meeting minutes for Grace's Cottage dated 10/22/18, showed the following: -Dietary: Food is mediocre; -CNAs: Sometimes there is too much noise in the kitchen area; -Make a lot of noise while doing the dishes; -No resident council response forms; -No documentation to show staff followed up on the residents' concerns from the meeting. During interview on 10/23/18 at 10:02 A.M. residents at the group meeting said the following: -Five of the seven residents said CNAs were not good to follow-up on grievances; -Resident #8 said there was a resident council, but they do not meet routinely when they do meet; -Resident #28 said they do not have regular meetings unless they have a problem, but it would probably be good to meet monthly to go over things; -Resident #7 said they do not meet regularly. During interview on 10/24/18 at 12:00 P.M. Resident #22 said the following: -The resident council did not get any response back after voicing concerns; -There was never any follow-up; -He/she had asked about activities several times and the lack of and he/she was told by the Activity Director there was only one of him/her; -He/she would like some type of follow-up in the meetings and how the facility was going to address their complaints; -Staff never read the minutes from the previous meeting to see what was taken care of, all he/she ever heard was that there was only one of him/her. During interview on 10/23/18 at 12:15 P.M. the Activity Director said the following: -When certain residents repeated concerns he/she didn't report that to anyone, because it was always the same thing; -The residents will complain about there not being enough staff in resident council meetings, but he/she told the residents that two CNAs worked during the day shift and one CNA on night shift and there was nothing that could be done about that, so he/she didn't tell anyone about that; -Activities were always brought up in the council meetings; -Residents had complained about not having enough staff on evenings and nights during group meeting; -He/she told the residents that there was always just one CNA on nights and on some evenings and that was just the way it was; -He/she did not report the residents' concerns to anyone regarding the complaints of call lights not being answered or not enough staff; -He/she was not aware he/she was to follow up on concerns and grievances from the council meeting or to document. During an interview on 10/29/18 at 3:09 P.M., the social service director said the following: -He/she was not aware of any grievances from group/resident council; -He/she did not receive a copy of the resident council/group meeting minutes and had not received any reports from the activity director regarding resident council/group grievances; -She would expect the activity director to report any missing items reported or any other grievance to her so they could start an investigation and try to find a solution to the problem. During interview on 11/1/18 at 1:29 P.M., the administrator said she would expect to receive a copy of the group minutes and all department heads should be notified with concerns. The minutes should be detailed and identified by which resident said what and who was going to follow up with the concerns.
CONCERN (E)

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

Employment Screening (Tag F0606)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to screen three new employees, (Environmental Service Staff F, Housekeeping Service Staff H and Registered Nurse (RN) G), in a review of nine ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to screen three new employees, (Environmental Service Staff F, Housekeeping Service Staff H and Registered Nurse (RN) G), in a review of nine newly hired employees to determine if any had a Federal indicator with the Nurse Aide Registry that would prohibit employment at the facility. The facility census was 39. 1. Review of the facility's undated policy Screening of Potential Hires for History of Criminal Acts or Abuse for a Valid Licensure showed the following: -In accordance with state and federal laws, all new employees will be checked for criminal background or other reasons that disqualify them from working with elders; -Team members are not allowed to work in elder contact positions (those that provided hands on patient care) until the following record checks have been completed are put into their personal files which included CNA Registry checks. (The policy did not indicate all employees needed to be checked only contact positions) 2. Review of Environmental Service Staff F's employee file showed the following: -Hired on 1/22/18; -No evidence the facility completed the Nurse Aide Registry check upon hire. 3. Review of Housekeeping Service Staff H's employee file showed the following: -Hired on 8/29/18; -No evidence the facility completed the Nurse Aide Registry check upon hire. 4. Review of RN G's employee file showed the following: -Hired on 6/4/18; -No evidence the facility completed the Nurse Aide Registry check upon hire. During interview on 10/25/18 at 1:35 P.M., the Business Office Manager said the following: -She had been the Business Office Manager since May 2018; -He/she was responsible for completing the background checks on all new employees, which included nurse aide registry checks; -Environmental Service staff, F was hired on 1/22/18 and the Nurse Aide Registry check was not completed upon hire; -Housekeeping Services staff H was hired on 8/29/18 and the Nurse Aide Registry check was not completed upon hire; -He/she did not realize the nurse aide registry checks had to be completed on housekeeping staff; -RN G was hired on 6/4/18 and the Nurse Aide Registry check was not completed upon hire; -He/she was not aware nurse aide registry checks had to be completed on all staff. During interview on 10/25/18 at 12:00 P.M. the administrator said she expected the Business Office Manager to complete the Certified Nurse's Aide Registry checks on all employees upon hire.
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0679 (Tag F0679)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide an ongoing program of meaningful activities on...

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 provide an ongoing program of meaningful activities on a daily basis to meet the interests and the physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident, based on the comprehensive assessment, for three residents (Residents #14, #19, and #28) in a review of 16 sampled residents and one additional resident (Resident #22). The facility census was 39. 1. Review of the facility's Activities and Social Services policy, undated, showed the following: -Residents shall have the right to choose the types of activities and social events in which they wish to participate as long as such activities do not interfere with the rights of other residents in the community; -Residents are encouraged to choose the types of recreational, cultural, and religious activities and social events in which they prefer to participate; -The Interdisciplinary Care Team will evaluate the individual's personal history and preferences, and will consider his/her medical condition and prognosis in identifying relevant recreational and cultural activities; -When the Care Planning Team develops the resident's activity and social care plans, the resident will be given an opportunity to chose when, where, and how he or she will participate in activities and social events. As much as possible, the community will provide activities, social events, and schedules that are compatible with the residents' interests, physical and mental assessment, and overall plan of care; -Residents who wish to meet with or participate in the activities of social, religious, and other community groups, at or away from the community, will be encouraged to do so. As much as possible, the community will help the individual arrange to reach these outside activities, but the community may not necessarily provide the transportation; -Should a resident be considered to lack sufficient decision making capacity, mental incompetence, or physical capacity to participate in Activity and Social Service Programs, the Activities or Social Services Staff will document the reason for any limitations in the resident's medical record (chart). The attending physician may also be asked to document the physical or medical basis for such limitations or restrictions; -Residents are encouraged to participate in community events. However, it is not this community's policy to assign staff members to accompany residents attending community events off premises; -Activities will be scheduled periodically during the day, as well as during evenings, weekends, and holidays. 2. Review of the Long-Term Care Facility Resident Assessment Instrument User's Manual, dated October 2013, showed the following: -Most residents capable of communicating can answer questions about what they like; -Obtaining information about preferences directly from the resident, sometimes called hearing the resident's voice, is the most reliable and accurate way of identifying preferences; -If a resident cannot communicate, then family or significant other who knows the resident well may be able to provide useful information about preferences; -Quality of life can be greatly enhanced when care respects a resident's choice regarding anything that is important to the resident; -Interviews allow the resident's voice to be reflected in the care plan; -Activities are a way for individuals to establish meaning in their lives, and the need for enjoyable activities and pastimes does not change on admission to a nursing home; -A lack of opportunity to engage in meaningful and enjoyable activities can result in boredom, depression, and behavior disturbances; -Individuals vary in the activities they prefer, reflecting unique personalities, past interests, perceived environmental constraints, religious and cultural background, and changing physical and mental abilities. 3. Record review of the facility's Resident Council meeting minutes for Betty's Cottage dated, 7/12/18, showed Activities: Poor system, need more help. Record review of the facility's Resident Council meeting minutes for Ella's Cottage dated, 7/17/18, showed Activities: Would like to play bingo with other cottages. Record review of the facility's Resident Council meeting minutes for Betty's Cottage dated, 8/4/18, showed Activities: Residents don't like the schedules and the CNAs don't follow the schedule. Record review of the facility's Resident Council meeting minutes for Betty's Cottage dated, 10/19/18, showed the activities are not always being done. 4. Review of Resident #19's significant change MDS dated [DATE], showed the following: -Cognitively intact; -It was very important to read books, newspapers, or magazines, listen to music keeping up with the news and participating in religious activities or practices; -It was somewhat important doing things with groups of people, participating in favorite activities and spending time outdoors. Review of the resident's care plan last revised on 10/8/18, showed the following: -He/she will participate in activities of choice at least one to two times per week; -He/she was able to move around and about throughout the facility independently; -He/she liked to read the newspaper in the morning; -He/she liked to work with other residents on puzzles; -Invite/encourage my family to attend activities with me in order to support participation; -My favorite activities are putting the community puzzle together, interacting with a few peers, playing games on my tablets, having visits from family, attending music therapy sometimes, some art and crafts; -Remind him/her that he/she may leave activities at any time, and he/she was not required to stay for entire activity. Review of the resident's Daily Participation log for activities dated October 2018, showed the following: -Family visits: Staff documented participation 10/1/18-10/16/18, and 10/22/18; -Bingo: Staff documented participation 10/5/18 and the remainder of the month showed no documentation; -Games: Staff documented participation on 10/6/18 and the reminder of the month showed no documentation; -TV area: Staff documented participation 10/1/18, 10/2/18 and 10/5/18 and 10/6/18; -Puzzles: Staff documented participation on 10/1/18, 10/2/18 and 10/5/18-10/16/18 (a puzzle was left set up in the dayroom on a table); -Outside: Staff documental participation on 10/7/18. During interview on 10/22/18 at 4:27 P.M., the resident said he/she always enjoyed getting together with his/her friends before he/she came to the facility and enjoyed activities. The facility didn't really do any activities and the activities on the calendar don't take place. He/she got bored. 5. Review of Resident #22's admission MDS dated [DATE], showed the following: -Lifetime occupation: Left blank; -Cognition intact; -Trouble concentrating on things, such as reading the newspaper or watching television two to six days out of 14 days; -Very important to have books, newspapers, and magazines to read; -Very important to keep up on the news, do things with groups of people, do favorite activity and go outside to get fresh air when the weather is good. Review of the resident's bedside [NAME] report, undated, showed the following: -Activities - Encourage ongoing, family to attend special events, activities, meals; -I need assistance with ADLs as required during activities; -Introduce me to other residents with similar background, interests and encourage/facilitate interaction; -Provide a program of activities that is of interest and empowers me by encouraging/allowing choice, self-expression and responsibility; -Thank me for attendance at activity functions. Review of the resident's care plan, undated, showed the following: -I can be independent of staff for meeting emotional, intellectual, physical, and social needs; -Encourage ongoing family involvement. Invite my family to attend special events, activities, meals; -Establish and record my prior level of activity involvement and interests by talking with me, my caregivers, and my family on admission and as necessary; -I may need assistance/escort to activity functions; -I need assistance with ADLs as required during activities; -Introduce me to other residents with similar background, interests and encourage/facilitate interaction; -Invite me to scheduled activities; -My preferred activities are socials, parties, putting puzzles together, spending time with other residents in my cottage and I may like to visit other cottages; -Provide a program of activities that is of interest and empowers me by encouraging/allowing choice, self-expression and responsibility; -Provide me with an activities calendar. Notify me of any changes to the calendar of activities; -Provide me with materials for individual activities as desired. I like the following independent activities: reading, putting puzzles together, coloring or drawing, and word search puzzles; -Thank me for attendance at activity functions; -When I choose not to participate in organized activities, I prefer to color, and work on word search puzzles, for social and sensory stimulation. Review of the resident's activity log for the month of October 2018, showed the following: -Family Visits: Showed no documentation of participation; -Bingo: Staff documented participation 10/5/18 the remainder of the month showed no documentation of participation; -Current Events: Showed no documentation of participation; -Reading: Showed no documentation of participation; -Exercise: Staff documented participation 10/6/18, 10/7/18, 10/8/18, 10/9/18, 10/12/18, 10/13/18, 10/14/18, 10/15/18, 10/16/18 and 10/22/18, the remainder of the month showed no documentation of participation; -1:1 activity: Staff documented participation 10/1/18, 10/2/18, 10/5/18, 10/6/18, 10/7/18, 10/8/18, 10/9/18, 10/10/18, 10/11/18, 10/12/18, 10/13/18, 10/14/18, 10/15/18, 10/16/18 and 10/22/18, the remainder of the month showed no documentation of participation; -Puzzles: Staff documented participation 10/1/18, 10/2/18, 10/5/18, 10/6/18, 10/7/18, 10/8/18, 10/9/18, 10/10/18, 10/11/18, 10/12/18, 10/13/18, 10/14/18, 10/15/18, 10/16/18 and 10/22/18, the remainder of the month showed no documentation of participation; -TV Area: Staff documented participation 10/2/18, 10/3/18, 10/4/18, 10/5/18, 10/6/18, 10/7/18, 10/8/18, 10/9/18, 10/10/18, 10/11/18, 10/12/18, 10/13/18, 10/14/18, 10/15/18, 10/16/18 and 10/22/18, the remainder of the month showed no documentation of participation; -Music therapy: Staff documented participation 10/12/18 and the remainder of the month showed no documentation of participation; -Outside: Staff documented participation 10/5/18 and the remainder of the month showed no documentation of participation. During interview on 10/24/18 at 12:00 P.M., the resident said the following: -He/she had brought up concerns with activities not being done in resident council many times, and there had been no follow-up; -He/she was told by the Activity Director that he/she was only one person; -He/she was told that the certified nurse assistants (CNA)s were responsible for the activities; -The CNAs are too busy with cares to do activities; -On Saturday and Sunday nothing was organized, the residents just watch television or turn on the radio; -The residents have to try and create something to do; -I have felt very alone, I can't stand to sit in my room alone, I have to be around people. 6. Review of Resident #28's admission MDS dated [DATE], showed the following: -Cognitively intact; -Understands others and makes self understood -Activities: Very important to read, listen to music, keep up on the news, go outside, be involved in religion, and do things with groups of people; -Very important to participate in activities. Review of the resident's bedside [NAME] report, undated, showed the following: -Activities-I prefer to socialize with staff, family, visitors and other residents; -I prefer socials, parties, reminiscing groups, small simple activities, exercise class, looking at magazines, kids, watching TV shows and movies; -Provide a program of activities that is of interest and empowers me by encouraging/allowing choice, self expression, and responsibility. Review of the resident's care plan, dated 10/31/18, showed the following: -I require ADL help as needed; -I require extensive ADL help with bed mobility, transfers, dressing, bathing and toileting; -I can be independent of staff for meeting emotional, intellectual, physical, and social needs; -Encourage ongoing family involvement. Invite my family to attend special events, activities, meals; -Introduce me to residents with similar backgrounds and interest; -Invite me to scheduled activities; -My preferred activities are socials, parties, reminiscing in groups. Review of the resident's activity log for the month of October 2018, showed the following: -Family Visits: staff documented participation 10/2/18, 10/11/18, 10/19/18, and 10/20/18; -Bingo: Staff documented participation 10/10/18 and 10/19/18 the remainder of the month showed no documentation of participation; -Current Events: staff documented 10/10/18 and 10/20/18 the remainder of the month showed no documentation of participation; -Reading: showed no documentation of participation; -Exercise: showed no documentation of participation; -Bible/mass: showed no documentation of participation; -Current events: showed no documentation of participation; -Food: showed staff documented participation for 10/7/18 the remainder of the month showed no documentation of participation; -1:1 activity: staff documented participation 10/1/18 through 10/23/18; -Parties: showed no documentation of participation; -Puzzles: staff documented participation 10/1/18, 10/2/18, 10/5/18, 10/6/18, 10/7/18, 10/8/18, 10/9/18, 10/10/18, 10/11/18, 10/12/18, 10/13/18, 10/14/18, 10/15/18, 10/16/18 and 10/22/18, the remainder of the month showed no documentation of participation; -TV Area: staff documented participation 10/1/18 through 10/23/18; -Music therapy: staff documented participation 10/12/18 the remainder of the month showed no documentation of participation; -Outside: showed no documentation of participation; -Pet therapy: showed no documentation of participation; -Reminiscing: showed no documentation of participation. Review of the facility activity calendar for Monday 10/22/18, showed activities of morning-chair exercise, afternoon-parachute, evening-book club. Observation on 10/22/18 from 1:30 P.M. to 5:50 P.M., in Ella's Cottage showed the staff did not conduct the parachute activity as scheduled on the activity calendar. During an interview on 10/22/18 at 5:00 P.M., the resident said the following: -The facility doesn't have any activities; -They have a calendar that says they are supposed to have activities but they rarely do them; -He/she was able to get bingo started once a week on Fridays; -He/she enjoys bingo but wished there were more activities; -The calendar shows they are supposed to do a parachute but he/she didn't know what that was; -The staff hadn't offered a parachute activity and supper was getting ready to be served so the activity wouldn't get done; -He/she was moving to a home closer to family that offered more activities; -One of the main reasons he/she was leaving the facility was due to not getting socialization and scheduled activities. 7. Review of Resident # 14's annual MDS, dated [DATE], showed the following: -Cognitively intact; -It was very important to read books, newspapers, or magazines, listen to music, being around animals such as pets, doing things with groups of people and spending time outdoors; -Somewhat important participating in favorite activities. Review of the resident's care plan last revised on 8/15/18, showed the following: -He/she needed assistance in meeting intellectual and social needs; -He/she wished to attend and or participate in my choice of activities 3-5 times per week to help maintain my cognitive stimulation. This will also keep me socially involved; -Please ask him/her if the activities going on were something he/she would like to do, and what options are available for transportation if needed, then set up appropriately; -If he/she is in his/her room with his/her headphones on and there is an activity, especially one outside, please come in and ask if he/she wished to go out with them; -Introduce him/her to new people with similar interests; -Please also provide an activity schedule and remind me before hand to see if I wish to participate as well as whom else is joining in. Review of the resident's Daily Participation Log for activities dated October 2018, showed the following: -Family visits: Staff documented participation 10/1/18 -10/16/18, 10/21/18 and 10/22/18; -Puzzles: Staff documented participation 10/1/18-10/16/18 and 10/22/18 (a puzzle was set up in the dayroom); -Exercise: Staff documented participation 10/22/18; -Music therapy: Staff documented participation 10/12/18; -Outside: Staff documented participation 10/1/18, 10/2/18, 10/5/18-10/7/18 and 10/22/18. During interview on 10/22/18 at 4:07 P.M., the resident said the following: -The facility had very few activities and the activities on the calendar did not get done; -He/she liked activities but the facility did not offer much to do; -He/she had told the Activity Director that the activities did not get done and he/she said that there was only one of him/her and the Certified Nurse Assistant (CNA)s were responsible for providing the activities; -The CNAs are busy taking care of the residents and the activities don't get done. 8. Observation on 10/22/18 at 2:39 P.M., in Kris' Cottage showed various residents sat in the dayroom, no activity took place. Observation on 10/23/18 at 9:15 A.M., in Kris' Cottage showed residents sat in different areas of the dayroom, no activity took place. Observation on 10/23/18 at 4:03 P.M., in Kris' Cottage showed various residents sat in the dayroom, the television was turned on but no other activity took place. Observation on 10/24/18 at 10:23 A.M., in Kris' Cottage showed the residents sat in the dayroom and no activity took place. Observation on 10/24/18 at 11:11 A.M., in Kris' Cottage showed various residents sat in the dayroom and no activity took place. 9. Interview with residents at the group meeting on 10/23/18 at 10:02 A.M., showed the following: -Six of the seven residents said there were no routine activities; -Resident #28 said he/she asked if he/she could play bingo so the residents meet in his/her cottage and he/she does the bingo. He/she got bingo started. The residents were told the activities would include musical outings, bands and van rides and he/she has been at the facility around a year and that hasn't occurred. A lot of time the activity calendar is not followed. The residents have to find things to do among themselves; -All seven of the residents agree there were no activities on the weekend; -Resident #19 said he/she gets bored with nothing to do; -Resident #8 said nothing was ever really scheduled routinely for activities. 10. During an interview on 10/23/18 at 12:30 P.M., CNA M said the following: -He/she was in charge of all cares for the residents in the building including activities; -He/she was not always able to get activities completed because the residents' personal cares came first; -He/she did not know what a parachute activity was or how to even conduct an activity with a parachute; -He/she worked in all the cottages at one time or another. During an interview on 10/23/18 at 12:30 P.M., CNA N said the following: -He/she was in charge of all cares for the residents in the building including activities; -He/she was not able to get activities completed because he/she had to provide personal care for the residents, clean, and cook; -He/she was not aware of what a parachute was or how to even conduct an activity with a parachute; -He/she worked in all the cottages. During interview on 10/23/18 at 4:00 P.M., CNA E said activities were put on the back burner. The residents voiced concern with the activities not getting done. On Sunday there was to be a Halloween activity and there were no supplies available, as the supplies were locked up in the office. During interview on 10/23/18 at 5:36 P.M., CNA C said he/she was not able to complete routine activities with the residents as he/she was busy providing personal cares, cooking, cleaning and doing laundry. During interview on 10/24/18 at 10:58 A.M., CNA D said the following: -He/she had worked the day shift for the past two months; -Activities were hard to get done as the staff was busy providing personal cares, cooking and cleaning for the residents; -The CNAs were to follow the calendar but for the last two months he/she has worked the activities did not get done. During interview on 10/24/18 at 11:45 A.M., Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) A said the CNAs were responsible for doing the activities. The CNAs did not get the activities done. There was not have enough staff to even get all of the resident cares completed. There were activities scheduled and there would be no supplies. During interview on 10/23/18 at 12:15 P.M., the Activity Director said the following: -At resident council, activities were always brought up as a concern. The residents said there were not enough activities; -Keeping up with the activities was overwhelming; -The CNAs were responsible for conducting activities in the cottages they were working per the calendar; -She stopped putting times on the activities because the CNAs were supposed to determine a time and inform the elders in their home; -The facility only had one parachute and she wasn't sure which cottage was supposed to do the parachute or if any of them did the parachute activity as scheduled per the calendar; -The facility had difficulty getting the CNAs to conduct the activities even though it was their responsibility; -The residents had voiced concerns about the activities not being offered as scheduled; -The TV activity noted on the calendar meant the TV was turned on in the main commons area. Residents watched TV as they desired. It was an independent activity. During interview on 11/1/18 at 1:29 P.M., the administrator said she would expect activities to be offered and completed as scheduled and per the residents' preferences. She expected the staff to document if an activity was completed or if there was a reason an activity was not completed.
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0725 (Tag F0725)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

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

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 sufficient staff to provide nursing and related services to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of residents, based on resident assessments and plans of care when there was insufficient staff to answer call lights in a timely manner for three residents (Resident #36, #28, and #142), in a review of 16 sampled residents. The facility census was 39. 1. Record review of the facility Staffing policy, undated, showed the following: -Our community provides adequate staffing to meet needed care and services for our resident population; -Our community maintains adequate staffing at all times to ensure that our residents' needs and services are met. Licensed registered nursing and licensed nursing staff are available to provide and monitor the delivery of resident care services. There is a minimum of one Certified Nurse Assistant (CNA) in each cottage at all times. There is a minimum of one licensed nurse for each pair of cottages at all times. During times of day when most residents are up (7 AM - 11 PM) a second CNA is staffed in each cottage; -A Registered Nurse (RN) will be on duty a minimum of eight hours a day (while residents are generally awake (7 AM - 11 PM) per state and federal regulations; -Other support services (e.g., dietary, activities/recreational, social, therapy, environmental, etc.) are adequately staffed to ensure that resident needs are met. 2. Review of the facility undated call light policy showed the following: -For the comfort and safety of the residents it is imperative that call lights be answered promptly; -Call lights are to be answered as soon as possible but no longer than five minutes for bathroom call lights and 15 minutes for room call lights; -Call light logs will be monitored by the Director of Nurses (DON) and others he/she may designate for patterns of non-compliance. 3. Interview with the residents at the group meeting on 10/23/18 at 10:02 A.M., showed the following: -Resident #8 said on Sunday not as many staff were around to get him/her to bed and up for meals as he/she has a amputated leg. At times there was only one CNA. He/she had to wait up to an hour for assistance; -Resident #28 said he/she had to wait up to 30 minutes for the call light to be answered. He/she takes two water pills a day. He/she had to wait and he/she had an accident, like a two year old it made me feel terrible; -Resident #35 said he/she had to wait 20 minutes for the call light to be answered and had an accident; -Resident #9 said he/she had to wait 40 minutes for assistance to go to the bathroom and it makes him/her feel very uncomfortable. 4. Record review of the facility's Resident Council meeting minutes for Betty's Cottage dated 7/12/18, showed the CNAs are overworked, not enough CNAs, and don't pay the residents any attention. Record review of the facility's Resident Council meeting minutes for Ella's Cottage dated 7/17/18, showed there should be more staff helping. Record review of the facility's Resident Council meeting minutes for Ella's Cottage dated, 9/25/18, showed need more staff at night, takes about 30 minutes or longer, and residents aren't being put first when doing tasks. Record review of the facility's Resident Council meeting minutes for Betty's Cottage dated 10/19/18, showed staff disappear and take breaks and the residents have to wait. 5. Review Resident #36's care plan with effective date 10/1/18, showed the following: -Required extensive assistance of staff for bathing, dressing, and personal hygiene/oral care; -Required limited assistance for bed mobility, toileting, and transfers; -Require assistance of one staff to walk; -Use a motorized wheelchair for locomotion when tired or feel weak; -Bowel incontinence; -Observe pattern of incontinence, and initiate toileting schedule if indicated. Review of the resident's [NAME] Report, dated 10/1/18, showed the following: -Anticipate and meet my needs; -I need prompt response to all requests for assistance; -I require extensive assistance by one staff with bathing/showering, dressing, and personal hygiene/oral care; -I require limited assistance by one staff for bed mobility, transfers, and toileting; -I am dependent for eating. Review of the resident's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS), a federally mandated assessment instrument completed by facility staff, dated 10/8/18, showed the following: -Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMs) of 14 which indicated intact cognition; -Able to make self-understood -Understands others; -Required supervision with limited assistance of one staff for bed mobility, and transfers; -Required limited assistance of one staff for dressing, toilet use, and personal hygiene; -Impaired upper and lower extremity on both sides; -Used a wheelchair; -Continent of urine; -Occasionally incontinent of bowel; -Diagnoses included amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) (progressive neurodegenerative disease that affects nerve cells in the brain and the spinal cord). Review of the call light log provided by the facility showed the following: -On 10/3/18 at 8:08 A.M., the resident's call light was on a total of one hour 17 minutes and 56 seconds; -On 10/5/18 at 10:02 P.M., the resident's call light was on a total of one hour five minutes and 28 seconds; -On 10/7/18 at 12:58 P.M., the resident's call light was on a total of 38 minutes and 42 seconds; -On 10/10/18 at 4:57 P.M., the resident's call light was on a total of 53 minutes and 40 seconds; -On 10/15/18 at 5:06 P.M., the resident's call light was on a total of 44 minutes and 40 seconds. During an interview on 10/24/18 at 10:44 A.M., the resident said he/she has waited at least 20 minutes for his/her call light to be answered and there have been times that he/she has waited an hour or more for light to be answered. 6. Review of Resident #28's quarterly MDS dated [DATE], showed the following: -Cognitively intact; -Understands others and makes self understood; -Required extensive assistance of one staff for bed mobility and bathing; -Required limited assistance of one staff for transfers and dressing; -Required supervision of one staff for toileting and personal hygiene. Review of the resident's [NAME] report undated showed the following: -Anticipate and meet my needs; -Make sure the call light is within reach and encourage me to use it for assistance as needed; -I require extensive assistance of staff with bed mobility, transfers, dressing, bathing, and toileting. Review of the resident's call light log provided by the facility showed the following: -On 10/5/18 at 12:23 A.M., the resident's call light was on a total of one hour 27 minutes and 57 seconds; -On 10/7/18 at 4:04 A.M., the resident's call light was on a total of six hours, twelve minutes and 11 seconds; -On 10/14/18 at 6:23 P.M., the resident's call light was on a total of 14 minutes and 13 seconds; -On 10/20/18 at 4:12 A.M., the resident's call light was on a total of 42 minutes and 30 seconds; -On 10/22/18 at 4:11 A.M., the resident's call light was on a total of 56 minutes and 53 seconds; -On 10/22/18 at 7:42 P.M., the resident's call light was on a total of 15 minutes and 40 seconds. During an interview on 10/22/18 at 5:00 P.M. the resident said the following: -He/she had to wait over 30 minutes at times to get staff to answer the call light and take him/her to the bathroom; -He/she had urinated in his/her pants before because staff did not get to him/her; -He/she had reported his/her concern to all staff including the administrator about call light not being answered in a timely manner; -He/she felt like a two year old and made him/her feel terrible when he/she urinated in his/her clothes. Review of the resident's care plan, with a date of 10/31/18, showed the following: -I require ADL help as needed; -I require extensive ADL help with bed mobility, transfers, dressing, bathing and toileting. 7. Review of Resident #124's care plan, with a date of 10/17/18, showed the following: -I require ADL assistance; -I require extensive ADL help with bed mobility, transfers, dressing, bathing and toileting. Review of Resident #124's admission MDS dated [DATE], showed the following: -Cognitively intact; -Understands others and makes self understood; -Required extensive assistance of one staff for bed mobility, transfers, dressing, toileting, and bathing. Review of the resident's call light log provided by the facility showed the following: -On 10/17/18 at 12:31 P.M., the resident's call light was on a total of one hour seven minutes and 34 seconds; -On 10/17/18 at 12:57 P.M., the resident's call light was on a total of one hour, ten minutes and 57 seconds; -On 10/19/18 at 1:17 A.M., the resident's call light was on a total of one hour, 43 minutes and 20 seconds; -On 10/21/18 at 7:54 P.M., the resident's call light was on a total of 31 minutes and 52 seconds; -On 10/22/18 at 5:55 P.M., the resident's call light was on a total of one hour, 39 minutes and 20 seconds; -On 10/23/18 at 7:49 A.M., the resident's call light was on a total of 16 minutes and 10 seconds. During an interview on 10/23/18 at 11:02 A.M. the resident said the following: -The staff don't answer the call lights in a timely manner; -When he/she puts on his/her call light, it is for a reason such as needing to go to the bathroom; -He/she doesn't just put on his/her call light to be handed an item he/she cannot reach, he/she waits till staff come to take him/her to bathroom and asks for everything at once, because he/she knows they are busy and don't have enough staff; -He/she has had to wait 25 minutes or longer to have his/her call light answered; -He/she had accidents in his/her pants, because staff didn't answer his/her call light promptly; -It made him/her feel like a child to urinate on him/herself; -He/she and his/her family member had reported the issue to the administrator and owners of the home, but did not feel like they were getting any response to fix the issue. During interview on 10/23/18 at 11:02 A.M. the resident's family member said the following: -He/she stays with the resident frequently and has seen staff not answer the call light for over 25 minutes; -He/she would leave the resident's room to find staff and had found staff eating and talking with other staff or on the computer; -He/she felt staff knew the call light had been on, because as soon as he/she would leave the room to check to see if staff were around and before he/she would say anything, staff would stop what they were doing when they saw him/her and go to the room to assist the resident; -Their biggest complaint is staff not answering the call light and not enough staff to care for the resident when needed. 7. During an interview on 10/23/18 at 12:30 P.M. CNA M said the following: -He/she was in charge of all cares for the residents; -He/she was not always able to get to the call lights as quickly as needed due to helping other residents; -He/she had to work by him/herself during the evening shift at times and it made it difficult to respond to call lights when helping other residents or cooking food. During an interview on 10/23/18 at 12:30 P.M. CNA N said the following: -He/she was in charge of all cares for the residents including cooking, cleaning, and laundry; -He/she was not always able to get to the residents call lights in a timely manner, because he/she had to provide personal care for all the residents, clean, do laundry and cook. During an interview on 10/23/18 at 6:31 P.M. CNA O said the following: -He/she worked evenings and nights; -He/she was responsible for resident care, cleaning, cooking, and laundry; -There were times he/she was the only staff member working in the evenings; -There was always just one CNA on night shift; -There were times it would take longer than 15 minutes to get to a resident's call light if he/she was in the middle of toileting or providing care for another resident. During an interview on 10/23/18 at 12:09 P.M. the activities director said the following: -Residents had complained about not having enough staff on evenings and nights during group meeting; -He/she told the residents there was always just one CNA on nights and on some evenings and that was just the way it was; -He/she did not report the residents' concerns to anyone regarding the complaints of call lights night being answered or not enough staff. During an interview on 10/29/18 at 3:09 P.M. the social service director said the following: -He/she received grievances from residents in the past regarding call lights; -He/she was not aware of any grievances from group regarding call lights; -He/she notified the administrator of call light and all grievances and they tried to come up with a solutions immediately. During an interview on 10/23/18 at 6:58 P.M. the Director of Nursing said the following: -She expected call lights to be answered in five to seven minutes; -She was aware residents had voiced concern regarding call lights; -Night shift only had one CNA and if a resident fell or needed toileted then there wasn't enough staff to answer the call lights; -Evening shift only had one CNA at times, if it was meal time there wouldn't be enough staff to answer call lights; -If any building had one staff and required two person assistance then there wasn't enough staff to provide cares; -The facility provided care for residents that required two staff assistance; -One staff per building was not enough staff when residents needed cares provided for them. During an interview on 11/1/18 at 1:29 P.M. the administrator said the following: -She expected staff to answer call lights within ten minutes; -The facility identified call lights being answered in a timely manner as an issue; -The facility was having weekly meetings regarding call lights complaints; -She was not aware there was an overall resident concern regarding call lights; -She felt the facility had enough staff to provide cares for the residents.
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, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure food items were labeled, dated, covered or discarded when expired; failed to maintain the internal surfaces of three i...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure food items were labeled, dated, covered or discarded when expired; failed to maintain the internal surfaces of three ice machines; failed to maintain three range hoods to be free of an accumulation of grease and debris; failed to ensure staff utilized sanitary measures during food preparation; failed to ensure fan shrouds in the walk-in cooler in the main kitchen were free of an accumulation of debris; and failed to maintain a ceiling vent to be free of an accumulation of debris in the main kitchen. The facility census was 39. 1. Observation on 10/22/18 at 2:52 P.M. of the walk-in cooler in the main prep kitchen showed the following: -A metal disposable pan dated 10/12 and contained pineapple rings with areas of black mold-like debris on the fruit; -A tall clear plastic container half-full of sour cream, not labeled or dated; -A tall clear plastic container full of coleslaw and not labeled or dated; -A large plastic container contained stewed tomatoes and was not labeled or dated. Observation on 10/22/18 at 3:58 P.M. of the refrigerator in Kris's Cottage showed the following: -A zip-lock bag of sliced ham dated 10/16 and labeled use by 10/21 and had not been discarded; -A zip-lock bag of sliced salami dated 10/16 and labeled use by 10/21 and had not been discarded. Observation on 10/22/18 at 4:03 P.M. of the freezer in Kris's Cottage showed the following: -A zip-lock bag of tenderloin patties was not labeled or dated; -A zip-lock bag containing three frozen hamburger patties was not labeled or dated; -A plastic bag of frozen cookie dough balls was not labeled or dated. Observation on 10/22/18 at 3:54 P.M. of the kitchen storage room in Kris's Cottage showed a zip-lock bag containing approximately 15 vanilla wafers was not labeled or dated. Observation on 10/22/18 at 4:14 P.M. of the refrigerator in Ava's Cottage showed five unthawed sausage patties in a zip-lock bag dated 10/15. Observation on 10/22/18 at 4:18 P.M. of the kitchen storage room in Ava's Cottage showed a clear plastic container labeled Mrs. Dash. The lid was only partially secured with an opening over the seasoning granules. Observation on 10/22/18 at 4:37 P.M. of the refrigerator in Ella's Cottage showed the following: -A large zip-lock bag of sliced deli turkey labeled with the Cottage name and was not dated; -A large zip-lock bag containing two sausage patties and was not labeled or dated; -Another large zip-lock bag contained approximately 12 sausage patties and was not labeled or dated. Observation on 10/22/18 at 4:44 P.M. of the kitchen storage room in Ella's Cottage showed the following items in the refrigerator: -A plastic container with a red lid which contained pasta dated 10/6 and 10/16 and labeled chic; -A plastic sack with a container of pasta in the sack. The container of pasta was not labeled or dated. Observation on 10/22/18 at 2:08 P.M. of the kitchen storage room in Harper's Cottage showed the following: -Two containers of Cheerios and cornflakes were not labeled or dated; -A large jug of sweet and sour sauce sat on a shelf of the metal storage rack. The label on the jug indicated the sauce should be refrigerated after opening. The jug had been opened and was half full of sauce. Observation on 10/22/18 at 5:01 P.M. of the kitchen storage room in Harper's Cottage showed the following items in the refrigerator: -A clear container with a blue lid on the Elders Shelf contained meat, potatoes and green beans and was not labeled or dated; -A container with old grapes or possibly prunes was labeled with a resident's first name and was not dated; -A 15.25-ounce individual container of clam chowder had been opened and covered with foil and was labeled HC 1 and was not dated; -Three dried up and shriveled slices of leftover pizza sat in a cardboard box and were not dated. Observation on 10/23/18 at 12:11 P.M. of the kitchen storage room in Harper's Cottage showed a 4 pound 11 ounce opened jug of sweet and sour sauce sat on the metal rack and was not refrigerated. Observation on 10/22/18 at 5:14 P.M. of the freezer in Grace's Cottage showed the following: -A large zip-lock bag of chocolate chip cookie dough balls and a second large zip-lock bag of peanut butter cookie dough balls that were not labeled or dated; -A large zip-lock bag contained two individual frozen biscuits that were not labeled or dated. Observation on 10/22/18 at 5:16 P.M. of the kitchen storage room in Grace's Cottage showed the following: -Two round plastic containers that contained cereal or granola and were not labeled or dated. The lids were not secure and both containers were open to the air. -A container with spices/seasoning was not labeled or dated. The lid was not secure and was open to the air. During an interview on 10/23/18 at 4:30 P.M., the dietary manager said the following: -Food items were to be labeled, dated, covered and discarded when past the date; -The stickers show the use by date. Leftovers are good for three days and should be discarded after three days. Some staff still used a marker instead of the stickers to label the food items; -If a date was written on an item with a marker, it was probably the date the item was placed into the refrigerator or freezer; -Items in the freezer should be dated as well and are good for 30 days in freezer. Any item that is opened should be closed or placed in a container with a lid and dated when the item was opened; -The instructions on food item containers should be followed, such as if the item said to refrigerate after opening, then the item should be stored in the refrigerator and not on shelf; -Care partners are responsible to ensure appropriate dates, labels and to discard item. 2. Observation on 10/22/18 at 3:24 P.M. in the kitchen storage room in Betty's Cottage showed black mold-like debris inside the ice machine on the side walls over the ice. Observation on 10/22/18 3:55 P.M. in the kitchen storage room in Kris's Cottage showed black mold-like debris inside the ice machine on the side walls over the ice. Observation on 10/22/18 at 4:49 P.M. in the kitchen storage room in Ella's Cottage showed black mold-like debris inside the ice machine on the side walls over the ice. During an interview on 10/23/18 4:30 P.M., the dietary manager said maintenance emptied, cleaned, and sanitized the ice machines quarterly. He thought the ice machines had last been cleaned approximately three months ago. 3. Observation on 10/22/18 at 3:29 P.M. in Betty's Cottage showed the kitchen range hood had a heavy buildup of thick yellowish-brown grease and chunky debris on the baffle filter. Observation on 10/22/18 at 4:07 P.M. in Kris's Cottage showed the kitchen range hood had a heavy buildup of yellow grease and fuzzy debris on the baffle filter. Observation on 10/22/18 4:32 P.M. in Ella's Cottage showed the kitchen range hood had a heavy buildup of yellowish-brown grease and fuzzy debris on the baffle filter. During an interview on 10/22/18 at 4:33 P.M., the dietary manager said maintenance staff was responsible for cleaning filters monthly, however, there was currently no full-time maintenance staff person. During an interview on 10/23/18 4:30 P.M., the dietary manager said in the absence of maintenance, the dietary manager or a care partner should clean the filters. He was unsure when the filters were last cleaned. He didn't think maintenance staff documented when the hoods were cleaned. 4. Observation on 10/23/18 at 8:53 A.M. in Betty's Cottage showed Care Partner Q cracked two raw eggs on the edge of the countertop near the stove and placed the raw eggs directly into a skillet to cook. Egg white ran down the countertop and dripped onto the floor. Care Partner Q did not clean the counter or floor and leaned against the counter top with his/her clothes touching the same general area where the eggs had been cracked open. Observation on 10/23/18 at 8:55 A.M. in Betty's Cottage showed Care Partner Q cracked two more eggs on the edge of the countertop and placed the raw eggs directly into a skillet to cook scrambled eggs. A small amount of egg white ran down the edge of the counter top and dripped on the cabinet below. During an interview on 10/23/18 at 4:30 P.M., the dietary manager said staff that cook eggs in the cottages should use a bowl to crack eggs into or crack them directly into the skillet by using the skillet surface for cracking. They should not use the edge of the countertop to crack eggs as the surface was not sanitary. 5. Observation on 10/22/18 at 2:52 P.M. showed inside the walk-in cooler in the main preparation kitchen, there was a moderate accumulation of fuzzy debris on two fan shrouds that blew in the breeze as the fans were running. During an interview on 10/23/18 at 4:30 P.M., the dietary manager said staff, usually maintenance staff, cleaned the fan shrouds in the walk-in cooler monthly. He was currently cleaning the fan shrouds until the new maintenance supervisor started in November. 6. Observation on 10/23/18 at 11:07 A.M. of the main preparation kitchen showed there was a moderate to heavy buildup of fuzzy debris on the large ceiling vent near the metal food preparation counter and positioned over metal storage shelves of cooking equipment. A metal bowl of melons and pineapple sat on the preparation counter underneath the ceiling vent. During an interview on 10/23/18 at 4:30 P.M., the dietary manager said maintenance or dietary staff should clean the ceiling vents monthly.
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Life-Threatening (Immediate Jeopardy)
J - Isolated K - Pattern L - Widespread
Actual Harm
G - Isolated H - Pattern I - Widespread
Potential for Harm
D - Isolated E - Pattern F - Widespread
No Harm (Minor)
A - Isolated B - Pattern C - Widespread

Questions to Ask on Your Visit

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

Our Honest Assessment

Strengths
  • • Licensed and certified facility. Meets minimum state requirements.
Concerns
  • • Multiple safety concerns identified: 1 life-threatening violation(s), 1 harm violation(s). Review inspection reports carefully.
  • • 11 deficiencies on record, including 1 critical (life-threatening) violation. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
  • • $17,696 in fines. Above average for Missouri. Some compliance problems on record.
Bottom line: Mixed indicators with Trust Score of 61/100. Visit in person and ask pointed questions.

About This Facility

What is Cottages Of Lake St Louis's CMS Rating?

CMS assigns COTTAGES OF LAKE ST LOUIS 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 Cottages Of Lake St Louis Staffed?

CMS rates COTTAGES OF LAKE ST LOUIS's staffing level at 4 out of 5 stars, which is above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 54%, compared to the Missouri average of 46%.

What Have Inspectors Found at Cottages Of Lake St Louis?

State health inspectors documented 11 deficiencies at COTTAGES OF LAKE ST LOUIS during 2018 to 2025. These included: 1 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death), 1 that caused actual resident harm, and 9 with potential for harm. Immediate Jeopardy findings are rare and represent the most serious regulatory concerns. They require immediate corrective action.

Who Owns and Operates Cottages Of Lake St Louis?

COTTAGES OF LAKE ST LOUIS is owned by a for-profit company. For-profit facilities operate as businesses with obligations to shareholders or private owners. The facility operates independently rather than as part of a larger chain. With 60 certified beds and approximately 56 residents (about 93% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in LAKE SAINT LOUIS, Missouri.

How Does Cottages Of Lake St Louis Compare to Other Missouri Nursing Homes?

Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Missouri, COTTAGES OF LAKE ST LOUIS's overall rating (4 stars) is above the state average of 2.5, staff turnover (54%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (4 stars) is above the national benchmark.

What Should Families Ask When Visiting Cottages Of Lake St Louis?

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

Is Cottages Of Lake St Louis Safe?

Based on CMS inspection data, COTTAGES OF LAKE ST LOUIS has documented safety concerns. Inspectors have issued 1 Immediate Jeopardy citation (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death). The facility has a 4-star overall rating and ranks #1 of 100 nursing homes in Missouri. Families considering this facility should ask detailed questions about what corrective actions have been taken since these incidents.

Do Nurses at Cottages Of Lake St Louis Stick Around?

COTTAGES OF LAKE ST LOUIS has a staff turnover rate of 54%, which is 8 percentage points above the Missouri average of 46%. Moderate turnover is common in nursing homes, but families should still ask about staff tenure and how the facility maintains care continuity when employees leave.

Was Cottages Of Lake St Louis Ever Fined?

COTTAGES OF LAKE ST LOUIS has been fined $17,696 across 1 penalty action. This is below the Missouri average of $33,256. While any fine indicates a compliance issue, fines under $50,000 are relatively common and typically reflect isolated problems that were subsequently corrected. Families should ask what specific issues led to these fines and confirm they've been resolved.

Is Cottages Of Lake St Louis on Any Federal Watch List?

COTTAGES OF LAKE ST LOUIS 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.