CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Resident Rights
(Tag F0550)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, facility staff failed to maintain the dignity of two residents (Resident #10...
Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, facility staff failed to maintain the dignity of two residents (Resident #10 and #27) by failing to change urinary catheter (a tube inserted in the bladder to drain urine) bags (bags that are used to cover the urine collection bag at the end of a urinary catheter) that were wet and stained. The facility census was 60.
1. Review of the facility's Dignity Policy, implemented October of 2022, showed staff are directed as follows:
-It is the practice of this facility to protect and promote resident rights and treat each resident with respect and dignity;
-All staff are involved in providing care to residents to promote and maintain resident dignity;
-When interacting with a resident, pay attention to the resident as an individual;
2. Review of the facility's Catheter Care Policy, revised May of 2022, showed staff are directed as follows:
-It is the policy of this facility to ensure residents with indwelling catheters receive appropriate catheter care and maintain their dignity and privacy when indwelling catheters are in use;
-Catheter care will be performed every shift and as needed by nursing personnel;
-Privacy bags will be changed when soiled.
3. Review of Resident 10's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), a federally mandated assessment tool completed by facility staff, dated 8/1/22, showed staff assessed the resident as follows:
-Moderately impaired cognition;
-Required extensive assistance from one staff member for toilet use;
-Required extensive assistance from two staff members for and dressing;
-Required extensive assistance from one staff member for locomotion off the unit;
-Required limited assistance from one staff member for personal hygiene;
-Used a wheelchair;
-Had an indwelling catheter.
Review of the resident's Care Plan, revised 10/5/22, showed staff documented the following care areas and interventions for the resident:
-Resident has impaired Activities of Daily Living (ADL), due to a diagnosis of intellectual disability;
-Requires extensive assistance with locomotion in wheelchair;
-Has a suprapubic catheter, provide catheter care per policy and provide catheter care every shift and As Needed (PRN).
Observation on 11/02/22 at 9:27 A.M., showed the resident in his/her wheelchair, in the activity room with six other residents. Further observation showed the resident's catheter bag hung under his/her wheelchair, in a privacy bag. The bottom half of the privacy bag was wet.
Observation on 11/02/22 at 11:13 A.M. showed Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) H entered the resident's room and invited the resident to lunch. The resident's privacy bag was wet and had a large yellow and brown stain on it. The CNA left the resident's room and did not change the resident's privacy bag.
Observation on 11/03/22 at 11:34 A.M., showed the resident sat at a dining room table, with multiple residents around. The resident's catheter bag hung under the wheelchair in the same stained privacy bag. The stain covered half of the privacy bag.
4. Review of Resident #27's Annual MDS, dated [DATE], showed staff assessed the resident as follows:
-Severely impaired cognition;
-Totally dependent on assistance from one staff member for toilet use;
-Required extensive assistance from two staff members for transfers;
-Required extensive assistance from one staff member for dressing, and personal hygiene;
-Required extensive assistance from one staff member for bed mobility;
-Used a wheelchair;
-Had an indwelling catheter.
Review of the resident's care plan, revised 10/29/22, showed staff documented the following care areas and interventions for the resident:
-Required extensive assistance with ADLs;
-Resident to be placed in a stationary chair at the nurse's station for observation between meals and activities;
-Provide catheter care every shift and PRN.
Observation on 11/03/22 at 11:19 A.M., showed the resident sat at the dining room table, with four other residents. The resident's catheter bag hung under his/her wheelchair in a privacy bag. Further observation showed brown stains on the bottom of the privacy bag.
Observation on 11/03/22 at 11:51 A.M., showed Registered Nurse (RN) E and Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) G transferred the resident from his/her wheelchair to a recliner by the nurse's station. Further observation showed the resident's privacy bag continued to have large brown stain on the bottom of the bag. Additional observation, showed staff did not change the stained privacy bag.
5. During an interview on 11/03/22 at 3:17 P.M., RN E said staff should change a resident's privacy bag if it is dirty. The RN said he/she was not aware Resident #10 and #27's privacy bags were stained. He/She said if a resident's privacy bag appears wet, staff should ensure the catheter bag is not leaking and change the privacy bag.
During an interview 11/03/22 at 3:27 P.M., CNA F said staff should change a privacy bag if it is stained or wet.
During an interview on 11/4/22 at 10:36 A.M., the Director of Nursing (DON) said the privacy bags are cleaned weekly or as needed. He/She said he/she and the aides are responsible to ensure the bags are not dirty, and if they are they should be changed immediately. He/She said he/she did not know why the staff did not change the soiled bags.
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Safe Environment
(Tag F0584)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, facility staff failed to provide a comfortable and homelike environment for ...
Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, facility staff failed to provide a comfortable and homelike environment for residents on the 300 Hall, when staff failed to ensure the residents' rooms were maintained and free of odor. The facility census was 60.
1. Review of the facility's Safe and Homelike Environment, dated 2017, showed:
-In accordance with resident's rights, the facility will provide a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, allowing the resident to use his or her personal belongings to the extent possible;
-Minimize odors by disposing of soiled linens promptly and reporting lingering odors and bathrooms needing cleaning to the Housekeeping Department;
-Report any unresolved environmental concerns to the Administrator.
Review of the facility's Promoting/Maintaining Resident Dignity policy, dated 10/22, showed:
-It is the practice of this facility to protect and promote resident rights and treat each resident with respect and dignity as well as care for each resident in a manner and in an environment, that maintains or enhances resident's quality of life by recognizing each resident's individuality.
2. Observation on 11/1/22 at 11:04 A.M., showed room [ROOM NUMBER] had chipped paint, and gouged walls. Further observation, showed black marks on the walls.
Observation on 11/2/22 at 8:01 A.M., showed room [ROOM NUMBER] had chipped paint, and gouged walls. Further observation, showed black marks on the walls.
Observation on 11/3/22 at 11:22 A.M., showed room [ROOM NUMBER] had chipped paint and gouged walls. Further observation, showed the privacy curtain was visibly dirty.
3. Observation on 11/1/22 at 11:17 A.M., showed room [ROOM NUMBER] had chipped paint and gouged walls. Further observation, showed black marks on the walls.
Observation on 11/3/22 at 11:22 A.M., showed room [ROOM NUMBER] had chipped paint and gouged walls. Further observation, showed black marks on the walls.
4. Observation on 11/1/22 at 11:11 A.M., showed room [ROOM NUMBER] had chipped paint and black marks on the walls.
Observation on 11/2/22 at 8:02 A.M., showed room [ROOM NUMBER] had chipped paint and black marks on the walls.
Observation on 11/3/22 at 11:21 A.M., showed room [ROOM NUMBER] had chipped paint and marks on the walls.
5. Observation on 11/1/22 at 11:22 A.M., showed room [ROOM NUMBER] had chipped paint and gouged walls. Further observation, showed black marks on the walls.
Observation on 11/2/22 at 8:23 A.M., showed room [ROOM NUMBER] had chipped paint and gouged walls. Further observation, showed black marks on the walls.
Observation on 11/3/22 at 11:20 A.M., showed room [ROOM NUMBER] had chipped paint and gouged walls. Further observation, showed black marks on the walls.
6. Observation on 11/1/22 at 11:40 A.M., showed room [ROOM NUMBER] had chipped paint and gouged walls. Further observation, showed black marks on the walls.
Observation on 11/3/22 at 11:19 A.M., showed room [ROOM NUMBER] had chipped paint and gouged walls. Further observation, showed black marks on the walls.
7. Observation on 11/1/22 at 11:52 A.M., showed room [ROOM NUMBER] had chipped paint and gouged walls. Further observation, showed black marks on the walls.
Observation on 11/2/22 at 11:25 A.M., showed room [ROOM NUMBER] had chipped paint and gouged walls. The walls had black marks on them. Further observation, showed the room had an odor that lingered.
Observation on 11/3/22 at 11:18 A.M., showed room [ROOM NUMBER] had chipped paint and gouged walls. The walls had black marks on them. Further observation, showed the room had an odor that lingered.
8. During an interview on 11/4/22 at 9:06 A.M., Certified Nurse Aide (CNA)/ Certified Medical Technician (CMT) A, said if he/she noticed environmental issues, he/she would fill out a maintenance request slip and put it at the nurses station. He/She said he/she had not noticed any issues with the rooms on 300 hall. He/She said the maintenance department is responsible for completing repairs if needed. He/She said he/she did not know how often the rooms were inspected.
During an interview on 11/4/22 at 9:27 A.M., Maintenance Worker C, said the residents' rooms are inspected monthly. He/She said the staff are expected to report environmental concerns to the charge nurse, so a work order can be completed and given to the maintenance department. He/She said he/she did not know the 300 hall resident rooms had chipped paint, and gouges. He/She said staff do not always notify the maintenance department of environmental issues. He/She said the maintenance department is short staffed, so he/she is not able to keep up with things in a timely manner.
During an interview on 11/4/22 at 9:33 A.M., Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) B said if staff have environmental concerns they are directed to fill out a maintenance slip and report the issues directly to the maintenance department. He/She said he/she did not know the 300 hall resident rooms had chipped paint and gouged walls. He/She said the rooms should be inspected by the maintenance staff, but he/she did not know how often they were inspected.
During an interview on 11/4/22 at 10:36 A.M., the Director of Nursing (DON) said he/she had approached the previous Administrator in regard to the environmental concerns in the facility, but nothing had been done about it. He/She said if staff noticed those issues, staff are to fill out a maintenance slip, or tell him/her.
During an interview on 11/4/22 at 11:01 P.M., the Administrator said he/she expects maintenance to repair issues as they are found. He/she said he/she expects staff to notify maintenance if there are problems but he/she did not know if there was an organized system.
During an interview on 11/4/22 at 12:11 P.M., the Administrator said the facility did not have a policy to address environmental concerns, such as chipped paint and gouged walls.
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Transfer Notice
(Tag F0623)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on interview and record review, facility failed to provide a written notice of discharge/ transfer to the resident and/or resident representative when three residents (Residents #11, #31, and #6...
Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview and record review, facility failed to provide a written notice of discharge/ transfer to the resident and/or resident representative when three residents (Residents #11, #31, and #60) were transferred to the hospital. The facility census was 60.
1. Review of the facility's Transfer and Discharge (including Against Medical Advice (AMA) Policy, revised 11/30/21, showed:
-For non-emergency transfers or discharges that are initiated by the facility, the Social Services Director will notify the resident and the resident's representative in writing at least 30 days before the resident is transferred or discharged ;
-For emergency transfers or discharges nursing should document information, in regards to transfers, in the medical record. The resident and resident representative shall be provided with the facility's bed hold policy within 24 hours of the transfer.
Review showed the policy did not contain information on notifying the resident and/or resident representative in writing for an emergency transfer.
2. Review of Resident #11's progress notes, dated 9/19/22, showed staff documented the resident was transferred to the hospital.
Review of the resident's medical record showed staff did not document they provided written notification to the resident or the resident's representative, of the reason for the transfer/discharge to the hospital.
3. Review of Resident #31's medical record showed staff documented the resident was transferred to the hospital on 9/4/22. Further review, showed staff did not document they notified the resident or resident representative with the required discharge/transfer information in writing.
4. Review of Resident #60's progress notes, dated 9/9/22, showed staff documented the resident was transferred to the hospital on 9/9/22.
Review of the resident's medical record, showed staff did not document they notified the resident or the resident representative with the required discharge/transfer information in writing.
5. During an interview on 11/03/22 at 4:02 P.M., the Social Services Designee (SSD) said the facility informs the resident and/or resident representative of the reason for their transfer/discharge verbally. The SSD said the facility does not provide a written notice of transfer or discharge to the resident and/or the resident representative. He/She said the residents did not receive a written notice of their reasons for discharge/transfer.
During an interview on 11/4/22 at 11:01 A.M., the Administrator said he/she had only been with the facility a month and cannot answer for the facility practices prior to that. He/she said social services is responsible to ensure transfer and discharge paperwork is completed when a resident goes home. He/she is not sure if it is being completed.
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0625
(Tag F0625)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on interview and record review, facility staff failed to provide written information to the resident and/or resident's representative of the facility's bed hold policy at the time of transfer to...
Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview and record review, facility staff failed to provide written information to the resident and/or resident's representative of the facility's bed hold policy at the time of transfer to the hospital for three residents (Resident's #11, #31, and #60). The facility census was 60.
1. Review of the facility's Bed Hold Notice Upon Transfer Policy, dated 6/6/17, showed the facility will provide the resident and/or the resident representative, at the time of transfer for hospitalization or therapeutic leave, written notice which specifies the duration of the bed-hold policy.
Review of the facility's Transfer and Discharge (including Against Medical Advice (AMA) policy, revised 11/30/21, showed the facility will provide the resident and resident's representative the facility's bed hold policy within 24 hours of the transfer, for emergency transfers/discharges.
2. Review of Resident #11's progress notes, dated 9/19/22, showed the resident was transferred to the hospital. Further review showed staff did not document they notified the resident or the resident's representative of the facility's bed hold policy.
3. Review of Resident #31's medical record showed the resident was transferred to the hospital on 9/4/22. Further review showed staff did not document they notified the resident or the resident's representative of the facility's bed hold policy.
4. Review of Resident #60's medical record showed staff documented the resident was transferred to the hospital on 9/9/22. Further review showed staff did not document they notified the resident or the resident's representative of the facility's bed hold policy.
5. During an interview on 11/03/22 at 4:02 P.M., Social Services Designee (SSD) said there is a copy of the bed hold policy in the admission packet, but the facility does not provide a copy to the resident and/or resident representative at the time of transfer or discharge. He/She said he/she informed the resident and/or resident representative verbally of the policy. He/She said the facility does not refuse to let residents return after a hospital stay.
During an interview on 11/4/22 at 11:01 A.M., the Administrator said a bed hold should be issued when a resident is transferred to the hospital. He/she said he/she did not know if the bed hold had been issued, but knows the facility is not refusing for residents to return at this time. He/she said the SSD is responsible for providing the bed hold information to the resident and/or resident representative and documenting the information in the medical record.
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Comprehensive Care Plan
(Tag F0656)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, facility staff failed to identify services necessary to meet the medical, an...
Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, facility staff failed to identify services necessary to meet the medical, and nursing needs for six residents (Resident #9, #11, #25, #57, #60 and #61) when staff failed to include splint use, code status, oxygen use, facial hair and nail care preferences, blood sugar monitoring, and surgical wound care on the residents' comprehensive care plans. Additionally, staff failed to develop a baseline care plan for one resident (Resident #60). The facility census was 60.
1. Review of the facility's Comprehensive Care Plan policy dated October 2022, showed:
-It is the policy of this facility to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, consistent with resident rights, that includes measurable objectives and timeframe's to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs that are identified in the resident's comprehensive assessment;
-The comprehensive care plan will describe, at minimum, the following:
-The services that are to be furnished to attain or maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being;
-Any services that would otherwise be furnished, but are not provided due to the resident's exercise of his or right to refuse treatment;
-Resident specific interventions that reflect the residents needs and preferences and align with the resident's cultural identity, as indicated;
-The comprehensive care plan will include measurable objectives and timeframe's to meet the resident's needs as identified in the the resident's comprehensive assessment and utilized to monitor the residents progress. Alternative interventions will be documented, as needed;
-The facility will attempt alternate methods for refusal of treatment and services and document such attempts in the clinical record, including discussions with the resident and/or resident representative.
2. Review of Resident #9's Quarterly Minimum Data Set, (MDS), a federally mandated assessment tool, dated 0/8/22/22, showed staff assessed the resident as:
-Cognitively intact;
-Required extensive assistance from one staff member for bed mobility, transfers, and dressing;
-Required total assistance from one staff member for toileting;
-Required limited assistance from one staff member for personal hygiene;
-Had functional limitation in Range of Motion (ROM), (joint and muscle movement) in both upper and lower extremities on one side;
-Diagnosis of a stroke.
Review of the resident's Physician Order Sheet (POS), dated 3/4/22, showed an order to apply a hand splint on the left hand twice a day, in the early morning and off in the evening. Review showed he/she may wear the splint at night as tolerated.
Review of the resident's care plan, updated 9/12/22, showed it did not contain direction for staff in regard to the use of a left hand splint.
Observation on 11/1/22 at 11:03 A.M., showed the resident did not have a splint on his/her left hand.
Observation on 11/2/22 at 11:12 A.M., showed the resident did not have a splint on his/her left hand.
Observation on 11/3/22 at 11:07 A.M., showed the resident did not have a splint on his/her left hand.
During an interview on 11/4/22 at 9:06 A.M., Certified Nurse Aide (CNA)/Certified Medical Technician (CMT) A said the resident is supposed to wear a hand splint, and staff offer to apply it, but sometimes the resident refuses to wear it. He/She said the splint should be listed on the care plan.
During an interview on 11/4/22 at 9:33 A.M., Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) B said the resident frequently refuses to wear the splint. LPN B said he/she would expect the resident's splint to be listed on the care plan.
3. Review of Resident #11's admission MDS, dated [DATE], showed staff assessed the resident with a moderate cognitive impairment.
Review of the resident's face sheet, undated, showed it did not contain documentation of the resident's code status.
Review of the resident's POS, dated 9/23/22, showed it did not contain an order for the resident's code status.
Review of the resident's care plan, revised 9/26/22, showed it did not contain direction for staff in regard to the resident's code status (order for life sustaining treatment).
4. Review of Resident #20's Quarterly MDS, dated [DATE], showed staff assessed the resident with a severe cognitive impairment.
Review of the resident's POS, dated 4/29/22, showed the resident had a code status of Full Code.
Review of the resident's care plan, dated 9/1/22, showed it did not contain documentation in regard to the resident's code status.
5. Review of Resident #25's Significant Change of Status (SCSA) MDS, dated [DATE], showed staff assessed the resident as:
-Cognitively impaired;
-Used Oxygen;
-Received Hospice;
-Had diagnoses of Dementia with behaviors, Anemia (low iron in the blood) Atrial Fibrillation (irregular heartbeat), Heart Failure, Asthma and Depression.
Review of the resident's physician's orders dated, 11/7/22, showed:
-1/7/21: Ipatropium-Albuterol 0.5 milligrams (mg)/3 milliliters (ML) -2.5 Solution four times a day (QID) for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), (a disease that affects breathing);
-2/2/21: Administer oxygen at 2 Liters per minute (LPM) to 4 LPM per nasal cannula (N/C) to keep oxygen saturation (amount of oxygen circulating in the blood) greater than or equal to 90%;
-12/22/21: Change nebulizer (machine used to spray medication so it can be inhaled) tubing and mask once a week on Fridays;
-10/21/22: Change oxygen humidifier bottle and N/C on Friday;
-11/3/22: Change the Wiki (small pouch used to store oxygen and nebulizer tubing) pouch for oxygen cannula and nebulizer treatment when not in use one time a month on the 3rd.
Review of the resident's care plan, dated 9/28/22, showed it did not contain direction for staff in regard to the resident's oxygen or nebulizer use.
Observation on 11/1/22 at 1:08 P.M., showed the resident wore oxygen via N/C at 3 LPM. Additional observation, showed a nebulizer machine sat on the bedside table.
Observation on 11/2/22 at 7:57 A.M., showed the resident wore oxygen via N/C at 3 LPM. Additional observation, showed a nebulizer machine sat on the bedside table.
Observation on 11/3/22 at 11:17 A.M., showed the resident wore oxygen via N/C at 3 LPM. Additional observation, showed a nebulizer machine sat on the bedside table.
6. Review of Resident #57's Quarterly MDS, dated [DATE], showed staff assessed the resident as:
-Cognitively impaired;
-Had no behaviors or rejection of care;
-Required extensive assistance from one staff member for personal hygiene;
-Had impaired functional range of motion on one upper and one lower extremity;
-Had diagnoses of Stroke, Hypertension, Hemiplegia (paralyzed on one side), Depression, and Neurogenic Bladder (lack of bladder control due to brain, spinal cord, or nerve problems).
Review of the resident's care plan, dated 7/25/22, showed:
-Required extensive assist with the majority of (Activities of Daily Living) ADLs due to stroke and hemiplegia;
-Required one or two staff for ADLs depending on the task;
-Provide assistance with ADLs;
-Did not contain direction, preferences or refusal of care regarding facial hair and nail care.
Observation on 11/1/22 at 1:15 P.M., showed the resident had long facial hair and long fingernails with dark debris under them.
Observation on 11/2/22 at 8:02 A.M., showed the resident had long facial hair and long fingernails with dark debris under them.
Observation on 11/2/22 at 10:18 A.M., showed the resident had long facial hair and long fingernails.
Observation on 11/4/22 at 8:23 A.M., showed the resident had long facial hair and long fingernails with dark debris under them.
7. Review of Resident #60's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], showed:
-Cognitively intact;
-Independent with ADLs;
-Did not refuse care;
-Had diagnoses of heart failure, diabetes, anxiety, depression, and chronic lung disease;
-Received insulin and oxygen;
Review of the resident's POS showed the following orders:
-11/17/20: Apply oxygen 2.5 LPM every four hours as needed (PRN). Not to exceed 3 LPM for residents with COPD (Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, lung disease that block airflow which makes it difficult to breathe);
-3/28/22: Blood glucose checks twice a week on Monday and Thursday at bedtime (HS);
-4/1/22: Fasting (before eating and/or drinking) blood glucose check, daily, in the morning;
-4/1/22: Victoza 1.8 mg (Injectable medication to improve blood sugar for people with diabetes) daily in the morning;
-4/7/22: Lantus 17 units (Insulin that helps to control blood sugar in people with diabetes) subcutaneous (SQ) (under the skin) daily at HS for one dose;
-9/6/22: Lantus 25 units SQ daily at HS;
-9/6/22: Victoza 0.6 mg SQ daily in the morning and to hold if blood sugar is under 120 mg/deciliter (dL).
Review of the resident's care plan, dated 9/4/22, showed it did not contain direction for staff in regard to oxygen use, blood glucose checks, and blood sugar monitoring.
8. Review of Resident #61's admission MDS, dated [DATE], showed:
-Severe cognitive impairment;
-Did not reject care;
-Required extensive assistance of one staff member for personal hygiene;
-Diagnosis of hip fracture;
-Had a surgical wound;
-Received surgical wound care.
Review of the resident's POS, dated 8/31/22, showed an order to cleanse and monitor left hip incision twice a day in the morning and at bedtime.
Review of the resident's Treatment Administration Record (TAR), dated 8/31/22, showed staff were instructed to cleanse and monitor left hip incision twice a day through 9/16/22.
Review of the resident's care plan, dated 9/13/22, showed it did not contain direction for staff in regard to the resident's left hip incision.
9. During an interview on 11/4/22 at 9:06 A.M., CNA/CMT A said the care plans should include the type of care the resident needs, and the amount of assistance. The CNA said he/she would expect to see nail care and facial hair preferences, refusal of care, assistive devices and code statuses addressed in the care plan.
During an interview on 11/4/22 at 9:33 A.M., LPN B said the MDS Coordinator updates the care plans. He/She said the care plans should be updated with any new order. He/She said the care plan should include wounds, code statuses, medical devices, hip incisions, refusal of care, and facial hair and nail care preferences. He/She said if interventions are not listed on the care plan, then staff may not know the type of care to provide.
During an interview on 11/4/22 at 10:20 A.M., LPN B said oxygen use, blood glucose monitoring, and treatments, including a surgical incision, should be on the care plan. He/She said the MDS Coordinator updates the care plans.
During an interview on 11/4/22 at 10:26 A.M., the Director of Nursing (DON) said anything that pertains to the resident should be on the care plan, which includes ADLs and diagnoses, including diabetes. He/She said blood sugar checks and oxygen use should be on the care plan. He/She said he/she would expect a hip incision listed on the care plan, so staff can provide wound care.
During an interview on 11/4/22 at 10:36 A.M., the DON said the MDS Coordinator is responsible for completing care plans. He/She said care plans should be completed quarterly, annually, after a significant change, and upon admission. He/She said he/she expects the care plans to include ADLs, safety, diet, pertinent diagnoses, code statuses, facial hair and nail care preferences, medical devices such as oxygen and splints, behaviors, and wounds. He/She said he/she did not know Resident #9's splint was not addressed on their care plans.
10. Review of the facility's Baseline Care Plan Policy, dated October 2022, showed:
-The facility will develop and implement a baseline care plan for each resident that includes the instructions needed to provide effective and person-centered care of the resident that meet professional standards of quality care;
-The baseline care plan will be developed within 48 hours of a resident's admission.
11. Review of Resident #60's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), a federally mandated assessment tool, dated 8/14/22, showed:
-Cognitively intact;
-Independent with ADLs;
-Did not refuse care;
-Had diagnoses of heart failure, diabetes, anxiety, depression, and chronic lung disease;
-Received insulin and oxygen.
Review of the resident's medical record showed it did not contain documentation of a baseline care plan.
12. During an interview on 11/3/22 at 4:16 P.M., the Social Services Designee (SSD) said baseline care plans should contain the resident's basic care needs, including diet, oxygen use, and ADLs. He/ She said the admitting nurse is responsible for completing them. He/She said the baseline care plans are kept for one month, and then thrown away. He/She said staff throw them away after the comprehensive care plans are completed.
During an interview on 11/4/22 at 10:20 A.M., LPN B said the admitting nurse should complete the baseline care plan. He/ She said the baseline care plans are kept in the 48 hour book at the nurses station. He/ She said staff know it is supposed to be completed because it is on our admission check list.
During an interview on 11/4/22 at 10:26 A.M., the DON said he/she expects baseline care plans to be completed on the day of admission. He/She said the baseline care plans should be kept at the nurses station, in a binder and a copy should be given to the family. He/She said the care plan should stay in the binder, until the comprehensive care plan is completed, and then it should be scanned into the computer system. He/She said he/she was not aware someone was throwing the baseline care plans away. He/She said he/she was not aware Resident #60's baseline care plan was not completed and he/she will look into it.
During an interview on 11/4/22 at 12:30 P.M., the DON said he/she had forgotten to look for Resident #60's baseline care plan.
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
ADL Care
(Tag F0677)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review, facility staff failed to ensure residents that were unable to complete their ...
Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review, facility staff failed to ensure residents that were unable to complete their own activities of daily living (ADLs), received the necessary care and services to maintain good personal hygiene when staff failed to provide hair care and nail care to five residents (Residents #1, #10, #11, #20 and #57). The facility census was 60.
1. Review of the facility's Activities of Daily Living (ADLs), dated 12/21, showed:
-Care and services will be provided for the following activities of daily living with bathing, dressing, grooming and oral care;
-A resident who is unable to carry out activities of daily living will receive the necessary services to maintain good nutrition, grooming, and personal and oral hygiene.
2. Review of Resident #1's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), a federally mandated assessment tool completed by facility staff, dated 8/30/22, showed staff assessed the resident as follows:
-Severely impaired cognition;
-Required extensive assistance from one staff member for personal hygiene.
Review of the resident's care plan, revised 10/11/22, showed staff documented the following care areas and interventions for the resident:
-Displays impaired cognitive abilities related to his/her Dementia;
-Nurse Aide (NA) assist with hygiene.
Observation on 11/02/22 at 7:57 A.M., showed the resident sat in a wheelchair by the nurses station. The resident's fingernails were long and had black debris under them.
Observation on 11/03/22 at 12:01 P.M., showed the resident sat in a wheelchair on the 200 hall. The resident's fingernails were long with had dark debris under them.
3. Review of Resident 10's Quarterly MDS, dated [DATE], showed staff assessed the resident as follows:
-Moderately impaired cognition;
-Required limited assistance from one staff member for personal hygiene;
Review of the resident's Care Plan, revised 10/5/22, showed staff documented the following care areas and interventions for the resident:
-Resident has impaired Activities of Daily Living (ADL), due to a diagnosis of intellectual disability;
-Required extensive assistance of one staff, with grooming.
Observation on 11/02/22 at 9:34 A.M., showed the resident had long fingernails with black debris under them.
Observation on 11/03/22 at 11:15 A.M., showed the resident sat at the dining room table for lunch. Further observation, showed the resident ate with his/her fingers. The resident's fingernails were long and had black debris under them.
4. Review of Resident #11's admission MDS, dated [DATE], showed staff assessed the resident as:
-Moderate cognitive impairment;
-Required extensive assistance from one staff member for dressing and personal hygiene.
Review of the resident's care plan, dated 8/29/22, showed staff documented the resident will be clean and well-groomed. Further review showed the resident required extensive assistance from one staff member for grooming, and one to two staff members for dressing.
Observation on 11/1/22 at 10:57 A.M., showed the resident had unkempt facial hair, unbrushed hair, and jagged fingernails, with debris under them.
Observation on 11/2/22 at 9:03 A.M., showed the resident had unkempt facial hair and jagged nails.
Observation on 11/3/22 12:01 PM showed the resident had unkempt facial hair and jagged nails. Further observation, showed white particles on his/her shirt.
5. Review of Resident #20's Quarterly MDS, dated [DATE], showed staff assessed the resident as:
-Severe cognitive impairment;
-Required extensive assistance from one staff member for personal hygiene.
Review of the resident's care plan, dated 9/1/22, showed staff are directed to keep the resident clean and well-groomed. Further review showed the resident required extensive assistance from one staff member for grooming.
Review of the resident's Physician Order Sheet (POS), dated 4/29/22, showed an order to trim the resident's fingernails and toenails every Saturday.
Observation on 11/1/22 at 1:30 P.M., showed the resident had unkempt facial hair and jagged nails.
Observation on 11/3/22 at 11:31 A.M., showed the resident had unkempt facial hair and jagged nails, with dark debris under them. Further observation, showed mucus dripped from his/her nose while he/she ate.
Observation on 11/3/22 at 11:55 A.M., showed the resident sat in the activity room. Further observation, showed mucus dripped from his/her nose.
6. Review of Resident #57's Quarterly MDS, dated [DATE], showed staff assessed the resident as:
-Cognitively impaired;
-Had no behaviors or rejection of care;
-Required extensive assistance from one staff member for personal hygiene;
-Had impaired ROM on one upper and one lower extremity;
-Had diagnoses of Stroke, Hypertension, Hemiplegia (paralyzed on one side), Depression, and Neurogenic Bladder (lack of bladder control due to brain, spinal cord, or nerve problems).
Review of the resident's care plan, dated 7/25/22, showed:
-Required extensive assistance with the majority of Activities of Daily Living (ADLs) due to stroke and hemiplegia;
-Required one to two staff for ADLs depending on the task;
-Did not contain direction, preferences or refusal of care regarding facial hair and nail care;
-Provide assistance with ADLs.
Observation on 11/1/22 at 1:15 P.M., showed the resident had long facial hair and long fingernails with dark debris under them.
Observation on 11/2/22 at 8:02 A.M., showed the resident had long facial hair and long fingernails with dark debris under them.
Observation on 11/2/22 at 10:18 A.M., showed the resident had long facial hair and long fingernails.
Observation on 11/4/22 at 8:23 A.M., showed the resident had long facial hair and long fingernails with dark debris under them.
8. During an interview on 11/4/22 at 9:06 A.M., Certified Nurse Aide/Certified Medical Technician (CNA/CMT) A said the nursing staff provides nail care and shaving. He/She said the residents' nails should be trimmed when needed and shaves should be completed daily.
During an interview on 11/4/22 at 9:46 A.M., Shower Aide D said they provide residents with showers twice a week. He/She said staff should shave the residents provide nail care during their shower. He/She said he/she had noticed residents with long nails and unkempt facial hair. He/She said sometimes the residents refuse. He/She said the aides are responsible for shaving and nail care on days the resident's do not receive showers.
During an interview on 11/4/22 at 9:33 A.M., Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) B said resident's are showered twice a week and nail care and shaves should be provided at that time. He/She said the aides are to check the residents daily for needed nail care and shaving. He/She said he/she had noticed unkempt facial hair and long dirty nails.
During an interview on 11/3/22 at 3:32 P.M., Registered Nurse (RN) I said nurses should trim the residents' fingernails, but the aides can help. The RN said the nurses clip the residents nails when the aides tell them it needs to be done. He/She said there is not a scheduled day to clip the residents' nails. The RN said residents' nails should be checked during their shower, and staff should be checking during cares.
During an interview on 11/4/22 at 10:36 A.M., the Director of Nursing (DON) said the nurse aides, shower team, and nurses are expected to keep the residents' nails trimmed and clean, and ensure facial hair is groomed. He/She said facial hair should be shaved one to two times a week and nails should be done as needed. He/She said Resident #20's nails should be trimmed once a week and he/she did notice his/her facial hair. He/She said he/she expected staff to provide him/her care. He/She said Resident #57 had a history of refusing nail care and it is a difficult process, due to his/her health conditions. He/She said he/she did not notice the resident's facial hair. He/She said he/she did notice Resident #11's facial hair, but did not notice his/her nails. He/She said the resident had his/her nails cleaned and trimmed earlier in the week. He/She said he/she did not notice Resident #1's facial hair and did not see his/her nails. He/She said Resident #10 had a history of refusing care. He/She said staff did not document when a resident refused care. He/She said if a resident refused care, staff are directed to attempt care at another point and tell the nurse. He/She said he/she would expect staff to immediately address facial hair and nail concerns. He/She said they are short staffed, which is why those residents needs were not addressed.
During an interview on 11/4/22 at 11:01 A.M., the Administrator said he/she expects staff to document refusals of care in the resident's record. He/she said about a week ago the beautician, who is a CNA/CMT, had been designated to the beauty shop at least two days per week to perform basic haircuts, nail care, and perms. He/she said the beautician will be spending less time being pulled to the floor as a floor aide. He/she said he/she expects the residents to be shaved on their shower day, or per their preference.
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
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, facility staff failed to properly propel three residents (Resident #23, #27,...
Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, facility staff failed to properly propel three residents (Resident #23, #27, and #43) in wheelchairs in a manner to prevent accidents. The facility census was 60.
1. During an interview on 11/3/22 at 12:30 P.M., the Director of Nursing (DON) said the facility did not have a wheelchair safety policy.
2. Review of Resident #23's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), a federally mandated assessment tool, dated 8/4/22, showed staff assessed the resident for:
-Cognitively impaired;
-Required extensive assistance of one staff member for locomotion;
-Had an impairment of both lower extremities;
-Used a wheelchair.
Observation on 11/3/22 at 10:07 A.M., showed Certified Nurses Aide/Certified Medication Technician (CNA/CMT) A pushed the resident from his/her room to the dining room in a wheelchair with foot pedals. Further observation, showed the resident's feet were in between the foot pedals and the left foot dragged on the floor.
Observation on 11/3/22 at 11:37 A.M., showed CNA/CMT A propelled the resident in a wheelchair. Additional observation, showed the resident did not have both of his/her feet on the foot pedals. One foot dragged the floor.
During an interview on 11/3/22 at 11:43 A.M., CNA/CMT A said he/she noticed the resident's foot between the foot pedals, but he/she did not see the resident's foot touch the floor. He/She said the resident did not like to keep his/her feet on the pedals. He/She said staff are directed to use foot pedals and make sure the resident's feet are placed on the pedals before propelling the resident. He/She said some residents refused to keep their feet on the pedals, so he/she will stop and try to place their feet back on pedals. He/She said staff should not propel a resident in their wheelchair if their feet are not on the pedals. He/She said it is not safe to propel a resident in their wheelchair with their feet not on the pedals.
3. Review of Resident #27's Annual MDS, dated [DATE], showed staff assessed the resident as follows:
-Severely impaired cognition;
-Did not require assistance from staff with locomotion on, or off the unit;
-Used a wheelchair;
Review of the resident's care plan, revised 10/29/22, showed staff documented the resident needed setup assistance for locomotion.
Observation on 11/03/22 at 11:42 A.M., showed CNA H propelled the resident in a wheelchair. The resident wore rubber soled shoes. Further observation, showed the resident's right foot dragged on the floor. Additional observation, showed the right foot became lodged under the wheelchair pedal, rolled to the side, and went under the wheelchair. The resident's right foot dragged the floor, until the CNA stopped at the bathroom.
During an interview on 11/03/22 at 11:49 A.M., CNA H said staff are supposed to ensure the resident's feet are on the pedals at all times when propelled in their wheelchairs. He/She said if a resident's feet fall off the pedals, staff should stop and place the feet back on the pedals.
4. Review of Resident #43's Quarterly MDS, dated [DATE], showed staff assessed the resident as:
-Cognitively impaired;
-Inattention that does not fluctuate;
-Had impairment of both lower extremities;
-Dependent on staff for locomotion;
-Used a wheelchair;
Observation on 11/1/11 at 10:57 A.M., showed Shower Aide D pushed the resident to the dining room from the nurses station without foot pedals on the wheelchair. Further observation showed the bottom of the residents feet touched the floor.
5. During an interview on 11/3/22 at 11:37 A.M., the DON said he/she expects staff to ensure there are foot pedals on the wheelchair and the resident's feet are placed on the foot pedals prior to propelling a resident.
During an interview on 11/4/22 at 10:36 A.M., the DON said if the resident's feet are not properly placed on the pedals or if the feet dragged the floor, it could result in bruising, abrasions, or even a fall.
During an interview on 11/4/22 at 12:30 P.M., the DON said if a residents foot comes off of the pedals, staff should stop and put the resident's foot back on the foot pedal. He/ She said staff were educated a couple years ago in regard to wheelchair and foot pedal use.
During an interview on 11/4/22 at 1:15 P.M., the Administrator said residents should have pedals on their wheelchairs before staff propel them. He/she said pedals should be adjusted if they don't fit the resident correctly or staff should use a modified device on the pedals to help the resident's feet stay up during locomotion. The administrator said if a resident planted their feet while being pushed in their wheelchair they could fall forward from the chair.
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 staff failed perform hand hygiene as often as necessary to prevent cross-contamination. Facility staff also failed to wash, rinse, and ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility staff failed perform hand hygiene as often as necessary to prevent cross-contamination. Facility staff also failed to wash, rinse, and sanitize the food processor and the food preparation sink between uses to prevent cross-contamination and the growth of food-borne pathogens. This had the potential to affect all residents. The census was 60.
1. Review of the facility's Hand hygiene policy, dated 2019, showed:
- Staff will perform hand hygiene when indicated, using proper technique consistent with accepted standards of practice;
- The use of gloves does not replace hand hygiene;
- If your task requires gloves, perform hand hygiene prior to donning (putting on) gloves, and immediately after removing gloves.
Observation on 11/1/22 at 11:02 A.M., showed [NAME] K used a gloved hand to touch sliced cheese and placed it on a hamburger on the grill. Further observation showed the cook touched the oven door handles and other food related items. He/She continued to touch sliced cheese for resident sandwiches. [NAME] K did not change gloves or perform hand hygiene after he/she touched the cheese and before he/she touched food related items.
Observation on 11/1/22 at 11:07 A.M., showed [NAME] K used a gloved hand to touch frozen food for the fryer. Further observation showed the cook touched bread slices and the oven handles. He/She did not change gloves or perform hand hygiene after he/she touched the frozen food items and before he/she touched bread slices or food related items.
Observation on 11/1/22 at 11:10 A.M., showed the dietary manager (DM) touched his/her bare hand to the front of his/her facemask. Further observation showed the DM donned gloves and touched bread slices for resident sandwiches. The DM did not perform hand hygiene after he/she touched his/her facemask.
Observation on 11/1/22 at 11:12 A.M., showed [NAME] K used gloves to prepare a bacon, lettuce and tomato (BLT) sandwich for lunch service. The cook removed his/her gloves, and put on a new pair of gloves and continued to prepare resident lunch plates. [NAME] K did not perform hand hygiene when he/she changed his/her gloves.
Observation on 11/1/22 at 11:17 A.M., showed [NAME] K wore a glove on his/her left hand but did not wear a glove on his/her right hand. Further observation showed the cook used his/her left hand to touch food directly and his/her right hand to touch other kitchen items. Further observation showed the cook moved utensils back and forth between his/her gloved hand and his/her non-gloved hand. [NAME] K did not remove the glove or perform hand hygiene after touching various kitchen items and before touching food.
Observation on 11/1/22 at 11:19 A.M., showed the DM adjusted his/her facemask with his/her bare hand. Further observation showed the DM prepared resident drinks for lunch. The DM did not perform hand hygiene after he/she touched his/her facemask or before he/she touch resident cups.
Observation on 11/1/22 at 11:20 A.M., showed [NAME] L used a gloved hand to touch frozen pork patties. Further observation showed the cook removed his/her gloves and touched various kitchen items. [NAME] L did not perform hand hygiene after he/she removed gloves or before he/she touched kitchen items.
Observation on 11/1/22 at 11:22 A.M., showed [NAME] K wore gloves and touched various kitchen items. Further observation showed the cook touched onions for a resident's sandwich. [NAME] K did not change gloves or perform hand hygiene after he/she touch kitchen items or before he/she touched the onions.
Observation on 11/1/22 at 11:41 A.M., showed [NAME] K used gloved hands to touch sliced cheese, the refrigerator handles, a hamburger patty, more sliced cheese, meal tickets, lettuce, onions, and a resident plate. [NAME] K used the gloved hands to pass the plate and meal to a dietary aide for resident meal service. [NAME] K did not change gloves or perform hand hygiene.
During an interview on 11/1/22 at 2:59 P.M., the DM said staff should wash hands after touching raw food, after breaks, when moving from dirty to clean tasks, after changing gloves, and after touching their facemasks. She said staff should change their gloves and wash hands after handling raw food and potentially hazardous foods. The DM said failure to change gloves and perform hand hygiene as necessary could contribute to cross contamination. The DM said the facility has a policy on handwashing and glove use, but she is not sure if the dietary staff are trained on the policy.
During an interview on 11/2/22 at 5:20 P.M., the administrator said staff are expected to wash their hands when they move from a clean task to a dirty task, after touching potentially hazardous foods, before putting on gloves, after removing gloves, and after touching their facemasks. He said the facility has a policy on hand hygiene, and staff have been trained on the policy. The administrator said staff are expected to change their gloves after touching food items and other times as appropriate.
2. Review of the facility's Pot and Pan Handling policy, dated 2004, showed:
- All pots and pans shall be cleaned by washing, rinsing, and sanitizing;
- All soiled pots and pans shall be placed on the dirty side of the pot and pan sink side board;
- The three compartment pot and pan sink will have each compartment cleaned before used;
- The policy did not address the use of the food preparation sink for cleaning dishes.
Observation on 11/1/22 at 11:25 A.M., showed [NAME] L used the food processor to prepare pureed pineapples for the dinner meal. Further observation showed the cook rinsed the food processor bowl and blade in the food preparation sink. The cook did not wash, rinse, or sanitize the food preparation sink after rinsing the dishes. He/She did not wash, rinse, or sanitize the food processor bowl and blade after use.
Observation on 11/1/22 at 11:45 A.M., showed [NAME] J rinsed pots, pans, and trays used to prepare food in the food preparation sink. Further observation showed the cook did not wash, rinse, or sanitize the food preparation sink after he/she rinsed the dishes.
Observation on 11/1/22 at 12:00 P.M., showed [NAME] L used the same food processor bowl to prepare pureed pork patties for the dinner meal. The cook rinsed the food processor bowl in the food preparation sink. The cook did not did not wash, rinse, or sanitize the food preparation sink after he/she rinsed the dishes. He/She did not wash, rinse, or sanitize the food processor bowl and blade after use.
Observation on 11/1/22 at 12:15 A.M., showed [NAME] L rinsed and chopped raw cabbage in the food preparation sink.
Observation on 11/1/22 at 12:17 P.M., showed pans used for meal preparation soaked in the food preparation sink.
Observation on 11/1/22 at 12:29 P.M., showed [NAME] L used the same food processor bowl to prepare pureed tater tots for the dinner meal.
During an interview on 11/1/22 at 2:59 P.M., the DM said staff should not use the food preparation sink to clean dishes, due to cross contamination. She said the sink should be washed, rinsed, or sanitized if staff use the sink for cleaning dishes. The dietary manager said the food processor bowl and blade should be washed, rinsed, or sanitized in between uses, due to cross contamination.
During an interview on 11/2/22 at 5:20 P.M., the administrator said staff should not clean dishes in the food preparation sink. He said it is expected staff would wash, rinse, and sanitize the dishes in the dishwashing area. The administrator said washing dishes in the food preparation sink could lead to cross contamination. The administrator said it is expected the food processor parts would be wash, rinse, or sanitize between uses.