HERITAGESPRING HEALTHCARE CENTER OF WEST CHESTER

7235 HERITAGESPRING DRIVE, WEST CHESTER, OH 45069 (513) 759-5777
For profit - Corporation 144 Beds CARESPRING Data: November 2025 1 Immediate Jeopardy citation
Trust Grade
41/100
#478 of 913 in OH
Last Inspection: April 2023

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

Overview

HeritageSpring Healthcare Center of West Chester has a Trust Grade of D, indicating below average performance with some significant concerns. Ranked #478 out of 913 facilities in Ohio, they are in the bottom half of the state, and at #18 out of 24 in Butler County, there are only a few local options that are better. While the facility is trending towards improvement, reducing issues from 7 in 2024 to 1 in 2025, they still face challenges, including a concerning staff turnover rate of 74%, which is significantly higher than the state average of 49%. There have been serious incidents, including a critical failure to provide timely care for a resident which resulted in death, and concerns about residents not being able to keep their personal items. On a positive note, they have excellent quality measures, but the overall staffing and health inspection ratings are below average, which families should carefully consider.

Trust Score
D
41/100
In Ohio
#478/913
Bottom 48%
Safety Record
High Risk
Review needed
Inspections
Getting Better
7 → 1 violations
Staff Stability
⚠ Watch
74% turnover. Very high, 26 points above average. Constant new faces learning your loved one's needs.
Penalties
⚠ Watch
$17,820 in fines. Higher than 81% of Ohio facilities, suggesting repeated compliance issues.
Skilled Nurses
✓ Good
Each resident gets 50 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than average for Ohio. RNs are trained to catch health problems early.
Violations
⚠ Watch
19 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
★★★☆☆
3.0
Overall Rating
★★☆☆☆
2.0
Staff Levels
★★★★★
5.0
Care Quality
★★☆☆☆
2.0
Inspection Score
Stable
2024: 7 issues
2025: 1 issues

The Good

  • 5-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
  • Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
  • No fines on record

Facility shows strength in quality measures, fire safety.

The Bad

3-Star Overall Rating

Near Ohio average (3.2)

Meets federal standards, typical of most facilities

Staff Turnover: 74%

27pts above Ohio avg (46%)

Frequent staff changes - ask about care continuity

Federal Fines: $17,820

Below median ($33,413)

Minor penalties assessed

Chain: CARESPRING

Part of a multi-facility chain

Ask about local staffing decisions and management

Staff turnover is very high (74%)

26 points above Ohio average of 48%

The Ugly 19 deficiencies on record

1 life-threatening
Apr 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

Pharmacy Services (Tag F0755)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** THE FOLLOWING DEFICIENCY REPRESENTS AN INCIDENT OF PAST NONCOMPLIANCE THAT WAS SUBSEQUENTLY CORRECTED PRIOR TO THIS SURVEY. Base...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** THE FOLLOWING DEFICIENCY REPRESENTS AN INCIDENT OF PAST NONCOMPLIANCE THAT WAS SUBSEQUENTLY CORRECTED PRIOR TO THIS SURVEY. Based on medical record review, staff interview and policy review, the facility failed to ensure an accurate reconciliation and accounting of all controlled substances. This affected one (#122) out of three reviewed for medication reconciliation. The facility census was 123. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #122 revealed an admission date of 02/13/25 and a discharge date of 03/15/25. Diagnoses include non-pressure chronic ulcer of right heel and midfoot with unspecified severity, type 2 diabetes mellitus with foot ulcer, rheumatoid arthritis without rheumatoid factor, and spondylolisthesis. Review of the Discharge Return Not Anticipated Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #122 was independent with eating, required supervision assistance with oral hygiene, personal hygiene, and wheelchair mobility, required partial assistance with bed mobility, required substantial assistance with bathing, dressing, and transfers, and was dependent on staff assistance with toileting hygiene. Review of the physician order dated 02/13/25 revealed an order for Oxycontin Oral Tablet Extended Release (ER) 12 Hour Abuse-Deterrent 10 mg tab, give 1 tablet by mouth two times a day for chronic pain syndrome. Further review of the physician orders revealed an order dated 03/14/25 that resident may discharge home with Home Health for physical therapy, occupational therapy and nursing (PT/OT/NSG) services. Review of the care plan dated 02/13/25 revealed Resident #122 required assistance with all activities of daily living. Review of the pharmacy packing slip dated 03/05/25 revealed Oxycontin Oral Tablet Extended Release (ER) 12 Hour Abuse-Deterrent 10 mg tablets, 30 tablets were delivered to the facility on [DATE] for Resident #122. Further record review revealed Resident #122's Oxycontin 30 tablets delivered on 03/05/25 could not be accounted for. Review of Resident #122's progress noted dated 03/15/25 at 10:00 A.M. revealed resident discharged to home with his wife today at 10:00 A.M., resident sent with his medications for the rest of the weekend. Interview on 04/25/25 at 10:34 A.M. with Administrator #335 confirmed on 03/16/25, the day after Resident #122 discharged home, the facility discovered 30 tablets of Oxycontin 10 mg, a full skid, came up missing on 03/16/25. Interview with Administrator #335 also revealed that the facility completed a full investigation, and two nurses, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #478 and Registered Nurse (RN) #479 were terminated for not following protocol of not giving the narcotic keys to another nurse without counting narcotics first. Administrator #335 confirmed the facility was unable to determine where the 30 tablets of Oxycontin 10 mg went. Review of the Controlled Drug Reconciliation policy, dated 04/2025 revealed all controlled medications (Schedule II, III, IV, V) are counted by licensed personnel. At every change of shift and hand-off of narcotic keys, a reconciliation is conducted by both the departing and incoming licensed health care professional responsible for the security and control of the drugs in the medication cart(s). The deficient practice was corrected on 03/19/25 when the facility implemented the following corrective actions: • On 03/16/25, the Director of Nursing (DON) was notified of an inconsistency with narcotic proof of use sheets and narcotic skids regarding Resident #122's medication. The DON reported a self-reported incident (SRI) to the Ohio Department of Health and began an investigation. The DON also notified Physician #12, Administrator, Medical Director and Police regarding Resident #122's missing medications. • On 03/16/25 at 9:00 P.M., LPN #478 and RN #479 were removed from the nursing schedule and a drug screen was completed. The results of the drug screen for LPN #478 and RN #479 were negative. However, at the conclusion of the facilities investigation, LPN #478 and RN #479 were terminated. • On 3/16/25 at 11:00 P.M., all facility medication carts were audited by the DON and another licensed nurse on duty to ensure verification of controlled substance counts. Additionally, current residents' narcotic proof of use sheets and shift count sheets were reviewed by DON. No other concerns were identified. • On 03/16/25 through 03/19/25, all licensed nurses were interviewed by the DON regarding medications and missing medications. There were no other concerns identified. • On 03/17/25, a Quality Assurance meeting was completed with the Medical Director. • On 03/18/25, licensed nurses on duty verified residents' controlled substances are available for administration. No concerns were identified. • By 03/19/25, the DON or designee completed an audit of current residents on opiates or controlled substances to verify medications are available for administration. No concerns were identified. • On 03/19/25, the DON completed in-service training with all licensed nurses on the abuse policy including misappropriation and controlled substance procedures. This deficiency represents non-compliance investigated under Complaint Number OH00164014.
Nov 2024 7 deficiencies 1 IJ
CRITICAL (J) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation

Quality of Care (Tag F0684)

Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on open and closed medical record review, staff interviews, review of Emergency Medical Services (EMS) report, review of e...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on open and closed medical record review, staff interviews, review of Emergency Medical Services (EMS) report, review of electronic monitoring device video footage, review of witness statements, review of the facility's timeline, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure Resident #60 received appropriate treatment and care and medical intervention to timely treat a change in condition. This resulted in Immediate Jeopardy and serious life-threatening harm which ultimately resulted in death beginning on 10/24/24 at 7:40 A.M. when Resident #60, who was dependent on staff for oral intake, was being fed breakfast by Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #13, started coughing, became congested and eventually had white secretions from his nose and mouth impairing his airway. Subsequently, Resident #60 coded on 10/24/24 around 9:36 A.M. and expired in the facility after failed attempts of resuscitation. This affected one (#60) of five residents reviewed for assessing a change in condition. The facility census was 111. On 11/13/24 at 12:52 P.M., the Administrator, the Director of Nursing (DON), Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) #45, [NAME] President of Nursing (VPN) #112 and Administrator #02 via phone, were notified Immediate Jeopardy began on 10/24/24 at 7:40 A.M. when CNA #13 entered Resident #60's room and began feeding him breakfast. Resident #60 suddenly started coughing, sounded congested and refused to eat anymore. CNA #13 left the resident's room to inform Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #22 of the sudden onset of coughing, congestion, the resident may vomit, and the resident ate less than his normal 75 to 100 Percent (%) oral intake. At 8:17 A.M. (via review of the electronic monitoring equipment inside the resident's room) LPN #22 entered the room, administered Resident #60's routine morning medications along with a routine ordered blood pressure and pulse, but failed to perform an assessment to address the resident's change in condition. At 8:59 A.M., CNA #12 entered Resident #60's room and noticed white phlegm-like secretions draining from the resident's nose, wiped his nose, left the room, and informed LPN #22 of the findings. At 9:14 A.M., Unit Manager (UM)/LPN #21, was doing routine morning rounds, entered Resident #60's room, noticed the white secretions from Resident #60's nose and wiped his nose. UM/LPN #21 retrieved a blanket, covered the resident up, left the room without completing an assessment and reported her findings to LPN #22. At 9:34 A.M., CNA #11 and CNA #12 entered the resident's room to give Resident #60 a bed bath and noticed white frothy secretions coming from Resident #60's nose and mouth. At 9:37 A.M., Resident #60 stopped breathing, cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) was started, EMS was summoned and worked on the resident until he was pronounced dead at 10:14 A.M. after failed attempts at resuscitation. The Immediate Jeopardy was removed on 11/14/24 when the facility implemented the following corrective actions: • On 10/24/24 at 7:39 A.M., according to the facility's timeline, CNA #13 entered Resident #60's room, repositioned the resident to eat, fed the resident, left room at 8:08 A.M. and went to notify LPN #22 that the resident was congested. • On 10/24/24 at 8:18 A.M., according to the facility's timeline, LPN #22 assessed Resident's #60 blood pressure and heart rate. • On 10/24/24 at 8:58 A.M., according to the witness statement, CNA #12 entered Resident #60's room and noted the resident was trying to blow his nose. CNA #12 looked in the back of the resident's throat, did not observe anything, and kept the resident sitting upright. • On 10/24/24 around 9:10 A.M., LPN #22 notified Nurse Practitioner (NP) #80 of her respiratory observation. New orders were received for a stat (immediately) chest X-ray (CXR). • On 10/24/24 at 9:14 A.M., according to the documentation in the medical record, UM/LPN #21 was conducting routine rounds and entered Resident #60's room to check on the resident and nasal drainage was noted. UM/LPN #21 assisted the resident as he blew his nose. No other complaints were voiced, or signs and symptoms of distress were noted at that time. • On 10/24/24 at 9:31 A.M., according to the facility's timeline, CNA #12 entered Resident #60's room to prepare the resident for a bed bath. • On 10/24/24 at 9:39 A.M., per the facility's timeline, CNA #11 entered Resident #60's room to assist with the bed bath. The CNAs in the room noted the resident had vomited as they were gathering supplies and noted the resident appeared to not be breathing. CNA #12 ran to get the nurse. • On 10/24/24 at 9:41 A.M., according to the facility's timeline, multiple licensed nurses entered Resident #60's room due to the resident not breathing. • On 10/24/24 at 9:49 A.M., according to the medical record, EMS entered Resident #60's room and took over care of the resident. EMS called the time of death at 10:14 A.M. • On 10/24/24 at 11:00 A.M., Resident #60's progress notes, orders, and care plans were reviewed by Corporate Registered Nurse (CRN)/Nurse Educator #111. No concerns were noted. • On 10/24/24 at 11:00 A.M., the DON and UM/LPN #21 interviewed LPN #22, CNAs #12, #11 and #13 in regard to Resident #60's condition prior to the resident coding. Interviews were completed on 10/24/24 at 5:15 P.M. • On 10/25/24 at 9:00 A.M., ADON #45 reviewed all current residents with any new progress notes during the past 24 hours to review for a possible change of condition. No concerns were identified. • On 11/12/24 at 8:30 A.M., the DON reviewed all current residents with any new progress notes during the past 24 hours to review for a possible change of condition. No concerns were identified. • On 11/12/24 at 3:00 P.M., the DON was provided in-service education by VPN #112 on the Change of Condition policy and conducting assessments including, but not limited to, vital signs and pulmonary assessment. • On 11/12/24 at 3:54 P.M., a Quality Assurance (QA) meeting was held with the Administrator, Medical Director #90 (Via Phone), the DON, ADON #45, CRN/Nurse Educator #111, and VPN #112 to review findings. The QA committee developed, reviewed and approved the plan of action. This QA meeting included a review of the Change of Condition policy. No changes were made to the Change of Condition policy. A determination was made for a plan of action including, but not limited to, plan to assess all residents' vitals and lungs in house. • Starting on 11/12/24 at 4:15 P.M., all 107 current residents' vital signs were obtained by the DON, ADON #45, LPN #21, RNs #32, #30, #33, #28, Physical Therapist (PT) #110, Director of Therapy #100 and all vital signs were completed at 5:43 P.M. Resident #05 refused vital signs. • Beginning on 11/12/24 at 4:15 P.M., all 107 current residents' pulmonary status were assessed by the DON, ADON #45, UM/LPN #21, RNs #32, #30, #33 and #28. All assessments were completed on 11/13/24 at 10:00 P.M. Resident #05 and Resident #42 refused assessments. Resident #32 was assessed with left lung rhonchi and right lung with diminished breath sounds. NP #80 was notified, and a new order for chest x-ray and albuterol (bronchodilator for difficulty breathing) was obtained. Resident #30 was assessed with coughing and diminished bilateral lung sounds. NP #80 was notified, and guaifenesin (expectorant) and a chest x-ray were ordered. • On 11/12/24 at 4:39 P.M., the DON and CRN/Nurse Educator #111 started an additional in-service education to the current 37 licensed nurses. This education was sent electronically, verified it was delivered, then reached out to every nurse for verification. The education included, but was not limited to, ensuring a nurse assesses residents for potential change in condition. A resident assessment for a change in condition assessment includes, but not limited to, vital signs and cardiopulmonary assessment. On 11/12/24, the DON and CRN/Nurse Educator #111 provided the 37 licensed nursing staff with one-on-one (1:1) additional in-service education. This additional in-service education included, but was not limited to, ensuring a nurse assesses residents for potential change in condition. A resident assessment for a change in condition assessment includes, but not limited to, vital signs and cardiopulmonary assessment. Any licensed nurse not on-site was provided education via telephone by the DON. The education onsite and via telephone were completed for all licensed nursing staff on 11/12/24 at 7:30 P.M. All licensed nurses were able to verbalize understanding of the educational content. • On 11/13/24 at 9:00 A.M, the DON reviewed all current residents with any new progress notes during the past 24 hours to review for a possible change of condition. No concerns were identified. • On 11/13/24, to monitor ongoing compliance, the DON or designee will review current residents progress notes daily from the past 24 hours to review for a possible change of condition. This will be completed daily for 30 days. • Beginning on 11/13/24 at 7:00 A.M., a Performance Improvement Audit Worksheet is being completed for 10 random residents to ensure the residents are assessed for potential changes in condition using a general physical assessment and obtaining vital signs. The Performance Improvement Audit Worksheet is being completed by the DON or designee daily for seven days, then three times per week for four weeks, then weekly for four weeks, then monthly. If any issues are noted, the DON will take appropriate action at the time the concern is noted. Results of the Performance Improvement Audit Worksheet will be reported to the QA committee for a determination of the need for further ongoing formal monitoring. • On 11/13/24 at 12:00 P.M., a QA meeting was held with the Administrator, Medical Director #90 (Via Phone), DON, ADON #45, CRN/Nurse Educator #111, and VPN #112 to review education and the audit findings. The QA committee reviewed the plan and no concerns were identified. The QA committee will monitor weekly for four weeks. • On 11/13/24 at 2:33 P.M., Medical Director #90 was notified of Immediate Jeopardy by the Administrator. • On 11/14/24, interviews with LPN #23 at 4:30 P.M., LPN #27 at 4:32 P.M., LPN #24 at 4:34 P.M., LPN #21 at 4:35 P.M., and ADON #45 at 4:37 P.M., revealed the staff had received education and in-service training on change in condition, physician notification, documentation and were knowledgeable about the facility's procedures and processes. • Review of the medical records for five additional residents (#30, #32, #75, #112, and #113) related to a change in condition, revealed no concerns were noted. Although the Immediate Jeopardy was removed on 11/14/24, the facility remained out of compliance at Severity Level 2 (no actual harm with the potential for more than minimal harm that is not Immediate jeopardy) as the facility is still in the process of implementing their corrective action plan and monitoring to ensure on-going compliance. Findings include: Review of the closed medical record for Resident #60 revealed an original admission date of 08/01/22 and the resident expired in the facility on 10/24/24. Medical diagnoses included Alzheimer's disease, dementia, hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebrovascular disease affecting the right dominant side, major depressive disorder, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and peripheral vascular disease (PVD). Review of the care plan revised 09/18/23 revealed Resident #60 had a nutritional problem and was at risk for malnutrition related to Alzheimer's, heart disease, cerebrovascular accident, self-feeding deficit, and COPD. Interventions included providing and serving diet as ordered and monitor, document, and report any signs and symptoms of dysphagia (pocketing, choking, coughing, drooling, holding food in mouth, and refusing to eat), administer medications as ordered, monitor weight and provide recommendations as needed. Review of the nutritional assessment, dated 09/11/24, authored by Registered Dietitian (RD) #60 revealed Resident #60 was on a regular diet with regular texture, thin consistency and dependent on staff for meals. The oral and swallowing status revealed Resident #60 had no concerns with coughing or choking during meals or when swallowing medications. The meal intakes were approximately 75 to 100 %. Review of physician orders for Resident #60 dated 09/11/24, revealed the resident was ordered a soft touch call light with brightly colored tape to the call light. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #60 had severe cognitive impairment as evidenced by a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of zero. Resident #60 was dependent on staff with eating, toileting, bathing, dressing, and transfers. Review of the facilities timeline of staff entering Resident #60's room dated 10/24/24, revealed at 7:39 A.M., CNA #13 entered Resident #60's room with a tray and at 8:08 A.M., CNA #13 exited the resident's room. At 8:18 A.M., LPN #22 entered the resident's room. At 8:35 A.M., RD #60 entered the resident's doorway to check on the resident. At 8:58 A.M., CNA #12 entered the resident's room for three minutes. At 9:14 A.M., LPN #21 entered the room. At 9:31 A.M., CNA #12 entered the resident's room. At 9:39 A.M., CNA#12 and CNA #11 entered the resident's room. At 9:41 A.M., multiple nurses entered the resident's room and at 9:41 A.M., EMS entered the resident's room. Review of the electronic monitoring device video footage from Resident #60's room dated 10/24/24 revealed the following observations for Resident #60: a. At 7:40 A.M., CNA #13 entered Resident #60's room with a breakfast tray to feed him breakfast, which included fried eggs, sausage patties, toast, and diced pears. CNA #13 raised his bed and the head of the bed (HOB) minimally and prepared his tray. b. At 7:45 A.M., Resident #60 coughed, and CNA #13 immediately looked up from her phone in her lap at the resident. CNA #13 was able to give the resident one additional bite of pears, and then he refused to eat after multiple attempts by CNA #13. c. At 7:48 A.M., CNA #13 got up, moved the bedside table with his breakfast tray on it near the window, lowered his bed, and left Resident #60's room. The resident's call light was hanging over the headboard from the back, looped down between the headboard and mattress and out of the resident's reach. d. At 7:49 A.M., Resident #60 coughed up white phlegm and expelled a piece of food, which appeared to be a pear. e. From 7:50 A.M. through 7:53 A.M., Resident #60 continued to forcibly cough and expelled more white secretions from his mouth. f. From 7:55 A.M. through 8:16 A.M., Resident #60 continued to cough intermittently. g. At 8:17 A.M., LPN #22 entered Resident #60's room, poured a medicine cup of medications in the resident's mouth, and placed a cup of water with a straw in it in the resident's mouth. LPN #22 obtained a blood pressure of 114/72 millimeters of mercury (mm/Hg) in the resident's right wrist. LPN #22 noticed the resident was coughing and asked if he could cough it up and asked if his throat was hurting. LPN #22 stated to Resident #60 he sounded gurgly and stated, you feel cold. LPN #22 stated she would have NP #80 come see him later. LPN #22 raised the HOB and left the room. LPN #22 did not complete an oxygen saturation level or complete an assessment on Resident #60. h. At 8:25 A.M., Resident #60 had white phlegm-like secretions protruding from bilateral nostrils and increased mouth breathing. i. From 8:35 A.M. through 8:58 A.M., Resident #60 appeared to be working harder to breathe with an open mouth and using his accessory (chest) muscles. j. At 8:59 A.M., CNA #12 entered the room to pick up his breakfast tray. CNA #12 noticed the white phlegm-like secretions from his nose and stated, you're not feeling good huh. CNA #12 wiped his nose, picked up his breakfast tray, and left the room. k. From 9:04 A.M. through 9:13 A.M., Resident #60 had produced more white phlegm-like secretions from bilateral nostrils going over his mustache and near the opening to his mouth. l. At 9:14 A.M., UM/LPN #21 entered Resident #60's room, noticed the thick white secretions coming from Resident #60's bilateral nostrils and stated she was going to put on gloves. UM/LPN #21 wiped his nose and instructed Resident #60 to blow his nose into the tissue. UM/LPN #21 covered the resident with a blanket and exited the room at 9:17 A.M. No assessment was completed. m. From 9:20 A.M. through 9:26 A.M., Resident #60 had increased white phlegm-like secretions protruding from bilateral nostrils, was taking shallow, rapid breaths through his mouth using accessory muscles. n. From 9:27 A.M. to 9:30 A.M, Resident #60 had copious amounts of thick white secretions protruding from bilateral nostrils but significantly more on right side, which was now observed in Resident #60's beard. Resident #60 was observed with signs of respiratory distress. o. At 9:31 A.M., CNA #12 entered Resident #60's room with linens. CNA #12 wiped his nose and exited the room. p. At 9:33 A.M., Resident #60 was seen with copious amount of white frothy secretions protruding from his mouth and down into his beard with respiratory distress and respirations diminished. q. At 9:34 A.M., CNA #11 and CNA #12 entered Resident #60's room and observed the white frothy secretions coming from his mouth. CNA #12 wiped his mouth. r. At 9:37 A.M., Resident #60 stopped breathing. CNA #11 checked for breathing and CNA #12 left the room. s. At 9:38 A.M., LPN #22 entered Resident #60's room and started sternal rubs and attempted to get a blood pressure. t. At 9:40 A.M., CPR was initiated on Resident #60. A backboard was placed underneath the resident along with an AED (automated external defibrillator - a medical device that can help people experiencing sudden cardiac arrest). u. At 9:48 A.M., EMS arrived in Resident #60's room and took over resuscitation measures for approximately 25 minutes when the resident expired. Review of the nurse's progress note for Resident #60 dated 10/24/24 at 9:25 A.M. authored by LPN #22, revealed an order by NP #80 for a stat chest x-ray related to congestion. Review of the EMS report dated 10/24/24, revealed EMS was dispatched to the facility at 9:40 A.M. for cardiac arrest. EMS arrived at the resident's bed at 9:50 A.M. and assumed CPR and life saving measures. The resident was found to be in asystole (a lethal heart rhythm), no vital signs and CPR was continued. EMS had to suction the resident's airway prior to inserting an endotracheal (ET) tube (a tube inserted into an airway to provide manual respirations). EMS administered advanced cardiac life support (ACLS) for approximately 25 minutes when the resident's power-of-attorney (POA) arrived and requested EMS to cease the life saving measures. EMS contacted medical control for a field termination and the resident was pronounced dead at 10:16 A.M. Review of the witness statement dated 10/24/24 at 12:59 P.M. revealed CNA #12 reported seeing Resident #60 only when she was getting ready to provide a bed bath. CNA #12 stated he was spitting up, and she assisted with blowing his nose and looked in the back of his throat. CNA #12 saw nothing in his throat, and he kept spitting up. Review of a witness statement dated 10/24/24 at 1:11 P.M., revealed CNA #11 went into Resident #60's room at roughly 9:30 A.M. with CNA #12 to perform a bed bath. CNA #11 reported it appeared Resident #60 had vomited. CNA #12 was cleaning him up while CNA #11 got the bath basin ready. When CNA #12 returned with the basin, CNA #11 came out of the bathroom after washing her hands and asked if Resident #60 was breathing. CNA #11 told CNA #12 Resident #60 was not breathing. CNA #12 ran to find a nurse, while CNA #11 stayed with Resident #60. Once a nurse entered the room, CNA #11 went to get the crash cart. Review of the witness statement dated 10/24/24 at 1:45 P.M., revealed CNA #13 entered Resident #60's room with a breakfast tray. CNA #13 repositioned Resident #60 to eat. CNA #13 fed him three bites of food. Resident #60 started calling her names and sounded congested. CNA #13 notified LPN #22. Review of the nurse's progress note for Resident #60 dated 10/24/24 at 2:03 P.M. authored by UM/LPN #21, revealed at approximately 9:21 A.M. the nurse was in the room to check on the resident and nasal drainage was noted. The nurse assisted the resident with blowing his nose. No other complaints were voiced, or signs/symptoms of distress noted at this time. At approximately 9:30 A.M., two aides were in with the resident preparing for a bed bath when the resident became unresponsive. The nurses were immediately notified and responded to the room. The nurse observed the resident not breathing, verified the code status, and initiated CPR. EMS and the family were notified. An AED was applied to the resident with no shock advised. At 9:49 A.M., EMS arrived and took over the life saving measures. Resident #60 remained asystole, and the time of death was 10:14 A.M. NP #80 was notified and gave orders to release the body to the funeral home. The DON called the coroner to release the body to the funeral home. Post-mortem care was provided. The family entered the room and asked the funeral home to be notified. At approximately 12:00 P.M., the funeral home arrived to retrieve the body. Review of the witness statement dated 10/24/24 at 3:44 P.M., revealed LPN #22 administered Resident #60's morning medications and noted congestion. LPN #22 obtained his blood pressure and received an order for a stat chest x-ray from NP #80. LPN #22 notified Resident #60's sister of the new orders. CNA #12 notified LPN #22 that Resident #60 didn't look right. Upon entering Resident #60's room, LPN #22 noticed he was not breathing. LPN #22 verified code status and instructed CNA #12 to get another nurse and call a code blue. LPN #22 lowered the head of the bed and began chest compression and suctioned his mouth. EMS arrived on site and took over care. Interview with CNA #12 on 10/24/24 at 4:04 P.M., revealed CNA #13 fed Resident #60 breakfast on 10/24/24 and she reported Resident #60 barely ate. CNA #12 reported she went into the resident's room to pick up his breakfast tray when she noticed a white substance coming out of his nose. CNA #12 wiped his nose, left the room and notified LPN #22 the resident looked like he needed to be suctioned. CNA #12 stated at approximately 9:31 A.M. her and CNA #11 went into Resident #60's room to give him a bed bath and upon entering the room, CNA #12 noted the resident had thick white secretions similar to foam coming out of his nose and mouth. CNA #12 wiped the resident's mouth and nose, but he kept spitting up the foamy substance. CNA #12 reported she looked at the resident, and he was not breathing. CNA #12 stated she asked CNA #11 if he was breathing, and she said no. CNA #12 went to get the nurse (LPN #22) while CNA #11 stayed with the resident. LPN #22 came in and assessed him, and then initiated a code. CNA#12 went to get other nurses and notified them of the incident. Interview with CNA #13 on 10/29/24 at 11:36 A.M., revealed she fed Resident #60 breakfast on 10/24/24. The resident had sausage patties, fried eggs, toast, and diced pears. CNA #13 reported the resident started coughing, stopped eating, and wouldn't allow her to give him a drink or complete eating, which was unlike him because the resident normally ate 75 to 100 % of his food. She was the primary staff member that fed him lunch and breakfast and he was not congested or coughing prior to feeding him. CNA #13 reported she told LPN #22 the resident sounded like he was congested. CNA #13 spoke to LPN #22, who stated she would notify the provider. Interview with UM/LPN #21 via phone on 10/29/24 at 7:20 P.M., revealed she was completing her morning rounds on 10/24/24 at approximately 9:15 A.M. when she went into Resident #60's room and noticed a whiteish secretion pouring from his nose. UM/LPN #21 stated she grabbed tissues and had the resident blow his nose. UM/LPN #21 reported he was mouth breathing at that time but had no other signs of respiratory distress. UM/LPN #21 reported she was notified a code was initiated on Resident #60 a little after 9:30 A.M., and she went to assist. Interview with LPN #22 via phone on 10/29/24 at 7:39 P.M., revealed CNA #13 came to her on the morning of 10/24/24 and reported Resident #60 appeared congested and could possibly vomit. LPN #22 reported she went into his room, administered his routine morning medications, checked his blood pressure and pulse and noticed the resident had congestion. LPN #22 stated she did not complete an assessment on Resident #60. LPN #22 stated she obtained an order for a stat chest x-ray. LPN #22 stated she saw her supervisor (UM/LPN #21) go in to assess him and have him blow his nose. LPN #22 revealed she was notified by CNA #12 that the resident didn't look right so she responded to the resident's room and noticed Resident #60 was not breathing and appeared gray. LPN #22 checked his code status, began CPR, had staff notify the other nurses and called 911. A follow-up interview with UM/LPN #21 via phone on 10/30/24 at 10:05 A.M., verified she did not complete an assessment on Resident #60 when she was in the resident's room on 10/24/24 and noticed the white secretions coming from the resident's nose. UM/LPN #21 stated she had the resident blow his nose and reported these findings to LPN #22 and instructed her to check on the resident frequently. A follow-up interview with CNA #13 on 11/12/24 at 11:29 A.M., while reviewing the videos, stated Resident #60 sounded congested after she started feeding him breakfast. CNA #13 reported Resident #60 started coughing, became more agitated than usual, and then refused to eat. CNA #13 stated he was not coughing or congested prior to breakfast. CNA #13 verified she reported to LPN #22, Resident #60 sounded very congested, didn't eat very much, and appeared as if he could vomit. A follow-up interview with LPN #22 on 11/12/24 at 12:19 P.M., while reviewing the videos, revealed she went into Resident #60's room at 8:17 A.M. to give him his routine morning medications and to get a routine blood pressure. LPN #22 stated CNA #13 reported to her Resident #60 sounded congested, didn't eat well, and looked like he could vomit. LPN #22 stated when she administered his morning medications, he sounded gurgly, which was not normal for him, and she reached out to the on-call provider to get an order for a STAT chest x-ray. LPN #22 verified she did not complete any kind of assessment on Resident #60. LPN #22 verified CNA #12 and UM/LPN #21 informed her of Resident #60's congestion before he coded. LPN #22 verified she did not go back into his room between when she administered his medications and before the resident coded. A follow up interview with UM/LPN #21 on 11/12/24 at 12:58 P.M., while reviewing the videos, verified Resident #60 had a change in condition on 10/24/24 when the resident was observed with mucous pouring out of his nose. UM/LPN #21 verified the mucous was not a normal finding for Resident #60. UM/LPN #21 verified she did not complete any kind of assessment or obtain vital signs on Resident #60. UM/LPN #21 verified she told LPN #22 about his condition and instructed her to check on the resident frequently. Interview with the DON on 11/12/24 at 1:54 P.M., while reviewing the videos, verified Resident #60 had a change in condition on 10/24/24 and stated the expectations were for nursing staff to complete an assessment on a resident when a change in condition was identified. The DON verified Resident #60 was not accurately assessed by nursing staff after Resident #60 had a change in condition. Interview with NP #80 on 11/12/24 at 2:14 P.M., revealed LPN #22 sent her a text message on 10/24/24 at 9:10 A.M. noting Resident #60 sounded severely congested and had crackles in his lungs. NP #80 stated she ordered a STAT chest x-ray and duo neb (combination of ipratropium and albuterol medications via hand-held nebulizer to treat respiratory conditions) every eight hours. NP #80 reported her expectations would be for the nurses to complete a thorough assessment of the residents prior to reaching out to her, so she could understand what was going on with the residents. NP #80 revealed severe congestion was not Resident #60's baseline. Interview on 11/12/24 at 4:37 P.M. with Medical Director (MD) #90, while reviewing the videos, verified the resident was having a change in condition due to the congestion and unknown white frothy secretions was not a baseline for Resident #60. MD #90 stated he did not know what the white frothy secretions were coming from the resident's nostrils and mouth but stated it could have been a sign/symptom of aspiration. MD #90 stated if a resident was having an acute change in condition, his expectations would be for the nursing staff to complete a timely and thorough assessment. Review of the facility document titled LPN Job Description revealed LPN duties included evaluating the resident's care needs, conditions, develop and or add to existing plan of care for the individual resident, instruction and observation of adherence to treatment or care protocols prescribed per the physician, and completing rounds and providing supervision of nursing staff care being provided. Review of the facility policy titled, Change of Condition, dated June 2015, revealed the facility staff would report identified significant changes in a resident's status. Skilled resident or residents with an active illness will be assessed every day based on the resident's specific needs and issues. Documentation of the condition would be noted in the nurse's charting or interdisciplinary charting as indicated. A significant change in a resident's condition included a resident's physical, mental, or psychosocial status (i.e., a deterioration in health, mental, or psychosocial status in either life-threatening conditions or clinical complications). This deficiency represents non-compliance investigated under Complaint Number OH00158336.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Free from Abuse/Neglect (Tag F0600)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** THE FOLLOWING DEFICIENCY REPRESENTS AN INCIDENT OF PAST NON-COMPLIANCE THAT WAS SUBSEQUENTLY CORRECTED PRIOR TO THIS SURVEY. Bas...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** THE FOLLOWING DEFICIENCY REPRESENTS AN INCIDENT OF PAST NON-COMPLIANCE THAT WAS SUBSEQUENTLY CORRECTED PRIOR TO THIS SURVEY. Based on record review, staff interviews, review of the facility policy, and review of the electronic monitoring device recording, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from verbal abuse. This affected one (#60) of the three residents reviewed for abuse. The facility census was 111. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #60 revealed an admission date of 08/01/22. Diagnoses included major depressive disorder, emphysema, peripheral vascular disease (PVD), and hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebrovascular disease affecting right dominant side. Review of the Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #60 had severe cognitive impairment as evidenced by a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of zero. This resident was dependent on staff for all activities of daily living (ADLs). Review of the care plan dated 08/01/23 revealed Resident #60 had behavior problems including combative with staff, resistive to care, using racial slurs, and swearing at staff. Interventions included administering medications as ordered, staff to anticipate and meet the resident's needs. staff to provide opportunities for positive interaction and attention, and staff to intervene as necessary to protect the rights and safety of others. Review of the electronic video recording in Resident #60's room dated 09/09/24 at 3:50 P.M. revealed Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #14 was providing incontinent care to Resident #60. CNA #15 was also present to assist as needed with care. CNA #14 was very rough with the resident during repositioning and the resident became agitated and stated expletive you to CNA #14. CNA #14 responded and said expletive you back to Resident #60. CNA #14 then extended her middle finger up to the resident's face asked Resident #60 if he saw it and said expletive you again. Throughout the video, CNA #14 continued to handle Resident #60 roughly during care. Resident #60 became agitated again and raised his arm up in a possible attempt to hit CNA #14. CNA #14 told Resident #60 she would call the police on him if he hit her. Resident #60 yelled call the police multiple times. CNA #14 stated she would call the police if he hit her and would tell them to come and get him. CNA #14 told Resident #60 to do it. CNA #14 continued to taunt Resident #60, and he stated expletive you again as CNA #14 repeated it back. CNA #14 stated she would bust his expletive. CNA#15 was observed standing at the bedside and did not intervene during the verbal abuse by CNA #14. CNA #14 and CNA #15 finished providing care and lowered Resident #60's bed to the floor and covered him up. The Director of Nursing (DON) arrived in the room and asked who had just provided care. The DON asked CNA #14 and CNA #15 to wait in the hallway. Review of the Self-Reported Incident (SRI) dated 09/09/24 at 5:35 P.M. revealed at approximately 5:20 P.M., the DON notified the Administrator regarding a message left with the receptionist. Resident sister called the facility and felt staff handled Resident #60 roughly by CNA #14 during care. Resident #60 had a history of being verbally aggressive and combative with staff. CNA #14 was immediately removed from the facility. A head-to-toe assessment was completed on Resident #60 with no negative findings. The local Police Department were called to the facility. According to Police Department, no physical assault occurred. CNA #14 admitted to using profanity toward Resident #60. CNA #14 was terminated. Education on abuse with all staff was completed. Other residents were assessed and interviewed with no negative findings. Review of the progress note dated 09/10/24 at 12:00 A.M. revealed Resident #60 was seen for a physical exam. Resident #60 was at baseline and reported he was not in any pain. Resident #60 was free from bruising, rashes, or lesions and vital signs were stable. Review of the police report dated 09/10/24 at 7:10 A.M. revealed the videos were observed of CNA #14 and CNA #15 providing care to Resident #60. In the video, Resident #60 cursed at CNA #14 several times. CNA #14 was heard saying expletive you to Resident #60 and continued changing him. CNA #14 was heard saying she would call the cops on Resident #60. The videos revealed no sign that CNA #14 physically assaulted Resident #60. Interview on 10/30/24 at 3:17 P.M. with interim Administrator revealed Resident #60's sister called the facility, while watching the live feed of the electronic monitoring device in the resident's room related to concerns during care to Resident #60. The interim Administrator reported she had notified the police of the alleged abuse. A head-to-toe assessment was completed on Resident #60 with no negative findings. The interim Administrator stated CNA #14 was immediately suspending pending investigation. Abuse education was completed with all staff and all residents were assessed or interviewed with no negative findings. The interim Administrator stated verified CNA #15 should have intervened during care to prevent further abuse from occurring. Interview on 10/30/24 at 3:52 P.M. with the Director of Nursing (DON) verified she had seen the videos regarding the incident on 09/09/24. The DON verified CNA #15 should have intervened during care to protect Resident #60 from the abuse. Review of the facility policy titled, Abuse/Neglect/Misappropriation of Property, dated September 2022 revealed residents have the right to be free from abuse, neglect, exploitation, and misappropriation of resident property. The facility staff should immediately report all such allegations to the Administrator and the respective State Survey Agency. Verbal abuse was the use of oral, written or gestured language that willfully included disparaging and derogatory terms to residents or their families, or within their hearing distance, regardless of their age, ability to comprehend, or disability. Examples of verbal abuse include, but were not limited to threats of harm, saying things to frighten a resident, such as telling a resident that he/she will never be able to see his/her family again. The deficient practice was corrected on 09/10/24 when the facility implemented the following corrective actions: • On 09/09/24, immediately following the allegations of abuse, the DON separated CNA #14 and CNA #15 from Resident #60's room, notified the Administrator, physician, and the resident's responsible party. • On 09/09/24, Resident #60 had a head-to-toe assessment completed with no negative findings related to abuse • On 09/09/24, the interim Administrator filed an SRI with the state agency, filed a police report, and initiated an investigation for the allegations of abuse towards Resident #60. • On 09/09/24, the DON educated all staff on the facility abuse policy. • On 09/09/24 and 09/10/24, Social services (SS) #70 and nursing staff conducted body audits and interviews on all residents in house to ensure no evidence of abuse was present. No abnormal findings were discovered. • Interviews with RN #30, LPN #22, CNA #10, and STNA #11 confirmed they had received education on the facility abuse policy on 09/09/24. • Beginning on 09/11/24, audits for abuse were conducted by DON of random residents for concerns of abuse. Audits were conducted every day for a week, and then weekly for eight weeks. No negative findings were identified during the audits. • On 09/09/24, CNA #14 was terminated from employment with the facility. This deficiency represents noncompliance investigated under Complaint Number OH00158336.
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

Incontinence Care (Tag F0690)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on review of the medical record, staff interviews, and job description, the facility failed to ensure interventions were i...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on review of the medical record, staff interviews, and job description, the facility failed to ensure interventions were implemented timely in order to appropriately treat a urinary tract infection (UTI). This affected one (#112) of four residents reviewed for infections. The facility census was 111. Findings include: Review of the closed medical record of the Resident #112 revealed an admission date of 07/12/24 with a discharge date of 09/13/24. Diagnoses included osteomyelitis of vertebra, mood disorder, generalized anxiety disorder (GAD), and atrial fibrillation. Review of the most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #112 had moderate cognitive impairment as evidenced by a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 11. This resident was dependent on staff for all activities of daily living (ADLs). Review of the care plan dated 08/07/24 revealed Resident #112 had a UTI. Interventions included to give antibiotic therapy as ordered, obtain and monitor vital signs, monitor intake and output, obtain and monitor laboratory (lab)/diagnostic work as ordered and report results to the provider, follow up as indicated, and encourage adequate fluid intake as diet allowed. Review of the nurse's progress note dated 08/07/24 at 12:00 A.M., revealed Resident #112 complained of suprapubic tenderness on exam. Resident #112 was noted to have cloudy urine in the Foley catheter bag with a moderate amount of sediment present. The resident was afebrile with stable vital signs. The plan was to collect a urinalysis (UA) with culture and sensitivity (UA C&S) and continue monitoring vitals signs and change in condition, mood, or behavior. Review of a physician order dated 08/07/24 revealed Resident #112 was ordered to have an UA C&S every shift for urinary discomfort. Review of a physician order dated 08/13/24 revealed Resident #112 was ordered an UA C&S every shift for urinary discomfort. Review of the UA C&S results for Resident #112 dated 08/19/24 at 7:29 A.M. revealed the resident's urine was collected on 08/16/24. The results determined the resident had an abnormal UA and the C&S determined the resident was positive Klebsiella Pneumouniae. Review of the nurse's progress note for Resident #112 dated 08/19/24 at 3:42 P.M. revealed the resident's UA C&S was final and new orders were received to start Macrobid (antibiotic) 100 milligrams (mg) twice a day for seven days. Review of the physician order for Resident #112 dated 08/19/24 revealed the resident was ordered Macrobid 100 mg two times a day for UTI. Interview with Nurse Practitioner (NP) #80 on 11/14/24 at 2:35 P.M. revealed if dayshift nurses had difficulties getting a UA completed, it would be passed on to the next shift. NP #80 reported it can be difficult for staff to get a resident's urine if residents are continent, but with an indwelling catheter, there should be no delay in getting a urine sample. NP #80 verified Resident #112 had a urinary catheter at that time. NP #80 also verified Resident #112 was seen on 08/07/24 and complained of suprapubic pain, which was why she ordered a UA C&S. NP #80 verified Resident #112 did not start on antibiotics until 08/19/24. Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 11/14/24 at 3:00 P.M., verified Resident #112 had an original order for a UA C&S dated 08/07/24 and the resident did not have a UA C&S collected until 08/16/24, which caused a delay in the administration of an antibiotic to the resident. Review of the Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) Job Description revealed duties included to evaluate resident care needs, condition, developed and or added to existing plan of care for the individual resident, instruction and observation of adherence to treatment or care protocols prescribed per the physician, and completing rounds and providing supervision of nursing staff care being provided. This deficiency represents non-compliance investigated under Complaint Number OH00159762 and OH00159005.
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

Deficiency F0711 (Tag F0711)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure the physician and nurse practitioner (NP)'s pr...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure the physician and nurse practitioner (NP)'s progress notes were timely written and signed at each visit. This affected three (#30, #32, and #75) of the three residents reviewed for physician progress notes. The facility census was 111. Findings include: 1) Review of the medical record for Resident #30 revealed an admission date of 09/05/24. Diagnoses included malignant neoplasm of upper lobe of right bronchus, anxiety disorder, chronic kidney disease , and depression. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #30 had moderate cognitive impairment as evidenced by a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of nine. Review of the progress note for Resident #30 dated 11/12/24 at 12:00 A.M. authored by NP #80, revealed the NP's note was signed on 11/13/24 at 10:17 P.M. 2) Review of the medical record for Resident #32 revealed an admission date of 07/10/24. Diagnoses included Parkinson's disease, diabetes mellitus, convulsions, and atrial fibrillation. Review of the Quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #32 had severe cognitive impairment as evidenced by a BIMS score of seven. Review of progress note for Resident #32 dated 10/15/24 at 11:00 P.M. with a date of service on 10/16/24 and authored by NP #80, revealed the NP's note was signed on 10/18/24 at 12:50 P.M. Review of the progress note for Resident #32 dated 10/28/24 at 11:00 P.M. authored by NP #80, revealed the NP's note was signed on 10/29/24 at 12:48 P.M. Review of the progress note for Resident #32 dated 11/04/24 at 12:00 A.M. authored by NP #80, revealed the NP's note was signed on 11/05/24 at 9:13 P.M. Review of the progress note for Resident #32 dated 11/05/24 at 12:00 A.M. authored by NP #80, revealed the NP's was signed on 11/07/24 at 9:45 A.M. Review of the progress note for Resident #32 dated 11/11/24 at 12:00 A.M. authored by NP #80, revealed the NP's note was signed on 11/13/24 at 9:20 A.M. Review of the progress note for Resident #32 dated 11/13/24 at 12:00 A.M. authored by NP #80 revealed the NP's note was signed on 11/15/24 at 12:33 A.M. Review of the progress note for Resident #32 dated 11/14/24 at 12:00 A.M. authored by NP #80 revealed the NP's note was signed on 11/15/24 at 10:09 P.M. 3) Review of the medical record for Resident #75 revealed an admission date of 02/20/24 with a discharge date of 10/25/24. Diagnoses included fracture of right femur, diabetes mellitus, anxiety disorder, and Alzheimer's disease. Review of the Significant Change MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #75 was unable to complete a BIMS because she was rarely/never understood. Review of the progress note for Resident #75 dated 09/09/24 at 12:00 A.M. authored by NP #80 revealed the NP's note was signed on 09/11/24 at 9:31 P.M. Review of the progress note for Resident #75 dated 09/20/24 at 12:00 A.M. authored by NP #80 revealed the NP's note was signed on 09/22/24 at 10:53 P.M. Review of the progress note for Resident #75 dated 09/25/24 at 12:00 A.M. authored by NP #80 revealed the NP's note was signed on 09/27/24 at 7:59 P.M. Review of the progress note for Resident #75 dated 10/06/24 at 11:00 P.M. with a date of service of 10/07/24 authored by NP #80, revealed the NP's note was signed on 10/08/24 at 11:01 P.M. Review of the progress note for Resident #75 dated 10/15/24 at 11:00 P.M. with a date of service of 10/16/24 authored by NP #80 revealed the NP's note was signed on 10/18/24 at 12:59 P.M. Interview on 11/14/24 at 2:35 P.M. with NP #80 revealed she did not chart her visits while she saw the residents. NP #80 reported when she was hired, she was instructed by her manager she had up to 48 hours to complete and sign her progress notes after seeing the residents. NP #80 verified her progress notes were not signed and completed at the time of the visit for residents.
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

Deficiency F0712 (Tag F0712)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on medical record review, staff interviews, and review of a job description of the Medical Director (MD), the facility fai...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on medical record review, staff interviews, and review of a job description of the Medical Director (MD), the facility failed to ensure residents were seen at least every 60 days after the initial assessment by the physician. This affected two (#30 and #75) of three residents reviewed for physician visits. The facility census was 111. Findings include: 1) Review of the medical record for Resident #32 revealed an admission date of 07/10/24. Diagnoses included Parkinson's disease, DM II, convulsions, and atrial fibrillation. Review of the Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #32 had severe cognitive impairment as evidenced by a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of seven. Review of the physician progress notes dated July through November 2024 revealed Resident #32 had not been seen by MD #90, who was the resident's physician, since 07/19/24. 2) Review of the medical record for Resident #75 revealed an admission date of 02/20/24 with a discharge date of 10/25/24. Diagnoses included fracture of right femur, type two diabetes mellitus (DM II), anxiety disorder, and Alzheimer's disease. Review of the Significant Change MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #75 was unable to complete a BIMS because she was rarely/never understood. Review of the physician progress notes dated February through October 2024 revealed Resident #75 had not been seen by MD #90, who was her physician, since 02/27/24. Interview on 11/14/24 at 4:37 P.M. with the Administrator verified Resident #32 and Resident #75 had not been evaluated by their physician every 60 days. Review of the job description for the medical director, revealed the medical provider must acquire, maintain, and apply knowledge of social, regulatory, political, and economic factors that relate to resident care services in the long-term setting. The medical director would coordinate and oversee medical care and treatment including physician services and services of other professionals as they relate to resident care. The medical director would oversee that all necessary medical services provided to residents were adequate and appropriate.
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

Medical Records (Tag F0842)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on review of the medical record, review of video footage from the electronic monitoring device, staff interviews, and job ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on review of the medical record, review of video footage from the electronic monitoring device, staff interviews, and job description of a licensed practical nurse (LPN), the facility failed to ensure accurate documentation in a resident's medical record. This affected one (#60) of three residents reviewed for documentation. The facility census was 111. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #60 revealed an admission date of 08/01/22. Diagnoses included major depressive disorder, emphysema, peripheral vascular disease (PVD), and hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebrovascular disease affecting right dominant side. Review of the Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #60 had severe cognitive impairment as evidenced by a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of zero. This resident was dependent on staff for all activities of daily living (ADLs). Review of the vital signs record for Resident #60 dated 10/24/24 revealed the following: blood pressure was 114/72 millimeters of mercury (mmHg), heart rate was 69 beats per minute (bpm), and oxygen saturation of 94 percent (%) on room air. Review of the electronic monitoring device video footage in Resident 60's room dated 10/24/24 at 8:17 A.M., LPN #22 entered Resident #60's room, poured a medicine cup of medications in the resident's mouth, and placed a cup of water with a straw in it in the resident's mouth. LPN #22 obtained a blood pressure of 114/72 millimeters of mercury (mm/Hg) in the resident's right wrist. LPN #22 noticed the resident was coughing and asked if he could cough it up and asked if his throat was hurting. LPN #22 stated to Resident #60 he sounded gurgly and stated, you feel cold. LPN #22 stated she would have NP #80 come see him later. The resident's left arm stayed tucked under the sheets and under his leg hanging over the right side of the bed. LPN #22 raised the HOB and left the room. LPN #22 did not complete an oxygen saturation level or complete an assessment on Resident #60. Interview with LPN #22 on 11/12/24 at 12:29 P.M. with Director of Nursing (DON) in the room and while reviewing the video footage of Resident #60's care, verified she did not complete an oxygen saturation on Resident #60. LPN #22 verified she documented a pulse oximetry of 94 %. Review of the LPN Job Description revealed duties included to evaluate resident care needs, maintain appropriate documentation per the resident chart and the facility policies, instruction and observation of adherence to treatment or care protocols prescribed per the physician, and completing rounds and providing supervision of nursing staff care being provided.
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

Infection Control (Tag F0880)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on review of the video footage from the electronic monitoring device, staff interviews, observations, and policy review, t...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on review of the video footage from the electronic monitoring device, staff interviews, observations, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure appropriate hand hygiene was maintained during resident care. This affected two (#60 and #114) of three residents reviewed for infection control. The facility census was 111. Findings include: 1) Review of the medical record for Resident #60 revealed an admission date of 08/01/22. Diagnoses included major depressive disorder, emphysema, peripheral vascular disease (PVD), and hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebrovascular disease affecting right dominant side. Review of the Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #60 had severe cognitive impairment as evidenced by a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of zero. This resident was dependent on staff for all activities of daily living (ADLs). Review of the electronic monitoring device video footage dated 10/24/24 at approximately 7:39 A.M. revealed Certified Nurse's Aide (CNA) #13 entered Resident #60's room with his breakfast tray. CNA #13 put the breakfast tray down on the bedside table. CNA #13 picked up the bed controller from the floor and raised the resident's bed. CNA #13 repositioned Resident #60 in bed. CNA #13 walked over to the bedside table after touching her face with her hand and moved the table over to the bed to prepare for feeding Resident #60. No hand hygiene was completed during the above observations and CNA #13 was not wearing any gloves. CNA #13 uncovered Resident #60's breakfast tray. During observation, CNA #13 removed the utensils from the napkin by grabbing the ends that would touch the resident's food. CNA #13 used the butter knife to cut up the resident's sausage then fed it to the resident. CNA #13 picked up the toast with her bare hands, buttered the toast and applied jelly. Throughout the video footage, CNA #13 was touching her personal phone sitting on her lap and rubbing her hands on her pants as she continued feeding Resident #60 without performing any kind of hand hygiene. Interview on 11/12/24 at 11:29 A.M. with CNA #13 while watching the electronic monitoring video footage, verified there were several infection control concerns including no hand hygiene or use of gloves while feeding Resident #60 his breakfast. 2) Review of the medical record for Resident #114 revealed an admission date of 10/30/24. Diagnoses included atrial fibrillation, retention of urine, dementia, and chronic kidney disease (CKD) stage three. Review of the care plan dated 10/30/24 revealed Resident #114 had an indwelling Foley catheter related to urinary retention. Interventions included catheter care and empty bag every shift and as needed, change catheter, tubing, and/or bag per order and as needed for obstruction, non-functioning, or accidental removal, check catheter tubing for kinks, enhanced barrier precautions (EBP) due to indwelling catheter, and monitor and report signs and symptoms of infection including pain, burning, blood-tinged urine, cloudiness, no output, increase temperature, altered mental status, and foul-smelling urine. Review of the MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #114 had severe cognitive impairment as evidenced by a BIMS score of seven and dependent on staff for being incontinent. Review of section H for bowel and bladder, revealed Resident #114 had an indwelling catheter and was frequently incontinent of bowel. Observation of catheter care and peri-care for Resident #114 on 11/14/24 at 1:57 P.M. performed by Certified Nurse's Aide (CNA) #17 and assistance from Unit Manager /Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #21, revealed CNA #17 had to be coached and instructed by LPN #21 during catheter care. Unit Manager/LPN #21 instructed CNA #17 to change her gloves and wash hands after providing care from a dirty to clean area. CNA #17 also touched Resident #114's sheets and comforter without changing her gloves and performing hand hygiene before she started cleaning the catheter tubing. CNA #17 was instructed again by Unit Manager/LPN #21 to change her gloves and wash her hands after cleaning the catheter tubing but had picked up a clean washcloth before doing so. CNA #17 used the same washcloth she contaminated to rinse the catheter tube of Resident #114. Interview on 11/14/24 at 2:10 P.M. with Unit Manager/LPN #21 verified she had to coach and instruct CNA #17 on multiple occasions to change her gloves and wash her hands during Resident #114's catheter and peri-care. Interview on 11/14/24 at 2:12 P.M. with CNA #17 verified she handled Resident #114's sheets prior to cleaning catheter tubing and did not change her gloves or complete any hand hygiene. CNA #17 also verified she used the contaminated washcloth to rinse the catheter tubing. Review of the facility policy titled, Hand Hygiene, dated August 2024 revealed all team members of the facility would follow hand hygiene guidelines to reduce the incidence of health care associated infections. Indications for handwashing included when hands were visibly soiled or dirty. Staff are to change gloves during patient care if moving from a contaminated body site to a clean body site. Remove gloves promptly after use, before touching non-contaminated items and environmental surfaces, and before caring for another patient. Decontaminate hands after removing gloves. This deficiency represents non-compliance investigated under Complaint Numbers OH00159762 and OH00159005.
Jul 2023 1 deficiency
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Incontinence Care (Tag F0690)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

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

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, staff interviews, observations, and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide timely and routine incontinence care to a resident. This affected one (Resident #7) of three residents reviewed for incontinence. The facility census was 119. Findings include: Review of Resident #7's medical record revealed an admission date on 04/17/18. Diagnoses included major depressive disorder, dementia, impairment of hearing, and osteoporosis. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #7 was severely cognitively impaired. Resident #7 required extensive assistance of two-persons for toileting. Resident #7 was incontinent of bowel and bladder. Review of the plan of care dated 02/02/23 revealed Resident #7 had bowel incontinence related to dementia and impaired cognition. Interventions included to assist to the bathroom or bedpan as needed, check the resident frequently, assist with transfers and toileting as needed, keep call light within reach while in the room, monitor bowel elimination, peri care after each incontinent episode, provide loose fitting easy to remove clothing, and utilize incontinence products or barrier cream as indicated. There was also a plan of care for Resident #7's potential for skin impairment to rule out impaired immobility, incontinence, fragile skin, dementia, failure to thrive, a history of pressure ulcers, and was non-compliant with interventions. The goals included for Resident #7's skin will remain/improve through the next review. Interventions included to assist as needed with toileting and hygiene and to keep skin clean and dry. Review of the Urinary Incontinent assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #7 was continent of urine. Resident #7 will be checked every two hours and toileted as needed. Provide peri care after each incontinent episode. Toilet and prompts before and after each meal and bedtime. Check every two hours at night. Review of the physician order dated 07/13/23 revealed Resident #7 had an order for Calmoseptine external ointment 0.44%-20.6% to apply to the bilateral buttocks every day and night for shift for moisture associated skin damage (MASD). Review of the weekly skin round dated 07/13/23 revealed Resident #7's area of concern skin condition was a reddened area, that was blanchable to the bilateral buttocks. New or current treatment was to use Calmoseptine cream. Review of the Braden Scale dated 07/14/23 for Resident #7 revealed that sensory perception was very limited due to responds only to painful stimuli, that cannot communicate discomfort except by moaning or was restless or has sensory impairment which limited the ability to feel pain or discomfort over half of body. Degree to which skin exposed to moisture was occasionally moist that required an extra linen change approximately once a day. Resident #7 was at moderate risk of skin breakdown. Review of the stated tested nursing aide (STNA) [NAME] for Resident #7 dated 07/18/23 revealed the STNAs were given the information that Resident #7 used disposable briefs. Resident #7 was incontinent of bowel and bladder. Resident #7 required extensive assistance with two staff members for toileting. Continuous observations on 07/18/23 from 10:33 A.M. through 12:03 P.M. revealed Resident #7 was in her Broda chair in the activity room asleep watching television. Resident #7 had a blanket over the top of her lower abdomen and lower extremities, while sitting in her Broda chair. No staff member had come into the activity room to check Resident #7 her for incontinence care during this time. Observations on 07/18/23 at 12:03 P.M. revealed STNA #201 took Resident #7 from the activity room to the dining room for lunch. STNA #201 did not check for incontinence at this time. From 12:04 P.M. to 1:46 P.M., Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #650 assisted Resident #7 with her meal in the dining room. At 1:47 P.M., STNA #70 took Resident #7 from the dining room back to her room in the Broda chair. Observation and interview on 07/18/23 from 1:51 P.M. to 1:59 P.M. with STNAs #270 and STNA #282 revealed they transferred Resident #7 with a Hoyer lift from the Broda chair to her bed. STNA #282 verified the black cushion in Resident #7's Broda chair was saturated with urine. Observation on 07/18/23 at 1:52 P.M. through 1:56 P.M. revealed Resident #7 was in her full clothes on her bed. STNAs #270 and #282 verified Resident #7 had a strong malodorous odor before removing clothes and incontinent brief. STNA #270 verified Resident #7's pants were saturated with urine. STNA #282 laid out a clean pair of pants next to Resident #7's bed. At 1:59 P.M., Resident #7's incontinent brief was observed with heavy saturated dark urine. Resident #7 had bowel movement when wiped down with disposable wipes. When Resident #7 was turned to her right side, she had a round red skin issues that estimated 1.5-2.5 inches circular on bilateral buttocks. There was a small red opened area of blood on the right buttocks. STNA #282 verified Resident #7's brief was heavily saturated of urine. Interview on 07/18/23 at 2:03 P.M. with STNA #270 stated the last time he changed Resident #7 was after breakfast between 8:30 A.M. and 9:00 A.M. Interview on 07/18/23 at 2:49 P.M. with STNA #201 stated for residents who were incontinent and confused, she would provide incontinence care every two to three hours. Interview on 07/18/23 at 2:51 P.M. with the Director of Nursing (DON) stated incontinence care was to be completed every two to three-hours. The DON verified Resident #7 should have been taken before lunch for incontinence care. At 2:56 P.M., the DON stated the staff typically check and change a resident after breakfast, then lay the resident down and then check and change the resident before lunch to make sure the resident was dry. Interview on 07/18/23 at 2:58 P.M. with STNA #217 stated she had taken care of Resident #7 before and would check and change her after breakfast, laying her down, and before lunch. STNA #217 stated lunch was served after 12:15 P.M. in the dining room. Subsequent interview on 07/18/23 at 4:33 P.M. with the DON stated Resident #7's video footage revealed that STNA #270 had entered Resident #7's room on 07/18/23 at 9:13 A.M. and left Resident #7's room at 9:24 A.M. The DON stated Resident #7 was checked and changed at that time. The DON stated the video footage was reviewed at the facility. Interview with the Administrator on 07/18/23 at 4:12 P.M. revealed the facility changed their policy to check and change residents every two to four hours for incontinence. The Administrator stated the policy was changed due to staffing shortages. The Administrator stated the blanket lying on Resident #7's lap covered up urine smell and LPN #650 who fed Resident #7 her lunch did not identify any odor. Review of the facility policy titled Urinary Incontinence Management, dated 03/2016, revealed routine or scheduled toileting should be offered to incontinent residents on a consistent basis. Caregiver will take the resident to void every two to four hours, including at night. The goal was to keep the resident dry. This deficiency represents non-compliance investigated under Complaint Number OH00144029.
Apr 2023 2 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

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

ADL Care (Tag F0677)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, medical record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to provide appropriate personal care for ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, medical record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to provide appropriate personal care for residents who required assistance. This affected two (#53 and #58) of 33 residents reviewed for care and treatment. The facility census was 122. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #53 revealed admission date of 02/16/18 with diagnoses of cerebral infarction, hemiplegia and hemiparesis, and Diabetes Mellitus type two. Review of Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #53 had severe cognitive impairment, no behaviors of refusal of care, and required extensive to total assistance of one person for personal hygiene and bathing. Review of progress notes revealed Resident #53 refused baths on 04/21/23 at 11:59 A.M., 04/18/23 on 9:10 A.M., and 04/13/23 at 8:55 A.M. Observation on 04/25/23 at 11:34 A.M., revealed Resident #53 in bed and had long fingernails that were untrimmed and jagged. Interview and observation on 04/26/23 at 2:50 P.M., with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #54 stated there had been some issues with refusal of baths and showers with Resident #53. She did indicate that Resident #53 would consent to a bath and then change her mind part way through. LPN #54 verified that Resident #53's fingernails were long, jagged, and dirty. 2. Review of medical record for Resident #58 revealed an admission date of 11/10/21, with diagnoses including fracture of one rib on right side, paroxysmal tachycardia, and protein calorie malnutrition. Review of MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #58 had severe cognitive impairment, no behaviors exhibited, and required extensive to total assistance of one for bathing and personal hygiene. Review of care plan revealed no care plan related to refusal of care or behaviors. Observation on 04/26/23 at 9:07 A.M. Resident #58 noted to have strong odor of urine. Interview and observation on 04/24/23 at 12:40 P.M., with State Tested Nursing Assistant (STNA) #64 verified that Resident #58 smelled strongly of urine, and she sometimes became agitated when offered care.
CONCERN (D)

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

Quality of Care (Tag F0684)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on medical record review, observation, staff interviews and review of policy, the facility failed to timely treat a reside...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on medical record review, observation, staff interviews and review of policy, the facility failed to timely treat a resident's skin impairment present on admission. This affected one (#525) of one resident reviewed for skin concerns. The facility census was 122. Findings include: Review of medical record for Resident #525 revealed an admission date on 04/23/23, with diagnoses including pulmonary embolism. pneumonia, sepsis, seizures, diabetes mellitus, nephritis, malignant melanoma, dementia, anxiety, and osteoarthritis. Review of the nursing admission assessment for Resident #525 dated 04/23/23 revealed a skin tear and abrasions to the shin area on right lower leg. Review of the comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] was in progress and unfinished. Review of the acute plan of care for Resident #525 revealed the resident has potential for skin impairment related to impaired mobility, incontinence, diabetes, fragile skin, malignant melanoma of upper limb, and prolonged periods of time in bed. Interventions include assist as needed with toileting and hygiene, assist with mobility, turning, and repositioning as needed, barrier cream as need after incontinent, Braden scale quarterly, gel cushion, pressure reducing mattress to bed, shower per schedule and as needed, skin rounds weekly, aide to check skin daily while doing routine care. Report changes to nurse. Review of the physician orders for Resident #525 orders for the month of April 2023 was silent for any orders related to the wound on the right shin. Review of the Treatment Administration record (TAR) for Resident #525 for the month of April 2023 was silent for any completed treatments related to the wound of the right shin. Observation on 04/26/23 08:50 A.M., of Resident #525 collaborating with Occupational Therapist (OT) #601 and Physical Therapist (PT) #602 with Resident #525's extremities exposed. Observation of a wound dressing dated 04/16/23 on his right lower leg. Interview on 04/26/23 09:10 A.M., with OT #601 and PT #602 verified the dressing on Resident #525 was dated 04/16/23. PT #602 stated they let the nurse know the dressing was present and dated 04/16/23. Observation on 04/26/23 at 10:10 A.M., with Team Leader Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #54 and LPN #93 remove old dressing, cleaned the area on right lower leg for Resident #525 and replace dressing dated 04/26/23. Interview on 04/26/23 at 10:16 A.M., with Team Leader LPN #54 verified the dressing was dated 04/16/23 and applied during the hospital stay. Further verified it was not changed on admission and should have been. Interview on 04/26/23 at 11:19 A.M., with Registered Nurse (RN) #63 who completed the initial body check and admission assessment verified she pulled the dressing back to see the wound but did not clean the area or reapply a new dressing. RN #63 verified she failed to notify the physician for treatment orders for the skin tear noted on admission for Resident #525. Review of the policy titled Skin Integrity Team (SIT)-Skin Monitoring Process dated June 2019 revealed under the area of skin rounds, the nurse will document wound location and description and notify the physician to obtain orders for treatment.
Jan 2019 8 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0679 (Tag F0679)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, observation, and interviews the facility failed to provide activities per residents' preferences. This a...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, observation, and interviews the facility failed to provide activities per residents' preferences. This affected two (#27 and #219) of five residents reviewed for activities. The facility census was 118. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #27's medical record revealed an admit date of 02/26/18 with diagnosis including Parkinson's disease, hypertension, cerebral vascular accident, adult failure to thrive, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, hypertension and dementia with behavioral disturbances. Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #27 was cognitively impaired, had no behaviors or rejections of care and required extensive assist of one to two for all activities of daily living except eating which required supervision only. Review of a activities assessment dated [DATE] revealed resident preferences included conversation and television. Multiple observations on 01/07/19 at 10:37 A.M., 12:07 P.M., 4:38 P.M., on 01/08/19 at 4:58 P.M., and on 01/09/19 at 9:27 A.M. revealed Resident #27 lying in bed with eyes closed, fully dressed, and the television was not on. Observation on 01/07/19 at 4:38 P.M. revealed activity staff #111 entered Resident #27's room, laid a activity calendar on the bedside table, stated hello to the resident and left the room. Interview on 01/07/19 at 4:44 P.M. with Resident #27 reported he sleeps a lot every day, and he denied attended any activities. Interview on 01/09/19 at 10:14 A.M. with Activity Director (AD) #30 reported Resident #27 was provided with one to ones of conversation or television watching by activity staff one to two times a week. AD #30 also stated the one to ones were a minimum of 30 minutes. She reported Resident #27 has came to movies. Follow up interview and review of the activity participation log on 01/09/19 at 12:23 P.M. with AD #30 verified the activity participation log had only one occurrence of an activity offered during the month of December 2018. 2. Record review revealed Resident #219 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including fracture of left femur, unspecified fall, Alzheimer's disease, hallucinations, anemia, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, hyperlipidemia, persistent mood disorder, gastro-esophageal reflux disease without esophagitis and dementia in other diseases classified elsewhere with behavioral disturbance and osteoarthritis. Review of the admission MDS dated [DATE] revealed the resident was severely cognitively impaired and was extensive assistance for bed mobility, transfer, and toileting. Review of Resident #219's care plan, dated 12/29/18 revealed the Resident #219 would engage in simple, structured activities that avoid overly demanding tasks, caregivers to provide opportunity for positive interaction and attention, offer structured activity program directed toward appropriate behavior and provide a program of activities that was of interest and accommodates residents' status. Review of Resident #219's Activity Assessment with Preferences indicated Resident #219 would like to participate with activities in a group about two to four times a week, would like to attend scheduled entertainment, enjoyed special events and music but did not like independent activities or self-directed activities alone. Observation on 01/07/19 at 11:30 A.M., revealed Resident #219 was seated in his room yelling, help. An attempt to interview the resident revealed she was not interviewable. Interview on 01/08/19 at 11:00 A.M., Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #23 reported Resident #219 yells out help numerous times throughout the day. LPN #23 indicated the resident yells out when no one is around. LPN #23 reported Resident #219 was used to one on one care, prior to admission. LPN #23 stated she had not seen the resident going to activities. Observation on 01/08/19 at 3:40 P.M., revealed Resident #219 was sitting in her room yelling, help. Observation on 01/09/19 at 6:25 A.M. revealed Resident #219 was sitting in her wheel chair in the nurses' station with two nurses. The resident was fully dressed in street clothes, head hanging forward with eyes closed. Interview on 01/09/19 at the time of the observation, State Tested Nurse Aide (STNA) #70 reported Resident #219 yells all night long. STNA #70 further reported the resident calls our for her mother. STNA #70 stated interventions include one to one, or food items were given to help distract the resident. Observation on 01/09/19 at 10:05 A.M., revealed Resident #48 was in wheelchair slumped over sleeping with oxygen on. Observation on 01/09/19 at 11:35 A.M., revealed Resident #219 yelling, help. STNA #96 went into Resident's #219's room and talked to the resident for about five minutes. Interview on 01/09/19 at 11:40 A.M., STNA #96 stated staff does one on one when the resident cries out. STNA #96 reported she did not see Resident #219 participating in activities. Observation on 01/10/19 at 9:45 A.M., revealed Resident #219 sitting in her wheelchair alone in her room. Interview on 01/10/19 at 11:00 A.M., AD #30 reported Resident #219 was recently admitted . At the time of the interview a request for the participation calendar for Resident #219 from the end of December 2018 to 01/10/19 was made. AD #30 did not provide a copy of Resident #219's activity participation sheet for the time frame requested. Observation on 1/10/19 at 4:25 P.M., revealed Resident #219 was in physical therapy. On 01/10/19 at 5:00 P.M., a second request was made for the activity participation sheet from AD #30. The facility was unable to provide any verification that Resident #219 participated in any activities since she was admitted .
CONCERN (D)

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

Quality of Care (Tag F0684)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on closed record review and staff interview the facility failed to follow and/or clarify physician orders. This affected o...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on closed record review and staff interview the facility failed to follow and/or clarify physician orders. This affected one (Resident #165) of six reviewed for nutrition. The facility census was 118. Findings include: Review of a closed record revealed Resident #165 was admitted to the facility originally on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE], he passed away on [DATE]. His diagnoses included diabetes type two, hypotension, diverticulitis of the large intestine, hypertension, peripheral vascular disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, major depressive disorder, coronary artery disease, gastro-esophageal reflux disease, hyperlipidemia, insomnia, lobar pneumonia and heart failure. He had a change of therapy Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment completed on [DATE]. He had moderate cognitive impairment. He required extensive assist of two staff for bed mobility, transfer and toilet use. He required supervision and set up for eating. Review of the clinical record revealed on [DATE], Resident #165 had a sodium level of 132 (which was below the normal limits of 135 to 145). Review of physician order dated [DATE] was for Ensure Clear (approximately 240 milliliters for each container) to be given two times daily and to push oral fluids each day for abnormal labs. The order to push oral fluids was record on the Medication Administration Record (MAR) as beginning [DATE] and was discontinued on [DATE]. On [DATE] the resident had a low sodium level of 126. On [DATE] at 8:09 A.M. a progress note was written by the nurse practitioner. The note indicated Resident #165 presented a new problem of hyponatremia (low sodiium level). The problem was reported by nursing staff and was described as acute. The symptom was sudden in onset. The sodium level was six to fifteen units below normal. The sodium level that day was 126 and had been 132 two days prior. The resident was asymptomatic. An auscultation of his heart revealed overall he had a regular rate, normal heart sounds and no murmurs. He had pedal pulses present and the pulses were equal bilaterally. He had no clubbing and no edema. The plan was to start a 1500 milliliters (ml) fluid restriction due to hyponatremia. He was to have a repeat Basic Metabolic Profile (BMP) in the morning of [DATE]. An order was written on [DATE] for the resident to have 1500 ml every day which began on [DATE] and ended on [DATE]. A review of the 11/2018 MAR revealed the nursing staff signing off that they were pushing oral fluids every day shift for abnormal labs from [DATE] until [DATE], although there was an order for a fluid restriction. The fluid restriction order was never placed on the MAR. The facility presented a copy of the meal intake record to show they were following the order. This information only contained the amount of fluid taken in with each meal. It did not account for the amount in his supplements, water with medication administration and fluids provided in between meals. Review of the BMP results dated [DATE] revealed the sodium level was still low, but improved at 131. A nursing note dated [DATE] at 7:40 A.M. indicated Resident #65 became unresponsive after sitting up and becoming short of breath. There were no detectable vital signs so cardio-pulmonary resuscitation was initiated at 7:57 A.M. with automated external defibrillator (AED) in use. Nine-one-one (911) was called and efforts to revive the resident continued. He was pronounced dead at the facility. There was no autopsy. His certificate of death indicated the immediate cause of death was suspected acute coronary syndrome. An interview was conducted with Dietician #46 on [DATE] at 6:11 P.M. She indicated the residents sodium was low when he first came, but it dropped to 126. She said there was an order for a fluid restriction and that was the intention of what was to be done. Later the labs improved and intake was encouraged.
CONCERN (D)

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

Accident Prevention (Tag F0689)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, observation, staff and resident interview the facility failed to ensure one resident had a closet with s...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, observation, staff and resident interview the facility failed to ensure one resident had a closet with shelves that were not sharp causing scratches on the resident and family member. This affected one Resident (#4) of five reviewed for physical environment. The facility census was 118. Findings include: Record review revealed Resident #4 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included psychosis, urinary tract infection, dizziness and giddiness, constipation, gastro-esophageal reflux disease, Alzheimer's disease, bipolar disorder, dry eye syndrome, polydipsia, mood disorder, Vitamin D deficiency, anxiety disorder, chronic diastolic (congestive) heart failure, hypertension, major depressive disorder, urge incontinence, atrial fibrillation, acute kidney failure, rheumatic tricuspid valve diseases, and hypo-osmolality and hyponatremia. She had a quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) completed on 01/01/19. She was cognitively intact. She had not had any hallucinations or delusions and no behaviors noted. She required limited assist of one staff for bed mobility, transfer, and toilet use. She required supervision for walking, locomotion, dressing with one staff assist, eating supervision with set up help, personal hygiene supervision with set up. She also required extensive assist of one staff for bathing. An interview was conducted with Resident #4's son on 01/09/19 at approximately 12:00 P.M. He indicated he had made several attempts to have the ends of the shelves in the closet covered. He indicated he reported it to staff including the Director of Nursing who indicated the matter would be looked into. He stated he received a cut from the shelf and had to go to facility staff for a bandage. He let them know at that time about the shelf On 01/10/19 at 12:01 P.M. an observation was made of Resident #4's closet. An observation was made of two sharp edges not covered by a cap on the ends of the shelves. On 01/10/19 at 12:03 P.M. an interview was conducted with the resident and she stated she had been scratched several times by the sharp ends. She indicated maintenance was aware and had replaced some of the caps but left two sharp ends open. On 01/10/19 at 12:07 P.M. an interview was conducted with Maintenance Supervisor #20. He indicated he replaced the end of one shelf when it was brought to his attention, but did not notice the two sharp ends without a cap. He verified the ends were sharp.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0760 (Tag F0760)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, observation, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure blood sugars results were assessed and insuli...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, observation, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure blood sugars results were assessed and insulin was administered timely. This affected two Resident's (#34 and #57) of two reviewed for insulin administration. The facility identified 28 residents as receiving insulin. The facility census was 118. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #57's medical record revealed an admit date of 07/03/18 with diagnosis of diabetes, major depressive disorder, neuropathy, heart failure, hypertension, dementia, and hypothyroidism. Review of a quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] indicated long and short-term memory problems, no behaviors, and extensive assist of one for bed mobility, transfers, and toileting with supervision only for ambulation, dressing, eating, and personal hygiene. Review of Resident #57's physician orders for 01/2019 revealed an order for Insulin Lispro Solution per sliding scale subcutaneously before meals and at bedtime. Review of the Medication Administration Record (MAR) for 01/2019 revealed blood sugars recorded as 7:30 A.M., 12:00 P.M., 5:00 P.M., and 9:00 P.M. Interview with Resident #57 on 01/09/19 at 8:45 A.M. reported concern that her blood sugar had not been checked and insulin had not been given. Resident #57 stated the nurses usually come to the dining room to check her blood sugars and give insulin. Interview on 01/09/19 at 9:12 A.M. with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #18 acknowledged Resident #57 had already eaten breakfast. LPN #18 verified she had not assessed Resident # 57's blood sugar or administered her insulin as ordered for 7:30 A.M. LPN #18 reported she was late due to she had not worked the residents' hall before. 2. Review of Resident #34's medical record revealed an admit date of 06/05/18 with diagnosis of lymphoma, carotid stenosis, dementia, diabetes, ulcerative colitis, major depressive disorder, and gout. Review of a quarterly MDS dated [DATE] indicated Resident #34 had cognitive impairment, no behaviors, and required extensive assistance of one for all activities except eating, which required supervision only. Review of physician orders for 01/2019 revealed an order for Novolog insulin per sliding scale subcutaneously before meals and at bedtime. Review of the MAR for 01/2019 revealed blood sugars recorded as 7:30 A.M., 12:00 P.M., 5:00 P.M., and 9:00 P.M. Observation of LPN #18 on 01/09/19 at 9:30 A.M. revealed her exiting Resident #34's room with a blood sugar monitor in hand. Interview on 01/09/19 at 9:34 A.M. with LPN #18 acknowledged she had just checked Resident #34's blood sugar and administered insulin based on that result even though Resident #34 had already eaten breakfast. LPN #18 verified she had not assessed Resident # 34's blood sugar or administered her insulin as ordered for 7:30 A.M.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0810 (Tag F0810)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, observation, staff interview and review of a tray ticket, the facility failed to provide assistive devic...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, observation, staff interview and review of a tray ticket, the facility failed to provide assistive devices to residents at meal time. This affected one (#33) of one resident reviewed for activities of daily living. The facility identified 12 residents as having adaptive eating devices. Facility census was 118. Findings include: Resident #33 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnosis included mood disorder due to known physiological condition, urinary tract infection, iron deficiency, anemia, duodenal ulcer unspecified as acute or chronic without hemorrhage or perforation, vitamin D deficiency, protein-calorie malnutrition, repeated falls, major depressive disorder, unspecified dementia with behavioral disturbance, gastro-esophageal reflux disease without esophagitis, delirium due to known physiological condition, anxiety disorder, hypertension, ulcer of esophagus without bleeding and chronic kidney disease stage three. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed the resident had severe cognitive deficit, memory problem and required extensive assistance with two plus persons for bed mobility, transfer and toileting. Review of Resident #33's meal ticket indicated the resident needed a two-handle cup with lid Observation on 01/07/19 at 12:34 P.M., revealed Resident #33 was sitting in the dining room. Resident #33 hands' shakes continuously. Resident #33 started feeding herself and was getting food on the table and on herself due to her hands shaking. There was no two- handle cup with lid present on the table. Resident #33 was given an eight-ounce cup of chocolate milk. The milk spilled on the table as Resident #33 attempted to drink out of the cup. Resident #33 was transferred to the activity room. Interview on 01/07/19 at 1:00 P.M., STNA #108 reported Resident #33 does not like to be fed and enjoyed feeding herself. STNA #108 stated Resident #33 liked to be independent but would allow staff to give her a few bites. STNA #108 stated Resident #33 was removed from the dining room because she was spilling food on herself and on the table. Observation on 01/08/19 at 5:52 P.M., revealed Resident #33 had an eight ounce regular cup of chocolate milk that was on the table. Resident #33 spilled the chocolate milk when she attempted to take a drink. The Director of Nursing (DON) sat down and tried to assist Resident #33 with her meal. Observation on 01/09/19 at 12:35 P.M., revealed Resident #33 was in the dining room. Resident did not have a two-cup handle with lid, she had a regular cup with juice and she spilled her juice on the table while trying to pick up the cup of juice. Interview on 01/09/19 at 12:45 P.M., STNA #70 stated Resident #33 liked to be independent and liked to feed herself. STNA #70 verified the meal ticket indicated Resident #33 was to have a two-handle cup with lid. On 01/09/19 at 1:15 P.M., Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #155 was observed giving Resident #33 a clear cup of ensure with a straw. LPN #33 held the cup for the resident as she drank the ensure. Resident #33 kept trying to grab the plastic cup, but the nurse did not let go of the cup. On 01/09/19 at 6:15 P.M., Resident #33 was in the dining room with a family member. Resident #33 had the two-handle cup with lid filled with chocolate milk. Resident #33 did not spill anything. Interview on 01/09/19 at 6:20 P.M., with Resident #33's family member reported the resident does not like to be fed and the two -handle cup with lid prevents Resident #33 from spilling milk or juice on the table. Interview on 01/10/19 at 1:00 P.M., the Director of Nursing (DON) reported staff was to abide by the residents tray tickets.
CONCERN (E)

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

Resident Rights (Tag F0550)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. Review of Resident #57's medical record revealed an admit date of 07/23/18 with diagnosis of diabetes, major depressive disor...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. Review of Resident #57's medical record revealed an admit date of 07/23/18 with diagnosis of diabetes, major depressive disorder, neuropathy, heart failure, hypertension, dementia, and hypothyroidism. Review of a quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] indicated long and short-term memory problems, no behaviors, and extensive assist of one for bed mobility, transfers, and toileting with supervision only for ambulation, dressing, eating, and personal hygiene. 3. Review of Resident #2's medical record revealed an admit date of 06/21/18 with diagnosis of hypertension, anxiety, anemia, diabetes, and seizures. Review of a quarterly MDS dated [DATE] revealed Resident #2 was cognitively intact and required extensive assist of one to two for activities of daily living. 4. Review of Resident #15's medical record revealed an admit date of 09/17/18 with diagnosis of diabetes, Parkinson's, depression, and dementia. Review of a quarterly MDS dated [DATE] revealed Resident #15 was cognitively impaired and required limited assist of one for activities of daily living. During an interview on 01/09/19 Resident #15 complained of having to wear an identification band on his wrist. A thick clear band was observed on his right wrist with a paper insert noting his name. Resident #15 reported he had complained to a nurse and was told the bands were needed. Residents #2 and #57 reported removing their own bands and staff replaced them twice. Observation on 01/09/19 at 8:45 A.M., revealed Resident #2 called Corporate Support Licensed Nursing Home Administrator (CS) #300 over to her table and asked for the band to be taken off. (CS) #300 explained to the resident that the facility preferred for the residents to wear them so the staff could identified the residents and give them the correct medications. As CS #300 started to walk away. Resident #2 stated loudly everyone knows her and she was capable of telling staff who she was. She stated she did not want to wear the band. CS #300 then stated they could put a bigger band on. Resident #2 repeated she could tell everyone who she was. CS #300 stated she would talk to the Director of Nursing (DON) and CS #300 left the room. Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) #157 approached Resident #2 and stated she needed to check on the concern. CS #300 reentered the room with a pair of scissors and removed the name band from Resident #2's wrist. Resident #2 stated staff were mad at her because she wouldn't wear the band. She denied knowing she could have refused to wear the band at any time. Interview on 01/10/19 at 3:00 P.M. with SS #34 verified the admission agreement did not contain mention of the name band policy, Review of the facility policy titled Identification Bands, dated 07/2008, revealed an identification band was prepared at admission and applied to the non-dominate wrist, residents have the right to refuse to wear the bands. Based on record review, observation and staff interview, the facility failed to provide a dignified dining experience for cognitively impaired residents. This affected one (#33) of four residents reviewed for dignity. The facility also failed to ensure residents were treated with dignity in regards to wearing identification wrist bands. This affected three (#2, #15, and #57) of four reviewed for dignity. The facility census was 118. Findings include: 1. Resident #33 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnosis included mood disorder due to known physiological condition, urinary tract infection, iron deficiency, anemia, duodenal ulcer unspecified as acute or chronic without hemorrhage or perforation, vitamin D deficiency, protein-calorie malnutrition, repeated falls, major depressive disorder, unspecified dementia with behavioral disturbance, gastro-esophageal reflux disease without esophagitis, delirium due to known physiological condition, anxiety disorder, hypertension, ulcer of esophagus without bleeding and chronic kidney disease stage three. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed the resident had severe cognitive deficit, memory problem and required extensive assistance with two plus persons for bed mobility, transfer and toileting. Review of Resident #33's care plan dated 10/22/18 indicated to encourage the resident to do as much as possible for self to support and help restore independence and to promote positive self-concept. Care plan also indicated the resident needed a quiet setting at meal times with adequate eating time and to encourage socialization and interaction with table mates during meal times. Review of Resident #33's meal ticket indicated the resident needed a two-handle cup with lid. Observations on 01/07/19 at 12:34 P.M., revealed Resident #33 was seated at a table with another resident. Resident #33's hands were observed to shake continuously. Resident #33 started feeding herself and was getting food on the table and on herself due to her hands shaking. Resident #33 was given an eight-ounce cup of chocolate milk in a regular cup. The milk spilled on the table as Resident #33 attempted to drink out of the cup. State Tested Nursing Assistant (STNA) #108 came to the table and attempted to assist Resident #33 with her meal by trying to feed her. Resident #33 spilled her soup as STNA #108 continued to try to feed her. STNA #108 removed Resident #33 from the dining room and placed her in the activity room. There was no other residents in the activity room. Interview on 01/07/19 at 1:00 P.M., STNA #108 reported Resident #33 does not like to be fed and enjoyed feeding herself. STNA #108 stated Resident #33 liked to be independent but would allow staff to give her a few bites. STNA #108 stated Resident #33 was removed from the dining room because she was spilling food on herself and on the table. Observations on 01/08/19 at 5:52 P.M., revealed Resident #33 was in the dining room seated at a table with another resident. Resident #33 had an eight-ounce cup of chocolate milk that was in a regular cup. The Director of Nursing (DON) sat down and tried to assist Resident #33 with her meal. When Resident #33 tried to feed herself, the DON would indicate she was trying to help the resident. Resident #33 grabbed a piece of bread from the hamburger she was eating and fed herself. Resident #33 also tried to eat the salad that was in front of her. Resident #33 was removed to the activity room. There was no other resident in the activity room. STNA #59 was trying to feed Resident #33. Interview on 01/08/19 at 6:00 P.M., STNA #59 reported Resident #33 did not eat her meal and would not allow STNA #59 to feed her. Observation on 01/09/19 at 12:35 P.M., revealed Resident #33 was in the dining room seated at a table with another resident. Resident #33 had juice that was in a regular cup and she spilled it on the table when she tried to pick it up. STNA #70 attempted to assist the resident. STNA #70 escorted Resident #33 to the activity room. There was no other resident in the activity room. Resident #33 would not allow STNA #70 to feed her. Interview on 01/09/19 at 12:45 P.M., STNA #70 reported Resident #33 liked to be independent and liked to feed herself. STNA #70 verified Resident #33 did not have a two-handle cup with lid. During an observation on 01/09/19 at 1:15 P.M., Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #155 give Resident #33 a clear cup of ensure with a straw. LPN #33 held the cup for resident as she drank the ensure. Resident #33 kept trying to grab the plastic cup to hold but the nurse did not let go of the cup. Observation on 01/09/19 at 6:15 P.M., revealed Resident #33 was in the dining room seated a table with another resident. Resident #33's family member was also seated at the table. Resident #33 had the two-handle cup with lid and it was filled with chocolate milk. The family member allowed Resident #33 to feed herself. The family member attempted to assist the resident. The family member was observed handing a spoon to the resident and the resident ate her pudding. Resident #33 stayed in the dining room until she finished her meal. Interview on 01/09/19 at 6:20 P.M., with Resident #33's family member revealed the resident does not like to be feed so the family member lets the resident feed herself. Observation on 01/10/19 at 12:40 P.M., revealed Resident #33 was in the dining room with a family member. Resident #33 had the two-handle cup with lid and it was filled with chocolate milk. Family member was present and allowed the resident to feed herself. Resident #33 did spill any of her food on the table or on herself. The family member was observed encouraging the resident to eat more and was handing her pieces of a hamburger. The resident refused and the family member let the resident feed herself. Interview at the time of the observation, the family member reported she tried to make it each day for at least one meal to encourage her mother to eat. The family member stated if she does not have anything scheduled then she comes and visits her mother twice a day during meal times. The family member denied taken Resident #33 to another room alone due to resident not eating. Interview on 01/10/19 at 1:00 P.M., the DON indicated she attempts to deescalate some of the stimuli for Resident #33. The DON indicated she believed this helped the resident to calm down so she could focus on her meal. The DON reported she moved Resident #33 on 01/08/19 from the dining room because the resident was moving food around on her plate and throwing food. The DON reported Resident #33 was not moved to the activity room all the time just when she had too much stimulus which caused her not to eat. The DON stated there were extra people in the dining room and the change caused Resident #33 not to focus on her meal and isolating her made her focus on her meal.
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0557 (Tag F0557)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, observation, and interviews the facility failed to ensure residents were able to keep their personal ite...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, observation, and interviews the facility failed to ensure residents were able to keep their personal items. notified of facility rules and their ability to make decisions. This affected five (#2, #9, #13, #15, #57) of seven residents who attended Resident Council meeting. The facility census was 118. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #57's medical record revealed an admit date of 07/23/18 with diagnosis of diabetes, major depressive disorder, neuropathy, heart failure, hypertension, dementia, and hypothyroidism. Review of a quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] indicated long and short-term memory problems, no behaviors, and extensive assist of one for bed mobility, transfers, and toileting with supervision only for ambulation, dressing, eating, and personal hygiene. 2. Review of Resident #2's medical record revealed an admit date of 06/21/18 with diagnosis of hypertension, anxiety, anemia, diabetes, and seizures. Review of a quarterly MDS dated [DATE] revealed Resident #2 was cognitively intact and required extensive assist of one to two for activities of daily living. 3. Review of Resident #15's medical record revealed an admit date of 09/17/18 with diagnosis of diabetes, Parkinson's, depression, and dementia. Review of a quarterly MDS dated [DATE] revealed Resident #15 was cognitively impaired and required limited assist of one for activities of daily living. 4. Review of Resident #9's medical record revealed an admit date of 03/17/18 with diagnosis of hypertension, diabetes, depression, and anxiety. Review of a quarterly MDS dated [DATE] revealed Resident #9 had cognitive impairment and required limited to extensive assist of one for activities of daily living. 5. Review of Resident #13's medical record revealed an admit date of 02/15/18 with diagnosis of cerebral vascular accident, hypertension, and depression. Review of a quarterly MDS dated [DATE] revealed Resident #13 was cognitively intact and required extensive assist of one for activities of daily living. During an interview on 01/09/19 at 8:30 A.M., Resident #57 complained staff took her personal care items (deodorant, lotion, body spray) out of her room on 01/07/19 without her knowledge. She stated she complained to her nurse and her daughter. She stated her daughter took her shopping on 01/08/19 to replace the items. Residents #2 and #15 both stated the facility does whatever they want. Interview on 01/09/19 at 1:30 P.M. with Social Service (SS) staff #34 reported any personal care items over four ounces was put in a locked nightstand drawer in the resident's room if the resident was alert enough to manage a key. She reported if a locked drawer was not indicated the items were put in the locked nurses station. She stated she was unsure of the locked bathroom cabinet use and was unable to state when sweeps were done or how residents were informed of a sweep for oversized items. During Resident Council Meeting on 01/09/19 at 1:40 P.M., Resident #57 complained again of personal care items being taken. Resident #2 complained she did not have a key to the locked white bathroom cabinet containing her personal care items. Residents #9 and #13 also complained of not having a key to their locked bathroom cabinets. Interview on 01/10/19 at 2:10 P.M. with the Director of Nursing (DON) reported an aide had pulled the oversized items from resident room, that an actual sweep was not done. The DON reported the white bathroom cabinets were for personal care items since residents shared a bathroom and a resident must ask for a key to the cabinets. She was unable to state how the residents were informed of the ounce limit or how to obtain a key to the cabinets. Interview on 01/10/19 at 3:00 P.M. with SS #34 verified the admission agreement did not contain mention of the four-ounce fluid restriction, or the locked white cabinets. Review of the facility policy titled Locked Individual Cabinets, dated 11/2012, revealed under procedure #2 - residents that were alert and oriented were offered and able to request a white cabinet key.
CONCERN (E)

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

Food Safety (Tag F0812)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

4. Dining observation on 01/09/18 from 12:19 P.M. to 1:23 P.M. on the second floor revealed dietary staff (DS)#10 and #153 plating food in the servery. DS #10 was observed while wearing gloves to touc...

Read full inspector narrative →
4. Dining observation on 01/09/18 from 12:19 P.M. to 1:23 P.M. on the second floor revealed dietary staff (DS)#10 and #153 plating food in the servery. DS #10 was observed while wearing gloves to touch the hot box and the refrigerator handle. While wearing the same gloves, DS #10 picked up lettuce, tomato, and pickles without tongs and placing them on two different resident sandwiches. DS #153 was observed wearing gloves to touch sandwich buns, retrieve a clear plastic wrap from the bottom shelf and wrap a plate. DS #153 turned on the water faucet and then touched the sandwich buns without changing gloves or washing hands. Interview on 01/09/19 at 1:23 P.M. with both DS #10 and DS #153 verified they had touched the various objects and had not changed their gloves or washed their hands. DS #10 stated they should be using tongs to prevent food contamination. Based on observation, staff interview, and policy and procedure review, the facility failed to label, date, and discard expired food items from the walk-in- refrigerator and freezer. The facility also failed to serve food in a sanitary environment. This had the potential to affect all residents residing in the facility except for one resident (Resident #3) identified by the facility as receiving nothing by mouth (NPO). The facility census was 118. Findings include: 1. On 01/02/19 from 8:15 A.M. to 8:35 A.M., an initial tour of the kitchen was conducted with Dietary Director (DD) #120. During the observation the following concerns were observed, and all the concerns were verified by DD #120. a. In the refrigerator there was a half of gallon of milk with an expiration date of 12/30/18. b. In the refrigerator there was a gallon of milk with an expiration date of 01/01/19. c. In the refrigerator there was a plastic container of mushrooms with date of 11/01/18. DD #120 was unable to verify if the date was a use by date or an expiration date. d. In the refrigerator there was a cheese ball with a date of 12/31/18. DD #120 was unable to verify if the date was a use by date or an expiration date. e. In the refrigerator there was a plastic container of chocolate pudding with a date of 02/15/18. DD #120 was unable to verify whether the date was a use by date or an expiration date. f. In the refrigerator there was a gallon of orange juice with an expiration date of 12/20/18. g. In the freezer there was a plastic bag of winter blend vegetables with no date and the bag was opened exposed to the air. h. In the freezer there was a plastic bag of cookies with no date. i. In the freezer there was a plastic container of melon balls with no date. j. In the freezer there was a plastic bag of hot dogs with a date of 12/05/18. DD #120 was unable to verify if the date was a use by date or an expiration date. k. The deep fryer was dirty and filled with fish crumbs left from 12/30/18 dinner. l. Utensil bin was filled with food particles, debris and crumbs in it. m. Underneath the steam table food particles, grease and debris was observed n. The steam table pans were covered with grease and food stains. Interview on 01/02/19 at 8:40 A.M., DD #120 revealed the kitchen was expected to be clean after every shift. Review of facility policy titled, Procedure for Food Storage, revised 12/20/16, revealed stored items are covered with foil, plastic, or lids and properly identified with labels and dated. Leftovers are covered, dated and appropriately identified with labels and stored within refrigeration units. Leftovers are used within three days. Review of the facility cleaning schedule titled, Dietary Services Cleaning Schedule, revealed the fryer is to be cleaned after each use and the steam table to be cleaned three times per day. 2. Observation on 01/07/19 at 12:37 P.M., revealed Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #116 touched her hair, passed out trays and fed Resident #5 without washing hands. LPN #116 held the straw for the resident as the resident was unable to hold the straw for herself. Interview on 01/07/19 at 12:50 P.M., LPN#116 reported she did not realize that she touched her hair, passed out trays and assisted Resident #5 with a straw to drink without washing her hands. 3. Observation on 01/08/19 at 5:52 P.M., revealed State Tested Nursing Assistant (STNA) #68 proceeded to feed Resident #5 after passing out trays in the dining room without washing her hands. Interview on 01/08/19 at 5:53 P.M., STNA #6 verified feeding Resident #5 without washing her hands after passing out trays to other residents in the dining room.
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?"
  • "Why is there high staff turnover? How do you retain staff?"
  • "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). Review inspection reports carefully.
  • • 19 deficiencies on record, including 1 critical (life-threatening) violation. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
  • • $17,820 in fines. Above average for Ohio. Some compliance problems on record.
  • • Grade D (41/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
Bottom line: Trust Score of 41/100 indicates significant concerns. Thoroughly evaluate alternatives.

About This Facility

What is Heritagespring Healthcare Center Of West Chester's CMS Rating?

CMS assigns HERITAGESPRING HEALTHCARE CENTER OF WEST CHESTER an overall rating of 3 out of 5 stars, which is considered average nationally. Within Ohio, this rating places the facility higher than 0% of the state's 100 nursing homes. This mid-range rating indicates the facility meets federal standards but may have areas for improvement.

How is Heritagespring Healthcare Center Of West Chester Staffed?

CMS rates HERITAGESPRING HEALTHCARE CENTER OF WEST CHESTER's staffing level at 2 out of 5 stars, which is below average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 74%, which is 27 percentage points above the Ohio average of 46%. High turnover can affect care consistency as new staff learn residents' individual needs. RN turnover specifically is 63%, which is notably high. RNs provide skilled clinical oversight, so turnover in this role can affect medical care quality.

What Have Inspectors Found at Heritagespring Healthcare Center Of West Chester?

State health inspectors documented 19 deficiencies at HERITAGESPRING HEALTHCARE CENTER OF WEST CHESTER during 2019 to 2025. These included: 1 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death) and 18 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 Heritagespring Healthcare Center Of West Chester?

HERITAGESPRING HEALTHCARE CENTER OF WEST CHESTER is owned by a for-profit company. For-profit facilities operate as businesses with obligations to shareholders or private owners. The facility is operated by CARESPRING, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 144 certified beds and approximately 128 residents (about 89% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in WEST CHESTER, Ohio.

How Does Heritagespring Healthcare Center Of West Chester Compare to Other Ohio Nursing Homes?

Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Ohio, HERITAGESPRING HEALTHCARE CENTER OF WEST CHESTER's overall rating (3 stars) is below the state average of 3.2, staff turnover (74%) is significantly higher than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (2 stars) is below the national benchmark.

What Should Families Ask When Visiting Heritagespring Healthcare Center Of West Chester?

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?" "How do you ensure continuity of care given staff turnover, and what is your staff retention strategy?" "Can you walk me through typical staffing levels on day, evening, and night shifts?" "Can I visit during a mealtime to observe dining assistance and food quality?" These questions are particularly relevant given the facility's Immediate Jeopardy citations, the facility's high staff turnover rate, and the below-average staffing rating.

Is Heritagespring Healthcare Center Of West Chester Safe?

Based on CMS inspection data, HERITAGESPRING HEALTHCARE CENTER OF WEST CHESTER 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 3-star overall rating and ranks #100 of 100 nursing homes in Ohio. Families considering this facility should ask detailed questions about what corrective actions have been taken since these incidents.

Do Nurses at Heritagespring Healthcare Center Of West Chester Stick Around?

Staff turnover at HERITAGESPRING HEALTHCARE CENTER OF WEST CHESTER is high. At 74%, the facility is 27 percentage points above the Ohio average of 46%. Registered Nurse turnover is particularly concerning at 63%. RNs handle complex medical decisions and coordinate care — frequent RN changes can directly impact care quality. High turnover means new staff may not know residents' individual needs, medications, or preferences. It can also be disorienting for residents, especially those with dementia who rely on familiar faces. Families should ask: What is causing the turnover? What retention programs are in place? How do you ensure care continuity during staff transitions?

Was Heritagespring Healthcare Center Of West Chester Ever Fined?

HERITAGESPRING HEALTHCARE CENTER OF WEST CHESTER has been fined $17,820 across 1 penalty action. This is below the Ohio average of $33,257. 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 Heritagespring Healthcare Center Of West Chester on Any Federal Watch List?

HERITAGESPRING HEALTHCARE CENTER OF WEST CHESTER 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.