TRINITY WOODS, INC.

4134 EAST 31ST STREET, TULSA, OK 74135 (918) 743-2565
Non profit - Corporation 84 Beds Independent Data: November 2025
Trust Grade
85/100
#35 of 282 in OK
Last Inspection: June 2023

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

Overview

Trinity Woods, Inc. has a Trust Grade of B+, which means it is above average and recommended for families considering care options. The facility ranks #35 out of 282 in Oklahoma, placing it in the top half of state facilities, and #3 out of 33 in Tulsa County, indicating only two local options are better. The trend is improving, with issues decreasing from four in 2019 to just one in 2023, showing progress in care quality. Staffing is a strength, with a 4/5 star rating and a turnover rate of 43%, which is lower than the state average of 55%, suggesting that staff are stable and familiar with residents' needs. However, there are some weaknesses to note. Although there have been no fines, the facility was found to have a serious issue in which two residents required supervision to prevent falls but did not receive adequate oversight, resulting in significant injuries. Additionally, the facility failed to have a documented water management plan to prevent waterborne pathogens, which raises concerns about infection control. Overall, while Trinity Woods shows strong potential, families should weigh both the positive aspects and the noted deficiencies when making their decision.

Trust Score
B+
85/100
In Oklahoma
#35/282
Top 12%
Safety Record
Moderate
Needs review
Inspections
Getting Better
4 → 1 violations
Staff Stability
○ Average
43% turnover. Near Oklahoma's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
Penalties
✓ Good
No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Oklahoma facilities.
Skilled Nurses
○ Average
Each resident gets 37 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — about average for Oklahoma. RNs are the most trained staff who monitor for health changes.
Violations
⚠ Watch
12 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
★★★★★
5.0
Overall Rating
★★★★☆
4.0
Staff Levels
★★★★★
5.0
Care Quality
★★★★☆
4.0
Inspection Score
Stable
2019: 4 issues
2023: 1 issues

The Good

  • 4-Star Staffing Rating · Above-average nurse staffing levels
  • 5-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
  • Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
  • No fines on record
  • Staff turnover below average (43%)

    5 points below Oklahoma average of 48%

Facility shows strength in staffing levels, quality measures, fire safety.

The Bad

Staff Turnover: 43%

Near Oklahoma avg (46%)

Typical for the industry

The Ugly 12 deficiencies on record

1 actual harm
Jun 2023 1 deficiency
CONCERN (E)

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

Infection Control (Tag F0880)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to have a documented water management plan for the prevention of water borne pathogens. The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents repor...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to have a documented water management plan for the prevention of water borne pathogens. The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents report, dated 06/13/23, documented 55 residents resided at the facility. Findings: A review of facility infection control policy and procedures failed to locate documentation of a water management program. On 06/15/23 at 12:13 p.m. the administrator was asked if the facility had a water management program. The administrator replied the facility did not and an organizational officer would work to develop one.
Dec 2019 4 deficiencies
CONCERN (E)

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

Transfer Notice (Tag F0623)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined the facility failed to provide in writing a notice of tran...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined the facility failed to provide in writing a notice of transfer/discharge for three (#52, #75, #33) of four sampled residents whose transfers/discharges were reviewed. The facility identified 28 residents were transferred or discharged to the hospital in the last three months. Findings: 1. Resident #52 was admitted to the facility on admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses which include diabetes, non-Alzheimer dementia, and anxiety. The quarterly assessment, dated 11/05/19, documented the resident was severely impaired for daily decision making and required extensive assistance with activities of daily living. The care plan, dated 11/14/19, documented the resident had a tendency to wander and interventions were documented. The physician orders, dated 11/25/19, documented the resident was to be transferred and admitted to the hospital for a possible bowel obstruction. On 12/02/19 at 2:43 PM, the resident was asleep in his bed with his call light within reach. On 12/05/19 at 3:10 PM, the director of nurses (DON) stated the resident's face sheet and medication record were sent to the hospital with the resident. The DON stated the facility did not send a written notice of transfer or discharge to the resident or the resident's representative. 2. Resident #75 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses which included a cerebral infarct and acute kidney failure. A five day assessment, dated 10/17/19, documented the resident was severely impaired for daily decision making. The assessment documented the resident required limited to extensive assistance of one person for activities of daily living (ADLs). The care plan, dated 10/23/19, documented the resident was dependent and required assistance with ADLs. The transfer report, dated 11/14/19, documented the resident was up in the wheelchair that morning and started shaking uncontrollably. The record documented the physician was notified. The record documented the resident was transferred to the hospital for evaluation. On 12/05/19 at 3:10 PM, the director of nurses (DON) stated the resident's face sheet and medication record were sent to the hospital with the resident. The DON stated the facility did not send a letter to the resident's representative providing a notice of discharge. 3. Resident #33 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included congestive heart failure. The admission assessment, dated 07/17/19, documented the resident required limited to extensive assistance with activities of daily living (ADLs). The care plan, dated 08/05/19, documented the resident required assistance with ADLs. An assessment, dated 08/21/19, documented the resident was discharged to the hospital. An assessment, dated 08/23/19, documented the resident returned to the facility. On 12/04/19 at 3:35 PM, the resident was in her room, in her recliner, and was watching television. The resident was clean, groomed, and operated the remote control without difficulty. The resident stated she had improved in her ability to complete her ADLs since she came back from the hospital. On 12/04/19 at 4:15 pm, the facility was not able to provide documentation a written notice of transfer/discharge had been provided to the resident or the resident's responsibility party upon discharge to the hospital. On 12/04/19 at 4:15 pm, the admissions coordinator and the social services coordinator stated the facility did not completely discharge the resident from the facility when admitted to the hospital. They stated the facility did not provide a notice of transfer/discharge since the resident's record remained open.
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0625 (Tag F0625)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined the facility failed to provide written information regardi...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined the facility failed to provide written information regarding the facility's bed hold policy for three of three residents (#33, #52, and #75) reviewed for transfer/discharge. The facility identified 28 residents were transferred or discharged to the hospital in the last three months. Findings: 1. Resident #52 was admitted to the facility on admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses which included, diabetes, dementia, and anxiety. A quarterly assessment, dated 11/05/19, documented the resident was severely impaired for daily decision making and required extensive assistance with activities of daily living. The care plan, dated 11/14/19, documented the resident had a tendency to wander and interventions were documented. The physician orders, dated 11/25/19, documented the resident was to be transferred and admitted to the hospital for a possible bowel obstruction. On 12/02/19 at 2:43 PM, the resident was asleep in his bed with his call light within reach. On 12/05/19 at 3:10 PM, the director of nurses (DON) stated the resident's face sheet and medication record were sent to the hospital with the resident. The DON stated the facility did not provide the bed hold policy to the resident or resident's representative at the time of the transfer. 2. Resident #75 was initially admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses which included a cerebral infarct and acute kidney failure. A five day assessment, dated 10/17/19, documented the resident was severely impaired for daily decision making. The assessment documented the resident required limited to extensive assistance of one person for activities of daily living (ADLs). The care plan, dated 10/23/19, documented the resident was dependent and required assistance with ADLs. The transfer report, dated 11/14/19, documented the resident was up in the wheelchair that morning and started shaking uncontrollably. The record documented the physician was notified. The record documented the resident was transferred to the hospital for evaluation. On 12/05/19 at 3:10 PM, the director of nurses (DON) stated the resident's face sheet and medication record were sent to the hospital with the resident. The DON stated the facility did not provide the resident or the resident's representative with the bed hold policy. 3. Resident #33 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included congestive heart failure. The admission assessment, dated 07/17/19, documented the resident required limited to extensive assistance with activities of daily living (ADLs). The care plan, dated 08/05/19, documented the resident required assistance with ADLs. The assessment, dated 08/21/19, documented the resident was discharged to the hospital. An assessment, dated 08/23/19, documented the resident returned to the facility. On 12/04/19 at 3:35 PM, the resident was in her room, in her recliner, and was watching television. The resident was clean, groomed, and operated the remote control without difficulty. The resident stated she had improved in her ability to complete her ADLs since she came back from the hospital. On 12/04/19 at 4:15 pm, the facility was not able to provide documentation a written bed hold policy had been provided to the resident or the resident's responsibility party upon discharge to the hospital. On 12/04/19 at 4:30 pm, the admissions coordinator and the social services coordinator stated the facility always held a resident's bed until the resident returned. They stated the facility did not provide the bed hold policy upon transfer or discharge since the resident's bed was always held.
CONCERN (E)

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

Assessment Accuracy (Tag F0641)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined the facility failed to accurately document the residents' ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined the facility failed to accurately document the residents' status in the assessments for two (#33 and #51) of 27 sampled residents reviewed for assessments. The facility census and condition report documented 70 residents lived in the facility. Findings: 1. Resident #51 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included dementia and coronary artery disease. The admission assessment, dated 11/07/19, did not document assessments for cognitive patterns, mood, behavior, or primary medical condition. The care plan, dated 11/27/19, documented the resident was a high risk for falls and was frequently restless. On 12/02/19 at 1:11 PM, the resident was observed in her room with a family member. The family member stated the resident fell on Thanksgiving while she was alone in her room. She stated the resident was confused and was not stable to walk unassisted. On 12/04/19 at 10:30 AM, registered nurse (RN) #2 stated she was responsible for the submission assessments. The nurse stated the staff did not complete the assessment sections. 2. Resident #33 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included congestive heart failure. A quarterly assessment, dated 10/15/19, documented the resident's memory score, presence of delirium, mood, and behaviors were not assessed. The assessment documented the resident required extensive assistance with most activities of daily living (ADLs). The care plan, dated 11/03/19, documented the resident required assistance with ADLs. On 12/03/19 at 8:00 AM, the resident was in the dining room, sitting in a wheelchair, eating her morning meal, and feeding herself. On 12/04/19 at 3:35 PM, the resident was in her room in her recliner, and was watching television. She was alert, oriented, and smiled. The resident was clean, groomed, and operated the remote control without difficulty. The resident stated she had improved in her ability to complete her ADLs since she came back from the hospital. The resident stated she was able to do most ADLs with little assistance. On 12/04/19 at 10:30 AM, registered nurse (RN) #2 stated the nurse who completed the assessments was terminated two months ago. The nurse stated she had been overseeing the completion of the assessments in addition to her other duties. The nurse stated each section of the assessment was delegated to selected individuals for completion. She stated the person who was assigned the sections for memory and psychosocial needs did not complete the sections. On 12/04/19 at 4:30 PM, RN #1 stated the resident required minimal assistance with ADLs and had improved since her surgery in August 2019. The nurse stated the assessment completed in October 2019 did not accurately document the resident's ADL abilities.
CONCERN (E)

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

Food Safety (Tag F0812)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined the facility failed to serve food in a sanitary manner for...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined the facility failed to serve food in a sanitary manner for 26 of 26 residents who dined in the [NAME] Hall household. The facility census and condition report documented 69 residents ate food served from household kitchens. Findings: On 12/04/19 at 4:50 PM, certified medication aide (CMA) #1 was serving the noon meal. She was wearing gloves. While preparing plates, the CMA touched the counter, cabinets, threw away trash. Without changing her gloves or washing her hands the CMA picked up and sliced fruit, placed the fruit on plates, and served the food to the residents. The CMA changed her gloves but did not wash her hands. The CMA opened cabinets, opened cans of soup, and opened the microwave. Wearing the same gloves, she removed hamburger buns from the package using her hands and placed the buns on a plate. With the same gloved hands she reached into the potato chip bag, grabbed a handful of potato chips, and placed them on a plate. The plate of food was served to a resident. The CMA continued to serve food without changing her gloves. On 12/05/19 at 12:05 PM, CMA #2 was serving food. She wore gloves while serving. She opened soup cans, turned knobs on the stove, and touched food without changing her gloves. On 12/05/19 at 2:30 PM, CMA #2 stated while serving food, gloves must be changed and hands washed after touching any type of surface besides serving utensils. The food handling policy stated food handlers must wash their hands after engaging in activities that contaminate the hands.
Oct 2018 7 deficiencies 1 Harm
SERIOUS (H)

Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures

Accident Prevention (Tag F0689)

A resident was harmed · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined the facility failed to provide supervision to prevent fall...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined the facility failed to provide supervision to prevent falls for two (#23 and #41) of 3 sampled residents reviewed for falls. The facility failed to: a) Assess the residents to determine needs of residents. b) Thoroughly investigate falls to determine underlying causes of falls for the residents. c) Implement preventative interventions to prevent falls for the residents. Resident #23 was on the dementia unit and had advanced dementia with behaviors. The resident sustained seven falls between March 2018 and May 2018. The resident sustained an eighth fall in September 2018. The resident was sent to the hospital. A hospital CT scan documented the resident had an upper arm impacted fracture of the humeral neck. Resident #41 was a new admission who was confused, agitated, and had behaviors toward others. The resident fell in his room and hit his head. The resident was transported to the hospital. The hospital discharge summary documented the resident had a intracranial hemorrhage. The risk management report documented 21 residents had experienced falls since August 1, 2018. Findings: The facility policy for fall prevention documented staff was to complete hourly rounding and check residents for positioning, check to ensure resident possessions were close, check residents for pain, and check residents for potty needs. The policy documented staff were to offer restless residents snacks, fluids, television, or company. The policy documented staff must huddle, complete a fall scene and incident investigation report, and complete an incident report after each fall. The policy documented staff were to evaluate information gathered till the cause of the fall was determined. The policy documented new interventions were to be implemented with each fall or indicate why the current approach was still relevant. 1. Resident #41 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included vascular dementia with behavioral disturbances. The fall risk assessment, dated 07/30/18, documented the resident was at moderate risk for falling. The physician orders, dated 07/30/18, did not document the resident was to receive psychoactive medication. A physician order, dated 07/31/18, documented an order for physical therapy (PT) to evaluate the resident for a walker. The care plan, dated 07/31/18, documented the resident needed assistance with activities of daily living (ADLs) and was at risk for falls. The care plan documented the interventions to prevent falls were for the staff to check on the resident frequently throughout the day and night. The care plan documented the staff were to encourage the resident to wait for staff assistance and keep the call light within his reach. The care plan documented the staff were to ask resident if he was thirsty, hungry, needed toileting, and provide assistance as needed when the resident was restless. The care plan documented the staff were to remind the resident to stand slowly and lock the brakes on his wheelchair. A discharge assessment, dated 08/02/18, documented the resident was discharged from the facility to the hospital. A progress note, dated 08/02/18, at 11:30 AM, documented the resident had extreme behaviors of hitting and yelling at other residents. The note documented the daughter was notified the resident was to transfer to the hospital for a psychiatric evaluation. An entry assessment, dated 08/15/18, documented the resident returned to the facility. The physician orders, dated 08/15/18, documented the resident was to receive Lorazepam (an antianxiety medication) every six hours for anxiety and agitation and Quetiapine Fumarated 50 mg (an antipsychotic) one time per day for behaviors. A progress note, dated 08/15/18 at 1:19 PM, documented the resident was combative toward staff and other residents. The note documented the resident was sent to the hospital for evaluation. A progress note, dated 08/15/18 at 5:08 PM, documented the resident arrived back to the facility at 2:42 PM accompanied by his daughter and was pleasantly confused. A progress note, dated 08/15/18 at 5:16 PM, documented the resident was agitated at dinner and displayed aggressive, violent, and verbal behaviors. The note documented Lorazepam was administered to the resident. An incident report, dated 08/15/18, documented the staff found the resident on the floor in front of his sink. The report documented the resident could not state what had occurred and complained of pain in his back. The report documented the resident had no apparent injuries and his vital signs were within normal limits. The report documented the resident stated he hit his head. The report documented the doctor was notified and received an order to send the resident to the emergency room. The report documented the family was notified. A fall investigation note, dated 08/16/18 at 01:28 AM, documented the events of the fall. The note did not document details of a fall investigation. A hospital Discharge summary, dated [DATE], documented the resident had a diagnosis of traumatic intracranial hemorrhage with a cerebral contusion and a petechial hemorrhage of the left frontal lobe. A progress note, dated 08/20/18 at 11:55 AM, documented a new order for Trazodone (an antidepressant) 50 mg 1 every 6 as needed for anxiety. A progress note, dated 08/20/18 at 6:21 PM, documented the resident returned to the facility at 2:15 PM accompanied by his son. The note documented the resident was alert and oriented to self. The physician orders, dated 08/20/18, documented the resident was to receive Keppra (an antiseizure medication) 500 mg for behaviors and Lorazepam topically every 6 hours for anxiety or agitation. A fall risk assessment, dated 08/20/18, documented the resident was a high risk for falls. The admission assessment, dated 08/30/18, documented the resident was moderately impaired for daily decision making. The assessment documented the resident had physical behaviors towards others and rejected care which interfered with the provision of care. The assessment documented the resident required extensive assistance with transfers, mobility, and other activities of daily living (ADLs). The assessment documented the resident did not walk during the assessment period, was not steady with transfers, had no range of motion impairment, used the wheelchair, and was frequently incontinent of bowel and bladder. The assessment documented the resident had falls before admission. The assessment documented the resident received antipsychotic, antianxiety, antidepressant, and diuretic medications. The care plan, dated 09/17/18, did not document new interventions to prevent falls. On 10/02/18 at 2:12 PM, the resident was observed. The resident was resting in bed. The bed was in low position and the call light was in reach. The resident had a Broda chair and a gait belt in his room. On 10/03/18 at 9:30 AM, the resident was observed in the living area, sitting in a Broda chair, and was in front of the television. No foot support was in place and the resident's feet were dangling. The resident's eyes were closed but he was easily awakened. The resident was not interacting with other residents or staff. On 10/03/18 at 12:00 PM, a family member was interviewed. The family discussed concerns relating to staff supervision, the treatment for the resident's behaviors, and the use of antipsychotic and antiseizure medication. The family stated the resident fell and hit his head the day he returned from the hospital. The family stated the resident had a bleed in his head. On 10/08/18 at 9:30 AM, the fall investigations were requested. The director of nurses (DON) provided the facility's fall incident report and stated the facility had no other fall investigation information documented. The DON stated an investigation huddle was to be completed at the time of the fall and documented on a form. The DON stated after the information was input into the computer, the form was discarded. The DON reviewed the incident report and stated no huddle or fall investigation information was documented on the report. On 10/08/18 at 3:19 PM, CNA #5 was interviewed regarding fall prevention. The CNA stated the resident was advanced with his dementia. The CNA stated when the resident was first admitted the staff attempted to walk the resident with his walker and it was difficult. She stated the resident would usually sit in his wheelchair and move his feet all the time. The CNA stated the resident had behaviors directed to the staff but not to other residents. The CNA stated the resident resisted care. The CNA stated the family brought a recliner for the resident and he would sit in the recliner in his room reading the Bible by himself. The CNA stated once the resident was in bed, the staff would check on him hourly. On 10/08/18 at 3:30 PM, CNA #4 was interviewed regarding the resident and his fall on 08/15/18. The CNA stated the staff supervised the residents in the television area and checked the residents every 30 to 40 minutes. The CNA stated she did not know who placed the resident in his room that evening. The CNA stated a staff member found him on the floor. The CNA could not state details of the fall. On 10/08/18 at 3:46 PM, LPN #2 was interviewed regarding the events of the resident's fall. The LPN stated the fall was not witnessed. The LPN stated 30 minutes prior to the fall incontinent care had been provided and the resident was placed in his recliner. The LPN stated the resident had not been agitated. The LPN stated the staff performed rounds at least every two hours and sometimes would sit with a resident. On 10/08/18 at 3:57 PM, the director of nurses (DON) was interviewed regarding falls. The DON stated at the time of the fall, the staff on duty was to have a huddle and document the details of the fall on the Fall Scene and Incident Investigation Report (FSII). The FSII report was the initial part of the fall investigation. The DON stated the report would be given to the unit coordinator and the coordinator would input the fall information to the electronic incident report. The DON reviewed the resident's incident report. The DON stated the report required less information than what was on the FSII report and the initial fall investigation details were not documented on the incident report. The DON was not able to provide a thorough investigation report documenting the underlying or root cause of the resident's fall. The DON stated the fall was discussed in the morning meeting and it was determined the resident had to go to the bathroom and that was the cause of his fall. The DON reviewed the admission care plan and the current care plan. The DON stated the care plan was not updated with a new intervention to prevent the resident from falling. 2. Resident #23 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnoses which included vascular dementia with behaviors, collapsed vertebra, cervical fracture, muscle weakness, and hypertension. The fall risk assessment, dated 02/19/18, documented the resident scored a 75 which was considered a high fall risk. The physician orders for February 2018 documented the resident was to receive Seroquel and Ativan. The comprehensive assessment, dated 03/04/18, documented the resident was severely impaired for daily decision making and required extensive assistance for activities of daily living. The assessment documented the resident required a wheelchair for mobility and was usually incontinent of bowel and bladder. The assessment documented the resident was taking antianxiety, antidepressant, and hypnotic medication. An incident report, dated 03/05/18 at 5:15 AM, documented the resident fell, was found on the floor next to her bed, and was yelling out. The report documented the nurse gave the resident Tramadol to help with yelling. The report did not document new interventions to prevent falls. The facility was not able to provide a completed fall investigation. The care plan was not updated with a new fall intervention. An incident report, dated 03/05/18 at 6:00 AM, documented the resident was found lying on the floor, on the fall mat, and next to her bed. The resident was sent to the hospital for evaluation. The report did not document new interventions to prevent falls. The facility was not able to provide a completed fall investigation. The care plan was not updated with a new fall intervention. The nurse notes, dated 03/05/18, documented the resident fell two times and was having behaviors. The note documented the resident was sent to the hospital for an evaluation. The care plan, dated 03/05/18, documented the resident required assistance with activities of daily living (ADL), had vascular dementia with behaviors, was incontinent, and was considered a high fall risk. An incident report, dated 03/17/18 at 10:00 PM, documented the resident fell and was found on the floor in her room. The report documented an X-ray of the right hip was obtained and the results were negative. The report documented hourly rounding was to continue and the staff was to sit with the resident until she fell back asleep that night. The facility was not able to provide a completed fall investigation. The care plan was not updated with a new fall intervention. An incident report, dated 03/21/18 at 7:19 PM, documented the resident was found on her knees by her bed. The report documented hourly rounding was to continue. The report did not document a new intervention to prevent falls. The facility was not able to provide a completed fall investigation. The care plan was not updated with a new fall intervention. An incident report, dated 04/03/18 at 10:00 PM, documented the resident stood up from her wheelchair without assistance and immediately sat on the floor in front of her wheelchair. The report documented the immediate action was for staff to offer activities, food, or fluid. The report documented the staff was to ask the resident the four P's (pain, potty, position, and possession). The facility was not able to provide a completed fall investigation. The offering of food, fluid, and the four P's were not documented on the care plan. An incident report, dated 04/05/18 at 5:45 PM, documented the resident was found on the floor by her wheelchair in her room. The report documented hourly rounding was to continue and provide constant monitoring while awake. The report documented the staff was to place a chair outside the resident's room and monitor while the resident slept. The facility was not able to provide a completed fall investigation. The care plan was not updated with a new fall intervention. The nurse notes, dated April 6, 2018 to April 30, 2018, were reviewed. The notes did not document the staff was monitoring the resident while she was sleeping. An incident report, dated 05/25/18 at 1:10 AM, documented the staff witnessed the resident slide out of the bed. The report documented the resident was wet and the floor was wet. The report documented the resident had been toileted at 11:30 PM. The report documented the resident did not sustain an injury from the fall. The facility was not able to provide a completed fall investigation. The care plan did not document a new intervention to prevent future falls. The quarterly assessment, dated 06/04/18, documented the resident was still dependent for daily decision making. The assessment did not document the resident had falls. The care plan, dated 08/22/18, documented the resident had one fall with injury. The care plan did not document new or updated interventions since 03/05/18. The incident report, dated 09/27/18 at 10:00 PM, documented the resident was found lying on the floor behind the door. The report documented the resident was complaining of left arm pain. The report documented the resident was assisted into wheelchair by the staff. The report documented the resident was sent to hospital for x-rays. The nurse notes, dated 9/28/18 at 6:33 AM, documented the resident returned to the facility. The X-ray report, dated 09/28/18, documented there was no acute fracture or a dislocation of the left arm. The nurse notes, dated 09/28/18 at 9:09 AM, documented the resident was complaining of severe pain of the left arm. The notes documented the physician was notified and the resident was sent back to the hospital for an outpatient CT scan. The CT report, dated 09/28/18 at 1:54 PM, documented the resident an impacted minimally displaced fracture of the left humeral neck. On 10/08/18 at 12:56 PM, the director of nurses (DON) stated the fall investigations should be with the incident reports. The incident reports did not include documentation regarding thorough fall investigations. On 10/08/18 at 3:10 PM, certified nurse aide (CNA) #5 was interviewed. The CNA stated resident #23 would try to get up in the dining area and the staff would assist her back to her chair. The CNA stated she did not sit by the resident's room while the resident slept. The CNA stated she would check on the resident every hour. On 10/08/18 at 4:00 PM, the DON was interviewed regarding how the facility investigated falls. The DON stated the staff on duty at the time of the fall was supposed to fill out a fall safety intervention investigation (FSII) report. The DON states the report was discussed in the morning meeting and the staff tried to figure out the cause of the falls. The DON stated the household LPN coordinator was to transfer the information from the FSII report to the facility incident report. On 10/08/18 at 4:18 PM, the LPN coordinator for Cobb Landing was interviewed. The LPN stated he entered the information on the FSII report regarding the fall and then discarded the FSII report. The LPN stated he did not document all the information on the new report because there was not a place for all the information. The LPN stated during stand up meetings every morning they would look for consistent factors related to the fall. The LPN stated the fall investigation was not documented. The LPN stated after a fall, the facility reviewed the resident's medication. The LPN stated the physician was aware of the resident's fall and had not reviewed her medicine at that time. The LPN stated he was notified when a fall occurred.
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** Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure dignity and respect were pro...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure dignity and respect were provided to one (#165) of 37 sampled residents who were reviewed for dignity and respect. The facility failed to ensure the staff interacted respectfully with a resident who had dementia. The census and condition report documented 23 residents with dementia lived at the facility. Findings: Resident #165 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included dementia, Parkinson's disease, a subdural hemorrhage, and a personality disorder. The care plan, dated 05/14/18, documented the resident had dementia and a personality disorder with behaviors. The care plan interventions documented the staff were to always be pleasant, patient, and reassuring. The care plan documented the resident would be allowed to verbalize her feelings and to be offered reassurance. The medication administration record for August 2018 documented the resident had received Memantin HCL and Aricept for dementia. The record documented the resident had received Olanzapine for a personality disorder and Lorazepam for anxiety. Progress notes for the month of August 2018 documented the resident was having behavioral episodes. The notes documented the resident was threatening staff and other residents. The progress notes documented the resident was confused, talked to herself, and was combative toward staff. The progress notes, dated 08/11/18 and 08/17/18, documented the resident had been sent to the hospital for behaviors and a psychiatric evaluation. On 10/03/18 at 12:00 PM, a family member of another resident discussed concerns regarding the night shift staff and how they talked to and about residents. The family member stated resident #165 fell and the staff tried to reason with the resident. The staff were overheard telling the resident she was going to the hospital and the hospital would restrain her. The family member stated the nurse told the other staff the resident was going out to the hospital. In front of the resident a staff member was heard stating yay, yay, party. On 10/09/18 at 6:30 AM, certified nurse aide (CNA) #1 was asked how she would care for a resident with dementia. The CNA stated the staff were to be patient, calm, and not argumentative with the resident. CNA #1 stated the resident was having behaviors such as wandering, was aggressive, argumentative, and refused care. The CNA stated she had not heard anyone speaking badly to the residents. On 10/09/18 at 6:40 AM, license practical nurse (LPN) #2 stated the resident had a personality disorder, would become aggressive, and resisted care. The LPN stated the resident often refused her medication. The LPN stated on 08/23/18 she notified the physician of the resident's behaviors and received an order to send the resident to the hospital for an evaluation. The LPN was asked if she had overheard the staff speak disrespectfully in front of the resident. The LPN stated she had not heard anyone speak disrespectfully or threaten the resident. On 10/09/18 at 9:22 AM, LPN #3 stated the staff should not express happiness when a resident was discharged . The LPN stated someone expressing happiness because a resident was being discharged should not have happened.
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0638 (Tag F0638)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure assessments were updated at ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure assessments were updated at least quarterly for three (#22, #23, and #26) of 37 residents reviewed for assessments. The census and condition report documented 68 residents lived at the facility. Findings: 1. Resident #22 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses which included dementia without behaviors, mood disorder, and anorexia. The quarterly assessment, dated 06/01/18, documented the resident was severely impaired for daily decision making. The assessment documented the resident required extensive assistance for activities of daily living (ADL). The next quarterly assessment was due 09/01/18 and was not completed. 2. Resident #23 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included vascular dementia with behaviors, collapsed vertebra, and a cervical fracture. The care plan, dated 03/05/18, documented the resident had an ADL self care performance deficit. The care plan documented the resident was cognitively impaired. The quarterly assessment, dated 06/04/18, documented the resident was severely impaired for daily decision making. The assessment documented the resident required extensive assistance for activities of daily living. The next quarterly assessment was due 09/04/18 and was not completed. 3. Resident #26 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included a fracture of the femur and dementia with behaviors. The quarterly assessment, dated 06/07/18, documented the resident was severely impaired for daily decision making. The assessment documented the resident required extensive assistance for ADLs. The next quarterly assessment was due 09/07/18 and was not completed On 10/08/18 at 3:18 PM, the minimum data set (MDS) coordinator stated she had been in the position for six months. The MDS coordinator stated she was behind on assessments because she had been going for training. The MDS coordinator stated the previous care plan coordinator would complete the assessments and care plans when she was away from the facility.
CONCERN (E)

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

Assessment Accuracy (Tag F0641)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined the facility failed to accurately document falls on the co...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined the facility failed to accurately document falls on the comprehensive assessment for one (#23) of 37 residents whose assessments were reviewed. The census and condition report documented 68 residents lived at the facility. Findings: Resident #23 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included vascular dementia with behaviors, collapsed vertebra, and a cervical fracture. The care plan, dated 03/14/18, documented the resident required assistance with activities of daily living (ADL). The care plan documented the resident's dementia with behaviors, impaired cognitive function/dementia, and impaired thought processes. The care plan documented the resident was a high fall risk. The medical records for March 2018, April 2018, and May 2018, documented the resident had multiple falls and did not sustain an injury with the falls. The quarterly assessment, dated 06/04/18, documented the resident was dependent for daily decision making. The assessment did not document the resident had falls during the assessment period. On 10/02/18 at 2:00 PM, the resident sat in a wheelchair in the hallway. Her left arm was in a sling. The resident's conversation was not appropriate to situation. The resident had non-skid socks and a concave mattress on her bed. On 10/08/18 at 3:18 PM, the assessment coordinator stated she had been in the position for six months. She stated she was behind on the assessments and did not know the assessment did not document the resident's falls accurately.
CONCERN (E)

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

Comprehensive Care Plan (Tag F0656)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined the facility failed to fully develop comprehensive care pl...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined the facility failed to fully develop comprehensive care plans related to the use of psychoactive medication for two (#23 and #26) of 37 sampled residents whose care plans were reviewed. The facility census and condition report documented 52 residents received psychoactive medications. Findings: 1. Resident #23 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included vascular dementia with behaviors. The admission assessment, dated 03/29/18, documented the resident was severely impaired for daily decision-making, had depression, delusions, and behaviors. The assessment documented the resident received anti-anxiety and anti-depressant medications. The care plan, dated 03/05/18 documented the resident received antianxiety and antidepressant medications. The care plan did not document the resident specific behaviors, side effects of the medication to monitor and report, or gradual dose reductions. The physician orders for October 2018 documented the resident was to receive Alprazolam (an anti-anxiety medication) for agitation, Buspirone (an antidepressant medication) for anxiety, and Seroquel (an antipsychotic medication) for anxiety and agitation. On 10/02/18 at 2:00 PM, the resident was observed sitting in a wheelchair in the hallway. Her left arm was in a sling. The resident had disorganized thoughts. The resident propelled herself about the unit in her wheelchair. On 10/03/18 at 9:30 AM, the resident was observed in the dining area sitting in her wheelchair. The resident was having difficulty staying awake. Her eyes were closed and her head was bobbing down onto the table. 2. Resident #26 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of a femur fracture. The admission assessment, dated 11/10/18, documented the resident was severely impaired for daily decision-making, had depression, and did not have behaviors. The assessment documented the resident received antipsychotic and antidepressant medications. The care plan, dated 12/28/18, did not document the resident received psychoactive medications, the resident's specific behaviors, the side effects to monitor, or the gradual dose reductions. The physician orders for October 2018 documented the resident received Sertaline (an antidepressant medication) for depression and Quetiapine (an antipsychotic medication) for major depressive disorder. On 10/03/18 at 10:15 AM, licensed practical nurse (LPN) #1 was observed providing wound care to the resident's shins. The resident expressed thoughts that were not relevant and were disorganized. On 10/09/18 at 11:15 AM, the care plan coordinator stated she started employment on 02/01/18 and began as the assessment and care plan coordinator in March 2018. The coordinator stated she had been to classes for the completion of the assessments. The coordinator stated she was not aware of the care plans were incomplete for psychoactive medications.
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0657 (Tag F0657)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 4. Resident #49 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included anemia, orthostatic hypertension, anxiety, ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 4. Resident #49 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included anemia, orthostatic hypertension, anxiety, and renal failure. The Morse fall risk assessment, dated 04/04/18, documented the resident was a moderate risk for falls. The initial care plan, dated 04/05/18, did not document the resident was at moderate risk for falls. A fall investigation progress note, dated 07/04/18 at 4:30 AM, documented the resident had fallen. The note documented the resident was heard calling for help and was found sitting on the floor. The note documented the resident had stated he had tried to go to the bathroom, lost his balance, and fell. The note documented the resident had suffered a skin tear to his left elbow. A fall investigation note, dated 07/05/18 at 3:15 PM, documented monitoring was to be continued to identify any further injury following the resident's fall. The quarterly assessment, dated 07/18/18, documented the resident was moderately impaired for daily decision making. The quarterly assessment documented the resident required limited to moderate assistance with activities of daily living (ADLs). The quarterly assessment documented the resident had one fall after the prior assessment had been completed. The care plan, dated 07/23/18, did not document the resident had a fall. The care plan did not document new interventions to prevent further falls. On 10/02/18 at 12:35 PM, the resident was observed in the dining room. A staff member was assisting the resident into the chair for lunch. The resident appeared very weak and unstable on his feet. On 10/09/18 at 2:00 PM, certified nurse aide (CNA) #6 was interviewed regarding the resident's risk for falls. The CNA stated she was not aware the resident was at risk for falls. On 10/09/18 at 11:15 AM, the care plan coordinator stated she started employment on 02/01/18 and began as the assessment and care plan coordinator in March 2018. The coordinator stated she had been to classes for the completion of the assessments. The coordinator stated she was not aware the care plans were not updated related to fall interventions. Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined the facility failed to update the care plan for four (#20, #23, #41, and #49) of 37 residents whose care plans were reviewed. The facility failed to: a) Update the care plan related to skin tears and wound care for resident #20. b) Update the care plan related to weight loss for resident #23. c) Update the care plan with interventions to prevent falls for residents #23, #41, and #49. The census and condition report documented 68 residents lived at the facility. Findings: 1. Resident #20 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included multiple sclerosis and abnormality of gait. The comprehensive assessment, dated 05/25/18, documented the resident was severely impaired for daily decision making, required extensive assist with transfers, and required total assistance with ambulation, had impairment to both lower extremities, and did not have skin sores. The care plan, dated 07/25/18, documented the resident was at risk for pressure ulcers and wounds due to her fragile skin. The care plan was not updated related to the resident's skin tears and wound care. The physician orders for October 2018 documented orders for staff to care the resident's skin tears to the left and right legs. On 10/03/18 at 10:15 AM, licensed practical nurse (LPN) #1 was observed providing wound care to the resident's shins. Four skin tears were observed on the left shin. The nurse removed the dressing from the right shin and the resident had two skin tears. 2. Resident #23 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included vascular dementia with behaviors. A nutritional assessment, dated 02/26/18, documented the resident received a ground diet, thin liquids, and Med Pass 2.0 (a high protein supplement) three times daily. The notes documented the resident's meal intake was fair and her weight was stabilizing. The admission assessment, dated 03/29/18, documented the resident was severely impaired for daily decision-making, required assistance with meals, and weighed 140 pounds. The care plan, dated 07/25/18, documented the resident required set up help with meals. The care plan did not document nutritional needs, identified weight loss, or interventions to prevent weight loss. The weight record, dated 10/01/18, documented the resident weighed 130 pounds. On 10/03/18 at 8:30 AM, the resident was observed in the dining area for the morning meal. The resident received meal assistance. The resident ate a small amount. 3. Resident #41 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included vascular dementia with behavioral disturbances. A fall risk assessment, dated 07/30/18, documented the resident was at moderate risk for falling. The care plan, dated 07/31/18, documented the resident needed assistance with ADLs and was at risk for falls. The care plan documented the interventions to prevent falls were for the staff to check on the resident frequently throughout the day and night. The care plan documented the staff were to encourage the resident to wait for staff assistance and keep the call light within reach. The care plan documented the staff were to ask the resident if he was thirsty, hungry, needed toileting, and provide assistance as needed when the resident was restless. The care plan documented the staff were to remind the resident to stand slowly and lock the brakes on his wheelchair. Physician orders, dated 08/15/18, documented the resident was to receive Lorazepam (an antianxiety medication) every six hours for anxiety and agitation and Quetiapine Fumarated 50 mg (an antipsychotic) one time per day for behaviors. An incident report, dated 08/15/18, documented the staff found the resident on the floor in front of his sink. A hospital Discharge summary, dated [DATE], documented the resident had a diagnosis of traumatic intracranial hemorrhage with a cerebral contusion and a petechial hemorrhage of the left frontal lobe. A fall risk assessment, dated 08/20/18, documented the resident was a high risk for falls. The admission assessment, dated 08/30/18, documented the resident was moderately impaired for daily decision making, The assessment documented the resident required extensive assistance with transfers, mobility, and other activities of daily living (ADLs). The assessment documented the resident had falls before admission. The care plan, dated 09/17/18, was not updated to include the resident had a fall with a head injury. The care plan did not document the resident did not bear weight or the way the staff were to transfer the resident. The care plan did not document the resident had a Broda chair and a recliner. The care plan did not document the resident received psychoactive medications. On 10/02/18 at 2:12 PM, the resident was observed. The resident was in bed. The resident had a Broda chair and a gait belt in his room. On 10/03/18 at 12:00 PM, a family member was interviewed. The family discussed concerns relating to staff supervision, the treatment for the resident's behaviors, and the use of antipsychotic and antiseizure medication. The family stated the resident fell and hit his head the day he returned from the hospital. The family stated the resident had a bleed in his head. On 10/09/18 at 11:15 AM, the assessment/care plan nurse was interviewed. The nurse stated she was the assessment nurse in March 2018. The nurse stated she attended two trainings for certification. The nurse stated since employees had changed positions, the assessment and care plan completion was behind. The nurse stated the care plans for falls had not been updated and the psychoactive medications were not on the care plans. The nurse stated she was not aware the assessment for resident #23 was not accurate for falls.
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0726 (Tag F0726)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure nursing staff demonstrated c...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure nursing staff demonstrated competency and/or skills when providing treatment and care for three (#20, #26, and #41) of 37 residents reviewed for care provision. The facility failed to: a) Complete wound care using correct technique for resident #20. b) Transfer and position residents using correct technique for residents #26 and #41. Findings: 1. Resident #20 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included multiple sclerosis and abnormality of gait. The comprehensive assessment, dated 05/25/18, documented the resident was severely impaired for daily decision making, required extensive assist with the activities of daily living, and did not have skin sores. The care plan, dated 07/25/18, documented the resident was at risk for pressure ulcers and wounds due to her fragile skin. The physician orders for October 2018 documented an order for staff to clean the skin tears to the left and right legs with normal saline, apply Hydrogel to skin tears with a sterile cotton tipped swab, apply Telfa to the site, and wrap with gauze. On 10/03/18 at 10:15 AM, licensed practical nurse (LPN) #1 was observed providing wound care to the resident's shins. Four skin tears were observed on the left shin. The nurse cleansed the wounds using a wet 4 by 4. The nurse wiped back and forth over all four tears multiple times using the same gauze. The LPN completed the dressing change. The nurse removed the dressing from the right shin and the resident had two skin tears. The nurse cleansed the tears with a wet 4 by 4 wiping back and forth over the tears multiple times using the same gauze. On 10/03/18 at 11:00 AM, LPN #1 was interviewed regarding dressing change technique. The nurse stated the site should be wiped once with gauze then the gauze should be discarded. The LPN stated a new gauze should be used with each wipe. 2. Resident #26 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included a fractured femur. The comprehensive assessment for 09/07/18 was not completed. The care care plan, dated 09/04/18 documented the resident required assistance with transfers, repositioning, and had a history of a hip fracture. The care plan documented the staff was to handle the resident's affected extremity gently, supporting it with hands or a pillow since movement of fractured bones was painful and muscle spasms could occur. The care plan documented adequate support diminished soft tissue tension. The care plan documented the staff were to assist the resident to reposition periodically, encourage coughing and deep-breathing exercises. On 10/03/18 at 9:30 AM the resident was observed in a Broda chair and the resident's feet were dangling and were not supported with a foot rest. 3. Resident #41 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included vascular dementia with behavioral disturbances. The admission assessment, dated 08/30/18, documented the resident was moderately impaired for daily decision making and required extensive assistance with transfers, mobility, and other activities of daily living (ADLs). The care plan, dated 09/17/18, documented the resident required assistance for positioning. The care plan did not document the resident used a Broda chair or the family requested the staff position the resident in the recliner. On 10/03/18 at 12:00 PM, the family was interviewed. The daughter stated the family was not sure the resident was repositioned routinely. The daughter expressed concerns the resident stayed in one position on his bottom for long periods and felt he was in pain due to the resident's grimacing. On 10/04/18 at 8:45 AM, the resident was in his Broda chair in the dining room and was assisted with the morning meal. The resident sat up straight and his feet were not supported with a foot rest. After the morning meal the resident was moved to the television area and was reclined back. The staff did not adjust the resident from side to side and no pillow was placed under his head for neck support. On 10/04/18 at 8:55 AM, the CMA moved the resident to the dining area. The CMA clipped his nails and lotioned his hands but did not reposition the resident in his chair. On 10/04/18 at 9:15 AM, the resident put his left leg up on table without assistance. On 10/04/18 at 9:30 AM, the resident was trying to move about in Broda chair and was grimacing. The resident bent his knees and placed his feet on edge of chair seat. CNA #7 lifted the leg rest but did not reposition the resident's bottom. The resident continued to grimace. On 10/04/18 at 9:50 AM, CMA #1 transported the resident down the hall, stopped, and lowered the leg rest. The CMA did not reposition the resident's bottom. The CMA transported the resident back up the hall and the resident had a grimace on his face. The resident was taken into the television area and transferred to the recliner by LPN #1 and the CMA. The staff lifted the resident under the arms and pulled on back of his pajama bottoms to complete the lift. The resident did not bear weight or assist with the lift. The resident was grimacing and the pajama bottoms were wedged in between his buttocks. On 10/09/18 at 1:47 PM, the LPN coordinator for the unit was interviewed regarding transfer technique. The LPN stated a non-weight resident would be transferred with two persons using a gait belt, a sliding board, or a Hoyer lift. The LPN stated the staff were not to transfer a resident lifting under the resident's arms or with the use of their pants. The LPN stated the staff were to reposition the residents in wheelchairs or Broda chairs every 30 minutes and were to utilize the foot support. Five employee personnel files were reviewed. The files did not document skill checks had been completed for for three of the five employees whose files were reviewed. The facility could not provide documentation for the employees skill checks. On 10/08/18 at 1:28 PM, the administrator (ADM) was interviewed. The ADM stated only two of the five requested skill check sheets had been obtained. The ADM stated a new employee would follow another employee for two weeks after hire. The ADM stated it was the responsibility of the new employee and the employee who was orienting them to turn in the skills check off sheets.
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Life-Threatening (Immediate Jeopardy)
J - Isolated K - Pattern L - Widespread
Actual Harm
G - Isolated H - Pattern I - Widespread
Potential for Harm
D - Isolated E - Pattern F - Widespread
No Harm (Minor)
A - Isolated B - Pattern C - Widespread

Questions to Ask on Your Visit

  • "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
  • "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"

Our Honest Assessment

Strengths
  • • Grade B+ (85/100). Above average facility, better than most options in Oklahoma.
  • • No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Oklahoma facilities.
  • • 43% turnover. Below Oklahoma's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
Concerns
  • • 12 deficiencies on record, including 1 serious (caused harm) violation. Ask about corrective actions taken.
Bottom line: Generally positive indicators. Standard due diligence and a personal visit recommended.

About This Facility

What is Trinity Woods, Inc.'s CMS Rating?

CMS assigns TRINITY WOODS, INC. an overall rating of 5 out of 5 stars, which is considered much above average nationally. Within Oklahoma, this rating places the facility higher than 99% of the state's 100 nursing homes. This rating reflects solid performance across the metrics CMS uses to evaluate nursing home quality.

How is Trinity Woods, Inc. Staffed?

CMS rates TRINITY WOODS, INC.'s staffing level at 4 out of 5 stars, which is above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 43%, compared to the Oklahoma average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.

What Have Inspectors Found at Trinity Woods, Inc.?

State health inspectors documented 12 deficiencies at TRINITY WOODS, INC. during 2018 to 2023. These included: 1 that caused actual resident harm and 11 with potential for harm. Deficiencies causing actual harm indicate documented cases where residents experienced negative health consequences.

Who Owns and Operates Trinity Woods, Inc.?

TRINITY WOODS, INC. is owned by a non-profit organization. Non-profit facilities reinvest revenue into operations rather than distributing to shareholders. The facility operates independently rather than as part of a larger chain. With 84 certified beds and approximately 57 residents (about 68% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in TULSA, Oklahoma.

How Does Trinity Woods, Inc. Compare to Other Oklahoma Nursing Homes?

Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Oklahoma, TRINITY WOODS, INC.'s overall rating (5 stars) is above the state average of 2.7, staff turnover (43%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (4 stars) is above the national benchmark.

What Should Families Ask When Visiting Trinity Woods, Inc.?

Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "Can I visit during a mealtime to observe dining assistance and food quality?" "How do you handle medical emergencies, and what is your hospital transfer rate?" "Can I speak with family members of current residents about their experience?"

Is Trinity Woods, Inc. Safe?

Based on CMS inspection data, TRINITY WOODS, INC. has a clean safety record: no substantiated abuse findings (meaning no confirmed cases of resident harm), no Immediate Jeopardy citations (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death), and is not on the Special Focus Facility watch list (a federal program monitoring the lowest-performing 1% of nursing homes). The facility has a 5-star overall rating and ranks #1 of 100 nursing homes in Oklahoma. While no facility is perfect, families should still ask about staff-to-resident ratios and recent inspection results during their visit.

Do Nurses at Trinity Woods, Inc. Stick Around?

TRINITY WOODS, INC. has a staff turnover rate of 43%, which is about average for Oklahoma nursing homes (state average: 46%). Moderate turnover is common in nursing homes, but families should still ask about staff tenure and how the facility maintains care continuity when employees leave.

Was Trinity Woods, Inc. Ever Fined?

TRINITY WOODS, INC. has no federal fines on record. CMS issues fines when nursing homes fail to meet care standards or don't correct problems found during inspections. The absence of fines suggests the facility has either maintained compliance or corrected any issues before penalties were assessed. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review recent inspection reports for the full picture.

Is Trinity Woods, Inc. on Any Federal Watch List?

TRINITY WOODS, INC. 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.