CRESTVIEW CENTER

262 TOLL GATE ROAD, LANGHORNE, PA 19047 (215) 968-4650
For profit - Partnership 180 Beds GENESIS HEALTHCARE Data: November 2025 2 Immediate Jeopardy citations
Trust Grade
31/100
#275 of 653 in PA
Last Inspection: July 2025

Inspected within the last 6 months. Data reflects current conditions.

Overview

Crestview Center has a Trust Grade of F, which indicates significant concerns about the facility's performance. It ranks #275 out of 653 in Pennsylvania, placing it in the top half of nursing homes in the state, but it ranks #23 out of 29 in Bucks County, meaning there are only a few local options that are better. The facility is reportedly improving, having reduced issues from 14 in 2024 to 6 in 2025, but it still faces serious challenges. Staffing is rated at 2 out of 5 stars, with a turnover rate of 47%, which is about average for Pennsylvania, while RN coverage is also average. However, the facility has concerning fines totaling $43,638, which is higher than 77% of other Pennsylvania facilities. Specific incidents raise serious red flags, including a failure to protect residents from abuse, with one resident being restrained and another sexually abused, creating an Immediate Jeopardy situation. Additionally, the facility did not develop an adequate care plan for a resident who was seeking inappropriate attention, compromising the safety of others. While there are strengths in the quality measures rated 5 out of 5 stars, the significant issues related to resident safety and care plans cannot be overlooked. Therefore, families should weigh both the improvements and the serious concerns when considering Crestview Center for their loved ones.

Trust Score
F
31/100
In Pennsylvania
#275/653
Top 42%
Safety Record
High Risk
Review needed
Inspections
Getting Better
14 → 6 violations
Staff Stability
⚠ Watch
47% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
Penalties
✓ Good
$43,638 in fines. Lower than most Pennsylvania facilities. Relatively clean record.
Skilled Nurses
○ Average
Each resident gets 35 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — about average for Pennsylvania. RNs are the most trained staff who monitor for health changes.
Violations
⚠ Watch
32 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: 14 issues
2025: 6 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 Pennsylvania average (3.0)

Meets federal standards, typical of most facilities

Staff Turnover: 47%

Near Pennsylvania avg (46%)

Higher turnover may affect care consistency

Federal Fines: $43,638

Above median ($33,413)

Moderate penalties - review what triggered them

Chain: GENESIS HEALTHCARE

Part of a multi-facility chain

Ask about local staffing decisions and management

The Ugly 32 deficiencies on record

2 life-threatening
Jul 2025 4 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

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

Assessment Accuracy (Tag F0641)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, review of facility policy, clinical record review and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that resident assessments accurately reflected reside...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, review of facility policy, clinical record review and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that resident assessments accurately reflected resident diagnoses for one of nine residents reviewed. (Resident R148) Finding includes:Review of facility policy titled Social Service Assessment revised March 15, 2024, revealed residents will have a social service assessment completed upon admission, quarterly, annually and with a significant change in condition.Review of Resident R148's clinical record revealed that on October 21, 2024, resident was given the diagnosis of anorexia. Review of Resident R148's care plan last revised on May 28, 2025, revealed that this resident has potential for nutrition hydration risk due to advanced age currently stable nutritionally.Interview with DON Employee E2 on July 3, 2025, at 09:40 a.m. revealed that the diagnosis of anorexia for Resident R148 was not accurate. It is believed that the diagnosis of Anorexia was used for that practitioners visit for the purpose of a billing code and transcribed into residence list of diagnosis in the resident's record. 28 Pa. Code 211.5 (f) Clinical records
CONCERN (D)

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

Comprehensive Care Plan (Tag F0656)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observations, review of facility policy, review of clinical records, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to develop and implement a person center care plan related...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observations, review of facility policy, review of clinical records, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to develop and implement a person center care plan related to elopement for one out of 33 residents reviewed. (Resident R77) Findings include: Review of facility policy titled Center Operations Policies and Procedures dated October 24, 2022, revealed A comprehensive, individualized care plan will be developed within seven days after completion of the comprehensive assessment (admission, annual or significant change in status) and review and revise the care plan after each assessment. Review of review of Resident R 77's was admitted into the facility February 2, 2023, with diagnosis' including autistic disorder (significant language delays, social and communication challenges, unusual behaviors and interests) anxiety disorder, personal history of traumatic brain injury, dementia severity with agitation, depression and psychotic disturbance, mood disturbance. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS- a federal mandated assessment tool for all residents) dated May 16, 2025, revealed that Resident R77's BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) score of 4, indicating the resident was cognitive impairment. Observation conducted on July 1, 2025, at 10:44 a.m., revealed that the Unit Manager Employee E8 brought Resident R77 to the front lobby and said, Relax and wait until outside time occurs. Resident R77 replied, Don't tell me what to do-I don't take orders from a woman. Employee E8 left Resident R77 in the lobby. Resident R77 started to propel on his own towards the entry door. The front lobby secretary, Employee E5, said, I'll unlock the door. Can you go back? Resident R77 was observed wearing a wanderguard (devices adject to the body that function in alarming doors to the outside of the facility), and the door alarm began sounding. Employee E5 was observed, trying to move Resident R77 away from the door by the wheelchair handles. Resident R77's behavior began to escalate, and the resident started arguing and cursing at Employee E5. Employee E5 went to get another staff member to assist with Resident R77. Resident R77 propelled himself toward the doors again, triggering the alarm a second time. Employee E5 again asked Resident R77 to move away from the door and silenced the alarm. The Business Office Manager, Employee E7, approached and pulled Resident R77's wheelchair backward to allow the family member to exit the building. Resident R77 began yelling and cursing again. The Business Office Manager, Employee E7, wheeled Resident R77 out onto the porch, where he attempted to propel himself down the ramp. The Director of Nursing, Employee E2, and the Regional Nurse, Employee E10, arrived on the scene. Staff asked Resident R77 where he was trying to go, which escalated the situation further. Resident R77 continued cursing, yelling, and attempting to propel himself toward the parking lot. A staff member went inside to call a female nursing aide, Employee E9. Upon arrival, Employee E9 got down to eye level with the resident and calmly said, It's Employee E9. I'm here to help you, while offering him a snack. She continued, Let's go watch TV in your room. I'm here to help you. Resident R77 appeared to recognize her voice, accepted the snack, and allowed Employee E9 to return him to his room without further verbal altercation. On July 1, 2025, at 1:05 p.m., an interview was conducted with Nursing Aide, Employee E9, who had successfully de-escalated an elopement attempt involving Resident R77. Employee E9 shared that Resident R77 has certain comfort items, including oatmeal pies and chocolate pudding, and that he enjoys watching TV in his room with the door closed as a way to calm himself. Review of Resident R77's comprehensive care plan, last revised on April 7, 2025, revealed that no specific or practicable interventions were documented to help de-escalate Resident R77's behaviors An interview with the Nursing Home Administrator (Employee E1) and Director of Nursing (Employee E2) confirmed the staff assigned to supervise the resident were unaware of the appropriate de-escalation interventions, which were only known to Employee E5. It was further confirmed that Resident R77's care plan had not been updated to include these interventions. 28 Pa. Code 211.10 (d) Resident care policies 28 Pa. Code 211.12(d)(1) Nursing services
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 review of facility documentation, review of clinical record, observation and staff interviews, it was determined that t...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on review of facility documentation, review of clinical record, observation and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide adequate supervision for two of 33 residents reviewed. (Resident R90 and Resident 136). Findings:Review of facility policy titled Safe Resident Handling/Transfer Equipment, revised 2024, revealed Safe Resident Handling involves the use of assistive devices to ensure that patients can be transferred safely and that care providers avoid performing high risk patient handling tasks. The purpose is to optimize staff safety and the safety, comfort, and function of patients during transfers, ambulation, and/or repositioning. Clinical record review revealed Resident R90 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (condition that prevents airflow to the lungs, causing breathing problems), chronic kidney disease (condition where kidneys are damaged and can't filter blood properly), and polyneuropathy (type of nerve disease that affects many nerves). Review of Resident R90's Minimum Data Set (MDS- assessment of a resident's abilities and care needs), dated October 14, 2024, revealed Resident R1 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, indicating intact cognition.Further review of Resident R90's MDS, under section Mobility revealed that Resident R90 was dependent (helper does all of the effort) for chair/bed-to-chair transfer (the ability to transfer to and from a bed to a chair/wheelchair).Review of Resident R90's care plan, dated August 10, 2024, revealed Resident R1 was at risk for decreased ability to perform activities of daily living. Interventions to limit falls included the assistance of 2 staff for transfers using a lift with a full body large green sling. Review of facility documentation, dated October 12, 2024, revealed an investigation was initiated on October 12, 2024 related to Resident R90's complaint of back pain as a result of allegedly falling on the night of October 11, 2024. Resident R1 reported two aides transferred her from her wheelchair to bed without using a sit to stand lift as required. Further review of investigation revealed Resident R1 initially reported falling to the floor and that the two aides fell down with her. When interviewed by director of nursing and nurse practitioner she reported they all fell to the floor and then fell onto the bed. She provided details about them moving the wheelchair close to the bed and having their legs between hers when they stood her up to transfer. Resident said she asked them to use the lift serval times but they did not use it. She provided physical description of both aides.Review of Resident R90's incident report, dated October 12, 2024, revealed Resident is ordered a sit to stand lift for transfers. According to patient, last night she was transferred from her chair to the bed without using a lift. She asked staff to use a lift because she is more comfortable. Two nurse aides attempted to transfer her by themselves and all three of them fell to the floor. She said she did not hit her head. on site nurse practitioner saw her and ordered x-rays due to pain.Further review of facility investigation revealed interview with Resident R90's roommate. Resident R90's roommate confirmed both aides did not use a sit to stand lift. During an interview on July 03, 2025, at 10:15 a.m. with Employee E2, Director of Nursing, confirmed that the two nurse aides failed to use the required sit to stand lift during Resident R90's transfer from chair to bed on October 11, 2024. Interview conducted on July 1, 2025, at 1:28 p.m.,with the front lobby secretary, Employee E5, related to scheduled porch break for the resident revealed that a a scheduled break was set to begin at 1:30 p.m. At that time, it was observed that Resident R136 used his electronic wheelchair to exit the building. Employee E5 did not notice that Resident R136 had wheeled himself out to the front porch.At 1:33 p.m., the surveyor approached Employee E5 and asked if she was aware that a resident was outside unsupervised. Employee E5 responded, No, I wasn't aware. The surveyor and Employee E5 confirmed that Resident R136 was sitting on the front porch without staff supervision.According to the facility's porch supervision schedule, the Maintenance Department was assigned to oversee the 1:30-2:30 p.m. porch break. However, no maintenance staff were present at the time. Employee E5 contacted the Maintenance Department and requested that they report to the front porch to provide supervision.In the meantime, the Human Services Director, Employee E8, brought a laptop outside and remained on the porch to supervise the resident. Shortly after, two additional residents came outside for their scheduled porch time.On July 1, 2025, at 1:29 p.m., an interview was conducted with Resident R136, who was alert and oriented. The resident came outside for the scheduled 1:30 p.m. porch time and, assuming the surveyor was the chaperone, stated, I didn't think we had a chaperone today. R136 shared that he/she regularly comes outside, weather permitting, and is usually accompanied by activity staff or aides. 28 Pa. Code 201.14 (a) Responsibility of licensee.28 Pa. Code 211.10 (d) Resident Care Policies.28 Pa. Code 211.12 (d)(5) Nursing Services.
CONCERN (D)

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

Infection Control (Tag F0880)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on review of clinical record, facility policy, observations, and interviews with staff, it was determined that the facility failed to exercise proper infection control techniques for one of thre...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on review of clinical record, facility policy, observations, and interviews with staff, it was determined that the facility failed to exercise proper infection control techniques for one of three nursing units observed (East wing).Findings include:Review of facility policy titled Enhanced Barrier Precautions, revised 2025, revealed personal protective equipment (PPE) should be readily accessible and located outside of the patient's room. Before exiting room, remove and place PPE (e.g., gowns and gloves) in the trash and perform hand hygiene upon exiting room. Observation on June 30, 2025 at 10:10 a.m. on east wing (rooms 300-330) revealed 17 resident rooms (rooms 301, 302, 304, 306, 307, 308, 309, 311, 312, 314, 316, 318, 319, 321, 322, 323, 328) with enhanced barrier precaution (EBP) signage on door and no appropriate disposal container available in the resident room to allow for removal of PPE inside the room. Further observation on June 30, 2025 at 10:20 p.m. revealed 10 of 17 resident rooms on EBP (rooms 304, 306, 309, 311, 312, 314, 316, 319, 323, 328) did not have an appropriate disposal container available outside the resident room. Interview on June 30, 2025 at 10:35 a.m. with License Practical Nurse, Employee E4, confirmed no appropriate disposal container for PPE was available inside or outside the above resident rooms. 28 Pa. Code 201.14(a) Responsibility of licensee28 Pa. Code 211.12(c)(d)(1)(5) Nursing Services
Jan 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

ADL Care (Tag F0677)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on a tour of resident care areas, review of facility documentation, review of clinical records, and staff and resident int...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on a tour of resident care areas, review of facility documentation, review of clinical records, and staff and resident interviews it was determined that the facility failed to ensure dependent residents received the necessary services to maintain persona hygiene for two of four residents reviewed (Resident R1 and Resident R2). Findings Include: Review of documentation submitted by the facility on January 20, 2025, to the State Survey Agency via the Event Reporting System (electronic database that collects reports of resident events from healthcare facilities), revealed on January 18, 2025, it was reported that there was no hot water available on the nursing units. Maintenance was contacted and was able to successfully restore one of two hot water heaters. The facility reported being unable to maintain comfortable water temperatures during times of peak water demand due to only one hot water heater supplying hot water to the entire center. Continued review of facility documentation submitted to the Event Reporting System on January 20, 2025, revealed nursing was advised to offered residents bed baths instead of showers until the hot water heater was repaired. Interview on January 30, 2025, at 9:35 a.m. with the Nursing Home Administrator, Employee E1, revealed the facility was still operating with only one hot water heater while waiting for the second one to be repaired. Nursing Home Administrator, Employee E1, reported that the facility was unable to maintain comfortable shower temperatures during peak shower time. Further interview with the Nursing Home Administrator, Employee E1, revealed no adjustments were made to resident shower times/days to accommodate resident needs. During a tour of shower rooms on January 30, 2025, at approximately 10:15 a.m. with the Nursing Home Administrator, Employee E1, and Maintenance Director, Employee E3, revealed shower temperatures were at comfortable levels for bathing in two of the three shower rooms checked (North Wing Shower room [ROOM NUMBER] degrees Fahrenheit (F), and [NAME] Wing Shower room [ROOM NUMBER] degrees F). Review of Resident R1's Minimum Data Set (MDS - federally mandated resident assessment and care screening) dated December 30, 2024, revealed the resident was cognitively intact and had diagnoses of muscle weakness and difficulty in walking. Review of Resident R1's comprehensive care plan revised November 16, 2024, revealed the resident required assistance/was dependent for activities of daily living care in bathing, grooming, and personal hygiene. Per a review of facility documentation Resident R1 scheduled shower times were Wednesday and Saturday during the 3:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. shift. During an interview on January 30, 2025, at 11:30 a.m. with Resident R1 the resident reported that her hair has not been washed in two weeks. Resident R1 reported not being offered a shower for two weeks due to the cold-water temperatures, and subsequently does not feel clean with just a bed bath. Resident R1 denied shower schedule being adjusted to accommodate a shower. Interview on January 30, 2025, at approximately 12:45 p.m. with nurse aide, Employee E4, confirmed Resident R1 was upset about not having her hair washed due to not getting showers. Further interview with nurse aide, Employee E4, revealed the employee set up Resident R1 an appointment with the hairdresser for January 31, 2025, so that Resident R1 can get her hair washed. Review of Resident R2's MDS dated [DATE], revealed the resident was cognitively intact and required supervision/touching assistance for shower/bathing self. Review of Resident R2's comprehensive care plan revised May 31, 2022, revealed Resident R2 was at risk for decreased ability to perform activities in daily living in bathing and personal hygiene related to fatigue and activity intolerance. Interview on January 30, 2025, at 12:37 p.m. with Resident R2 revealed the resident has not had a shower or her hair washed in a couple weeks due to shower temperatures being cold. Resident R2 denied shower schedule being adjusted to accommodate a shower. 28 Pa. Code 201.14 (a) Responsibility of licensee.
Jan 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

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 staff interviews, review of facility policy and the review of clinical records, it was determined that the facility fai...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on staff interviews, review of facility policy and the review of clinical records, it was determined that the facility failed to assess, monitor and notify the physician regarding an injury of unknown origin for one of two residents reviewed. (Resident R1) Findings include: Review of facility policy on Assessment revealed that under section POLICY: The Center will conduct initially and periodically a comprehensive, standardized, reproducible assessment of each patient's functional capacity. The assessment must accurately reflect the patient's status at the time of assessment. Routine and focused assessments will be performed on an ongoing basis as needed. The assessment process must include direct observation and communication with the patient, as well as communication with licensed and non-licensed direct care staff members on all shifts. Under section PURPOSE: To determine patient's condition and clinical needs. Under section PRACTICE STANDARDS 4. Conduct a change in condition assessment as needed using the eInteract Change in Condition Evaluation. 5. Utilize assessment data to develop the care plan. 6. Notify physician/advanced practice provider (APP) of assessment results as indicated. 7. Document physician/APP notification and response if indicated. Review of Resident R1's clinical record revealed that Resident R1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident R1's diagnoses included Cerebral Infarction, Aphasia, Vascular Dementia with other Behavioral Disturbance, and Anxiety Disorder. Review of Resident R1, most recent MDS (minimum data set- a federally required resident assessment completed at a specific interval) dated November 2, 2024, revealed a BIMS (brief interview for mental status) score of 3, indicating severe cognitive impairment. Review of Resident R1's nursing note dated January 9, 2025, time stamped at 12:03 p.m. reveled that Resident R1 was transferred to local hospital for, new onset strabismus left eye. Progress notes dated January 9, 2024, 6:24 p.m. revealed a late entry note revealing that nurse spoke to intensive care unit (ICU). Per ICU nurse, per EMS (Emergency Medical Services) resident had unwitnessed fall with head injury at time unknown. Facility nurse informed ICU nurse that no fall documentation was noted at facility. Further review of Resident R1's nursing note revealed that prior to January 9, 2025, there was no documentation regarding Resident R1's injuries, there was no documented evidence that the physician was notified. Review of nurse's aide, Employee E3's statement dated January 10, 2024, revealed that on January 8, 2025, during the 7 to 3 shift, Employee E3 wrote redness around the left eye and black around the left eye the next day. Interview with nurse's aide, Employee E3 conducted on January 21, 2024, at 12:27 p.m. confirmed that on January 8, 2025, she was in Resident R1's room with the therapist Employee E4 and that Employee E4 and her observed discoloration on Resident R1's left eye. Further, Employee E3 revealed that she did not have to report her observation to licensed nurse Employee E5 who was the nurse on the unit that day, because licensed nurse Employee E5 came into the room and saw the discoloration herself. Review of therapist Employee E4's statement dated January 9, 2025, revealed that on January 8, 2025, Resident R1 was seen at bedside with nursing (nurse aide and licnesed nurse). Resident R1 complained of pain with movement of left lower extremity. Bruising observed on forehead and left eye. On Thursday January 9, 2025, bruising spread to both eyes- no fall was reported. Review of licensed nurse Employee E5's written statement revealed that on January 8, 2025, Resident R1's left eye was slightly puffy, skin color different from the last time I have seen her which was before resident went to the hospital, yellow under the eyes, discoloration, mid upper forehead had yellow spot. On January 9, 2025, noticed left eye bruise with eye brow risen, lump on forehead, yellow color, right eye inverted towards the nose, left eye stayed straight. Telephone interview with therapist Employee E4 conducted on January 21, 2025, at 12:52 pm revealed that she was in room with nurse's aide Employee E3, when she observed the bruise on Resident R1's forehead and left eye. Further, therapist Employee E4 revealed that licensed nurse, Employee E5 came in to give meds. Further therapist Employee E4 also revealed that she reported her observation to licensed nurse Employee E5 at the time and that she talked to licensed nurse Employee E5 about the bruising on the left eye and the forehead. Interview with Facility Administrator Employee E1 conducted on January 21, 2024, at 12:30 pm revealed that Employee E4 was no longer working at the facility. Employee E4 was not available for interview. Review of the resident's clinical record revealed no documented evidence that the physician was notified of Resident R5's injury of unknown origen. 28 Pa Code 201.18 (b)(1) Management 28 Pa. Code 211.10 (c) Resident care policies 28 Pa. Code 211.12 (c)(d)(1)(3) Nursing services
Sept 2024 12 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0554 (Tag F0554)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, review of clinical records, and staff and resident interviews, it was determined that the facility failed...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, review of clinical records, and staff and resident interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to determine if residents were safe to self-administer medications for two of two residents observed (Resident R25 and R61). Findings Include: Review facility policy on Self Administration of Medication with a most recent review date of March 1, 2022, revealed that under section Policy, patients who request to self-administer medications will be evaluated for safe and clinically appropriate capability based on the patients. functionality and health condition. If it is determined that the patient is able to self-administer, a physician / advanced practice provider order is required. Self-administration and medication self-storage must be planned. When applicable, patient must be provided with a secure, locked area to maintain medications. Patients must be instructed in self-administration. Evaluation of capability must be performed initially, quarterly and with any significant change in condition. Review of Resident R25's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS - federally mandated resident assessment and care screening) dated July 5, 2024, revealed the resident was cognitively intact and had a diagnosis of respiratory failure and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD - progressive lung disease characterized by persistent respiratory symptoms such as breathlessness and cough). Review of Resident R25's physician order summary revealed an order dated April 10, 2024, for Albuterol Sulfate Inhalation 2 puff inhale orally every four hours as needed for wheezing. Observations on September 4, 2024, at 9:45 a.m. revealed Resident R25 had the Albuterol inhaler placed on the overbed table. Interview with Resident R25 revealed the resident self-administers the inhaler four times per day. Interview on September 4, 2024, at 2:36 p.m. with Licensed Nurse, Employee E15, confirmed Resident R25 keeps the albuterol at bedside to self-administer the medication. Review of Resident R25's clinical record revealed there was no interdisciplinary assessment to evaluate Resident R25's ability to safely self-administer the medication. Further review of Resident R25's clinical record revealed there was no documentation included in the care plan related to self-administration of medications. Review of Resident R61's clinical record revealed that Resident R61 was most recently readmitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses of but not limited to: chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia. Type 2 diabetes mellitus, Peripheral vascular disease, Impetigo, Urticaria, Pruritus, Rash, and other non-specified skin eruption. Review of resident R61 clinical record revealed a physician order for: (Klayesta) Nystatin External Powder 100000 UNIT/GM (Nystatin (Topical)) Apply to B/L groin topically every day and night shift for fungal rash May keep at bedside and apply to B/L abdominal fold topically every day and night shift - ordered June 29, 2024. Further review of Resident R61's physician's orders revealed no order to allow resident to self medicate Nystatin External Powder 100000 UNIT/GM (Nystatin (Topical) Observation of Resident R61 conducted on September 3, 2024, at 11:19am revealed that a bottle of Klayesta powder 100, 000 unit was on top of Resident R61's over head table. Further, the bottle of Klayesta powder 100, 000 unit was labelled with Resident R61's name. Interview with Resident R61 conducted at the time of the observation confirmed that the bottle of Klayesta was hers. Further Resident R61 revealed that the staff left the medication with her and that she uses the Klayesta(nystatin)powder for her open wounds. Interview with unit manager Employee E3 conducted on September 3, 2024, at 11:48 am confirmed that Resident R61 has a bottle of Klayesta in her possession. Further Employee E3 revealed that resident R61 was allowed to keep her medication with her because she was alert and oriented. 09/05/24 10:04 AM Interview with Director of Nursig Employee E2 confirmed that there was no documentation and physician order related to Resident R61's self medication. Further, Employee E2 revealed that they had just initiated all the documentation regarding Resident R61's self medication 211.10 (d) Resident care policies. 211.12 (d)(5) Nursing services.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0604 (Tag F0604)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on review of facility policies, clinical record review, observations and staff interviews, it was determined the facility failed to identify the placement of a bed against the wall as a restrain...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on review of facility policies, clinical record review, observations and staff interviews, it was determined the facility failed to identify the placement of a bed against the wall as a restraint and failed to assess the functional status of an individual resident to determine the use of the restraint for one of nine residents reviewed. (Residents R44). Findings Include: Review of facility policy titled, Restraints: Use of with a revision date of December 2022, revealed Patients have the right to be free from any physical or chemical restrains imposed for the purposes of discipline or convenience, and not required to treat the patient's medical symptoms Clinical record review indicated Resident R44 was admitted to the facility December 23, 2023 with a diagnosis of Cerebral Infarction (disrupted blood flow to the brain due to problems with the blood vessels that supply it), Hemiplegia and Hemiparesis (muscle weakness on one side of the body), and Hypertension (high blood pressure). Review of Resident R44's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment (a mandated assessment of a resident's abilities and care needs) dated July 24, 2024, revealed the resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 0 indicating severe cognitive impairment. Observation on September 3, 2024 at 9:50 a.m. revealed Resident R44 was asleep in bed and the bed (left side) was pushed against the wall. Review of Resident R44's care plan dated December 4, 2023, revealed Resident R44 was at risk for falls due to cognitive loss, lack of safety awareness, and impaired mobility. No care plan or assessment was included in the clinical record for safety with a bed against the wall. Further record review revealed Resident R44 was seen by Medical Doctor on August 21, 2024 for skin change- ecchymosis (bruising) on right 2-3 finger and right and left forearm. Progress note dated August 21, 2024, stated pt reported to be resistant to care, banging extremities on side wall. Observation on September 5, 2024 at 10:40 a.m. revealed Resident R44's bed pushed against the wall. Interview on September 5, 2024 at 10:45 a.m with Employee E6, confirmed Resident R44's bed was pushed against the wall. 28 Pa. Code 211.8(e)(f) Use of Restraints. 28 Pa. Code:211.12(d)(1)(5) Nursing services.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0655 (Tag F0655)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on review of facility policies, clinical records, and staff interviews, it was determined at the facility failed to develo...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on review of facility policies, clinical records, and staff interviews, it was determined at the facility failed to develop a baseline care plan that includes the instructions needed to provide effective and person-centered care within 48 hours of admission for respiratory care, communication, and total parenteral nutrition for three of 31 residents reviewed. (Resident R369, R143, Resident R150) Findings include: Review of facility policy on person centered care plan. With the most recent review date of October 24, 2022, revealed that under section Policy: the Center must develop and implement a baseline person centered care plan within 48 hours of admission readmission for each patient/ resident (herein after patient) that includes the instructions needed to provide effective and person-centered care that meet professional standards of quality care. Person centered care means to focus on the patient as the focus of control and support the patient in making their own choices and having control over their daily life. Under section Purpose: To attain or maintain the patient's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being. To promote positive communication between patient, patient representative, and team. To obtain the patients and residents representatives input into the plan of care. Ensure effective communication and optimized clinical outcomes. Under section Practice standards: #1. A baseline care plan must be developed within 48 hours and include the minimum health care information necessary to properly care for a patient, including but not limited to 1.1. Initial goals based on admission orders. 1.2. Physician orders. Review of Resident R369's clinical record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and had a diagnosis of adult failure to thrive and postprocedural complications and disorders of the digestive system. Review of Resident R369's physician order dated August 29, 2024, revealed the resident received Total Parenteral Nutrition (TPN - administration of nutrition and calories intravenously into a vein) 12 hours per day. Review of Resident R369's nutrition assessment dated [DATE], revealed Resident R369 has been dependent on TPN for the last two months. Review of Resident R369's clinical record revealed no documented evidence a baseline care plan was developed to address the management and care needs of the TPN. Review of Resident R143's clinical record revealed the Resident R143 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnosis of Failure to Thrive, Retention of Urine, Occlusion and Stenosis of Left Vertebral Artery, Atherosclerosis of Aorta, Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease, Vancomycin Resistance, Urinary Tract Infection. Further review of clinical record revealed a physician order for Oxygen at 2 L/min via Nasal Cannula continuously, every day and night shift for SOB (shortness of breath) Post Tx (treatment): Evaluate heart rate, respiratory rate, pulse oximetry, skin color, and breath sounds ordered on June 21, 2024. Further, an order for: Pulse ox every shift to keep oxygen sats greater than or equal to 92% was also ordered on June 21, 2024. Further review of Resident R143's clinical record revealed a physician's order to wean O2 as able, Keep SAT (Oxygen saturation) at 92 - 95%. If greater than 92%, then decrease O2 by 1L/hr until off O2. If >92%, then increase O2 back to prior. Keep O2 at lowest flow to keep sat (oxygen saturation) >92%. Goal is to wean off O2. Review of Resident R143's admission MDS (minimum data set- a federally required resident assessment completed at a specific interval) with assessment reference date of June28, 2024, section O0110 (Special Treatments, Procedures, and Programs), C1 (Oxygen therapy) b (While a Resident) indicated that Oxygen therapy was Performed while a resident of this facility and within the last 14 days. Further review of Resident R143's clinical record revealed that the respiratory care plan was started on July 1, 2024, further there was no baseline care plan regarding the use of Oxygen for Resident R143 that includes the instructions needed to provide effective and person-centered care within 48 hours of admission. Observation on Resident R143 conducted on September 9, 2024, at 11:59 am revealed that Resident R143 was on O2 concentrator via nasal cannula at 3 liters/minute, Review of Resident R150's clinical record revealed that Resident R150 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses of to Cerebral Infarction and Aphasia (a comprehension and communication disorder resulting from damage or injury to the specific area in the brain.) Review of Resident R150's admission MDS dated [DATE], section B0600. Speech Clarity revealed that resident R150 had unclear speech, B0700. Makes Self Understood was coded sometimes understood, B0800. Ability To Understand Others was coded usually understands Review of Resident R150's clinical record revealed a care plan for impaired communication dated August 13, 2024. Further review of Resident R150's clinical record revealed that there was no baseline care plan regarding Resident R150's diagnosis of Aphasia, communication deficit due to aphasia, unclear speech and deficits in making himself understood. Observation on Resident R150 conducted during the tour of the facility on September 3, 2024, at 11:35 revealed that Resident R150 was in a wheelchair, on the hallway outside room [ROOM NUMBER]. Interview with Resident R150 revealed that resident had difficulty expressing himself and had difficulty with word finding. Interview with unit manager conducted at the time of the observation revealed that resident had a diagnosis of Aphasia and had difficulty communicating. 28 Pa. Code 211.10(d) Resident care policies
CONCERN (D)

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

Comprehensive Care Plan (Tag F0656)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on review of clinical record was determined that the facility failed to develop a person-centered care plan related to ant...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on review of clinical record was determined that the facility failed to develop a person-centered care plan related to antibiotic use via Midline intravenous catheter for one of 31 residents reviewed. (Resident R61) Findings include: Review Facility policy on Person Centered Care Plan with a most recent review date of October 24, 2022, revealed that under Section Policy: A comprehensive individualized care plan will be developed within seven days after completion of the comprehensive assessment (admission, annual or significant change in status), Care plan includes measurable objectives and timetables to meet a patient's medical, nursing, nutrition, and mental and psychosocial needs that are identified in the comprehensive assessments for newly admitted patients. The Comprehensive care plan must be completed within seven days of the completion of the comprehensive assessment and no more than 21 days after admission. The care plan will be prepared by the interdisciplinary team. The interdisciplinary team, in conjunction with the patient and or patient representatives as appropriate, will establish the expected goals and outcomes of care, the type, amount, frequency and duration of care, and any other factors related to the effectiveness of care. Documentation will show evidence of. Patience, goals, and preferences; patient status as triggered in the Care Area Assessment (CAA), and development of care planning interventions. Under section Purpose: To attain or maintain the patient's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being, to promote positive communication between patient, patient representative and team, to obtain the patients and residents representative input into the care plan, ensure effective communication and optimize clinical outcomes. Under section Practice standards: A comprehensive care plan may be developed in place of a baseline care plan if it is developed within 48 hours and meets the requirement for a comprehensive care plan. A comprehensive person-centered care plan must be developed for each patient and must describe the following: Services that are to be furnished, any services that would otherwise be required but are not provided due to the patient's exercise of rights, including the right to refuse treatment. The care plan must be customized to each individual patient's preferences and need. Care plans will be communicated to appropriate staff and patient. Patient representative family. Review of Resident R61's clinical record revealed that Resident R61 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses of Chronic Respiratory Failure with Hypoxia, UTI (urinary tract infection), Extended Spectrum Beta Lactamase Resistance, Carrier of Other Specified Bacterial Disease, Elevated [NAME] Blood Cell Count, Personal History of Methicillin Resistant staphylococcus Aureus, Further review of Resident R61'd clinical record revealed a physician's order for: Heparin Lock Flush Solution 10 UNIT/ML (Heparin Lock Flush) Use 3 ml intravenously every 8 hours for SASH (saline-administration-saline-heparin) technique after administration of saline- ordered on August 27, 2024. Further a physician's order for: IV (intravenous): Midline (midline intravenous- catheter-A long, flexible tube inserted into a vein in the upper arm to deliver medication or fluids directly into the bloodstreams) Non-Valved: Gauge 4 French TOTAL LENGTH: 15 cm. Number of Lumens: 1- ordered on August 27, 2024, was also in place. Further review of Resident R61's clinical record revealed a physician's order for: Gentamicin in Saline Intravenous Solution 1 MG/ML (Gentamicin in Saline) Use 100 mg intravenously every 8 hours for skin infection for 7 Days ordered on August 27, 2024, and discontinued on September 4, 2024. Further, Ertapenem Sodium Solution Reconstituted 1 GM Use 1 gram intravenously every 24 hours for skin infection for 7 Days was also ordered August 27, 2024, and discontinued on September 4, 2024. Further review of Resident R61's clinical record revealed that there was no care plan for the use of midline intravenous catheter, use of heparin, and intravenousaAntibiotics. 28 Pa. Code 211.12(d)(5) Nursing service
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 F0658 (Tag F0658)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations,staff interviews, review of clinical records and facility documentation, it was determined that the facili...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations,staff interviews, review of clinical records and facility documentation, it was determined that the facility failed to provide care and services in accordance with professional standards of practice to prevent accident and falls for one of 31 resident records reviewed (Resident R6). Findings include: Resident R6 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], diagnosed with a contractured right knee, chronic pain, major depression, anxiety, morbid (severe) obesity, mild cognitive impairment and dependent on a wheelchair for mobility. Review of Resident R6 nursing progress note dated, May 13, 2024, stated a staff member was pushing Resident R6 down the ramp, next in line, to play an outdoor activity and the resident fell out of her the wheelchair, noting bilateral abrasion to the knees and lip. The resident was transferred to the hospital post fall and returned the facility on the same day. Interview with Resident R6, on September 4, 2024, at 2:00 p.m. said during an activity a staff member wheeled me down the ramp the wrong way. Instead of wheeling me backwards I was wheeled forwards and fell right on my face and got a fat lip. Review of facility documentation submitted to the Department of Health dated May 13, 2024 stated while the Recreational Director was assisting the resident down a small ramp by pushing the wheelchair forward and Resident R6 fell forward, out of her wheelchair The resident told the facility her feet got caught under the seat of the wheelchair causing the fall also noting the leg rests were not in use while the staff member propelled the resident down the ramp. Interview with the Director of Rehabilitation on September 6, 2024, at 12:00 p.m. stated for safety, leg rests should always be used and when using a ramp with a wheelchair, positioning the chair going backwards. 28 Pa. Code 201.18(b)(1)(3) Management. 28 Pa. Code 211.12(d)(1)(3)(5) Nursing service
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 review of facility policies, review of facility documentation, clinical record review and interviews with staff, it was...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on review of facility policies, review of facility documentation, clinical record review and interviews with staff, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that a resident received adequate supervision for one of seven residents reviewed for falls (Resident R157). This deficiency was identified as past non-compliance. Findings Include: Review of facility policy Safe Resident Handling/Transfer Equipment revised March 1, 2024, revealed patients will be assessed upon admission and on an ongoing basis to determine the patient's ability to transfer and reposition and the need for safe resident handling equipment. Review of Resident R157's comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS - federally mandated resident assessment and care screening) dated February 16, 2024, revealed the resident had severe cognitive impairment and diagnoses of adult failure to thrive, and contractures of the left and right knee. Further review of Resident R157's MDS dated [DATE], revealed the resident had impairment in range of motion to both upper extremities and was dependent (helper does all the effort. Resident does none of the effort to complete the activity. Or, the assistance of 2 or more helpers is required for the resident to complete the activity) on staff for shower/bathing and rolling left to right (the ability to roll from lying on back to left and right side, and return to lying on back on the bed). Review of Resident R157's comprehensive care plan revised July 25, 2021, revealed Resident R157 was at risk for decreased ability to perform activities of daily living in bathing, grooming, and bed mobility related to limited activity and exercise. Continued review of Resident R157's comprehensive care plan revealed interventions dated January 30, 2020, that the resident required total assist of two staff members for bed mobility. Review of facility documentation submitted to the State Survey Agency on March 22, 2024, revealed on March 21, 2024, Resident R157 had a witnessed fall from bed whiling receiving a bed bath. Review of facility documentation revealed an incident report dated March 21, 2024, that revealed while nurse aide, Employee E16, was turning Resident R157 to the left side while washing the resident's back and bottom, the resident started to fall over to the floor face down. Further review of the incident report revealed no other staff members were present to assist nurse aide, Employee 16, to turn/reposition Resident R157 in bed. Review of the statement dated March 21, 2024, by nurse aide, Employee E16, revealed during patient care the nurse aide, Employee E16, turned Resident R157 to the left side while washing the resident's back and bottom. Resident R157 started falling over and subsequently fell on the floor. Interview on September 5, 2024, at 12:11 p.m. with the Director of Nursing, Employee E2, confirmed Resident R157 should have been assisted with two staff members during turning and repositioning in bed. Further interview on September 5, 2024, at 12:47 p.m. with the Director of Nursing, Employee E2, revealed that resident rooms have door tag codes to specify the amount of help required during resident care. Further interview revealed all nursing staff receive education during orientation on the door tags. Continued interview on September 5, 2024, at 12:47 p.m. with the Director of Nursing, Employee E2, revealed at the time of the fall on March 21, 2024, Resident R157's door was coded as TA2 which meant the resident required more than 1 person and additional equipment for turning and repositioning in bed. On March 21, 2024, following the incident, the facility immediately implemented the following corrective actions: -On 3/21/24 [Resident R157] care plan immediately updated to include two staff for all care. -On 3/21/24 the nurse aide [Employee E16] was taken off the schedule pending further investigation and CSU was notified. -On 3/21/24 the nurse practice educator (NPE)/designee audited all resident door tags to ensure the correct door tag sticker is in place reflecting lift/transfer/repositioning needs per most recent Lift Transfer Evaluation. -Starting on 3/21/24 and completed 3/22/24 the DON audited all resident care plans to ensure correct transfer and bed mobility status per most recent Lift Transfer Evaluation is in place and appears on the [NAME]. -Starting on 3/21/24 and completed 3/28/24 the NPE/designee re-educated all nursing staff on understanding lift/transfer/repositioning door tags and the steps needed done immediately after completing a Lift Transfer Evaluation (updating care plan/[NAME] and posting door tag sticker). -On 3/22/24 the NPE/designee audited all nursing staff to ensure they have completed the Safe Resident Handling Program per requirements. -Director of nursing will audit all new Lift Transfer Evaluations completed daily to ensure the care plan matches the Lift Transfer Evaluation, is on [NAME], and correct door tag sticker is posted. -Director of Nursing/Designee will complete random weekly audits x 4 weeks to ensure proper lift/transfer/repositioning needs are followed by nursing staff (completed 4/17/24). -Findings will be reported to the QAPI (Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement) committee who will determine the need for further education or audits (completed 4/23/24). Interviews with nursing staff on September 5, 2024, and September 6, 2024, confirmed that they had all been in-serviced on reviewing and following the resident [NAME], care plan, and door tags to ensure proper assistance is being provided with care. Review of clinical records and door tags confirmed correct door tag sticker is in place reflecting lift/transfer/repositioning needs per most recent Lift Transfer Evaluation. This deficiency was identified as past non-compliance. 211.10 (d) Resident care policies. 211.12 (d)(5) Nursing services.
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0565 (Tag F0565)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on review of resident council minutes, resident and group interviews and interviews with staff, and facility policy, it was determined the facility failed to ensure the residents were offered a ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on review of resident council minutes, resident and group interviews and interviews with staff, and facility policy, it was determined the facility failed to ensure the residents were offered a private group meeting during resident council for 6 of 6 residents interviewed (Resident R9, R47, R82, R120, R133, and R145) Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Recreation Services Policies and Procedures revised on 8/7/23 states the facility will promote and support self-governing and decision-making Resident Councils to provide an opportunity to meet regularly and without interference. The same policy states to provide appropriate accommodations and a meeting place that is private. During Resident Group with 6 alert and oriented residents on September 4, 2024, at approximately 11:00 a.m. Resident R82 indicated during resident council some of the members did not like to use their name if there was a concern or problem so the facility doesn't get told. Members of the resident council were asked, during the time they meet in private would it be more comfortable to tell the president the concerns and then the president would relay the concerns to the facility as a group, vs. one particular resident. The President's responded that the Resident Council was always conducted with the facility staff present, we never had it any other way. The residents that attended the group discussion were not aware they could have private meetings. Interview with the Director of Nursing on September 5, 2024, at 2:00 p.m. indicated the facility was always invited to the group meeting but confirmed the meetings were not held privately with only the residents. 28 Pa. Code 201.29(a) Resident rights
CONCERN (E)

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

Safe Environment (Tag F0584)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on observations and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure a comfortable and homelike environment in one of eight resident's rooms observed (Resident 114 and Resid...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observations and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure a comfortable and homelike environment in one of eight resident's rooms observed (Resident 114 and Resident 124). Findings include: Observation on September 3rd, 2024 at 9:50 am revealed that Resident R114 and Resident R124 double bed room had a hole in the wall and bed sheets hanging up on the windows. Resident R114 and Resident R124 stated the hole in the wall and bed sheets hanging instead of curtains, did not feel like a comfortable and homelike environment. Interview with Employee E10, Maintenance Director, confirmed the hole in the wall needed to be repaired and the bed sheets needed to be replaced with curtains. 28 Pa. Code 201.29(j) Resident rights. 28 Pa. Code 207.2(a) Administrator's responsibility.
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0679 (Tag F0679)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on interviews with residents and staff, and facility policy, it was determined that the facility failed to provide activities that enhanced the resident's interactions in the community based on ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interviews with residents and staff, and facility policy, it was determined that the facility failed to provide activities that enhanced the resident's interactions in the community based on the identified preferences/interests for six of six residents attending resident council (Resident R9, R47, R82, R120, R133, and R145) Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titles, Resident Rights stated, The resident has a right to interact with members of the community and participate in community activities both inside and outside the community. During Resident Group with 6 alert and oriented residents on September 4, 2024, at approximately 11:00 a.m. the group all agreed they wanted to go on trips again like they did previously. Resident R82 stated, We used to go on trips, but we don't go out anymore. We used to see a Christmas play around the holidays then eat at a nearby popular restaurant, but the facility stopped it. We were told we can't because of the facility's new van service. On September 5, 2024, at 2:00 p.m., interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) said they were aware the residents missed going on trips, saying the facility also took them to casinos. The DON explained that it was an ongoing issue between the residents and the facility. The facility's new van service doesn't offer those services like our previous one. It is difficult with most residents in wheelchairs to find a large van to accommodate the residents. Further interview with the Director of Nursing revealed a van service was found but would cost the residents $5.00 each for money they may not have and would not hold many residents, maybe 3 or 4 due to the wheelchairs. Further stating the size of this van and the facility's new van are the same size as the original van. 28 Pa. Code: 201. 18(b)(3) Management 28 Pa. Code: 207.2(a) Administrators Responsibility
CONCERN (E)

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

Respiratory Care (Tag F0695)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, review of facility policy, review of clinical records, and staff and resident interviews, it was determin...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, review of facility policy, review of clinical records, and staff and resident interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that a resident who is dependent on oxygen therapy consistent with physician orders for three of three residents with oxygen reviewed (Resident R25, R118, and R127). Findings Include: Review of Resident R25's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS - federally mandated resident assessment and care screening) dated July 5, 2024, revealed the resident was cognitively intact and had a diagnosis of respiratory failure and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD - progressive lung disease characterized by persistent respiratory symptoms such as breathlessness and cough). Review of Resident R25's physician orders revealed an order dated June 9, 2024, for continuous oxygen every shift. Further review of Resident R25's physician orders revealed an order dated April 10, 2024, for oxygen tubing to be changed weekly and label each component with date and initials. Review of Resident R118's quarterly MDS dated [DATE], revealed the resident had severe cognitive impairment and had a diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease (a brain disorder that causes memory loss, thinking problems, and behavior changes). Review of Resident R118's physician orders revealed an order dated August 8, 2024, for continuous oxygen every shift. Further review of Resident R118's physician orders revealed an order dated August 8, 2024, for oxygen tubing to be changed weekly and label each component with date and initials. Review of Resident R127's comprehensive MDS dated [DATE], revealed the resident had severe cognitive impairment and had a diagnosis of COPD (Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease). Review of Resident R127's physician orders revealed an order dated June 9, 2024, for oxygen via nasal cannula as needed to maintain O2 saturation greater than or equal to 89%. Further review of Resident R127's physician orders revealed an order dated June 9, 2024, for oxygen tubing to be changed weekly and label each component with date and initials. Observations on September 4, 2024, at 9:45 a.m. revealed Resident R25's oxygen tubing was not labeled and dated per physician orders. Observations on September 4, 2024, at 9:54 a.m. revealed Resident R118's oxygen tubing was not labeled and dated per physician orders. Observations also revealed a visible build up of dust on the oxygen concentrator. Observations on September 4, 2024, at 10:16 a.m. revealed Resident R127 was using the oxygen via nasal cannula. Resident R127's oxygen tubing was not labeled and dated per physician orders. During a tour with the Director of Nursing, Employee E2, on September 4, 2024, at 11:45 a.m., it was confirmed that the above residents did not have the oxygen tubing labeled and dated per physician orders. Director of Nursing, Employee E2, also confirmed Resident R118's oxygen concentrator has a visible build-up of dust. Review of Resident R143's clinical record revealed Resident R143 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnosis of Adult Failure to Thrive. Further review of clinical record revealed a physician order for Oxygen at 2 L/min via nasal cannula continuously, every day and night shift for SOB (shortness of breath) Post Tx (treatment): Evaluate heart rate, respiratory rate, pulse oximetry, skin color, and breath sounds ordered on June 21, 2024. Further review of Resident R143's clinical record revealed a physician's order to wean O2 as able, Keep SAT (Oxygen saturation) at 92 - 95%. If greater than 92%, then decrease O2 by 1L/hr until off O2. If >92%, then increase O2 back to prior. Keep O2 at lowest flow to keep sat (oxygen saturation) >92%. Goal is to wean off O2. Further a physician's order to MD order revealed and order for: Oxygen tubing change weekly Label each component with date and initials dated September 4, 2024 was also in place. Review of Resident R143's admission MDS (minimum data set- a federally required resident assessment completed at a specific interval) with assessment reference date of June28, 2024, section O0110 (Special Treatments, Procedures, and Programs), C1 (Oxygen therapy)b (While a Resident) indicated that Oxygen therapy was Performed while a resident of this facility and within the last 14 days. Further review of Resident R143's clinical record revealed that the respiratory care plan was started on July 1, 2024, there was care plan addressing the use of Resident R143's Oxygen use until July 1, 2024. Observation on Resident R143 conducted on September 9, 2024, at 11:59 am revealed that Resident R143 was on O2 concentrator via nasal cannula, Further, observation revealed that the oxygen tubing was not dated. Review of Resident R364's clinical record revealed a physician's order for Oxygen at 6L/min via Nasal Cannula continuously every night and day shift-start date August 30, 2024, further a physician's order for Oxygen tubing change weekly Label each component with date and initials every day shift every Wednesday dated august 30, 2024 was also in place. Observation conducted on during tour of the facility together with the Director of Nursing, Employee E2, on September 4, 2024, at 11:45 a.m. revealed that Resident R364's oxygen tubing did not have a date or label affixed to it. 211.10 (d) Resident care policies 211.12 (d)(5) Nursing services
CONCERN (E)

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

Safe Environment (Tag F0921)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on observations, interviews with resident and staff and review of facility documentation, revealed the facility failed to provide a safe functional, sanitary, and comfortable environment for res...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observations, interviews with resident and staff and review of facility documentation, revealed the facility failed to provide a safe functional, sanitary, and comfortable environment for residents for one of three main shower rooms. (100-unit Main Shower) Findings include: Observation conducted on September 3, 2024, of the 100-unit Main Shower room revealed a sign indicating it was out of order. During Resident Group on September 4, 2024, at approximately 11:00 a.m. three residents who reside in the 100-unit, Resident R47, R120, and R133 voiced their concerns about the 100-unit hallway and bathroom. Resident R47 stated, The Shower room its always out of order and has been for a very long time. Resident R120 said, They make us go to another bathroom instead and My room is close to the shower room and it bothered my allergies, Resident R133 stated, It smells too! They tell us, 'Yeah we are working on it' or 'We're waiting on a part.' ''This has been going on for a very long time! On September 6, 2024, at 10:00 a.m. interview with the Maintenance Director stated the problem with the North Wing shower room started in mid-December. Initially believed to be plumbing issue found the problem was the shower room floor. Review of facility work order states Floor is cracked, causing leaking from shower into hallway and patient room. A proposal with a monetary estimate was dated January 23, 2024, indicating the work could start within 15 days or sooner. The Director stated he's been waiting for corporate headquarters' approval. The Director indicated he uses epoxy to seal the shower room, but it's temporary, the residents have to wait a couple days for it to dry. Then in 2-3 months I have to do this again. 28 Pa. Code 202.28(b)(3) Management
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0925 (Tag F0925)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on observations of the physical environment interviews with staff and reviews of the pest control operators reports, it was determined that the facility was not maintaining an effective pest con...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observations of the physical environment interviews with staff and reviews of the pest control operators reports, it was determined that the facility was not maintaining an effective pest control program. Fndings include: Observations of the main kitchen of the food and nutrition department were completed with the director od dietary services, Employee E8 at 9:30 a.m., on September 3, 2024. Common household pests (flies) were observed throughout the dish room area, food preparation areas and the hallway located outside the food and nutrition department. The doorway leading from the hallway into the main kitchen was open allowing easy access to the main kitchen. Observations of the three windows located above the three compartment sink inside the main kitchen revealed that the windows were opened to the outside and contained no screens to prevent pest (flies) entry into the kitchen. The large window area located adjacent to the juice dispensing system contained an ill-fitting screen. The screen was torn and not secured into the window allowing easy access for pests into the food and nutrition department. Observations of the ceiling light screens located throughout the main kitchen revealed an accumulation of dead insects. Observations at the end of the hallway, located outside the food and nutrition department revealed a doorway that opened directly outside the building. When closed the door way was not sealed; at its' threshhold. A one inch gap was noted along the bottom of the door allowing easy access to the building for pests and rodents. Further observations, revealed that the garbage storage area for the facility was located directly outside this doorway. The area contained a dumpster unit used to hold the facility's trash and refuse. It was also noted that five receptacles/containers of soiled linens were in this area awaiting pick up by the contracted laundry services. Observations of the entrance lobby doors that lead directly out of the building from the lobby area of the facility revealed that the threshold of the doors evidenced a two inch gap upon closing. This void allowed easy access inside the facility for pests and rodents. Review of the pest control operators' reports for for June, July and August 2024 revealed on-going problems with common household pests (mice and flies). Interview with the director of maintenance, Employee E10 at 11:00 a.m., confirmed the treatments and reports documented by the pest control operator for June, July and August, 2024. The pest control operator's report dated August 30, 2024 indicated that resident rooms were noted with fly activity. The pest control operator recommended a light designed for extinguishing flying insects for the nursing unit. The pest control operator's report dated August 23, 2024 indicated that resident rooms and the main kitchen contained common household pests (flies). The pest control operator's report dated August 16, 2024 indicated that common household pests (rodents and flies) were noted in the kitchen or resident rooms. The pest control operator's report dated July 12, 2024 indicated that the main kitchen was treated for common household pests (rodents). The pest control operator's report dated June 21, 2024 indicated that the main kitchen was treated for common household pests (rodents and flies). Observations of the residents on the 300 nursing unit revealed that common household pests (flies) were inside resident rooms, the community dinning area and hallways on this nursing unit. Residents were observed attempting to eat lunch on September 3 and 4, 2024 with flies annoying their meals and disrupting their eating. Residents: (R20, R59, R38, R136, R26, R9 and R56). Observations of the common household pest problems in resident rooms, dinning areas and throughout the 300 nursing unit were confirmed with the nursing staff, (Employees: E6, E7, E11 and E14) who were observed swatting at the flies with their hand, as they were assisting residents with meals, charting at the nurses station and administering medications to the residents. 28 Pa. Code 201.18(b)(3) Management 28 Pa. Code 211.6(f) Dietary services
Apr 2024 2 deficiencies
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 F0558 (Tag F0558)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on review of facility policy, observation and staff and resident interviews, it was determined the facility failed to ensure that a resident's call bell was within reach for one of 14 residents ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on review of facility policy, observation and staff and resident interviews, it was determined the facility failed to ensure that a resident's call bell was within reach for one of 14 residents reviewed. (Resident R2) Findings include: Based on facility policy titled Call Lights revised June 1, 2021, revealed that to ensure safety and communication, all residents will have a call light or alternative communication device within their reach at all times when unattended. Review of facility grievances of the past three months revealed on January 15, 2024, February 8, 2024, February 14, 2024, and February 19, 2024 there were documented grievances describing concerns related to a delay response to call bells. Further review of the grievances revealed that all concern has been addressed and resolved by implementing education for staff and call bell audits. Observation of Resident R2 on April 18, 2024 at 8:47 a.m. revealed that Resident R2 was calling for help. Resident R2 stated she did not feel well and needed a nurse. Resident stated she needed to be cleaned; an odor of feces was detected in the room. Further observation revealed that the resident's call bell was found behind the resident's bed and out of resident's reach. Interview with nursing assistant, Employee E4, who responded to the resident's needs, confirming the resident needed care and call bell was not assessable to the resident. 28 Pa. Code 211.10 (d) Resident care policies 28 Pa Code 211.12 (d)(1) Nursing services
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

Tube Feeding (Tag F0693)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on review of facility policy, review of clinical record, review of manufacture directions and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that an opened container of en...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on review of facility policy, review of clinical record, review of manufacture directions and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that an opened container of enteral feeding formula was label and dated for one of one resident review on enteral feeding. (Resident R1) Findings include: Review of facility policy titled Enteral Management revised March 1, 2022, revealed that the purpose is to provide safe and effective management of enteral tubes to provide nutrition when the resident is unable to consume food orally. Further review of the policy states that enteral feeding may be provided by a syringe bolus when ordered by a physician. This method is for select situations for stable patients who do not have a history of gastrointestinal reflux or previous aspiration pneumonia, who have normal gastric function and are able to protect their airways or provide their own care. Review of Resident R1's clinical record revealed the diagnoses of fracture of right pubis, history of traumatic brain injury, severe protein calorie malnutrition, fusion of spinal cervical region (surgery that joins two or more vertebrae in the neck), dysphagia (term for difficulty swallowing), hepatitis C (viral infection that affects the liver), and dementia(loss of memory). Continued review of Resident R1's clinical record revealed a physician order for enteral feed initiated March 29, 2024, Two Cal HN (a high calorie formula and protein dense nutrition to support patients with volume intolerance and or fluid retention) , with instructions to administer bolus via syringe at 225ml four times daily having a total of 900ml daily. Review of the manufactures instruction for Two Cal HN enteral feed instructs that this formula once opened must be used within 48 hours. Observation of Resident R1 on April 18, 2024, at 8:30 a.m. revealed that Resident R1 was resting in bed, next to the bed was observed a container of the enteral feeding formula Two Cal HN on top of the Resident R1's bedside table. The container of formula was opened, undated, and unlabeled. Interview with Employee E3 at time of observation confirmed that the container of enteral formula Two Cal was not labeled or dated. 28 Pa. Code 211.10 (c) Resident care policies 28 Pa Code 211.12(d)(1) Nursing care policies
Dec 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

ADL Care (Tag F0677)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, review of clinical record and staff and resident interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, review of clinical record and staff and resident interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents were provided with showers for one of eight residents reviewed (Resident R1). Findings include: Review of Resident R1's clinical record revealed that Resident R1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Further review of Resident R1's clinical record revealed that Resident R1 had the diagnoses of Cerebral Infarction (a condition that occurs as a result of disrupted blood flow to the brain due to problems with blood vessels that supply it. A lack of blood supplies to the brain cells deprives them of Oxygen and vital nutrients which can cause parts of the brain to die off), Hemiplegia (Paralysis of one side of the body)/Hemiparesis (weakness of one side of the body) and Aphasia (a language disorder that affects a person's ability to communicate. It can occur suddenly after a stroke) following cerebral infarction. Review of Resident R1's admission Minimal Data Set (MDS- assessment of resident care needs) dated November 16, 2023, section C - Cognitive Patterns, C0500 (BIMS Summary Score) revealed a score of 15 suggesting that Resident R1 was cognitively intact. Section GG - Functional Abilities and Goals - Admission, E. Shower/bathe self: The ability to bathe self, including washing, rinsing, and drying self (excludes washing of back and hair). Does not include transferring in/out of tub/shower was coded 02 indicating that Resident R1 required Substantial/maximal assistance. Further review of Resident R1's clinical record revealed that under section task (documentation completed by the nurse aide) revealed that for the Bathing Task, there was no entry for November 28, 29 and 30. Further, there was no entries for Bed Bath for November 28, 29 and 30 indicating that Resident R1 was not bathed on November 28, 29 and 30, 2023. Further review of Resident R1's clinical record revealed that there was no documented evidence that Resident R1 refused to be bathed or that there was any reason for Resident R1 not being bathed. Interview with Resident R1 conducted on December 7, 2023, at 10:48 a.m. revealed that Resident R1 was not washed regularly. 28 Pa. Code 211.10(d) Resident care policies 28 Pa. Code 211.12(c) Nursing services 28 Pa. Code 211.12(d)(1) Nursing services 28 Pa. Code 211.12(5) Nursing services
Nov 2023 6 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0694 (Tag F0694)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observations, reviews of clinical records and review of facility policies and procedures, it was determined that the facility failed to provide adequate treatment for midline catheter (a long...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observations, reviews of clinical records and review of facility policies and procedures, it was determined that the facility failed to provide adequate treatment for midline catheter (a long, thin, flexible tube that is inserted into a large vein in the upper arm. It is used to safely administer medication into the bloodstream) line in accordance with professional standards of practice for one of 30 residents reviewed (Resident R356). Findings include: Review of the facility policy Midline Catheter Dressing Change, dated February 2022 revealed that Sterile dressing change using transparent dressings is performed. Upon admission: If transparent dressing is dated, clean, dry and intact, the admission dressing change may be omitted and scheduled 7 days from the date on the dressing label. Review Resident R356's physician order dated November 7, 2023 revealed an order to change midline catheter transparent dressing every seven days. Observation of Resident R356 on November 14, 2023, at 10:18 a.m. revealed that the resident had a left upper extremity midline line insertion. The documentation on the dressing indicating the date and time the dressing last changed was on November 6, 2023. An interview with Employee E29, Registered Nurse on November 14, 2023, at 2:43 p.m confirmed that the dressing was last changed on November 6, 2023, and it should have been changed on November 13, 2023. An interview with Director of Nursing, Employee E2, on November 15, 2023, at 1:59 p.m. confirmed that the midline dressing for Resident R356 was last changed on November 6, 2023, and the dressing change was not completed as ordered by the physician. 28 Pa. Code: 211.10 (c) Resident care policies 28 Pa. Code: 211.10 (d) Resident care policies 28 Pa. Code: 211.12 (d)(3) Nursing services 28 Pa. Code: 211.12(d)(5) Nursing services
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

Based on review of clinical records and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to incorporate individualized medical approaches into the comprehensive care plans for three of thr...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on review of clinical records and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to incorporate individualized medical approaches into the comprehensive care plans for three of three residents with Left Ventricular Assist Device (LVAD-mechanical pumps that are attached directly to the heart. One end of the pump is attached to the left chamber (left ventricle) which helps pump blood out of the ventricle to the aorta and then to the rest of the body). (Resident R357, R138 and R358). Findings include: An undated document provided by the facility titled LVAD-Left Ventricular Assist Device revealed that Blood pressure is taken with a Doppler. -A peripheral pulse may not be palpable -If parameters are out of range call LVAD coordinator -Driveline dressing changed weekly and as needed-Must be sterile dressing change. -If there is yellow or red alarm notify LVAD coordinator ASAP! -A q shift test needed to be completed to ensure the LVAD is working properly-Press and hold the battery button on the system controller, then screen displays self-test- the audio alarm will sound an control panel alarm will light up-these alarms include power, hazard and advisory alarms. The MAP-mean arterial pressure goal is usually between 65-85 the BP obtained via a Doppler. Complications. Infections-LVAD patients are at high risk for infection-drive line dressing care is most importance. Review of an undated facility education document Post acute care of patient with VAD-Principles and Practices revealed that Prior to admission: Prepare a VAD treatment plan specific to your patient and center. Include patient history. Plan for staff education Center specific VAD treatment plan Draft VAD standing orders with Nurse Practitioner and according to Genesis Policy and Procedure. Review of clinical record for Resident R138 revealed that the resident was admitted to the facility with diagnosis including congestive heart failure and presence of heart assist device. Review of care plan for Resident R138 dated October 20, 2023, revealed no evidence that the facility developed a care plan for the care of LVAD with intervention and precautions specific to the care of LVAD including care of the machine, dressing changes, monitor for placement and monitoring for signs and symptoms of infection. Review of clinical record for Resident R357 revealed that the resident was admitted to the facility with diagnosis including ischemic cardiomyopathy and presence of heart assist device. Review of care plan for Resident R357 dated November 2, 2023, revealed no evidence that the facility developed a care plan for the care of LVAD with intervention and precautions specific to the care of LVAD. Review of clinical record for Resident R358 revealed that the resident was admitted to the facility with diagnosis including congestive heart failure and presence of heart assist device. Review of care plan for Resident R138 dated November 8, 2023, revealed no evidence that the facility developed a care plan for the care of LVAD with intervention and precautions specific to the care of LVAD including care of the machine, dressing changes, monitor for placement and monitoring for signs and symptoms of infection. 28 Pa. Code 211.10(c)(d) Resident care policies 28 Pa. Code 211.12(d)(1)(3)(5) Nursing services
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0658 (Tag F0658)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on review of professional literature, clinical records, facility documentation, resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide care and services to meet the...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on review of professional literature, clinical records, facility documentation, resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide care and services to meet the accepted standards of practice for three of three residents reviewed for care and management of Left Ventricular Assist Device (LVAD-mechanical pumps that are attached directly to the heart. One end of the pump is attached to the left chamber (left ventricle) which helps pump blood out of the ventricle to the aorta and then to the rest of the body) (Resident R357, R138 and R358). Findings Include: Review of journal from American Nurses Today (Facility provided document) volume 12, Number 5, Caring for Patients with a left ventricular assist device dated May 2017, revealed the following information: Proper Assessment Caring for the hospitalized patient with an LVAS begins with through assessment of both LVAD and patient. Monitor blood pressure and mean arterial pressure (MAP), the goal is 60 mm Hg to 90 mm Hg. Elevated MAP decreases flow and perfusion. If MAP is too high, the patient may require antihypertensive drugs, such as metoprolol, hydralazine, and isosorbide dinitrate. These drugs may need to be adjusted until the goal MAP is reached. Always check with the provider before holding any medications due to a low MAP. Check the LVAD each time you assess the patient's vital signs. You will hear the continuous humming sound of the pump when auscultating the heart. Make sure the battery- charging station is plugged into the wall and at least two spare batteries are in the charge station; a green light indicates a full charge. Additional safety checks include assessing the driveline to ensure it's securely in place and confirming there's a back-up system controller in the room. Technical Care of the LVAD The LVAD requires regular care and system checks, including power-source changes, daily self-tests, and driveline dressing changes. Performing these tasks in the hospital provides teaching opportunities for patients and caregivers. Performing a daily self-test Teach the patient to perform a daily self-test to ensure the LVAD is working properly. When the patient presses and holds the battery button on the system controller, the screen displays Self Test, If the panel is working properly, the audio alarm will sound, and control panel alarms will light up. These alarms include power and battery alarms, a red heart (hazard) alarm, and a wrench (advisory) alarm. Changing the driveline dressing Assess the driveline site during each patient assessment, or more frequently if you're concerned about dislodgment. Except under special circumstances, the driveline dressings must be changed daily or every other day, depending on the provider's order and how long the patient has had the LVAD. Ultimately, you're responsible for ensuring the dressing change is completed; however, if you or the VAD coordinator have trained and observed the patient and caregiver changing the dressing, you can let them do it. Managing Complications Common LVAD complications include infection, pump thrombus, hemorrhage, arrhythmias, and suction events. Infection Several factors put patients with LVADs at high risk for infection- for example, malnutrition. Potential sources of infection include ventilators, central venous catheters, peripheral I.V. lines, and indwelling urinary catheters. Keep in mind that all hospital patients are at risk for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infection and Clostridium difficile infection, as well as pressure injuries, which can become infected. After surgery, driveline infections are common. To help prevent these infections, provide thorough patient and caregiver education on performing driveline dressing changes. Review of an undated facility education document Post acute care of patient with VAD-Principles and Practices revealed that Prior to admission: Prepare a VAD treatment plan specific to your patient and center. Include patient history. Plan for staff education Center specific VAD treatment plan Draft VAD standing orders with Nurse Practitioner and according to Genesis Policy and Procedure. Contact discharging hospital's VAD coordinator to schedule onsite training for core staff if needed -Unit Managers -Cart Nurses (weekend and night shift especially important) -NPE -NPE to present training materials provided by VAD manufacturer and VAD coordinator -Broader education of clinical staff -Clinical competencies Special Considerations. - Patient must be managed by an RN An undated document provided by the facility titled LVAD-Left Ventricular Assist Device revealed that Blood pressure is taken with a Doppler. -A peripheral pulse may not be palpable -If parameters are out of range call LVAD coordinator -Driveline dressing changed weekly and as needed-Must be sterile dressing change. -If there is yellow or red alarm notify LVAD coordinator ASAP! -A q shift test needed to be completed to ensure the LVAD is working properly-Press and hold the battery button on the system controller, then screen displays self-test- the audio alarm will sound an control panel alarm will light up-these alarms include power, hazard and advisory alarms. The MAP-mean arterial pressure goal is usually between 65-85 the BP obtained via a Doppler. Complications. Infections-LVAD patients are at high risk for infection-drive line dressing care is most importance. Interview with the Director of Nursing, Employee E2, confirmed that on November 15, 2023, at 1:59 p.m. stated facility did not have an LVAD policy and staff competency protocol to ensure staff education and skills. Review of LVAD instruction for Resident R138 revealed that staff should complete daily weights, check vital signs and VAD parameters every shift, document all vital signs obtained into flow sheets. Further review of the instructions revealed that staff should call VAD coordinator with any alarms, MAP below 60 or above 90, 1 hour after administering scheduled blood pressure medication. Complete driveline dressing change weekly with supervision. Review of LVAD instruction for Resident R138 revealed that staff should immediately call LVAD coordinator if at any time the residents pump reading were out of parameter limits. Further review of the instruction revealed that there was no out of range parameters were established. Review of physician order for Resident R138 dated October 20, 2023, revealed orders to record shift check of LVAD controller and the power base unit (PBU) every day shift and night shift, vital signs every day and night shift, weight daily, check previous shifts alarms - document if alarm is present, and Record Pump Rate (PR), Pulse Index (PI), Pump Power (PP) and Pump Speed (PS) every shift, Review of Medication and Treatment Administration Record (MAR/TAR) and LVAD flowsheet for Resident R138 for the month of October 2023 revealed that no PI, PP, PS or PR for October 29 and 31-day shift. There was no weight documented for October 21, 23, 25 and 31. Further review of LVAD flow sheet revealed that no self-test was documented as completed on October 21, 22, 23, 25, 27 and 30 day and night shifts. October 26 and 29 day shift, October 28 and 31 night shift. Further review of LVAD flow sheet for Resident R357 revealed that there was MAP documented above 90, 16 times from October 20 to November 14 with any documented evidence of a follow up or notification to the physician or LVAD coordinator. Review of physician order for Resident R358 dated November 8, 2023, revealed orders to record shift check of LVAD controller and the power base unit (PBU) every day shift and night shift, vital signs every day and night shift, weight daily. Review of Medication and Treatment Administration Record (MAR/TAR) and LVAD flowsheet for Resident R358 for the month of November 2023 revealed that there was no weight documented for November 9, 10 and 13. Review of physician progress note for Resident R358 dated November 8, 2023, revealed that the resident was admitted with LVAD drive line infection and resident was on wound vac (Vacuum-assisted closure of a wound is a type of therapy to help wounds heal). A recommendation was made to change wound vac according to the orders. Review of physician progress note for Resident R358 dated November 10, 2023, revealed a recommendation to change wound vac Monday, Wednesday and Friday. Further review of the physician orders for Resident R358 and Treatment Administration Record` revealed no evidence that a physician order was obtained for driveline dressing changes or a dressing change date was scheduled and completed until November 15, 2023. Review of LVAD flow sheet for Resident R358 revealed that there was missing documentation on November 10, 13, 15, 16 for both shifts. Review of physician order for Resident R357 dated November 9, 2023, revealed orders to change LVAD dressing change utilizing sterile technique every Thursday day shift. Review of TAR for Resident R357 revealed that the nurse signed out the order as completed on November 9, 2023. Review of LVAD parameters for Resident R357 revealed that there was values entered for pump speed, flow, pulse index and power. However, the notification range was not entered or established for staff guidance to notify the physician or LVAD coordinator. Review of LVAD flow sheet for Resident R357 revealed that there was missing documentation on November 6,10, 13 for both shifts. Interview with Licensed Practical Nurse, Employee E13, on November 17, 2023, at 12:54 p.m. stated she did not complete the dressing changes for Resident R138 and R357 because there was no dressing supply available. She stated the previous shift nurse placed clean dressings instead of a sterile dressing. Interview with Director of Nursing, Employee E2, on November 17, 2023, at 2:00 p.m. confirmed that the facility did not provide care and services to residents with LVAD according to professional standards. Employee E2 stated facility did not have a policy and staff competency related to LVAD care. Facility did not complete LVAD education since March 2020. 28 Pa. Code: 201.14(a) Responsibility of licensee. 28 Pa. Code 211.12(d)(1)(2)(5) Nursing services
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0659 (Tag F0659)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on clinical record review, facility procedures and interview with staff, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that Left Ventricular Assist Device (LVAD-mechanical pumps that are ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on clinical record review, facility procedures and interview with staff, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that Left Ventricular Assist Device (LVAD-mechanical pumps that are attached directly to the heart. One end of the pump is attached to the left chamber (left ventricle) which helps pump blood out of the ventricle to the aorta and then to the rest of the body) care and services were provided by a qualified person (Registered Nurses), in accordance with facility protocol and acceptable standards for three of three residents reviewed. (Resident R138, R357 and R358). Findings Include: Review of an undated facility education document Post acute care of patient with VAD-Principles and Practices revealed that Prior to admission: Prepare a VAD treatment plan specific to your patient and center. Include patient history. Plan for staff education Center specific VAD treatment plan Draft VAD standing orders with Nurse Practitioner and according to Genesis Policy and Procedure. Contact discharging hospital's VAD coordinator to schedule onsite training for core staff if needed. -Unit Managers -Cart Nurses (weekend and night shift especially important) -NPE -NPE to present training materials provided by VAD manufacturer and VAD coordinator -Broader education of clinical staff -Clinical competencies Special Considerations. - Patient must be managed by an RN Review of clinical record for Resident R138 revealed that resident was provided care and assessments, including LVAD assessments were completed by Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN), Employee E14, on November 6, 2023, day shift. Review of clinical record for Resident R138 revealed that resident was provided care and assessments, including LVAD assessments were completed by Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN), Employee E13, on November 4, 9, 11. Employee E11 also signed the LVAD dressing change order on November 9, 2023, Review of staffing sheet and Resident R138's clinical record revealed that Licensed Practical Nurse, Employee E15, provided care and assessments, including LVAD assessments on November 8, 2023, day shift. Review of clinical record for Resident R138 revealed that resident was provided care and assessments, including LVAD assessments were completed by Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN), Employee E16, on November 8, 2023, night shift. Review of clinical record for Resident R357 revealed that resident was provided care and assessments, including LVAD assessments were completed by Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN), Employee E14, on November 6, 2023, day shift. Review of clinical record for Resident R357 revealed that resident was provided care and assessments, including LVAD assessments were completed by Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN), Employee E13, on November 4, 9, 11. Employee E11 also signed the LVAD dressing change order on November 9, 2023. Review of staffing sheet and Resident R357's clinical record revealed that Licensed Practical Nurse, Employee E15, provided care and assessments, including LVAD assessments on November 8, 2023, day shift. Review of clinical record for Resident R357 revealed that resident was provided care and assessments, including LVAD assessments were completed by Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN), Employee E16, on November 8, 2023, night shift. Review of clinical record for Resident R358 revealed that resident was provided care and assessments, including LVAD assessments were completed by Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN), Employee E14, on November 6, 2023, day shift. Review of clinical record for Resident R358 revealed that resident was provided care and assessments, including LVAD assessments were completed by Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN), Employee E13, on November 4, 9, 11. Employee E11 also signed the LVAD dressing change order on November 9, 2023. Review of staffing sheet and Resident R358's clinical record revealed that Licensed Practical Nurse, Employee E15, provided care and assessments, including LVAD assessments on November 8, 2023, day shift. Review of clinical record for Resident R358 revealed that resident was provided care and assessments, including LVAD assessments by Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN), Employee E16, on November 8, 2023, night shift. Interview with Director of Nursing, Employee E2, on November 17, 2023, at 2:00 p.m. confirmed that the facility protocol stated RN should be assigned to care for residents with LVAD and Resident R138, R357 and R358 were provided care and assessment by LPN's including LVAD assessments and dressing changes. 28 Pa. Code: 201.14(a) Responsibility of licensee. 28 Pa. Code 211.12(d)(1)(5) Nursing services
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Quality of Care (Tag F0684)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on observations, interview with staff and residents it was determined that the facility did not ensure that residents receive treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of prac...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observations, interview with staff and residents it was determined that the facility did not ensure that residents receive treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice related to skin assessments and not following physician orders for two out of 33 residents reviewed (Resident R5 and R138) Findings include: Review of facility's policy 'Skin Integrity and Wound Management', revised on February 1, 2023, The nursing assistant will observe skin daily and report any changes or concerns to the nurse. The licensed nurse will evaluate any reported or suspected skin changes or wounds. Review of Resident R5's care plan, revised on August 1, 2023, revealed that Resident R5 was at risk for skin breakdown related to advanced age, contractures, decreased activity, frail fragile skin, history of pressure ulcer, impaired cognition, impaired sensation, incontinence, hypotension, hypoxia and had actual skin breakdown. The intervention included for the resident to wear heel boots to bilateral feet at all times. Remove for skin checks. Observation of Resident R5's skin on November 16, 2023 at 1:23 p.m., with nurse aide, Employee E5 revealed that Employee E5 removed Resident R5's heel boot on left lower extremity. Upon removal of the heel boot there was an unsanitary discoloration on the inside of boot as well as reddened, callous and painful to touch left heel. Finding confirmed by Licensed nurse, Employee E4 and Unit manager, Employee E3. Review of Resident R5's last skin assessment, which was completed on November 10, 2023 at 7:41 p.m., revealed no evidence of Resident R5's assessment of left lower extremity. Additional review of progress notes between November 10, 2023 and November 16, 2023, revealed no evidence of assessment or evaluation of Resident R5's lower left extremity. Further review of Resident R5's orders revealed an order placed on November 16, 2023 at 6:18 p.m., for Aquaphor advanced therapy external ointment to be applied to left heel everyday at bedtime. Review of physician order for Resident R138 dated October 20, 2023, revealed an order for Hydralazine(Medication to treat blood pressure) 25 milligrams (mg), one tablet three times a day for Hypertension (high blood presure), hold the medication for MAP (mean arterial pressure) less than 85. Review of Medication Administration Record for Resident R138 for October 2023 revealed that the medication was administered on October 22 at 8:00 a.m. with a MAP of 82, October 26 at 8:00 a.m. with a MAP of 74, October 31 at 8:00 a.m. with a MAP of 84, October 25 at 2:00 p.m. with a MAP of 77, October 26 at 2:00 p.m. with a MAP of 72, October 28 at 2:00 p.m. with a MAP of 72, October 30 at 2:00 p.m. with a MAP of 84, October 31 at 2:00 p.m. with a MAP of 84, October 30, at 10:00 p.m. with a MAP of 84. Review of Medication Administration Record for Resident R138 for November 2023 revealed that the medication was administered on November 1 at 8:00 a.m. with MAP of 84, November 6 at 2:00 p.m. with a MAP of 78, November 13 at 2:00 p.m. with a MAP of 84. Interview with Director of Nursing, Employee E2, on November 17, 2023, at 2:00 p.m. confirmed that the staff did not follow physician orders related to the medication administration of Resident R138. 28 Pa. Code 211.10(c) Resident care policies 28 Pa. Code 211.12(d)(1)Nursing services
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0726 (Tag F0726)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on the review of facility documentation and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that nursing staff possessed the appropriate competencies and skill sets related...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on the review of facility documentation and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that nursing staff possessed the appropriate competencies and skill sets related to the care and assessment of Left Ventricular Assist Device (LVAD-mechanical pumps that are attached directly to the heart. One end of the pump is attached to the left chamber (left ventricle) which helps pump blood out of the ventricle to the aorta and then to the rest of the body) for 16 of 16 staff reviewed (Employee 13, 14, 15. 16. 17, 18, 19, 20. 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27 and 28) Findings include: Review of an undated facility education document Post acute care of patient with VAD-Principles and Practices revealed that Prior to admission: Prepare a VAD treatment plan specific to your patient and center. Include patient history. Plan for staff education Center specific VAD treatment plan Draft VAD standing orders with Nurse Practitioner and according to Genesis Policy and Procedure. Contact discharging hospital's VAD coordinator to schedule onsite training for core staff if needed. -Unit Managers -Cart Nurses (weekend and night shift especially important) -NPE -NPE to present training materials provided by VAD manufacturer and VAD coordinator -Broader education of clinical staff -Clinical competencies Special Considerations. - Patient must be managed by an RN A review of the facility documentation revealed that the facility had three residents, Resident R138, Resident R357 and Resident R358, with LVAD. Review of clinical record for Resident R357 and Resident R358 revealed that Employee 13, 14, 15. 16. 17, 18, 19, 20. 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27 and 28 were assigned to care for LVAD including assessments and dressing changes. A request for the evidence of LVAD care and assessment competencies or annual evaluations were made to Director of Nursing on November 15, 2023, at 1:59 p.m. Review of facility training records revealed no documented evidence that the nursing staff competencies or annual evaluations related to LVAD care and assessment were completed for Employee 13, 14, 15. 16. 17, 18, 19, 20. 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27 and 28. Interview with Director of Nursing, Employee E2, on November 17, 2023, at 2:00 p.m. confirmed that the facility did not have a policy and staff competency related to LVAD care. Facility did not complete LVAD education since March 2020. 28 Pa. Code 211.12 (c)(d)(1)(5) Nursing services.
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

Deficiency F0925 (Tag F0925)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations of the maintenance and interior of the building, interviews with residents and reviews of the pest control...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations of the maintenance and interior of the building, interviews with residents and reviews of the pest control operator's service reports, it was determined that the facility was not maintaining an effective pest control program, to ensure that the building was free of pests for one of three units ( North wing) Findings include: Observations of resident rooms 130, 123, 112 and 118 located on the North wing nursing unit revealed window screens that were the wrong size or shape for prevention of pest entry into the building. Window screens also had torn mesh the allowed easy access for pests (flies). The lack of maintenance to maintain, secure and repair the window screens was confirmed with the administrator, Employee E1 at 10:30 a.m., on July 31, 2023. Interviews with alert and oriented residents (R1, R5, R6, R7, R8, R9 R10, R11, R12, R13, R14, R15, R16, R17 and R18) revealed that the pests (flies) have been annoying all summer. The residents also reported that common household pests (flies) were present in their rooms, dining areas, hallways and corridors. Observations of the North wing nursing unit revealed flying insects (flies) throughout the area. The observations of the pests flying throughout the North wing nursing unit were confirmed with the registered nurse, Employee E3, at 11:30 a.m., on July 31, 2023. A review of the pest control operator's service reports revealed that for the month of July, 2023 the facility was identifed with common household pest (flies) issues. On July 28, 2023 resident rooms [ROOM NUMBERS] required treatment for flies. On July 26, 2023 resident rooms 114, 129, 117, 116, 101, 304, 305, 303, 311 and 314 required treatment for flies. On July 14, 2023 the pest control service report indicated that fly bait was placed in the food pantry and inside resident room [ROOM NUMBER]. Interview with the Administrator, Employee E1 at 1:00 p.m., on July 31, 2023 confirmed the service reports for the months of June and July 2023 for common house hold pests and rodents. 28 Pa. Code 204.15(a) Windows 28 Pa. Code 201.18(b)(1)(3) Management
Jul 2023 4 deficiencies 2 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

Free from Abuse/Neglect (Tag F0600)

Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews with residents and staff, review of clinical records, review of facility policy and review of facility docum...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews with residents and staff, review of clinical records, review of facility policy and review of facility documentation, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that Resident R5 was free from sexual and physical abuse. This failure resulted in an Immediate Jeopardy situation for Resident R5 whose arm was restrained and was sexually abused by Resident R6 for one of eight residents reviewed. (Resident R5) Findings include: The facility policy titled, OPS300 Abuse Prohibition revised October 24, 2022, stated that the Center prohibits abuse, mistreatment, neglect, misappropriation of resident'/patient property, and exploitation for all patients. This includes, but not limited to, freedom from corporal punishment, involuntary seclusion, and any physical or chemical restraint not required to treat the patient's medical symptoms. The Center will implement an abuse prohibition program through the following: Screening of potential hires; training of employees (both new employees and ongoing training for all employees); prevention of occurrences; Identification of possible incidents or allegations which need investigation; Investigation of all incidents and allegations; and reporting of incidents, investigations, and Center response to the results of their investigations. Further, the policy stated, Abuse is defined as the willful infliction of injury, unreasonable confinement, intimidation, or punishment with resulting physical harm, injury, or mental anguish. Abuse also includes the deprivation by an individual, including a caretaker of goods and services that are necessary to attain or maintain physical, mental, or psychological well-being. Instances of abuse of all patients, irrespective of any mental or physical condition, cause physical harm, pain, or mental anguish. It includes verbal abuse, sexual abuse, physical abuse, and mental abuse including abuse facilitated or enabled through the use of technology. Willful, as used in this definition of abuse, means the individual must have acted deliberately, not that the individual must have intended to inflict injury or harm. Verbal Abuse is any use of oral, written, or gestured language that will fully includes disparaging terms to patients or their families or within their hearing distance, regardless of their age, ability to comprehend or disability. Sexual Abuse is a non-consensual sexual contact of any type with patient. It includes but not limited to sexual harassment, sexual coercion, or sexual assault. Review of the July 2022 physician orders revealed Resident R6 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses of coronary artery disease (condition that affect the heart); heart failure (condition that develops when your heart doesn't pump enough blood for the body's needs); peripheral arterial disease (condition in which narrowed arteries reduce blood flow to the arms and legs); stroke (damage to the brain from interruption of its blood supply) and dementia (the loss of cognitive functioning - thinking, remembering, and reasoning). Review of the Resident R6's quarterly Minimum Data Set Assessment (MDS- a periodic assessment of a resident's needs) dated May 2, 2023, indicated that the resident had a BIMS (Brief Interview of Mental Status) of 13, which indicated that the resident was cognitively intact. Review of Resident R5's June 2018, physician orders revealed Resident R5 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses of arterial fibrillation (an irregular heart rhythm), deep vein thrombosis (formation or presence of a blood clot in a blood vessel), and dementia (the loss of cognitive functioning - thinking, remembering, and reasoning). Review of Resident R5's quarterly Minimum Data Set Assessment (MDS- a periodic assessment of a resident's needs) dated April 6, 2023, revealed that Resident R5 was severely cognitively impaired, with inability to express ideas and wants, verbally and nonverbally. Review of facility information submitted to the Department of Health on July 6, 2023, revealed that Employee E16 witnessed Resident R6 restraining one of Resident R5's arms while his other hand was observed underneath her gown in her peri-area making fast up/down movements causing Resident R5's gown to move around. Nurse aide, Employee E16 witnessed Resident R5 swinging her arm to stop Resident R6. Review of facility documentation revealed a witness statement by nurse aide, Employee E16, related to an incident involving Resident R5 and Resident R6 that took place on July 6, 2023 at approximately 4:15 p.m. during the 3 p.m.-11:00 p.m. nursing shift. The statement indicated that male Resident R6 was seen with female Resident R5 grabbing on to one arm holding it down while his other hand was under the female resident. Interview with the nurse aide, Employee E16, on July 13, 2023, at 11:45 p.m. confirmed the above-mentioned statement. Employee E16 stated during the interview that on the day of the incident, Employee E16 had stepped away from the dining room for a few minutes to help other residents and when she came back minutes later, Resident R6 was holding her down with one hand and with the other hand in the genital private area. Resident R5 was trying to fight but she couldn't. It's not like she can talk or say anything, or scream. Review of another witness statement by Nurse Unit Manager, Employee E21, dated July 6, 2023, revealed Employee E21 stated that she was aware of a consensual relationship between Resident R6 and another female resident (Resident R12); he referred to her as girlfriend. Employee E21 stated, I have witnessed them holding hands and I have also witnessed a conversation between the two of them regarding going to hotel room. Review of resident R12's clinical record revealed that the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses including hyperlipidemia (an elevated level of lipids in the blood), multiple sclerosis (disease of the central nervous system), and depression (a mood disorder that causes persistent feeling of sadness and loss of interest). Review of Resident R12's quarterly Minimum Data Set Assessment (MDS- a periodic assessment of a resident's needs) dated May 19, 2023, indicated that the resident had a BIMS (Brief Interview of Mental Status) of 13, which indicated that the resident was cognitively intact. Interview held with the Nursing Home Administrator on July 12, 2023, at approximately 5:30 p.m. revealed the facility staff were aware of a relationship between Resident R6 and Resident R12. During the interview a policy regarding consensual relationships was requested regarding Resident R6 being diagnosed as having a stroke and dementia and Resident R12 being diagnosed as having multiple sclerosis and depression. The Nursing Home Administrator stated that the facility does not have a policy on consensual relationships. Review of a witness statement by nurse aide, Employee E22, indicated that Resident R6 always called staff, baby, honey and is always around talking to Resident R5. Interview with nurse aide, Employee E22 on July 12, 2023, at approximately 6:15 p.m. revealed Resident R6 seemed to gravitate toward the confused residents and always talks to us: honey baby, you love me baby. We tell him: you can't talk to us like that. Further interview with Nurse Manager, Employee E21, at approximately 5:43 p.m. revealed Resident R6 was inappropriately name calling female staff and residents: baby, sweetie pie, and honey. Interview held with nurse aide, Employee E22, and the Nurse Unit Manager, Employee E21 on July 12, 2023, at 5:41 p.m. and 6:15 p.m. revealed Resident R6 and Resident R12 were witnessed kissing a long time ago, by another resident. Further interview with nurse aide, Employee E16, on July 13, 2023, at 11:45 p.m. revealed Resident R6 referred to facility staff members inappropriately, honey boo, sweetie pie, and baby. and was told that it is inappropriate to call the staff members this way. Review of Resident R6's clinical records, including progress notes and care plan, failed to reveal documentation regarding inappropriate verbal behavior or name calling and identifying Resident R12 as a significant other. Review of Resident R12's clinical records including progress notes and care plan failed to reveal documentation identifying Resident R6 as a significant other. During an interview with the facility Administrator, Employee E1, and the Director of Social Services, Employee E26, on July 12, 2023, at approximately 5:30 p.m. a review of care pans for Resident R5, R6, and R12 was conducted. During this interview, it was confirmed that there was no care plan developed regarding inappropriate verbal behaviors and identifying as a significant other, for Residents R6, and R12. Another interview held with the facility Administrator, Employee E1, on July 13, 2023, at 10:40 a.m. confirmed that there is nothing documented in the clinical records, including an individualized care plan for each resident mentioned above. The facility failed to ensure that Resident R5 was free from sexual abuse by Resident R6. Based on the above-mentioned findings, an Immediate Jeopardy to the situation was identified to the Nursing Home Administrator, on July 13, 2023, at 1:14 p.m. for failure to ensure that residents were free from physical and sexual abuse from Resident R6, and that other residents were protected from further abuse. The Immediate Jeopardy template was provided to the Nursing Home Administrator on July 27, 2023, at 2:49 p.m. and an Immediate action plan was requested. On July 13, 2023, at 6:09 p.m. the facility provided the following corrective action plan. 1. An audit will be completed today 7/13/23 by interviewing all residents residing in facility to identify any residents who reported any unwanted sexual overtures (as capable). Employees will be interviewed to identify any witnessed unwanted sexual overtures. 2. The female resident was immediately removed from the male resident by the witnessing nursing assistant and assessed. No injury noted. All cognitively impaired residents on nursing unit had a skin check performed and no unknown injuries were identified. Female resident on unit were interviewed and denied any unwanted contact with make resident. 3. The male resident was placed on a 1:1 and moved to another unit. The 1:1 remains in place. The resident was seen by Psychiatry with medication recommendations called to primary Physician and POA. His care plan has been updated to include inappropriate behaviors towards residents and staff. The female residents care plan will be updated to provide interventions to protect against unwanted behaviors. 4. The sexual abuse policy was reviewed and includes nonconsensual sex and actions including revision to care plan. 5. Staff education was identifying residents with sexually promiscuous behaviors will be immediately initiated with goal of 80% by 7/14 and continue wit each employee before next scheduled shift with goal of 80% by 7/14. 6. Resident care plans will be updated to include any resident with identified sexual overtures and interventions to protect other residents. 7. All audits and Training will be reported to QAPI committee who will determine need for further actions. The implementation of the action plan was verified on July 14, 2023. Interviews conducted with facility staff on July 14, 2023, reported they had all been in-serviced on the resident abuse prohibition policy, recognizing the signs of resident abuse, to whom to immediately report an allegation of resident abuse and actions to be taken related to incident of resident abuse. The Immediate Jeopardy was lifted on July 14, 2023, at 5:51 p.m. 28 Pa. Code 201.14(a) Responsibility of Licensee 28 Pa. Code 201.18(b)(1) Management 28 Pa. Code 201.18(b)(2) Management 28 Pa. Code 201.18(e)(1) Management 28 Pa. Code 201.29 (c) Resident rights 28 Pa. Code 211.12(c) Nursing services 28 Pa. Code 211.12(d)(1) Nursing services
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

Comprehensive Care Plan (Tag F0656)

Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews with residents and staff, review of clinical records, review of facility policy and review of facility docum...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews with residents and staff, review of clinical records, review of facility policy and review of facility documentation, it was determined that the facility failed to developed a plan of care for a male resident (Resident R6) who was seeking attention from female residents and staff. This failure resulted in Resident R6 engaging in inappropriate sexual contact with a female resident placing Resident R5 and other residents in an Immediate Jeopardy situation for one of eight residents reviewed. (Resident R5) Findings include: The facility policy titled, OPS300 Abuse Prohibition revised October 24, 2022, stated that the facility is to . take steps to revise patients' care plan where indicated if there is a change in the patient's medical, nursing, physical, mental or psychosocial needs or preferences as result of an incident of abuse. Review of the July 2022 physician orders revealed Resident R6 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses of coronary artery disease (condition that affect the heart); heart failure (condition that develops when your heart doesn't pump enough blood for the body's needs); peripheral arterial disease (condition in which narrowed arteries reduce blood flow to the arms and legs); stroke (damage to the brain from interruption of its blood supply) and dementia (the loss of cognitive functioning - thinking, remembering, and reasoning). Review of the Resident R6's quarterly Minimum Data Set Assessment (MDS- a periodic assessment of a resident's needs) dated May 2, 2023, indicated that the resident had a BIMS (Brief Interview of Mental Status) score of 13, which indicated that the resident was cognitively intact. Review Resident R5's June 2018, physician orders revealed Resident R5 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses of arterial fibrillation (an irregular heart rhythm), deep vein thrombosis (formation or presence of a blood clot in a blood vessel), and dementia (the loss of cognitive functioning - thinking, remembering, and reasoning). Review of Resident R5's quarterly Minimum Data Set Assessment (MDS- a periodic assessment of a resident's needs) dated April 6, 2023, revealed that Resident R5 was severely cognitively impaired, with inability to express ideas and wants, verbally and nonverbally. Review of facility information submitted to the Department of Health on July 6, 2023, revealed that nurse aide, Employee E16 witnessed Resident R6 restraining one of Resident R5's arms while his other hand was observed underneath her gown in her peri-area making fast up/down movements causing Resident R5's gown to move around. Nurse aide, Employee E16 witnessed Resident R5 swinging her arm to stop Resident R6. Review of facility documentation revealed a witness statement by nurse aide, Employee E16, related to an incident involving Resident R5 and Resident R6 that took place on July 6, 2023 at approximately 4:15 p.m. during the 3 p.m.-11:00 p.m. nursing shift. The statement indicated that male Resident R6 was seen with female Resident R5 grabbing on to one arm holding it down while his other hand was under the female resident. Interview with the nurse aide, Employee E16, on July 13, 2023, at 11:45 p.m. confirmed the above-mentioned statement. Employee E16 stated during the interview that on the day of the incident, Employee E16 had stepped away from the dining room for a few minutes to help other residents and when she came back minutes later, Resident R6 was holding her down with one hand and with the other hand in the genital private area. Resident R5 was trying to fight but she couldn't. It's not like she can talk or say anything, or scream. Review of another witness statement by Nurse Unit Manager, Employee E21, dated July 6, 2023, revealed Employee E21 stated that she was aware of a consensual relationship between Resident R6 and another female resident (Resident R12); he referred to her as girlfriend. Employee E21 stated, I have witnessed them holding hands and I have also witnessed a conversation between the two of them regarding going to hotel room. Interview held with the Nursing Home Administrator on July 12, 2023, at approximately 5:30 p.m. revealed the facility staff were aware of a relationship between Resident R6 and Resident R12. During the interview a policy regarding consensual relationships was requested. Nursing Home Administrator stated that the facility does not have a policy on consensual relationships. Review of witness statement by nurse aide, Employee E22, indicated that Resident R6 always called staff, baby, honey and is always around talking to Resident R5. Interview with nurse aide, Employee E22 on July 12, 2023, at approximately 6:15 p.m. revealed Resident R6 seemed to gravitate toward the confused residents and always talks to us: honey baby, you love me baby. Employee E22 stated that the unit staff would always redirect this inappropriate behavior, we tell him: you can't talk to us like that. Further interview with Nurse Manager, Employee E21, at approximately 5:43 p.m. revealed Resident R6 was inappropriately name calling female staff and residents: baby, sweetie pie, and honey. Interview held with nurse aide, Employee E22, and the Nurse Unit Manager, Employee E21 on July 12, 2023, at 5:41 p.m. and 6:15 p.m. revealed Resident R6 and Resident R12 were witnessed kissing a long time ago, by another resident. Further interview with nurse aide, Employee E16, on July 13, 2023, at 11:45 p.m. revealed Resident R6 referred to facility staff members inappropriately, honey boo, sweetie pie, and baby, and was told that it is inappropriate to call the staff members this way. Review of Resident R6's clinical records, including progress notes and care plan, failed to reveal documentation regarding inappropriate verbal behavior or name calling and identifying Resident R12 as a significant other. Review of Resident R12's clinical records including progress notes and care plan failed to reveal documentation identifying Resident R6 as a significant other. During an interview with the facility Administrator, Employee E1, and the Director of Social Services, Employee E26, on July 12, 2023, at approximately 5:30 p.m. a review of care pans for Resident R5, R6, and R12 was conducted. During this interview, it was confirmed that there was no care plan developed regarding inappropriate verbal behaviors and identifying as a significant other, for Residents R6, and R12. Another interview held with the facility Administrator, Employee E1, on July 13, 2023, at 10:40 a.m. confirmed that there is nothing documented in the clinical records, including an individualized care plan for each resident mentioned above. Based on the above-mentioned findings, an Immediate Jeopardy situation was identified to the Nursing Home Administrator, on July 13, 2023, at 1:14 p.m. for failure to ensure that a plan of care was developed for a male resident (Resident R6) who demonstrated attention seeking behaviors from females, resulting in engaging in inappropriate sexual contact with a female resident. (Resident R5) The Immediate Jeopardy template was provided to the Nursing Home Administrator on July 27, 2023, at 2:49 p.m. and an Immediate action plan was requested. On July 13, 2023, at 6:09 p.m. the facility provided the following corrective action plan. 1. An audit will be completed today 7/13/23 by interviewing all residents residing in facility to identify any residents who reports any unwanted sexual overtures (as capable). Care Plans will be developed for identified residents who exhibit sexual behaviors. 2. The female resident was immediately removed from the male resident by the witnessing nursing assistant and assessed. No injury noted. All cognitively impaired residents on Nursing unit had a skin check performed and no unknown injuries were identified. Female resident on unit were interviewed and denied any unwanted contact with male resident. 3. The Male resident was placed on 1:1 and moved to another unit. The 1:1 remains in place. The resident was seen by Psychiatry with medical recommendations to address sexual disinhibition in Dementia. Recommendations called to primary Physician and POA. His care plan has been updated to include inappropriate behaviors towards residents and staff. 4. The Sexual abuse policy was reviewed ad includes nonconsensual sex and actions including revision and care plan. 5. Staff education on Identifying residents with sexually promiscuous behavior and updated the care plan will be immediately initiated with goal of 80% by 7/14 and continue with each employee before next scheduled shift if unable to be reached by 7/14. 6. Staff Training on identifying and reporting sexually inappropriate behavior exhibited by residents has been initiated with goal of 80% by 7/14 and continue with each employee before next scheduled shift if unable to be reached by 7/14. 7. Residents care plans will be updated to include any resident with identified sexual overtures and interventions to protect other residents. 8. All Audits and training will be reported to QAPI committee who will determine need for further actions. Interviews with 29 staff members from various departments were conducted on July 14, 2023, during the 7:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. and 3:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. shifts. All staff members reported that they received education regarding identifying and reporting residents with attention seeking behaviors leading to sexual advances and education on care plan completion and updating. Licensed nursing staff, nursing assistants, as well as ancillary staff from various departments including maintenance, housekeeping, and therapy were interviewed. Review of facility plan of action confirmed that the facility completed audits to ensure other residents with attention seeking behaviors were identified and the comprehensive care plans were developed to address behaviors with 100% compliance. Further review of the facility plan of action confirmed all residents were screened to identify if any other residents experienced inappropriate touching and to ensure the residents feel safe. All resident's reported feeling safe and there were no abnormal findings from the skin checks. Review of clinical records for Resident R5 and Resident R6 confirmed care plans were implemented for behaviors and psych consults were completed. Resident R12's care plan was updated for psychosocial aspects related to maintaining an appropriate relationship. The immediate Jeopardy was lifted on July 14, 2023, at 5:51 p.m. 28 Pa. Code 201.14(a) Responsibility of licensee 28 Pa. Code 201.18(b)(1) Management 28 Pa. Code 211.10 (d) Resident care policies 28 Pa. Code 211.12(c) Nursing services 28 Pa. Code 211.12(d)(1) Nursing services
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

Administration (Tag F0835)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on review of clinical records, facility documentation and interviews with staff, it was determined that the Nursing Home Administrator and the Director of Nursing failed to effectively manage th...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on review of clinical records, facility documentation and interviews with staff, it was determined that the Nursing Home Administrator and the Director of Nursing failed to effectively manage the facility related to ensuring that a resident remained free from abuse (Resident R5) which resulted in an Immediate Jeopardy situation. Findings include: Review of the job description of the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) revealed that the NHA Creates an environment that is focused on patient and staff safety . Complies with and promotes adherence to applicable legal requirements, standards, policies and procedures . Highly visible throughout the Center on all shifts and days of the week to develop positive relationships with residents, patients, family members and staff to assure that the needs of all are being met . Review of the job description of the Director of Nursing (DON) revealed that the DON Implements, evaluates, and develops an effective nursing practice model to meet the needs of diverse patient populations; Implements and assures adherence to the organizations policies and procedures; and has overall accountability for providing leadership, direction, and administration of day-to-day operations associated with direct patient care . Review of facility documentation submitted to the Department of Health dated July 6, 2023, at 11:15 a.m. revealed that resident R5 was sexually abused by Resident R6. Review of facility investigation submitted to the Department of Health on July 6, 2023, revealed that Employee E16 witnessed Resident R6 restraining one of Resident R5's arms while his other hand as observed underneath her gown in her peri-area making fast up/down movements causing Resident R5's gown to move around. Nurse aide, Employee E16 witnessed Resident R5 swinging her arm to stop Resident R6. Review of facility documentation revealed a witness statement by nurse aide, Employee E16, related to an incident involving Resident R5 and Resident R6 that took place on July 6, 2023, at approximately 4:15 p.m. during the 3 p.m.-11:00 p.m. nursing shift. The statement indicated that male Resident R6 was seen with female Resident R5 grabbing on to one arm holding it down while his other hand was under the female resident. Interview with the nurse aide, Employee E16, on July 13, 2023, at 11:45 p.m. confirmed the above-mentioned statement. Employee E16 stated during the interview that on the day of the incident, Employee E16 had stepped away from the dining room for a few minutes to help other residents and when she came back minutes later, Resident R6 was holding her down with one hand and with the other hand in the genital private area. Resident R5 was trying to fight but she couldn't. It's not like she can talk or say anything, or scream. Review of another witness statement by Nurse Unit Manager, Employee E21, dated July 6, 2023, revealed Employee E21 stated that she was aware of a consensual relationship between Resident R6 and another female resident (Resident R12); he referred to her as girlfriend. Employee E21 stated, I have witnessed them holding hands and I have also witnessed a conversation between the two of them regarding going to hotel room. Interview held with the Nursing Home Administrator on July 12, 2023, at approximately 5:30 p.m. revealed the facility staff were aware of a relationship between Resident R6 and Resident R12. During the interview a policy regarding consensual relationships was requested. Nursing Home Administrator stated that the facility does not have a policy on consensual relationships. Review of witness statement by nurse aide, Employee E22, indicated that Resident R6 always called staff, baby, honey and is always around talking to Resident R5. Interview with nurse aide, Employee E22 on July 12, 2023, at approximately 6:15 p.m. revealed Resident R6 seemed to gravitate toward the confused residents and always talks to us: honey baby, you love me baby. Employee E22 stated that the unit staff would always redirect this inappropriate behavior, we tell him: you can't talk to us like that. Further interview with Nurse Manager, Employee E21, at approximately 5:43 p.m. revealed Resident R6 was inappropriately name calling female staff and residents: baby, sweetie pie, and honey. Interview held with nurse aide, Employee E22, and the Nurse Unit Manager, Employee E21 on July 12, 2023, at 5:41 p.m. and 6:15 p.m. revealed Resident R6 and Resident R12 were witnessed kissing a long time ago, by another resident. Further interview with nurse aide, Employee E16, on July 13, 2023, at 11:45 p.m. revealed Resident R6 referred to facility staff members inappropriately, honey boo, sweetie pie, and baby, and was told that it is inappropriate to call the staff members this way. Review of Resident R6's clinical records, including progress notes and care plan, failed to reveal documentation regarding inappropriate verbal behavior or name calling and identifying Resident R12 as a significant other. Review of Resident R12's clinical records including progress notes and care plan failed to reveal documentation identifying Resident R6 as a significant other. During an interview with the facility Administrator, Employee E1, and the Social Work Director, Employee E26, on July 12, 2023, at approximately 5:30 p.m. where a review of Residents R5, R6, R12's care plan was conducted. This interview confirmed that there was no care plan developed regarding inappropriate verbal behaviors and identifying as a significant other, for Residents R6 and R12. Another interview was held with the facility Administrator, Employee E1, on July 13, 2023, at 10:40 a.m. confirmed that there is nothing documented in the clinical records, including an individualized care plan for each resident mentioned above. Based on the deficiencies identified in this report, the NHA and DON failed to fulfill essential duties and responsibilities of their position, contributing to the Immediate Jeopardy situation. Refer to F600 and F656.
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 F0914 (Tag F0914)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation and resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to assure all equipment was e...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation and resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to assure all equipment was effective to provide full visual privacy for each resident in four of 14 resident rooms observed. (Rooms 125, 103, 316, 130) Findings include: A facility tour conducted on July 12, 2023, at 11:00 a.m. revealed the following: room [ROOM NUMBER] and 125 vertical blinds were missing window blind slats. Further observations revealed room [ROOM NUMBER] had missing window blind slats on the right side. Interview with Resident R2 on July 12, 2023, a 2:00 p.m. revealed resident feels exposed in her room and feels that she has no privacy. Observations in room [ROOM NUMBER] revealed resident R2's blinds are defective and did not function to fully cover the window, exposing Resident R2's room. The right side of the blinds were bent and missing slats. A walk through the facility with the facility Administrator, Employee E1, on July 14, 2023, at 1:55 p.m. confirmed the above-mentioned findings. Further interview confirmed resident rooms were missing slats and not providing full visual privacy if desired for those residents. 28 Pa. Code 201.14(a) Responsibility of licensee 28 Pa. Code 201.29(j) Resident rights
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Life-Threatening (Immediate Jeopardy)
J - Isolated K - Pattern L - Widespread
Actual Harm
G - Isolated H - Pattern I - Widespread
Potential for Harm
D - Isolated E - Pattern F - Widespread
No Harm (Minor)
A - Isolated B - Pattern C - Widespread

Questions to Ask on Your Visit

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

Our Honest Assessment

Strengths
  • • Licensed and certified facility. Meets minimum state requirements.
Concerns
  • • Multiple safety concerns identified: 2 life-threatening violation(s), $43,638 in fines. Review inspection reports carefully.
  • • 32 deficiencies on record, including 2 critical (life-threatening) violations. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
  • • $43,638 in fines. Higher than 94% of Pennsylvania facilities, suggesting repeated compliance issues.
  • • Grade F (31/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
Bottom line: Trust Score of 31/100 indicates significant concerns. Thoroughly evaluate alternatives.

About This Facility

What is Crestview Center's CMS Rating?

CMS assigns CRESTVIEW CENTER an overall rating of 3 out of 5 stars, which is considered average nationally. Within Pennsylvania, 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 Crestview Center Staffed?

CMS rates CRESTVIEW CENTER's staffing level at 2 out of 5 stars, which is below average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 47%, compared to the Pennsylvania average of 46%.

What Have Inspectors Found at Crestview Center?

State health inspectors documented 32 deficiencies at CRESTVIEW CENTER during 2023 to 2025. These included: 2 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death) and 30 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 Crestview Center?

CRESTVIEW CENTER 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 GENESIS HEALTHCARE, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 180 certified beds and approximately 169 residents (about 94% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in LANGHORNE, Pennsylvania.

How Does Crestview Center Compare to Other Pennsylvania Nursing Homes?

Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Pennsylvania, CRESTVIEW CENTER's overall rating (3 stars) matches the state average, staff turnover (47%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (2 stars) is below the national benchmark.

What Should Families Ask When Visiting Crestview Center?

Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "What changes have been made since the serious inspection findings, and how are you preventing similar issues?" "Can 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?" "How do you handle medical emergencies, and what is your hospital transfer rate?" These questions are particularly relevant given the facility's Immediate Jeopardy citations and the below-average staffing rating.

Is Crestview Center Safe?

Based on CMS inspection data, CRESTVIEW CENTER has documented safety concerns. Inspectors have issued 2 Immediate Jeopardy citations (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death). The facility has a 3-star overall rating and ranks #1 of 100 nursing homes in Pennsylvania. Families considering this facility should ask detailed questions about what corrective actions have been taken since these incidents.

Do Nurses at Crestview Center Stick Around?

CRESTVIEW CENTER has a staff turnover rate of 47%, which is about average for Pennsylvania 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 Crestview Center Ever Fined?

CRESTVIEW CENTER has been fined $43,638 across 1 penalty action. The Pennsylvania average is $33,515. 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 Crestview Center on Any Federal Watch List?

CRESTVIEW CENTER 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.