MARYWOOD HEIGHTS

2500 ADAMS AVENUE, SCRANTON, PA 18509 (570) 343-4065
For profit - Limited Liability company 72 Beds Independent Data: November 2025
Trust Grade
35/100
#458 of 653 in PA
Last Inspection: May 2025

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

Overview

Marywood Heights in Scranton, Pennsylvania, has received a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns about the quality of care provided. Ranking #458 out of 653 facilities in Pennsylvania places it in the bottom half, and it is #11 out of 17 in Lackawanna County, suggesting limited local options for better care. Although the facility is improving, as evidenced by a reduction in issues from 20 in 2024 to 6 in 2025, it still faces serious challenges, including $32,646 in fines, which is concerning and higher than 84% of facilities in the state. Staffing is a relative strength with a 4 out of 5 rating, but the turnover rate of 53% is average, and there is less RN coverage than 76% of Pennsylvania facilities, which can impact resident care. Specific incidents have raised alarms: one resident was neglected in receiving necessary supervision, resulting in multiple falls, while another resident experienced a serious burn due to inadequate safety measures. Families should weigh these factors carefully when considering this facility for their loved ones.

Trust Score
F
35/100
In Pennsylvania
#458/653
Bottom 30%
Safety Record
Moderate
Needs review
Inspections
Getting Better
20 → 6 violations
Staff Stability
⚠ Watch
53% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
Penalties
○ Average
$32,646 in fines. Higher than 53% of Pennsylvania facilities. Some compliance issues.
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
37 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
★★☆☆☆
2.0
Overall Rating
★★★★☆
4.0
Staff Levels
★☆☆☆☆
1.0
Care Quality
★★★☆☆
3.0
Inspection Score
Stable
2024: 20 issues
2025: 6 issues

The Good

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

Facility shows strength in staffing levels, fire safety.

The Bad

2-Star Overall Rating

Below Pennsylvania average (3.0)

Below average - review inspection findings carefully

Staff Turnover: 53%

Near Pennsylvania avg (46%)

Higher turnover may affect care consistency

Federal Fines: $32,646

Below median ($33,413)

Moderate penalties - review what triggered them

The Ugly 37 deficiencies on record

2 actual harm
May 2025 6 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0565 (Tag F0565)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on a review of facility policy, the minutes from facility Resident Council meetings, and grievances lodged with the facility, and resident and staff interviews, it was determined the facility fa...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on a review of facility policy, the minutes from facility Resident Council meetings, and grievances lodged with the facility, and resident and staff interviews, it was determined the facility failed to put forth sufficient efforts to promptly resolve continued resident complaints and grievances expressed during Resident Council meetings and verbal grievances, including those voiced by six of six residents attending a resident group meeting (Residents 16, 43, 62, 129, 32, and 71) and failed to keep the residents apprised of the status of the facility's decisions and efforts toward grievance resolution. Findings include: A review of the facility's Grievance Policy last revised in December 2019 indicated the residents', families, and their representatives have the right to voice grievances concerning care and treatment, behavior of staff or other residents or any concerns regarding their stay. Further stating the grievance official or designee will meet with the resident to formally review the resolution to the grievance. A review of the Minutes from Resident Council meetings dated March 5, 2025, revealed concerns from residents that call bells were not answered timely. A grievance was filed on March 5, 2025, regarding this concern. Review of this grievance revealed no follow up was completed with the residents who raised this concern during resident council. There was no documented evidence of corrective actions taken to address this issue. A group meeting conducted on May 7, 2025, at 10:00 a.m. with six residents (Residents 16, 43, 62, 129, 32, and 71) revealed unanimous reports the facility failed to address their complaints regarding the timeliness of call bell response. The facility was unable to provide documented evidence that efforts had been made to resolve resident complaints concerning call bell timeliness as of the survey ending May 8, 2025, that had been brought up during resident council meeting. During an interview on May 8, 2025, at 9:10 a.m., the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) and Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed the absence of documented actions addressing grievances raised during Resident Council meetings or verbal complaints. 28 Pa. Code 201.18 (e)(1)(4) Management 28 Pa. Code 201.29(a) Resident Rights
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0697 (Tag F0697)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on clinical record and select facility policy review and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to provide...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on clinical record and select facility policy review and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to provide effective pain management and administer pain medication as prescribed by the physician and failed to attempt non-pharmacological interventions to alleviate pain prior to the administration of a narcotic pain medication prescribed on an as needed basis for one resident out of 18 sampled residents (Resident 69). Findings include: A review of the facility's policy entitled Pain Management with a policy review date of January 2, 2025, indicated that all residents are assessed for pain every shift by a nurse utilizing a 0 (zero) to 10 pain intensity scale (0 = no pain, 1,2, and 3 are classified as mild pain, 4, 5, 6, and 7 are classified as moderate pain, 8, 9, and 10 are classified severe pain). Non-pharmacological interventions may be effective for pain relief and might include ice packs, heat, (these require a physician's order) toileting, position changes, therapeutic touch, music, breathing exercise, distraction, and equipment such as a TENS (transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation uses low voltage electrical current to relieve pain) unit (also requires a physician order). The nurse must assess for pain after utilizing these measures, which may be appropriate, and must note this in a progress note. A clinical record review revealed that Resident 69 was initially admitted to the facility on [DATE], and a more recent readmission to the facility on December 23, 2024, with diagnoses that included major depressive disorder (is a mood disorder that causes a persistent feeling of sadness and loss of interest that affects how one feels, thinks, and behaves and can lead to a variety of emotional and physical problems) with severe psychotic symptoms (is the term for a collection of symptoms that happen when a person has trouble telling the difference between what's real and what's not), lack of coordination, abnormal gait (walking patterns) and mobility, and history of fracture to the left pubis (left pelvis is the sturdy ring of bones located at the base of the spine). A review of the resident's physician's orders revealed an order dated September 28, 2024, at 6:18 PM, Acetaminophen Tablet 325 mg (milligrams), give 2 tablets by mouth every 4 hours PRN (as needed) for mild pain and Oxycodone HCl (an opioid analgesic used to treat moderate to severe pain) oral tablet 5 mg, give 5 mg by mouth every 5 hours PRN for pelvic pain. Additionally, the orders for Oxycodone HCl failed to specify a corresponding administration intensity scale. A review the resident's electronic Medication Administration Record (eMAR - is used to document medications taken by each resident) dated January 2025, revealed that the PRN Acetaminophen (non-opioid pain medication) ordered to manage mild pain and PRN Oxycodone HCl (opioid pain medication) were administered without any documented attempts of nonpharmacological interventions and administered outside of the prescribed physician orders/pain intensity scale on the following dates as follows. January 5, 2025, at 10:57 PM, administered PRN opioid pain medication for a reported pain level at 7 and without attempted nonpharmacological interventions. January 7, 2025, at 9:24 PM, administered PRN opioid pain medication for a reported pain level at 7 and without attempted nonpharmacological interventions. January 14, 2025, at 2:22 AM, administered PRN Acetaminophen for a reported pain level at 9 and without attempted nonpharmacological interventions with pain level exceeding the mild pain intensity scale. January 14, 2025, at 2:36 AM, administered PRN opioid pain medication for a reported pain level at 9 and without attempted nonpharmacological interventions. January 14, 2025, at 9:45 AM, administered PRN opioid pain medication for a reported pain level at 7 and without attempted nonpharmacological interventions. January 15, 2025, at 3:04 AM, administered PRN Acetaminophen for a reported pain level at 3 and without attempted nonpharmacological interventions. January 15, 2025, at 5:22 PM, administered PRN opioid pain medication for a reported pain level at 7 and without attempted nonpharmacological interventions. January 15, 2025, at 10:00 PM, administered PRN opioid pain medication for a reported pain level at 7 and without attempted nonpharmacological interventions. January 16, 2025, at 7:26 PM, administered PRN opioid pain medication for a reported pain level at 8 and without attempted nonpharmacological interventions. January 17, 2025, at 7:25 PM, administered PRN opioid pain medication for a reported pain level at 7 and without attempted nonpharmacological interventions. January 18, 2025, at 2:48 AM, administered PRN opioid pain medication for a reported pain level at 8 and without attempted nonpharmacological interventions. January 18, 2025, at 5:23 AM, administered PRN opioid pain medication for a reported pain level at 7 and without attempted nonpharmacological interventions. January 18, 2025, at 11:26 PM, administered PRN opioid pain medication for a reported pain level at 8 and without attempted nonpharmacological interventions. January 20, 2025, at 3:29 PM, administered PRN opioid pain medication for a reported pain level at 8 and without attempted nonpharmacological interventions. January 21, 2025, at 10:00 PM, administered PRN opioid pain medication for a reported pain level at 6 and without attempted nonpharmacological interventions. January 22, 2025, at 9:01 AM, administered PRN opioid pain medication for a reported pain level at 5 and without attempted nonpharmacological interventions. January 23, 2025, at 3:18 PM, administered PRN opioid pain medication for a reported pain level at 7 and without attempted nonpharmacological interventions. January 24, 2025, at 5:17 AM, administered PRN opioid pain medication for a reported pain level at 8 and without attempted nonpharmacological interventions. January 24, 2025, at 4:14 PM, administered PRN opioid pain medication for a reported pain level at 7 and without attempted nonpharmacological interventions. January 24, 2025, at 8:58 PM, administered PRN Acetaminophen for a reported pain level at 3 and without attempted nonpharmacological interventions. January 26, 2025, at 3:00 AM, administered PRN opioid pain medication for a reported pain level at 10 and without attempted nonpharmacological interventions. January 26, 2025, at 3:12 AM, administered PRN Acetaminophen for a reported pain level at 10 and without attempted nonpharmacological interventions with pain level exceeding the mild pain intensity scale. January 26, 2025, at 8:58 PM, administered PRN Acetaminophen for a reported pain level at 3 and without attempted nonpharmacological interventions. January 29, 2025, at 3:32 PM, administered PRN opioid pain medication for a reported pain level at 8 and without attempted nonpharmacological interventions. January 30, 2025, at 9:31 AM, administered PRN Acetaminophen for a reported pain level at 3 and without attempted nonpharmacological interventions. Further review of Resident 69's clinical record failed to consistently reveal that licensed nursing staff attempted to notify the resident's attending physician of increased complaints and effectively alleviate her increased pain intensity levels. Additionally, the facility failed to assure that licensed nursing staff attempted non-pharmacological interventions prior to administering analgesic pain medication that included opioids. An interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) on May 8, 2025, at 2:30 PM, confirmed that licensed nursing staff failed to timely notify the resident's attending physician of increased complaints to develop an effective pain management regime to manage Resident 69's increased pain intensity levels. The DON also confirmed that the facility could not provide documented evidence that licensed nursing staff attempted non-pharmacological interventions prior to the administration of opioid pain medication. 28 Pa. Code 211.5(f) Medical records 28 Pa. Code 211.12 (c)(d)(1)(5) Nursing Services
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0757 (Tag F0757)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

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

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on a review of clinical records, and staff interviews, it was determined the facility failed to ensure that a resident's drug regimen was free of unnecessary antibiotics for one out of 18 residents sampled (Resident 56). Findings included: A review of Resident 56's clinical record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses to include senile degeneration of the brain (a decline in cognitive function associated with aging) and chronic lymphocytic leukemia (a slow growing cancer of the white blood cells). A nursing progress note dated April 23, 2025, indicated the resident was noted to have yellow discharge from his penis. The physician was notified, and an order was obtained for a Urinalysis with Culture and Sensitivity (UA C&S a laboratory test used to detect and identify bacteria or fungi in urine, A urine culture is a method to grow and identify bacteria that may be in the urine. The sensitivity test helps select the best medicine to treat the infection) to assess for possible infection. A nursing progress note dated April 24, 2025, at 10:22 AM documented that a urine sample was obtained from the resident, the progress note further revealed the resident's urine appeared concentrated (dark in color, indicating potential infection or dehydration) A review of a nursing progress notes dated April 25, 2025, at 10:40 AM revealed the resident's urinalysis results were received, and faxed to the physician with no new orders at the time. A review of a nursing progress notes dated April 25, 2025, at 1:37PM revealed a new order for Ciprofloxacin 500mg by mouth twice daily for 7 days for a diagnosis of a urinary tract infection. A review of the resident's laboratory report dated April 25, 2025, 10:10AM revealed the urine culture identified Morganella morganii (a rare infection of urinary tract, commonly associated with antibiotic resistance. These enzymes break down certain antibiotics making the bacteria resistant to these medications) with bacterial growth of 50,000- 100,000 CFU/ml. The report further indicated the prescribed antibiotic (Ciprofloxacin) was resistant to the bacteria found in the resident's urine, rendering the treatment ineffective. A review of Resident 56's Medication Administration Record (MAR) for April 2025 revealed the resident received eight (8) doses of Ciprofloxacin, an unnecessary antibiotic, even though the culture and sensitivity results confirmed the prescribed medication was ineffective. During an interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) on May 8, 2025, at approximately 1:15 PM, the DON confirmed the administration of Ciprofloxacin was not clinically justified, as the prescribed antibiotic was ineffective against the identified organism. The DON acknowledged the resident received an unnecessary medication, which did not align with evidence-based infection control and antimicrobial stewardship practices. 28 Pa. Code 211.2(d)(3)(5) Medical Director 28 Pa. Code 211.12(d)(3)(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 select facility policy, a review of clinical records and staff interviews it was determined the facility failed to provide nursing services consistent with professional standards of quality b...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on select facility policy, a review of clinical records and staff interviews it was determined the facility failed to provide nursing services consistent with professional standards of quality by failing to ensure that licensed nurses timely administered residents' medications for 2 of 18 residents reviewed. (Resident 9 and 41). Findings included: According to the Pennsylvania Code, Title 49, Professional and Vocational Standards, State Board of Nursing, 21.11 (a)(1)(2)(4) indicates the registered nurse (RN) was to carry out nursing care actions that promote, maintain, and restore the well-being of individuals. The Pennsylvania Code, Title 49, Professional and Vocational Standards, State Board of Nursing, 21.145 Functions of the Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) (a) The LPN is prepared to function as a member of the health-care team by exercising sound judgement based on preparation, knowledge, skills, understandings and past experiences in nursing situations. The LPN participates in the planning, implementation, and evaluation of nursing care in settings where nursing takes place. 21.148 Standards of nursing conduct (a) A licensed practical nurse shall: (5) Document and maintain accurate records. According to the American Nurses Association Principles for Nursing Documentation, nurses document their work and outcomes and provide an integrated, real-time method of informing the health care team about the patient status. Timely documentation of the following types of information should be made and maintained in a patient's EHR (electronic health record) to support the ability of the health care team to ensure informed decisions and high quality care in the continuity of patient care including Medication Records. A review of facility policy entitled: Medication Administration last reviewed by the facility on January 2, 2025, indicated that medications are administered within 60 minutes of their scheduled time. A review of the clinical record of Resident 9 revealed admission to the facility on June 7, 2024, with diagnoses which included unspecified dementia (a progressive loss of cognitive function) and muscle weakness. A review of Resident 9's Medication Administration Record for May 2025 revealed the resident was prescribed and scheduled to receive the following medications: Loratadine 10MG (antihistamine used to treat allergies) 1 tablet by mouth at 8:00 AM Duloxetine HCL 30MG (antidepressant) 1 capsule by mouth at 8:00 AM Lactobacillus Rhamnosus- (probiotic supplement used to treat digestive issues) 1 capsule by mouth at 08:00AM Glucosamine-Chondroitin 750/600 mg-(dietary supplement to treat joint disorders) 1 tablet by mouth at 08:00AM Triamterene-HCTZ 37.5-25MG (a water pill used to commonly treat high blood pressure)- 1 tablet by mouth at 08:00AM Allopurinol 100MG- (used to prevent gout and decrease uric acid levels)1 tablet by mouth at 08:00AM Metoprolol Succinate 50MG (used to treat high blood pressure)- 1 tablet by mouth at 08:00AM Miralax Powder 17 GM- (used to treat constipation)1 scoop by mouth at 08:00AM Review of the resident's medication administration audit report for May 2025 indicated that on May 3, 2025, the medications scheduled for 8:00 AM were administered at 10:19 AM, 2 hours and 19 minutes after the scheduled time. On May 6, 2025, the scheduled 8:00 AM medications were administered at 10:23 AM, 2 hour and 23 minutes after the scheduled time. A review of the clinical record of Resident 41 revealed admission to the facility on July 16, 2024, with diagnoses, of Parkinson's disease (a progressive neurological disorder that affects movement causing tremors and stiffness of the muscles), and generalized muscle weakness. A review of Resident 41's Medication Administration Record for May 2025 revealed that the resident was prescribed and scheduled to receive the following medications: Carafate 1 GM/10ML (anti ulcer medication)- 10ML by mouth at 08:00AM Vitamin D 50mcg- 1 tablet by mouth at 08:00AM Sennosides 8. 6mg (used to treat constipation)- 2 tablets by mouth at 08:00AM Finasteride 5mg (used to treat difficult urination)-1 tablet by mouth at 08:00AM Carbidopa-Levodopa 25/100MG (used to treat Parkinson's disease)- 2 tablets by mouth at 08:00AM Protonix 40MG (used to treat stomach disease/ulcers)- 1 packet by mouth at 08:00AM Multivitamin- 1 tablet by mouth at 08:00AM Calcium Carb/Cholecalciferol 600 MG/10 MCG (calcium supplement)- 1 tablet by mouth at 08:00AM Liquacel Oral Solution (protein supplement)- 30 ml by mouth at 08:00AM Gabapentin 100MG (used to treat nerve pain)- 1 tablet by mouth at 08:00AM Folic Acid 1MG- 1 tablet by mouth at 08:00AM Lasix 20mg (diuretic or water pill)- 1 tablet by mouth at 08:00AM Toprol XL 25MG (used to treat high blood pressure)- 1 tablet by mouth at 08:00AM Klor-Con 20 mEq (potassium supplement)- 1 tablet by mouth at 08:00AM Review of the resident's medication administration audit report for May 2025 indicated that on May 5, 2025, the medications scheduled for 8:00 AM were administered at 09:52 AM, 1 hour and 52 minutes after the scheduled time. On May 6, 2025, the medications scheduled at 08:00AM were administered at 10:54 AM, 2 hours and 54 minutes after the scheduled time. Interview with the Nursing Home Administrator on May 8, 2025, at approximately 2:45 PM confirmed that the late medication administration is not consistent with the professional standards and medications should be received in a timely manner. 28 Pa. Code 211.12 (c)(d)(1)(3)(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

Pharmacy Services (Tag F0755)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on a review of controlled drug shift count records, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to implement procedures to promote accurate controlled medication records on two of...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on a review of controlled drug shift count records, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to implement procedures to promote accurate controlled medication records on two of two medication carts observed. Findings include: A review of facility policy entitled Marywood Heights Count Records last reviewed January 2, 2025, revealed controlled drugs are inventoried and documented under proper conditions in regard to security and state/federal regulations. Further the policy indicated Scheduled II medications are counted by the oncoming nurse and outgoing nurse at the change of each shift and documented on the individual shift count sheet for narcotics. A review of the facility Master Control Substance Log from the 215 to 271 nursing unit medication cart revealed the following: April 13, 2025, the day shift on coming nurse failed to sign that the narcotic count was completed and correct. April 13, 2025, the evening shift off going nurse failed to sign that the narcotic count was completed and correct. April 15, 2025, the night shift off going nurse failed to sign that the narcotic count was completed and correct. April 16, 2025, the day shift oncoming nurse failed to sign that the narcotic count was completed and correct. April 16, 2025, the evening shift oncoming nurse failed to sign that the narcotic count was completed and correct. April 16, 2025, the day shift off going nurse failed to sign that the narcotic count was completed and correct. April 16, 2025, the night shift oncoming nurse failed to sign that the narcotic count was completed and correct. April 16, 2025 the evening shift off going nurse failed to sign that the narcotic count was completed and correct. April 19, 2025, the night shift on coming nurse failed to sign that the narcotic count was completed and correct, April 20, 2025, the night shift off going nurse failed to sign that the narcotic count was completed and correct. An interview with Employee 1 LPN (licensed practical nurse) on May 6, 2025, at 9:05 AM confirmed the narcotic sheet was not signed off by the off going and oncoming nurses on the above dates. A review of the facility Master Control Substance Log from the 202 to 262-unit medication cart revealed the following: May 2, 2025, the day shift off going nurse failed to sign the narcotic count was completed and correct. May 2, 2025, the night shift on coming nurse failed to sign the narcotic count was completed and correct. May 2, 2025, the night shift off going nurse failed to sign the narcotic count was completed and correct. An interview with Employee 2 RN (registered nurse) on May 6,2025, at 9:25 AM, confirmed the narcotic sheet was not signed by the off by the off going and oncoming nurses on the above dates. An interview on May, 6 2025, at approximately 1:45 PM, the Nursing Home Administrator confirmed the facility failed to demonstrate consistent implementation of procedures for promoting accurate controlled drug records. 28 Pa Code 211.12 (c)(d)(1)(3)(5) Nursing service 28 Pa Code 211.9 (c)(k) Pharmacy services 28 Pa Code 211.5(f)(x) Clinical records
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

Deficiency F0761 (Tag F0761)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on observation, select facility policy review and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to implement procedures to ensure acceptable storage for medications on one of two nursin...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, select facility policy review and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to implement procedures to ensure acceptable storage for medications on one of two nursing units observed. Findings include: A review of facility policy titled Disposal of Medications and Medication Related Supplies, last reviewed by the facility in January 2, 2025, revealed that discontinued medications and mediations left in the facility after a resident's discharge, which do not qualify for return to the pharmacy for credit, are destroyed. Observation of the medication storage room on May 6,2025, at 8:44 AM revealed an unsecured, opened white paper bag located on the counter of the medication room. The bag contained the following: Two separate rolls of medication packets, one roll containing 46 packets of medications, the second roll contained 29 packets of medications. One box containing two tabletss of Cefdinir (antibiotic). A clear plastic envelope containing two capsules of tizanidine (a muscle relaxant). One clear plastic envelope containing two tablets of Furosemide (a diuretic). A clear plastic envelope contained seven tablets of Potassium Chloride (a mineral supplement). 11 tabs of Torsemide (a diuretic). 14 tablets of Cefuroxime Axetil (an antibiotic). One box of Enalapril- HCTZ (blood pressure medication). One box containing four capsules of Doxycycline(antibiotic). One box containing 14 tabs of Olanzapine (an antipsychotic medication). One clear plastic envelope containing 20 tablets of Escitalopram(an antidepressant). A clear plastic envelope containing four tablets of Metoprolol Tartrate (blood pressure medication). A clear plastic envelope containing Metoprolol Succinate (blood pressure medication). One clear plastic envelope containing 12 tablets of Vitamin D3. A clear plastic envelope containing three tablets of Vitamin C. Interview with Employee 1 a licensed practical nurse (LPN) during the time of the observation, confirmed the medications were all discontinued resident medications that were removed from the medication carts and brought into the medication storage room to be destroyed or returned to the pharmacy. Employee 1 indicated the medications are destroyed when the nurses have time. Employee 1 further stated she was a new employee to the facility and was unsure if she was allowed to destroy the medications without another nurse present. Employee 1 was uncertain of the timeframe which the pharmacy picks up discontinued medication. Interview the Director of Nursing (DON) and the Nursing Home Administrator on May 6,2025 at 1:45 PM confirmed the expectation was that discontinued resident medications would be removed from the medication cart by a licensed nurse and destroyed or returned to pharmacy per facility policy. 28 Pa. Code 211.9 (a)(1)(k) Pharmacy Services 28 Pa. Code 211.12 (d)(3)(5) Nursing services
Jul 2024 13 deficiencies 1 Harm
SERIOUS (G) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures

Accident Prevention (Tag F0689)

A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident

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

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on a review of clinical records and select investigation reports and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide necessary supervision, and implement effective individualized safety measures for a resident with known unsafe behaviors to prevent multiple falls for one resident (Resident 13) and a serious burn, to one resident (Resident 27) out of 19 residents sampled. Findings include: A review of Resident 27's clinical record revealed that the resident was admitted to the facility April 14, 2023, with diagnoses to include hemiplegia and hemiparesis following nontraumatic intracerebral hemorrhage affecting left dominant side. (Hemiparesis, also called unilateral paresis, is the weakness of one entire side of the body. Hemiplegia, in its most severe form, is the complete paralysis of one entire side of the body). A quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment (MDS - a federally mandated standardized assessment process conducted at specific intervals to plan resident care) dated May 15, 2024, revealed that the resident was severely cognitively impaired with a BIMS score of 6 (Brief Interview for Mental Status, a tool to assess the resident's attention, orientation, and ability to register and recall new information). The resident required supervision and the assistance of one staff person when eating according to the MDS assessment. The resident had a current physician order, initially dated January 23, 2024, for the use of a Kennedy cup (a lightweight spill proof drinking cup that is used with a straw) at all meals and for the use of Divided scoop dish and built up utensils to max his ability to engage in self-feeding tasks dated November 27, 2023. An Occupational Therapy treatment encounter note dated December 14, 2023, the last encounter the resident had with Occupational Therapy, prior to an incident that occurred while the resident was eating on July 14, 2024, indicated that the resident required precautions due to the resident's left sided hemiplegia (paralysis on one side of the body). The resident was able to drink from a Kennedy cup and utilize built-up utensils and scoop dish with moderate staff assistance to manage eating with these assistive devices. Review of documentation in Resident 27's clinical record revealed the resident had multiple falls since the resident's admission to the facility on April 14, 2024, through the time of the survey ending July 25, 2025, with progress note documentation revealing that the resident displayed frequent behaviors of restlessness and impulsivity. A nurses note dated July 14, 2024, indicated that at approximately 4:00 PM Resident 27 accidentally spilled soup on his LLQ (left lower quadrant) and left groin during evening meal. Area from lower abdomen to groin erythematous with bright coloration and shiny appearance. One (1 cm) blister noted on center of LLQ area. Resident c/o pain and was medicated per order. At time of event, resident was sitting in chair at dining table, soup was placed in center of table out of exact reach, staff were present in dining room serving other residents, clothing protector was in place for protection. Resident over estimated ability to handle soup bowl independently. Resident diagnosed with left hemiplegia/hemiparesis post cerebral infarct as well as lack of coordination. Following event, nurse immediately removed source of heat and rushed [Resident 27] to wash area where clothing was removed, area soaked in cool running tap water. SSD applied. Call out to on-call provider. A review of the incident report completed by the facility Director of Nursing, dated July 15, 2024, revealed that Resident 27 sustained a burn while reaching for his soup, which staff placed on the table in a reachable distance from the resident, when staff turned to get an ice cube to cool the resident's soup per his preference. The incident report revealed that the dietary staff had taken the temperature of the soup in the kitchen, prior to point of service to the resident, and noted the temperature 179 degrees fahrenheit at that time. The facility staff did not obtain the temperature of the soup after it was brought to the dining room steam table, the point of service to residents, as per facility policy. Review of a witness statement from Employee 3, LPN, dated July 14, 2024, revealed that at dinner time, she delivered Resident 27's soup from the steam table in the dining room and set him up at the dining table to eat, thinking the soup was out of the resident's reach. Employee 3 stated she turned around to get the resident an ice cube per his preference and the resident was able to reach his soup and it spilled in his lap. Resident 27's clinical record revealed resident sustained a 12 cm x 15-centimeter reddened area on his left lower stomach with a 1-centimeter blister noted. A physician order dated July 15, 2024, was noted to cleanse the blister on the resident's left lower abdomen with NSS, apply Silvadene cream, non-stick dressing and optifoam daily and prn soilage/displacement. An Occupational Therapy consult dated July 16, 2024, after the resident sustained the burn on July 14, 2024, revealed that the resident had a decline in ability to feed himself even with the use of built up utensils, and now required moderate staff assistance during eating. The consult noted that the resident's poor safety awareness contributed to his spillage of soup and subsequent burn. The facility failed to consistently provide the resident with the necessary staff supervision at meals, based on the resident's known restlessness and impulsivity, to prevent a serious injury to the resident. Interview with the NHA and DON on July 25, 2024, at approximately 12:00 PM revealed that the facility was unable to provide evidence that staff supervised Resident 27 while eating to prevent the resident from spilling hot soup on himself sustaining painful burns. Clinical record review revealed that Resident 13 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses which included hemiplegia and hemiparesis following a stroke affecting left non-dominant side, bipolar disorder, and anxiety. Review of Resident 13's transfer paperwork the facility received from a prior skilled nursing facility revealed that the resident was at high risk for falls. The sending [NAME] nursing facility provided this current facility with the resident's plan of care, which included all interventions implemented for safety. These interventions included to encourage the resident to be out of bed for all meals, placement of a fall mat to left side of bed while resident in bed, low bed- keep in lowest position (bed controls out of resident's reach), offer to adjust temperature when placed in bed, offer toileting between 1:30 PM and 2:30 PM and change (incontinence care) if needed, pad alarm to bed hung behind headboard [control box] to alert staff of self-transfers and check functioning and placement every shift, resident request is to be in bed between 7:30 PM and 8 PM, resident to be out of bed in wheelchair with rearward tilt of wheelchair seat, thicker fall mat to window side (left) side of bed when resident in bed and check every shift, keep frequently used items in reach, and high risk for falls. Resident 13's transfer documentation also revealed that she had a self-releasing seat belt with alarm to alert staff of attempts to self transfer initiated October 19, 2023, and had experienced a recent fall on May 24, 2024. An admission MDS (Minimum Data Set - a federally mandated standardized assessment conducted at specific intervals to plan resident care) dated June 12, 2024, revealed that the resident was cognitively intact with a BIMS score of 15 (a score of 13 to 15 indicates no cognitive impairment). A Fall Morse Scale evaluation dated June 5, 2024, revealed that the resident was identified as a Moderate Fall Risk. Interventions implemented upon admission included to have call bell in reach, pain evaluation, non-skid socks, and a therapy screen. A review of Resident 13's baseline care plan dated June 5, 2024, revealed that interventions implemented upon admission on [DATE], were to anticipate and meet resident's needs, encourage resident to use call bell for assistance as needed, and for room to be free from spills and/or clutter with adequate light. An incident report investigation dated June 18, 2024, revealed that at 1:45 PM, Resident 13 fell to the floor in her room while attempting to self-transfer to wheelchair from standard chair. The resident was found on the floor, lying on her left side, after the resident's roommate rang the call bell for staff assistance. According to investigation, Resident 13's roommate witnessed the fall, and Resident 13 did not sustain any injuries. Safety interventions implemented after fall included to apply dycem (non-skid material) beneath cushion. Review of care plan revealed that interventions added June 20, 2024, included a sensor pad to both the resident's bed and chair. An incident report investigation dated June 25, 2024, revealed that at 11:35 AM, staff again found the resident on the left side of her bed on the floor. She sustained a bump on the back of her head. According to the investigation, the resident stated that she was attempting to get out of bed to go out the door. The physical therapy assistant found the resident on the floor when she had returned Resident 13's roommate to their room. There was no evidence according to incident report and witness statement, that bed or chair alarms were sounding/functioning to alert staff that Resident 13 had self-transferred and on the floor. The incident report indicated that a low-bed and a medication review were to be implemented, and orders received for ice to be applied to bump on the back of resident's head, and neuro checks were initiated. Review of documentation dated June 25, 2024, at 2:27 PM revealed that the resident complained of dizziness and nausea. Neuro check within normal limits with the exception of the new nausea and dizziness. Orders were received from the physician to send the resident to the emergency room for an evaluation. Review of emergency room evaluation dated June 25, 2024, the resident was seen after falling backwards in her bathroom, hitting the back of her head on the tile. En route to the ED [emergency department], patient offered complaints of HA [headache] accompanied by blurry vision, nausea, and dizziness. No injuries were identified and based on urinalysis, the resident returned to the facility on antibiotic for possible urinary tract infection. An incident report investigation dated June 29, 2024, revealed that at 6:45 AM, staff again found the resident on the floor to the left side of the resident's bed. The bed alarm was sounding and the resident's call bell within reach. According to the investigation, the resident rolled out of bed. Resident 13 then complained of left knee and left hip pain and x-rays were ordered by the physician. No fractures/injuries were identified and floor mats were to added to both sides of the resident's bed when the resident in bed (an intervention that had been in place when the resident resided at the prior skilled nursing facility and noted on the transfer form, with a thicker fall matt on the left side). Review of an incident report investigation dated July 7, 2024, revealed that at 10:45 AM, Resident 13's roommate rang the call bell to alert staff that Resident 13 was ambulating unassisted. Staff found Resident 13 sitting on the floor, on the left side, in front of wheelchair. According to the investigation, Resident 13 stated that she went to get my sneakers, I didn't ring because I'm stupid. The investigation's conclusion indicated that the resident self-removed chair alarm and attempted to ambulate across the room to retrieve item, and overestimates functional abilities and has poor safety recall. The alarm was replaced, and a therapy screen was submitted for further recommendations. An incident report investigation dated July 11, 2024, revealed that at 6 AM, the resident had an unwitnessed fall while attempting to self-transfer out of bed. The resident was found on window side of the bed with alarm sounding, fall mats were noted to be in place, call bell within reach, and non-skid socks in place. The resident stated she wanted to get up. According to the report, the resident had been tended to approximately 30 minutes prior to fall. Additional intervention included application of a perimeter/raised edge mattress to the resident's bed to enhance safety awareness of bed perimeter. A incident report investigation dated July 16, 2024, revealed that at 10:45 AM, staff found Resident 13 on the floor in the bathroom of the resident's room, sitting next to the toilet. According to the investigation, the resident stated that she transferred herself from the toilet to the wheelchair and slid to the floor. The investigation's conclusion, revealed that resident did not ask for assistance, requires assist of 2 staff members with rollator walker for transfers, is non-ambulatory, forgets to ask for assistance, and self-removed alarm. The resident did not sustain any injuries. The resident's risk for falls and need for multiple safety and fall prevention measures was included in the resident's transfer documentation upon the resident's admission to the facility. The facility failed to timely address the resident's high risk for falls and promptly implement sufficient safety and fall prevention interventions, individualized to the resident's habits and behaviors identified in the resident's transfer documentation, to prevent repeated falls, which increased the resident's risk for serious injury. Interview with the NHA and DON on July 25, 2024, at 11:30 AM confirmed that the facility was unable to demonstrate the implementation of necessary individualized fall prevention measures, and sufficient staff supervision at the level and frequency required, to prevent Resident 13's repeated falls. 28 Pa Code 211.12 (d)(3)(5) Nursing services
CONCERN (D)

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

Assessment Accuracy (Tag F0641)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on a review of clinical records and the Resident Assessment Instrument and staff interview, it was determined that the fac...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on a review of clinical records and the Resident Assessment Instrument and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the Minimum Data Set Assessments (MDS - a federally mandated standardized assessment conducted at specific intervals to plan resident care) accurately reflected the status of one resident out of 19 sampled (Resident 13). Findings included: Clinical record review revealed that Resident 13 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses which included hemiplegia and hemiparesis following a stroke affecting left non-dominant side, bipolar disorder, and anxiety. Review of Resident 13's transfer paperwork revealed that the resident was at high risk for falls and had last experienced a fall on May 24, 2024. A review of Resident 13's admission MDS assessment dated [DATE], Section J - Health Conditions, question J1700 Fall History on Admission/Entry or Reentry, did the resident have a fall any time in the last month prior to admission/entry or reentry, revealed that the coded answer was 0 which indicated no. There was no evidence that Resident 13's admission assessment accurately identified the resident's fall history.
CONCERN (D)

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 review of clinical records and staff interview it was determined that the facility failed to provide care and services ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on review of clinical records and staff interview it was determined that the facility failed to provide care and services according to accepted standards of clinical practice in the identification of a resident's diagnosis of bipolar disorder for one resident (Resident 41) out of 19 residents sampled. Findings include: A review of the Resident 41's clinical record revealed that the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with three psychiatric/mood disorders: major depressive disorder, anxiety disorder, and obsessive-compulsive disorder. A review of Resident 41's resident's medical diagnosis list revealed a diagnosis of bipolar disorder, was added on April 4, 2023. A review of a physician progress note dated April 30, 2023, at 4:32 PM revealed that the physician examined the resident who presented with severe anxiety. Since the previous dose reduction and reintroduction (of medications), the resident has not responded to medical management. The physician indicated that her impression was the resident had bipolar depression. The plan of treatment was to change Seroquel (antipsychotic medication) to Zyprexa (antipsychotic medication) and discharge Atarax (medication used to treat anxiety). Review of Resident 41's Documentation Survey Report v2, Monitor-Behavior Symptoms dated April 2023, revealed staff documented on the resident's behavior daily. The report indicated that there were no days in April where Resident 41 exhibited adverse behaviors such as frequent crying, repeated movements, yelling/screaming, kicking/hitting, pushing, grabbing, pinching/scratching/spitting, biting, wandering, abusive language, threatening behavior, sexually inappropriate, and rejection of care. All entries made by staff indicated that none of the above observed. A review of Resident 41's comprehensive plan of care initially dated July 12, 2023, and revised April 17, 2024, revealed a significant change in mental condition with a diagnosis of bipolar disorder. The interventions included monitoring behavior and mood and administer medications as prescribed. Review of a psychiatry consult dated October 11, 2023, revealed that the resident was diagnosed with generalized anxiety disorder. There was no documented evidence in the resident's clinical record to demonstrate that a clinical practitioner had diagnosed the resident with bipolar disorder with documented supporting clinical findings in the resident's clinical record from the time of the resident's admission to the facility on October 29, 2018, through the current survey which ended on July 25, 2024. Interview with the Director of Nursing on July 24, 2024, at 1:40 PM, confirmed that the facility did not have documented evidence of a practitioner diagnosing the resident with bipolar disorder according to professional standards. 28 Pa. Code 211.2 (d)(3) Medical Director 28 Pa. Code 211.5 (f) Medical records
CONCERN (D)

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

Quality of Care (Tag F0684)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, review of clinical records, and resident and staff interviews it was determined that the facility failed to provide services consistent with professional standards of practice by...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, review of clinical records, and resident and staff interviews it was determined that the facility failed to provide services consistent with professional standards of practice by failing to follow physician orders for bowel protocol for one resident (Resident 24) to promote normal bowel activity to the extent practicable and failed to follow physician orders for the consistent application of a prescribed therapeutic measure, Darco shoes, for one resident of 19 sampled (Resident 55). Findings include: According to the American Academy of Family Physicians {The American Academy of Family Physicians is one of the largest medical organizations in the US founded to promote the science and art of family medicine} the primary goal of constipation management should be symptom improvement, and the secondary goal should be the passage of soft, formed stool without straining at least three times per week). A review of the clinical record revealed that Resident 24 had physician orders, dated February 27, 2024, for the following bowel regimen: - Milk of Magnesia (MOM) Suspension 7.75% (Magnesium Hydroxide), give 30 ml by mouth as needed for constipation. Give 30 ml on evening shift if no BM (bowel movement) by day 3. -Biscolax Suppository 10 mg (Bisacodyl), inset 1 suppository rectally as needed for constipation. Give on evening shift if no BM by day 4 if MOM is not effective. -Fleet Bisacodyl Enema 10 mg/30 ml (Bisacodyl), insert 1 applicatorful rectally as needed for constipation. Give on evening shift on day 5 if suppository is not effective. If not effective notify MD (physician). Review of Resident 24's Documentation Survey Report v2 for July 2024, revealed that Resident 24 did not have a bowel movement on July 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 2024. Review of Resident's Medication Administration Record (MAR) for July 2024, revealed no documented evidence that nursing administered the prescribed bowel protocol during the time period without a bowel movement to promote bowel activity. There was no documented evidence that the staff had notified the physician that the resident went six consecutive days, July 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 2024, without a bowel movement. During an interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) on July 24, 2024, at 1:10 PM, the DON was unable to provide evidence that physician ordered bowel protocol was followed for Resident 24 during the period without bowel activity stated above, nor evidence of timely physician notification. A review of Resident 55's clinical record revealed a physician's order dated March 20, 2024, for the application of a heel off DARCO shoe (specialty shoe designed to off-load pressure from the heel by shifting weight to the mid and forefront of the foot to promote faster healing of a wound), to the RLE (right lower extremity), and a DARCO shoe to the LLE (left lower extremity). Observation of Resident 55 sitting in his wheelchair in the common area on July 23, 2024, at 12:45 PM, July 24, 2024, at 11:10 AM, and July 25, 2024, at 11:20 AM, revealed that the resident was not wearing a heel off DARCO shoe to his RLE or a DARCO shoe to his LLE as ordered at the time of each observation. Instead, the resident was wearing a pair of socks with sandals. During an interview with Resident 55 on July 23, 2024, at 12:45 PM, he reported that he does not wear DARCO shoes and only wears the socks and sandals that he was currently wearing. Interview with Employee 2 (licensed practical nurse) on July 25, 2024, at 11:20 AM, verified that Resident 55 had a physician's order for a heel off DARCO shoe to the RLE and a DARCO shoe to the LLE. Employee 2 confirmed that the resident was not wearing the DARCO shoes on his bilateral lower extremities at the time observed. During an interview on July 25, 2024, at approximately 12:30 PM, the Nursing Home Administrator and Director of Nursing confirmed that the staff had not followed the physician order for the application of the physician prescribed DARCO shoes. 28 Pa. Code 211.12 (d)(3)(5) Nursing services 28 Pa. Code 211.5(f) Medical records
CONCERN (D)

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

Incontinence Care (Tag F0690)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on a review of clinical records and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed provided necessary care to...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on a review of clinical records and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed provided necessary care to prevent urinary tract infections to the extent possible for one resident with an indwelling urinary catheter out of 19 sampled residents (Resident 1). Findings included: Clinical record review revealed Resident 1 was admitted on [DATE], with diagnoses, which included retention of urine, acute cystitis without hematuria, urinary tract infection, and required the use of an indwelling catheter for urination. Review of physician orders revealed an order dated March 15, 2024, to change catheter monthly/every 30 days and as needed for blockage, leakage, or dislodgement with 16 French and a 10 cc balloon (size of catheter) on the night shift. Review of Treatment Administration Record dated April 2024, failed to provide evidence that the resident's catheter was changed as ordered by the physician during the month of April 2024. Review of clinical record revealed that on May 17, 2024, the resident had an appointment with Urology. Orders received from urology included to irrigate foley daily to prevent sediment buildup, irrigate as needed for decreased urinary output, maintain foley with changes every 4 weeks, treat only symptomatic UTI (urinary tract infection) i.e.: fevers, chills, altered mental status. According to the Urology consult, the resident's urine will always come back with growth i.e.: colonization. Maintain adequate output from foley, avoid obstruction of foley. Physician orders revealed an order dated May 17, 2024, to change the foley catheter monthly on the 17th during the evening shift, to irrigate the foley daily to prevent sediment build-up, and irrigate foley as needed every 8 hours for decreased urinary output. Review of the physician orders revealed that the order dated March 15, 2024, to change the catheter every 30 days continued to be active. There was no evidence that the nursing staff verified what was to be used to flush the foley catheter, or how much solution was to be used for flushing the catheter. Additional review of the TAR dated May 2024 revealed that urinary output from the foley was to be documented each shift. There was no evidence that the solution used to flush the catheter was taken into consideration when calculating total urinary output for each shift, therefore potentially providing inaccurate amount of the resident's true output of urine. Review of TAR dated May 2024, revealed that the resident's catheter was changed on May 17, 2024, as ordered. Documentation dated June 29, 2024, indicated that the resident was prescribed antibiotic therapy due to a urinary tract infection. Review of documentation dated July 2, 2024, at 1023 PM indicated that Resident 1 pulled out the foley catheter and a new one was inserted. Review of the TAR dated July 2024, failed to provide documented evidence that the resident's catheter was changed on July 2, 2024. Further review of the TAR revealed that the resident's catheter was documented as being changed on July 16, 2024, and again July 17, 2024, due to the duplicate orders remaining in the resident's record. There was no evidence that the nursing staff referred to the orders from Urology to change the catheter every 4 weeks. Observation on July 23, 2024, at 11:30 AM, revealed an undated bulb piston syringe, and an undated, unlabeled, opened 1000 mL bottle of sterile water with approximately 600 mL remaining in the bottle setting on top of a 3-drawer cart in Resident 1's bathroom. Interview with Employee 1, licensed practical nurse (LPN), confirmed the observation. Employee 1 further confirmed that there was no evidence of how old the items were, and that the items were not stored in a sanitary manner. At time of survey ending July 25, 2024, there was no evidence that the nursing staff had verified the orders received from Urology on May 15, 2024, regarding flushing of the resident's catheter. Interview with the Director of Nursing on July 25, 2024, at approximately 2 PM, confirmed that the facility failed to provide appropriate care and services for a resident with and indwelling catheter and recurring urinary tract infections. Refer F880 28 Pa. Code 211.12 (d)(3)(5) Nursing services 28 Pa. Code 211.10 (a)(c)(d) Resident care policies
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 F0740 (Tag F0740)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on review of clinical records and staff interview it was determined that the facility failed to consistently provide neces...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on review of clinical records and staff interview it was determined that the facility failed to consistently provide necessary services to meet the behavioral health needs of one of 19 sampled residents (Resident 27). Findings include: Review of the clinical record revealed that Resident 27 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and had diagnoses, which included major depressive disorder. Resident 27's clinical record revealed documentation dated from the time of the resident's admission through the survey ending July 25, 2024, that the resident had consistent behavioral symptoms of yelling out repeatedly. These episodes occurred almost daily and not easily redirectable. Review of Resident 27's care plan in effect at time of survey ending July 25, 2024, revealed a focus area related to the resident's history of depression with an intervention for psyche follow ups as ordered/scheduled. A review of Resident 27's clinical record revealed the resident had an appointment with a psychiatrist scheduled for May 28, 2024. This appointment was canceled due to the facility being unable to provide transportation for the resident to attend the appointment. Further review revealed that this appointment was not yet rescheduled as of end of survey July 25, 2024. There was no documented evidence that Resident 27 was provided timely follow-up psych services treatment thru the time of the survey ending July 25, 2024. During an interview with the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA), on July 24, 2024, at approximately 11:00 a.m., the NHA was unable to provide evidence that Resident 27 had received psychological/psychiatric services as recommended. 28 Pa. Code 211.2 (d)(8) Medical director
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0757 (Tag F0757)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

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

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on a review of clinical records and staff interviews it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the resident's drug regimen was free of unnecessary antibiotic drugs for one out of 19 residents sampled (Resident 13). Findings included: Clinical record review revealed that Resident 13 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses which included hemiplegia and hemiparesis following a stroke affecting left non-dominant side, bipolar disorder, and anxiety and was cognitively intact. A review of documentation dated June 25, 2024, at 2:27 PM, revealed that the resident was sent to the emergency room for an evaluation due to complaints of dizziness and nausea after sustaining a fall in the bathroom and hitting her head earlier that day. Documentation dated June 25, 2024, at 11:35 PM, indicated that the resident returned to the facility with no acute injuries and an order for Keflex 500mg twice a day for 10 days for diagnosis of possible urinary tract infection and will follow-up with hospital to obtain culture results when available. Review of Medication Administration Record (MAR) dated June 2024, revealed that the antibiotic therapy for treatment of a possible UTI was initiated on June 26, 2024, at 8 AM. Documentation dated June 28, 2024, at 2:16 PM, indicated that a call was placed to the hospital to request urinalysis results that were performed on June 25, 2024. The hospital did not complete a culture and sensitivity test on the urine during the evaluation. Urinalysis results were made available and given to nursing supervisor. Nursing documentation dated from June 25, 2024, through July 5, 2024, revealed no documentation that the resident was displaying signs or symptoms of a UTI. Review of Resident 13's clinical record revealed that antibiotic therapy continued to be administered two times per day from June 26, 2024, through July 5, 2024, despite the resident not having signs/symptoms of a UTI or the necessary diagnostic studies to clinically justify the administration of the antibiotic Keflex. Interview with the Infection Preventionist on July 25, 2024, at approximately 12:45 PM, confirmed that the administration of Keflex was not clinically justified for treatment of Resident 13's possible UTI. 28 Pa. Code 211.2 (3) Medical Director 28 Pa. Code 211.9 (k) Pharmacy Services 28 Pa. Code 211.12 (d)(1)(3) Nursing Services
CONCERN (D)

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

Medication Errors (Tag F0758)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

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

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on review clinical records and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that a resident was free from unnecessary psychoactive drugs by failing to assure the presence of the documented prescriber clinical rationale for the use of a psychotropic medication one of five residents reviewed (Resident 45). Findings include: Review of Resident 45's clinical record revealed that the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses including dementia. The resident had a physician order initially dated December 10, 2023 for Xanax Oral Tablet 0.25 MG (Alprazolam) anti anxiety for anxiety. A review of a pharmacist consult to the physician dated June 26, 2024 reveled a request for a gradual dose reduction (GDR) for the Xanax. There was no physician response to this request. Further review of Resident 45's clinical record revealed that the pharmacy consult was sent to the wrong physician and at time of survey ending July 25, 2024 had not been reviewed by Resident 45's physician. The facility was unable to provide documented evidence to support the continued use of the current dose of Xanax or evidence that a gradual dose reduction attempt of the psychoactive medications conducted in the past year. During an interview with the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) and Director of Nursing (DON) on July 24, 2024, at approximately 12:45 PM, confirmed the lack of GDR attempts for the psychoactive drugs prescribed for Resident 45. 28 Pa. Code 211.9 (a)(1)(k) Pharmacy Services 28 Pa. Code 211.2 (d)(3)(9) Medical Director 28 Pa. Code 211.5 (f) Clinical records
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0761 (Tag F0761)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure adherence to medication and pharmaceuticals expiration dates in one of 4 medication carts. Findings incl...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure adherence to medication and pharmaceuticals expiration dates in one of 4 medication carts. Findings include: An observation of the second-floor Cart A medication cart on July 25, 2024, at 8:05 AM revealed two multidose insulin vials opened. One multidose vial of Lantus 100units/ mL and one multidose vial of Admelog 100units/ mL were labeled with an expiration date of July 17, 2024. Employee 4, licensed practical nurse, confirmed the observations of the expired medications at the time of observation. Interview with the Director of Nursing on July 25, 2024, at 1:33 PM confirmed that the expired medications should have been removed from the medication cart and discarded. 28 Pa. Code 211.9 (a)(1)(k) Pharmacy Services 28 Pa. Code 211.12 (c)(d)(3)(5) Nursing services
CONCERN (D)

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

Dental Services (Tag F0791)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on review of clinical records and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to offer routine annual dental services for one Medicaid payor source out of four residents sampled ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on review of clinical records and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to offer routine annual dental services for one Medicaid payor source out of four residents sampled (Resident 23) for dental services. Findings include: Review of the clinical record of Resident 23 revealed admission to the facility on July 15, 2014, and the resident's payor source was Medicaid. There was no documented evidence at the time of the survey ending July 25, 2024, that the resident had been offered dental services in the past year. Review of Resident 23's care plan initially dated April 13, 2020, and revised December 9, 2023, indicated that the resident declined dental visits. However, the facility was unable to provide documented evidence that the resident was offered and declined dental services for the past year. Interview with the Director of Nursing on July 25, 2024, at 1:27 PM confirmed that the facility had not offered Resident 23 routine dental services in the past year. 28 Pa. Code 211.12 (c)(d)(3)(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

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on clinical record review, observations, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain infec...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on clinical record review, observations, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain infection control practices to prevent potential spread of infection on one resident care unit out of two. (Second Floor). Findings include: Clinical record review revealed Resident 1 was admitted on [DATE], with diagnoses which included retention of urine, acute cystitis (sudden bacterial infection of the bladder or lower urinary tract) without hematuria (blood in urine), urinary tract infection ([UTI] an infection of the urinary system which includes the kidney, bladder, or urethra), and required the use of an indwelling catheter( a thin hollow tube inserted through the urethra into the urinary bladder to collect and drain urine) for urination. Review of clinical record revealed that on May 17, 2024, the resident had an appointment with Urology. Orders received from urology included to irrigate foley daily to prevent sediment buildup, irrigate as needed for decreased urinary output, maintain foley with changes every 4 weeks. Observation on July 23, 2024, at 11:30 AM, revealed an undated bulb piston syringe, and an undated, unlabeled, opened 1000mL bottle of sterile water with approximately 600mL remaining in the bottle setting on top of a 3-drawer cart in Resident 1's bathroom. Interview with Employee 1, licensed practical nurse (LPN), confirmed the observation on July 23, 2024, at approximately 11:45 AM. Employee 1 further confirmed that there was no evidence of how old the items were, that the items should have been labeled and dated, and that the items were not in a manner to prevent the potential spread of infection. During an interview with the Director of Nursing (DON), and in the presence of the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) on July 25, 2024, at 1:30 p.m., confirmed that the facility failed to maintain resident care equipment in a manner to prevent the potential spread of infection. Refer F690 28 Pa. Code 211.10(a)(c)(d) Resident care policies 28 Pa. Code 211.12 (c)(d)(1)(5) Nursing services
CONCERN (E)

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

Drug Regimen Review (Tag F0756)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on review clinical records and medication administration record, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the attending physician acted upon on the pharmaci...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on review clinical records and medication administration record, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the attending physician acted upon on the pharmacist's reports of irregularities in the drug regimen of one resident of 19 residents reviewed (Resident 41). Findings include: Review of Resident 41's clinical record revealed admission to the facility on October 29, 2018, with diagnoses that included major depressive disorder (major loss of interest in pleasurable activities), anxiety disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder and dementia (a chronic or persistent disorder of the mental processes caused by brain disease or injury and marked by memory disorders, personality changes, and impaired reasoning). Review of the consultant pharmacist's Note to Attending Physician/Prescriber dated January 24, 2024, addressed the physician's order for Ativan (an antianxiety medication) 0.5 mg three times a day for anxiety. The pharmacist recommended a Gradual Dose Reduction (GDR), noting that per CMS guidelines for psychotropic drugs, a GDR must me attempted annually, unless clinically contraindicated. The pharmacist further noted that if the drug therapy is to continue, the physician must document why the risk of the adverse consequences presented by an attempted GDR exceed the benefit of the GDR due to potential negative impact on the resident's psychiatric instability, functional capacity and quality of life. The facility failed to provide written documentation of the attending physician's response to the consultant pharmacist's recommendation and there was no documentation that the resident's physician acknowledged this identified pharmacy report. Review of the consultant pharmacist's Note to Attending Physician/Prescriber dated April 24, 2024, noted that Resident 41 was prescribed three medications for anxiety: Remeron, Ativan, and Buspar with recommendation to evaluate if any of the medications could be reduced or discharged to avoid duplication of effect. The facility failed to provide written documentation of the attending physician's response to the consultant pharmacist's recommendation and there was no documentation that the resident's physician acknowledged this identified pharmacy report. Review of the consultant pharmacist's Note to Attending Physician/Prescriber dated June 26, 2024, indicated that this is the 2nd request regarding three medications for anxiety: Remeron, Ativan, and Buspar with recommendation to evaluate if any of the medications could be reduced or discharged to avoid duplication of effect. The facility failed to provide written documentation of the attending physician's response to the consultant pharmacist's 2nd request for recommendation and there was no documentation that the resident's physician acknowledged this identified pharmacy report. An interview with Director of Nursing on July 24, 2024, at approximately 2:00 PM confirmed that the facility was unable to provide documented evidence that the attending physician acted upon the pharmacy recommendations. 28 Pa. Code 211.9 (k) Pharmacy services. 28 Pa Code 211.5 (f) Medical records 28 Pa. Code 211.2 (d)(7) Medical director
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

Medical Records (Tag F0842)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

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

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on review of clinical records and resident and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain accurate and complete clinical records, according to professional standards of practice, reflecting the medial care for three residents out of 19 sampled (Residents 13, 37 and 60). Findings included: The Pennsylvania Code, Title 49, Professional and Vocational Standards, State Board of Nursing, 21.145 Functions of the Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) (a) The LPN is prepared to function as a member of the health-care team by exercising sound judgement based on preparation, knowledge, skills, understandings, and past experiences in nursing situations. The LPN participates in the planning, implementation, and evaluation of nursing care in settings where nursing takes place. 21.148 Standards of nursing conduct (a) A licensed practical nurse shall: (5) Document and maintain accurate records. According to the American Nurses Association Principles for Nursing Documentation, nurses document their work and outcomes and provide an integrated, real-time method of informing the health care team about the patient status. Timely documentation of the following types of information should be made and maintained in a patient's EHR (electronic health record) to support the ability of the health care team to ensure informed decisions and high-quality care in the continuity of patient care: · Assessments · Clinical problems · Communications with other health care professionals regarding the patient · Communication with and education of the patient, family, and the patient ' s designated support person and other third parties. Clinical record review revealed that Resident 13 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses which included hemiplegia and hemiparesis following a stroke affecting left non-dominant side, bipolar disorder, and anxiety. Review of documentation dated June 25, 2024, at 2:27 PM revealed that Resident 13 was sent to the emergency room for an evaluation due to complaints of dizziness and nausea after sustaining a fall. Documentation dated June 25, 2024, at 9:53 PM indicated that Resident 13 returned to the facility at 8 PM. Verbal report was received from the hospital with instruction for the facility to administer Keflex 500mg twice a day for 10 days for a possible urinary tract infection. A review of the resident's clinical record conducted during the survey ending July 25, 2024, revealed no documented evidence from Resident 13's evaluation in the emergency room on June 25, 2024, which resulted in treatment for a possible UTI. During an interview with the Infection Preventionist on July 25, 2024, at 11:00 AM confirmed there was no evidence of any documentation from the emergency room evaluation of Resident 13. The Infection Preventionist produced the information at approximately 1 PM on July 25, 2024. Review of Resident 37's clinical record revealed admission to the facility on April 19, 2021, with diagnoses which included Alzheimer's disease, venous insufficiency, and hypertension. Review of resident's immunization record failed to provide evidence that Resident 37 was screened for Tuberculosis prior to admission to the facility or annually per facility policy. Interview with the facility's Infection Preventionist (IP) on July 24, 2024, at approximately 10:30 AM, confirmed that the resident's clinical record did not include evidence of screening for Tuberculosis since admission to the facility. Review of resident screenings for Tuberculosis provided by the IP on July 24, 2024, revealed that Resident 37 had been screened according to policy, and last screening was performed in October 2023, yet the screenings were not provided in the resident's clinical record. Interview with the DON and Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) on July 25, 2024, at approximately 1:45 PM confirmed that the resident clinical records were not completed and or maintained accordingly. A review of the clinical record revealed Resident 60 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses to include polyneuropathies (damage/disease affecting the peripheral nerves featuring weakness, numbness and burning pain), autonomic neuropathy (damage to the nerves that control the automatic body functions such as blood pressure, temperature control, digestion, and bladder function), and anxiety. An admission Minimum Data Set assessment (MDS-standardized assessment completed at specific intervals to identify specific resident care needs) dated April 29, 2024, indicated that the resident was cognitively intact with a BIMS (brief interview to assess cognitive status) score of 14 (13-15 represents cognitively intact responses). Review of a nurses note dated May 31, 2024, at 11:29 AM revealed the facility received a call from the resident's wife stating that she received a call regarding a referral that was made while the resident was in the hospital. The resident had a scheduled appointment with Psychology at [NAME] in Danville on July 1, 2024, at 12:25 PM. MD aware. A nurses note dated June 12, 2024, at 7:54 AM revealed a call was placed to the resident's wife to communicate that the facility was unable to accommodate transporting the resident to the [NAME] Psychology appointment on July 1, 2024, due to distance as per Administrator and DON (Director of Nursing). Message left. A nurses note dated June 12, 2024, at 12:00 PM revealed a call was received from the resident's wife acknowledging that the facility was unable to transport the resident. Wife stated she will call [NAME] Psychology to see if they will do a telehealth appointment. A nurses note dated July 12, 2024, at 1:18 PM revealed the facility spoke with the Psychology department at [NAME] and the receptionist stated the resident will login (for his appointment) through his MyChart login. During an interview with Resident 60 on July 23, 2024, at 11:50 AM, the resident stated that the facility was unable to transport him to the July 1, 2024, appointment so his wife and daughter drove him to his [NAME] Psychology appointment in Danville. A review of the resident's clinical record revealed no documented evidence that the resident had left the facility to attend the appointment on July 1, 2024, or the results of that appointment upon the resident's return to the facility. Continued interview with Resident 60 revealed that the resident had a telehealth visit on July 12, 2024. The resident expressed frustration that the facility did not provide an electronic device to conduct the visit and his daughter had to scramble to get my son to bring in a device. Further review of the resident's clinical record revealed no documented evidence that the resident had a scheduled telehealth visit and no documented evidence of the results of that visit. Interview with the Director of Nursing on July 25, 2024, at approximately 12:15 PM, confirmed there was no documented evidence the resident left and returned to the facility for an appointment on July 1, 2024, no documented evidence that the resident attended a telehealth visit on July 12, 2024, and no documented evidence of the outcome of those visits. 28 Pa. Code 211.12 (c)(d)(1)(3)(5) Nursing services 28 Pa. Code 211.5(f) Medical records
Jan 2024 7 deficiencies 1 Harm
SERIOUS (G) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures

Free from Abuse/Neglect (Tag F0600)

A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on a review of the facility's abuse prohibition policy, select investigative reports and clinical records, and interview w...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on a review of the facility's abuse prohibition policy, select investigative reports and clinical records, and interview with staff it was determined that the facility neglected to provide the care and services necessary to avoid physical harm and maintain physical health for one resident out of five residents sampled (Resident 2). Findings include: A review of the facility's Resident Abuse policy, last revised January 2023, revealed that the facility will provide each resident with the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychological services to meet their individual needs and to promote or maintain the resident at their highest level of well-being. This includes the protection of Resident's Rights. Each resident has the right to privacy, dignity and confidentiality for all aspects of care and services. A review of the clinical record revealed that Resident 2 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], 2022, with diagnoses, which included dementia, muscle weakness and the need for assistance with personal care A quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment (MDS- a federally mandated standardized assessment process conducted at specific intervals to plan resident care) dated November 20, 2023, indicated that the resident required the assistance of staff for activities of daily living and and utilized a sit to stand lift for transfers. A review of the resident's current plan of care, initially dated July 8, 2023, revealed a care plan in place for ADL (activities of daily living) self-care performance deficit. Planned interventions were that upon admission the resident needed to utilize a sit to stand lift (devices used to assist with transfers and movement of individuals who require support for mobility beyond the manual support provided by caregivers alone). A review of a facility investigation report dated December 19, 2023, at 9:55 PM revealed that Employee 3, an agency nurse aide, and Employee 4, an agency nurse aide, were transferring Resident 2 from the wheelchair to the bed via a sit to stand lift. The nurse aides placed the resident into the lift and had her hovering {in the lift sling} over her bed. Employee 3, an agency nurse aide, left the room to get a clean brief. At the same time, Employee 4, an agency nurse aide, left the resident in the lift to get a washcloth from the bathroom sink. When Employee 4 looked back from the bathroom, she observed Resident 2 opening the velcro ties to the sling (on the lift), falling onto the bed, and then onto the floor, hitting her buttocks and back. The RN supervisor assessed the resident. The Physician was contacted. No injuries were noted. An interview with the Nursing Home Administrator and Director of Nursing on January 31, 2024, at approximately 2 PM confirmed that Employees 3 and 4 were aware that the resident's transfer was to performed with two people, utilizing a sit to stand lift, but both employees left the resident unattended in the lift sling resulting in the resident's fall. 28 Pa. Code 201.29(a)(c) Resident Rights 28 Pa. Code 211.12 (d)(5) 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

Notification of Changes (Tag F0580)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on review of clinical records and grievances lodged with the facility and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to notify a resident's representative of an unwitnessed fall...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on review of clinical records and grievances lodged with the facility and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to notify a resident's representative of an unwitnessed fall incurred by one resident out of five sampled (Resident 4). Findings include: A review of the clinical record revealed that Resident 4 was admitted into the facility on October 18, 2023, with diagnoses including chronic kidney disease and dementia. A nurse's note dated December 23, 2023, at 4:30 PM, but entered into the record on December 24, 2023, at 7:33 PM revealed that the resident had an unwitnessed fall and staff found the resident on the floor. The entry noted that the resident's physician and responsible party were notified of the fall. A review of a facility concern/grievance form dated January 15, 2024, revealed that Resident 4's responsible part stated that she was not notified of Resident 4's fall on December 23, 2023. An interview with the Director of Nursing on January 31, 2024, at approximately 2 PM confirmed the facility failed to timely notify the resident's responsibility party of the resident's fall at the time of occurrence as noted in the resident's clinical record. She further confirmed that Employee 5 (LPN) wrote the nurses note indicating that she had contacted the resident's responsible party, but she had not contacted the responsible party at that time. 28 Pa. Code 211.12 (d)(5)Nursing services 28 Pa. Code 201.29 (a) Resident rights
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 F0726 (Tag F0726)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on a review of clinical records and facility investigative reports and staff and family interviews it was determined the f...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on a review of clinical records and facility investigative reports and staff and family interviews it was determined the facility failed to provide nursing staff with the appropriate competencies and skills sets necessary to provide physician ordered care and services, the use of a wound vacuum, for one resident admitted to the facility with a surgical wound, (Resident 4), out of eight sampled residents. Findings include: A review of Resident 4's clinical record revealed that the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses to include, status post fracture of the humerus (the upper arm) with an open wound. Post hospitalization treatment at the facility was to include wound treatments. The resident was cognitively intact with a BIMS score of 15 (brief interview for mental status - a tool to assess cognitive function, a score of 13 to 15 indicates the resident is cognitively intact) according to a quarterly Minimum Data Set Assessment (MDS - a federally mandated standardized assessment process conducted periodically to plan resident care) dated February 26, 2024. The resident required minimal staff assistance with activities of daily living, was at risk for pressure areas, and had a surgical wound. A review of an admission nursing assessment dated [DATE], revealed that Resident 4 was admitted with an open surgical incision, area, right elbow with tendon exposed 7 cm x 5 cm x 0.4 cm, wound vac now in place. Small amount serosanguineous drainage, surgical incision superior (3 sutures) and distal (11 sutures) well-approximated. The resident had admission physician orders, dated February 20, 2024, for Negative Pressure Wound Therapy to Right elbow: wound vac (a type of therapy to help wounds heal. During the treatment, a device decreases air pressure on the wound. This can help the wound heal more quickly). Treatments prescribed were to clean area with normal saline; Apply skin prep to perimeter of wound; Cut black foam to fit inside wound; Cut drape to fit over foam trying not to cover; sutures, pressing drape to release air bubbles and form adherence; Cut quarter sized hole in drape and apply track pad with tubing running down arm; Secure track pad with piece of drape using care; not to cover tubing; Attach tubing to wound vac, turn on - settings: 125 mmHg continuous every evening shift related to UNSPECIFIED FRACTURE OF LOWER END OF RIGHT HUMERUS, SUBSEQUENT ENCOUNTER FOR FRACTURE WITH ROUTINE HEALING. This order was Discontinued March 5, 2024. A facility investigation report and nursing documentation dated March 8, 2024, at 8:30 PM revealed that Resident 4 reported to his son-in-law during a phone conversation that his wound vacuum dressing to his right elbow had not been changed since it was put on (on February 20, 2024), when his son-in-law asked the resident how the wound was looking. Resident 4 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] status post open fracture of lower end of right humerus. Employee 4, LPN, admitted the dressing changes were not completed although she had documented that the dressing changes were completed. Facility licensed nursing staff signed the resident's February 2924 and March 2024 Treatment Administration Records (TAR) indicating that these nursing staff members had provided the resident's wound treatment and wound vac change on February 21, 23, 26 and 28, 2024 and March 1, 2024 and March 4, 2024. An undated witness statement from Employee 5 (RN Supervisor) revealed On March 5, 2024 I received a call from {Resident 4}'s son-in-law. He was very concerned. His father-in -law told him that the resident stated that he hadn't had his wound vac changed in a while. Upon investigation, the physician ordered, three times a week wound vac changes, were documented as completed. There were no accompanying progress notes. I then interviewed Resident 4. He stated I {Employee 5} was the last person to change the wound vac after his visit to the orthopedic surgeon, a week and a half prior. At that time, upon assessing the dressing, there was no date and the dressing was intact, attached to the wound vac and the appliance was functioning. I then informed the resident that I would change the dressing/wound vac. When removing the old dressing, I did encounter difficulty getting the black sponge at the base of the wound to remove. The wound was noted to be smaller in size with a moist red wound base and no concerning findings. The Wound vac dressing changed to right elbow area. Wound measuring 6.5 cm x 3.2 cm, appearing smaller than previous. Beefy red tissue at wound base, no odor. Resident tolerated well. I informed the Director of Nursing (DON) of the findings. Employee 4 (LPN) had been documenting in the clinical chart that the wound care was completed. On numerous occasions, including the day before, which was a Monday, I asked Employee 4 (LPN) if she needed any help specifically with treatments as I knew she had a few to complete. She was sitting in the medication room charting, and stated she was fine and didn't need any help. A review of an undated witness statement from Employee 4 (LPN) revealed When {Resident 4} was admitted to the facility, {Employee 5, RN Supervisor} called me to the second floor (I was working on the third floor) so a wound vac instructor ( not an employee of the facility) would show us how to apply and use the wound vac. Once the instructor arrived, {Employee 5 (RN Supr)} and I ended up performing most if not all of the work (wound vac application) with very little helpful guidance from the instructor herself. I was under the impression I would physically be taught how to manage a wound vac, but had not received any valuable knowledge that day. Even when emptying the canister, that was something I was not taught or competent in. {Employee 5 (RN Supr)} had mentioned to me that she didn't really teach us anything (wound vac management), and I agreed. But not once did she (Employee 5 (RN Supr) had she offered to come down and assist me with the wound vac considering I need that extra hand. Because of the staffing inadequacy, I had only changed the wound dressing one other time after the instruction. A review of facility documentation revealed that Employee 4 (LPN) was hired at the facility on September 12, 2023, and received facility abuse training on the same day. A review of nursing competencies dated September 12, 2024, completed with this employee revealed that they did not include the care and use of a wound vac system. The facility failed to ensure that Employee 4, an LPN, demonstrated knowledge of the resident's individual needs and used techniques and skills for wound maintenance as directed in the physician orders for providing wound care to this resident. The facility failed to ensure that licensed professional nursing staff consistently assessed the resident's health status, including wound management to ensure that the resident received timely treatment at the level required for treatment of the resident's serious injury. During an interview March 26, 2024 at 2 PM, the Director of Nursing and the Nursing Home Administrator confirmed that Employee 4 (LPN) did not complete Resident 4's wound treatment as ordered. 28 Pa. Code 211.12 (c)(d)(1)(3)(5) Nursing Services. 28 Pa. Code 211.5 (f) Medical records
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Pharmacy Services (Tag F0755)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on review of controlled drug records and select facility policy and staff interview, it was determined that the facility f...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on review of controlled drug records and select facility policy and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to implement pharmacy procedures for reconciling controlled drugs and records accounting for their administration for one of five residents sampled (Resident 3). Finding include: Clinical record review revealed Resident 3 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses of peripheral vascular disease and chronic pain. The resident was readmitted to the facility after a hospital stay on December 22, 2023. A physician order was noted November 20, 2023, for Percocet (Oxycodone-APAP, an opioid narcotic combination pain medication) 5/325 mg, one tab every 4 hours as needed for pain. A review of a pharmacy invoice dated November 20, 2023, revealed that 90 Oxycodone-APAP 5-325 mg were delivered to the facility for administration to Resident 3 A review of Medication Administration Records revealed that from November 22, 2023 through November 30 2023, revealed documented evidence that 36 doses of the Oxycodone-APAP 5-325 mg were administered to Resident 3. A review of Medication Administration Records revealed that from December 1, 2023 through December 14, 2023, 39 doses of the Oxycodone-APAP 5-325 mg were administered to Resident 3. The documentation on the MARs indicated that a total of 75 pills of Oxycodone-APAP 5-325 mg were administered during November 2023 and December 2023. However, at the time of the survey ending January 31, 2024, there was no evidence of the associated pharmacy provided controlled drug narcotic sign out record (accountability form) associated with Resident 3's supply of Oxycodone-APAP 5-325 mg 90 pills dispensed to the the facility on November 20, 2023, or of the disposition of the remaining 15 doses of the narcotic medication. The resident was admitted to the hospital on [DATE] and readmitted to the facility on [DATE]. There was no documented evidence of the remaining 15 doses of Resident 3's controlled medication at the time of the survey ending January 31, 2024. During an interview January 1, 2023 t 2 P.M., the Director stated that Resident 3's controlled drug narcotic sign out sheet for the resident's supply of Oxycodone-APAP 5-325 mg dispensed to the facility on November 20, 2023, could not be located and facility was unable to account for the remaining 15 doses of the narcotic medication. Refer F602 28 Pa Code 211.12 (c)(d)(3)(5) Nursing services. 28 Pa Code 211.9 (a)(1)(j.1)(4)(k) Pharmacy 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

Deficiency F0761 (Tag F0761)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation and and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to implement procedures to store medications under proper temperature controls in one of two medication storage...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation and and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to implement procedures to store medications under proper temperature controls in one of two medication storage rooms. Findings include: An observation on March 26, 2024, at approximately 1 PM, in the presence of Employee 6, Agency LPN, revealed two multi-dose containers of Ativan Oral Concentrate 2 MG/ML (Lorazepam, an antianxiety medication) were in the locked compartment of the second floor medication cart. Observation revealed that the 2 mg per ml oral concentrate was supplied as a clear colorless to light yellow solution, with labeling instructions for the drug to be stored at Cold Temperature-Refrigerate 2°-8°C (36°-46°F). Interview with the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) on January 11, 2023, at approximately 12:40 PM, confirmed that Ativan concentrate was to be stored in the refrigerator and not the med cart. 28 Pa. Code 211.9 (a)(1)(k) Pharmacy services 28 Pa. Code 211.12 (d)(3)(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

Deficiency F0602 (Tag F0602)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on a review of clinical records, select facility policy and investigative reports it was determined that the facility fail...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on a review of clinical records, select facility policy and investigative reports it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that one of five residents sampled were free from misappropriation of property, medications (Resident 3). Findings include: A review of the facility's Resident Abuse policy, last revised January 2023, revealed that misappropriation of Resident Property is the deliberate misplacement, exploitation or wrongful, temporary or permanent use of a resident's belongings or money without the resident's consent. Examples of misappropriation include, but are not limited to taking resident's monies, using their phone to make personal calls, administering a resident's medication to another resident, or eating food items off a resident's tray. Clinical record review revealed Resident 3 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses of peripheral vascular disease and chronic pain and readmitted to the facility after a hospital stay on December 22, 2023. A physician order was noted, December 22, 2023, for Oxycodone -APAP ( an opioid narcotic combination pain medication) 5-325 mg, one tablet by mouth, as needed, every 4 hours for pain level rated 4-10. A review of a prescription dated and signed by the resident's attending physician on December 22, 2023, revealed the order for Oxycodone-APAP 5-325 mg, one tablet by mouth as needed every 4 hours for pain. The prescription indicated that 180 pills were to be dispensed by the pharmacy and sent to the facility for the resident. A review of a pharmacy delivery sheet dated December 22, 2023, revealed that 180 Oxycodone-APAP pills were dispensed for Resident 3 and received at the facility. Three separate cards of oxycodone-APAP, containing 60 pills each, were noted in the delivery received by the facility. A review of a facility investigation dated January 11, 2024, revealed that the facility's pharmacy notified Employee 1 (RN Supervisor) that it was too soon to refill Resident 3's prescription for Percocet Oral Tablet 5-325 MG (Oxycodone w/ Acetaminophen); the pharmacy informing the facility that the pharmacy sent 180 tablets on December 22, 2023. Facility records revealed that only one card of 60 was present in the facility with only 11 doses remaining on January 11, 2024. A review of an employee witness statement dated January 14, 2024, revealed that Employee 2 (LPN) stated that 3 cards of 60 pills were sent and received at the facility on December 22, 2023 on the 11 PM to 7 AM shift. The three cards of the opioid narcotic controlled medication were placed in the locked narcotic box in the med cart and the corresponding narcotic sign sheets were placed in the narcotic book according to Employee 2's statement. The facility's investigation noted that the facility conducted an immediate search of med carts, med room, but no Percocet cards and corresponding narcotic reconciliation forms were found for Resident 3 to indicate the amount of opioid medication present in the med cart. Two of the three cards of 60 pills each could not be located, 120 doses of the Oxycodone-APAP 5-325 mg were missing. During an interview January 31, 2024, the Director of Nursing and the Nursing Home Administrator confirmed that the facility confirmed that Resident 3's property, medications, had been misappropriated from the facility. Refer F755 28 Pa. Code 201.29 (a)(d) Resident rights 28 Pa. Code 211.12 (c)(d)(1)(3)(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

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

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on review of clinical records and facility provided documentation and staff interviews it was determined that the facility failed to provide nursing services consistent with professional standards of practice for one resident (Resident 1) out of 5 residents reviewed by failing to show ongoing monitoring, identification and documentation of changes in resident condition to assure prompt and necessary treatment of fracture. Findings included: According to the Pennsylvania Code, Title 49, Professional and Vocational Standards, State Board of Nursing, 21.11 (a)(1)(2)(4) indicates that the registered nurse was to collect complete ongoing data to determine nursing care needs, analyze the health status of individuals and compare the data with the norm when determining nursing care needs, and carry out nursing care actions that promote, maintain, and restore the well-being of individuals. The Pennsylvania Code, Title 49, Professional and Vocational Standards, State Board of Nursing, 21.145 Functions of the Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) (a) The LPN is prepared to function as a member of the health-care team by exercising sound judgement based on preparation, knowledge, skills, understandings and past experiences in nursing situations. The LPN participates in the planning, implementation, and evaluation of nursing care in settings where nursing takes place. 21.148 Standards of nursing conduct (a) A licensed practical nurse shall: (5) Document and maintain accurate records. According to the American Nurses Association Principles for Nursing Documentation, nurses document their work and outcomes and provide an integrated, real-time method of informing the health care team about the patient status. Timely documentation of the following types of information should be made and maintained in a patient's EHR (electronic health record) to support the ability of the health care team to ensure informed decisions and high quality care in the continuity of patient care: · Assessments · Clinical problems · Communications with other health care professionals regarding the patient · Communication with and education of the patient, family, and the patient ' s designated support person and other third parties. A review of clinical record revealed Resident 31 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses, which included moderate intellectual disabilities and a history of falling. A review of a quarterly MDS (Minimum Data Set - a federally mandated standardized assessment conducted at specific intervals to plan resident care) dated November 20, 2023, revealed that Resident 1 was moderately cognitively impaired with a BIMS score of 9 (Brief Interview for Mental Status tool used to screen cognitive condition of residents) and required staff assistance with activities of daily living and had a history of falls. A nurses notes dated October 20, 2023 at 11:07 AM revealed that the report of the resident's Dexa scan (an imaging test to measure the bone density) was received and that the resident was identified to be at risk for fractures. A review of nursing documentation dated November 7, 2023 indicated that Resident 1 had pain in her left shoulder. There was no further nursing documentation of a nursing assessment of the resident's left shoulder at that time or follow-up nursing documentation regarding the status of the resident's left shoulder pain. The nurse's notes dated November 23, 2023, at 9:43 PM revealed that Resident 1 complained of discomfort to the left arm and told her family about the discomfort. The entry noted that the resident recently, July 21, 2023, received tetanus vaccine to that arm and Tylenol was offered to the resident. On November 24, 2023 at 7:26 PM revealed that nursing Received call from resident's niece/POA, with concerns for resident complained of pain and limited mobility in left upper extremity. Resident told her that she fell in her bathroom last month but states that she has very poor short term memory and is not cognizant of time. The POA thinks that maybe resident overstretched arm. Resident able to move left arm out to a 90 degree angle but did not complained of pain for me. She had received Tdap vaccine on July 21, 2023 but niece states that it started about two weeks ago, requests ibuprofen and MRI. Nursing left voicemail at Dr. the Physician's office. Updated the resident's POA on leaving message(with the Physician) and waiting on call back. A physician order was noted November 27, 2023, for Voltaren arthritis pain external gel 1% ( a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) for pain management; apply to left shoulder area, twice a day for pain in the left shoulder. Following surveyor during the survey ending January 31, 2024, the facility provided physician documentation dated December 11, 2023, revealed that the physician noted that Resident 1 was having arm pain. The POA (Resident 1's niece) called to discuss. Will evaluate next week and call in Medrol (steroid medication). A physician order was noted December 12, 2023, at 3:40 PM, for a Medrol Pak, 4 mg (an oral steroid for inflammation) until December 18, 2023. A nurses note dated December 14, 2023, at 9:43 PM revealed that Resident continues on Medrol dose pack for Left shoulder. She complained of occasional pain, which is manageable with current pain medication. She denies having any radiating pain at this time. Resident able to perform range of motion with minimal difficulty. A review of a nurses note dated December 15, 2023 at 5:20 PM revealed Resident sitting in dining room. She continues on Medrol dose pack for Left shoulder pain. Resident able to perform range of motion with minimal assistance. Resident encouraged to rest periodically throughout the day/evening to aide in lessening her pain, as well. Resident continues to walk through hallways with walker frequently. A physician's assistant note dated December 29, 2023, at 2:25 PM revealed that the resident had upper respiratory symptoms. The entry included a note note; to the primary care physician as an FYI, the resident's niece was asking about Resident 1's shoulder and asked if an x-ray was done. No notes documented that she was evaluated (by the physician) but per your note, you were going to see her. A nurse's note dated January 12, 2024, revealed that Resident 1 was seen by attending Physician and an order was received for an x-ray of the left shoulder. A review of an x-ray report dated January 12, 2024, revealed a mildly comminuted, non-displaced, non united fracture of the lateral left humeral head (shoulder), likely acute. A late entry nurses note written on January 18, 2024 at 10:45 A.M. for January 15, 2024 at 10:44 A.M., revealed multiple attempts to contact Ortho physicians office to schedule an orthopedic appointment. Left message to return call to facility. A review of a nurses note dated January 18, 2024, at 11:02 AM., revealed that Resident 1 had an ortho appointment on January 31, 2024 at 8:30 AM There was no evidence that Resident 1's left shoulder pain, first reported by the resident on November 23, 2023, was timely and fully evaluated, assessed and treated. There was no documented evidence that nursing staff timely consulted with the physician regarding the resident's ongoing complaints of left shoulder pain. During an interview on January 26, 2024, at approximately 9:00 a.m., the Director of Nursing confirmed that Resident 1's fracture was not timely identified and treated. 28 Pa. Code 211.12 (c)(d)(1)(3)(5) Nursing Services 28 Pa. Code 211.5 (f) Medical records
Jun 2023 9 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0561 (Tag F0561)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on clinical record review and resident and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to accommodate a resident's preference for receiving a medication prescribed at the hour of...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on clinical record review and resident and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to accommodate a resident's preference for receiving a medication prescribed at the hour of sleep for one of 16 sampled residents (Resident 4). Findings include: Clinical record review revealed that Resident 4 had diagnoses that included COPD (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease-group of lung diseases that block airflow and make it difficult to breathe) and insomnia (sleep disorder that can make it hard to fall and stay asleep). A physician order dated March 13, 2023 noted an order for Hydroxyzine (antihistamine which can have a sedative effect and help with sleep) 25 mg by mouth at HS (hour of sleep). Interview with Resident 4 on June 21, 2023 at 1:00 PM revealed that she did not receive her sleeping pill timely on June 19, 2023. Resident 4 indicated that she prefers to have her sleeping pill around 8:40 PM as she goes to sleep around 8:45 PM. Resident 4 stated that on that night the nurse did not come to give her the sleeping pill until 10:00 PM. Review of Resident 4's Medication Administration Audit Report confirmed that on June 19, 2023 Hydroxyzine 25 mg by mouth at HS was administered at 10:11 PM. The scheduled time noted on the report was 8:00 PM. Interview with the administrator on June 22, 2023 at 11:00 AM confirmed that on the evening of June 19, 2023 Resident 4 was not offered the medication prescribed for sleep according to the resident's preference for scheduling. 28 Pa. Code 201.29(j) Resident rights. 28 Pa. Code 211.12(d)(1)(5) Nursing Services.
CONCERN (D)

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

Notification of Changes (Tag F0580)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on review of select facility policy and clinical records, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to timely consult with the physician and notify the resident's intereste...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on review of select facility policy and clinical records, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to timely consult with the physician and notify the resident's interested representative of a change in condition for one resident out of 16 sampled (Resident 37). Findings include: A review of facility policy entitled Resident Change in Condition Notification last reviewed November 6, 2022, revealed the physician and responsible party will be notified timely whenever a change in condition is identified. A review of the clinical record revealed that Resident 37 was admitted into the facility on March 23, 2017, with diagnoses which included dementia (impaired ability to remember, think, or make decisions that interferes with doing everyday activities). A review of a nursing note dated for June 14, 2023, at 7:17 PM, but entered into the clinical record later, revealed that staff found a new skin issue as Resident 37 presented a fluid filled area behind her left knee. There was no documented evidence that the resident's attending physician was informed of the area or that the resident's interested representative was notified. An interview with the Director of Nursing on June 22, 2023, at approximately 2:00 PM confirmed the facility failed to notify the physician and the resident's representative in a timely manner of the fluid filled area behind the resident's left knee. 28 Pa. Code 201.29 (d)(l)(1) Resident rights 28 Pa Code 211.12 (a)(c)(d)(3)(5) Nursing services
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0661 (Tag F0661)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to complete a discharge summary,...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to complete a discharge summary, which included a recapitulation of the resident's stay, the course of illness, corresponding treatment, discharge instructions, and a post-discharge care plan for one of three closed records reviewed (Resident 57). Findings include: A review of the closed clinical record revealed that Resident 57 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses including non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (a type of heart attack) and urinary tract infection (UTI-an infection in any part of the urinary system such as the kidneys or bladder). A closed clinical records review revealed that Resident 57 was discharged home on March 24, 2023. A review of Resident 57's closed clinical record revealed a Discharge Record form dated March 24, 2023, which included the resident's admitting diagnosis as UTI and MI (Urinary Tract Infection and Myocardial Infarction), the resident's final diagnosis section was left blank, the resident's course of treatment as antibiotics, the resident's condition on discharge as good, the resident's prognosis as good and the resident's disposition as good. Further review of Resident 57's closed clinical record revealed a Discharge Summary form dated March 24, 2023, which included a reason for discharge as discharged to home, and the discharge diagnosis section of the form was left blank. At the time of the survey ending June 23, 2023, there was no documented evidence that a discharge summary was provided to the resident or the resident's representative, which included a recapitulation of the resident's stay, the course of illness, corresponding treatment, discharge instructions, and a post-discharge care plan. The documented discharge summary failed to include an accurate and current description of the clinical status of the resident and sufficiently detailed, individualized care instructions to ensure that the resident transitions safely from the facility to home. During an interview conducted on June 22, 2023, at approximately 2:00 PM, the Nursing Home Administrator was not able to provide evidence that a discharge summary was accurately and fully completed for Resident 57. 28 Pa. Code 211.12 (a)(c)(d)(3)(5) Nursing services 28 Pa. Code 201.25 Discharge policy
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0697 (Tag F0697)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on a review of select facility policy and clinical records and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to administer pain medication as prescribed by the physician to manage ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on a review of select facility policy and clinical records and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to administer pain medication as prescribed by the physician to manage one resident's pain out of 15 residents reviewed (Resident 2). Findings include: A review of the facility's policy entitled Pain Management provided by the facility on August 24, 2023, indicated that orders for pain medications prescribed on a PRN (as needed) basis must be delineated if they are for mild, moderate, or severe pain when the order is received from the physician. The medication for mild pain is often tried first unless the resident is demonstrating the need for a stronger pain medication. The medication administered must correlate with the pain level unless a resident specifically requests a particular medication. The pain intensity scale is based on a 0 to 10 pain intensity scale (0 = no pain, 1,2, and 3 are classified as mild pain, 4, 5, and 6 are classified as moderate pain, and 7, 8, and 9 are classified as severe pain, and 10 is classified as the worst pain imaginable). A review of the clinical record revealed that Resident 2 was admitted into the facility on April 21, 2023, with diagnoses, which included dementia (impaired ability to remember, think, or make decisions that interferes with doing everyday activities) and osteoarthritis and was cognitively impaired. Review of Resident 2's care plan, dated April 20, 2023, indicated that the resident had potential for pain related to limited mobility and gout. The resident's goal was to verbalize adequate relief of pain or ability to cope with incompletely relieved pain with interventions that included to administer pain medications as per physician's orders, evaluate the effectiveness of pain interventions as needed, review for compliance, alleviating of symptoms, dosing schedules, resident satisfaction with results, and impact on functional ability and impact on cognition. Additional interventions included to notify physician if interventions are unsuccessful or if current complaint is a significant change from resident's past experience of pain. Review of current physician orders revealed an order for Tramadol HCL (opioid pain medication) 50 mg by mouth every 12 hours as needed for moderate pain (pain level of 4-6) and Acetaminophen 325 mg, two tablets every 4 hours as needed for mild pain (pain level of 1-3), and Voltaren arthritis pain external gel 1%, apply 2 gm to right hand topically every 12 hours as needed for moderate arthritis pain. Review of Resident 2's August 2023 Medication Administration Record revealed that on August 8, 2023, at 5:42 p.m., Tramadol was administered for a pain level of 8; on August 2, 2023, at 4:31 p.m., for a pain level of 8; August 3, 5, 6, and 7, 2023, for a pain level of 7, and on August 12, 2023, for a pain level of 8, which was not consistent with the physician order for moderate pain rated from 4-6. According to the resident's MAR, on August 7, 2023, at 8:30 p.m. Tramadol was not effective for relieving the resident's pain. According to the August 2023 MAR on August 15, at 11:41 p.m., and again on August 16, 2023, at 1:09 p.m., nursing administered Acetaminophen 750 mg for a pain level of 6 moderate pain. Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) on August 24, 2023, at 2:35 PM, confirmed that the facility failed to administer as needed pain medications as prescribed by the physician and in accordance with the facility's established pain scale. Refer F580 28 Pa. Code 211.2 (d)(3) Medical Director 28 Pa. Code 211.12 (d)(1)(2)(5) Nursing Services
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0712 (Tag F0712)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

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

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on clinical record review and resident and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that two of 16 sampled residents were seen timely by a physician (Residents 16 and 4). Findings include: A review of the clinical record of Resident 16 revealed admission to the facility September 14, 2022, with diagnoses which included COPD (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease- group of lung diseases that block airflow and make it difficult to breathe) and diabetes mellitus. During interview with Resident 16 on June 22, 2023 at 1:00 PM the resident could not recall the last time the physician visited and indicated that it was longer than two months ago. A review of the resident's clinical record revealed the only documented physician visit and progress note was on March 22, 2023. There was no documented evidence the resident's attending physician visited Resident 16 every 30 days for the first 90 days after admission and at least once every 60 days thereafter. Review of the clinical record of Resident 4 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had diagnoses which included COPD and insomnia (sleep disorder that can make it hard to fall and stay asleep). During interview with Resident 4 on June 23, 2023 at 9:45 AM the resident stated that the physician had not visited in months. A review of the resident's clinical record revealed the most recent documented physician visit and progress note was on March 14, 2023 (40 days past required visit of every 60 days). Interview with the director of nursing on June 23, 2023, at 10:30 AM confirmed that the physician did not visit Resident 16 and Resident 4 as required. 28 Pa. Code 201.18 (e)(3) Management 28 Pa. Code 211.2 (a)(d)(2) Physician services
CONCERN (E)

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

Quality of Care (Tag F0684)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on a review of clinical records, select incident reports and facility policies and staff interviews it was determined that...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on a review of clinical records, select incident reports and facility policies and staff interviews it was determined that the facility failed to provide nursing services consistent with professional standards of quality to ensure that licensed nurses promptly assessed and evaluated residents' skin injuries to assure the resident timely received necessary care and services for two residents (Resident 36 and 37) out of 19 residents reviewed and failed to ensure that licensed nurses administered medications as prescribed to two residents of 19 sampled residents (Resident 31 and 32) Findings included: According to the Pennsylvania Code, Title 49, Professional and Vocational Standards, State Board of Nursing, 21.11 (a)(1)(2)(4) indicates that the registered nurse was to collect complete ongoing data to determine nursing care needs, analyze the health status of individuals and compare the data with the norm when determining nursing care needs, and carry out nursing care actions that promote, maintain, and restore the well-being of individuals. The Pennsylvania Code, Title 49, Professional and Vocational Standards, State Board of Nursing, 21.145 Functions of the Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) (a) The LPN is prepared to function as a member of the health-care team by exercising sound judgement based on preparation, knowledge, skills, understandings and past experiences in nursing situations. The LPN participates in the planning, implementation, and evaluation of nursing care in settings where nursing takes place. 21.148 Standards of nursing conduct (a) A licensed practical nurse shall: (5) Document and maintain accurate records. According to the American Nurses Association Principles for Nursing Documentation, nurses document their work and outcomes and provide an integrated, real-time method of informing the health care team about the patient status. Timely documentation of the following types of information should be made and maintained in a patient's EHR (electronic health record) to support the ability of the health care team to ensure informed decisions and high quality care in the continuity of patient care: · Assessments · Clinical problems · Communications with other health care professionals regarding the patient · Communication with and education of the patient, family, and the patient ' s designated support person and other third parties. A review of facility policy entitled Identification of Skin Issues last reviewed by the facility November 16, 2022, revealed that it is the policy of the facility to treat any skin issues identified. When a skin issue is identified, the charge nurse is immediately notified. The area will be assessed and reported to the physician. A review of clinical record revealed Resident 36 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses, which included chronic kidney disease. A review of an incident report dated May 22, 2023, indicated the resident was outside visiting with his granddaughter and her dog. The dog bit the resident on the left hand, and the resident sustained a small laceration to the forefinger and middle finger. There was no documentation in the resident's clinical record that the Registered Nurse assessed the resident's wound at that time on May 22, 2023. There was no nursing documentation in the resident's clinical record to indicate the size of the laceration, the appearance of the wound, or if any drainage was present. There was no documentation that the physician was notified. A review of the clinical record revealed that Resident 37 was admitted into the facility on March 23, 2017, with diagnoses, which included dementia (impaired ability to remember, think, or make decisions that interferes with doing everyday activities). A review of a nursing note dated for June 14, 2023, at 7:17 PM but entered in the clinical record on a later date revealed that the resident had a new fluid filled area behind her left knee. There was no documentation in the resident's clinical record that the Registered Nurse assessed the area when it was found on June 14, 2023. There was no nursing documentation in the resident's clinical record to indicate the size of the area, appearance of the area and surrounding skin or other characteristics. There was no indication of the treatment or care provided and there were no physician orders for treatment to the fluid filled area. Interview with the Nursing Home Administrator on June 23, 2023, at approximately 2:15 PM confirmed there was no documented evidence in the resident's clinical record that the facility's professional nursing staff had timely and fully assessed the above skin impairments/skin injuries Review of the clinical record revealed that Resident 31 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses which included hypertension, congestive heart failure, and heart disease. A physician order dated June 15, 2023, was noted for Midodrine HCL 10 mg, give one tablet three times a day for orthostatic hypotension (a form of low blood pressure that happens when standing up from a sitting or lying position), hold for systolic blood pressure (SBP - top number on blood pressure reading) greater than 110. The medication was scheduled for 8 AM, 1 PM, and 8 PM. Review of Resident 31's Medication Administration Record for the month of June 2023, revealed that on June 16, 2023, at 8 PM the Midodrine was administered for a blood pressure of 132/74. Further review of MAR revealed that the medication was administered on June 17, 2023, at 8 AM for a blood pressure of 130/68, at 1 PM for a blood pressure of 130/68, and at 8 PM for a blood pressure of 136/64, on June 18, 2023, at 1 PM for a blood pressure of 130/76, and at 8 PM for a blood pressure of 136/78. Each time, the medication was administered when the resident's SBP was greater than 110. Interview with the Director of Nursing on June 22, 2023, at approximately 2:00 PM confirmed that the nursing staff failed to administer Resident 31's Midodrine medication as prescribed by the physician. A clinical records review revealed that Resident 32 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that include dementia (a chronic or persistent disorder of the mental processes caused by brain disease or injury and marked by memory disorders, personality changes, and impaired reasoning), atrial fibrillation (an irregular and often very rapid heart rhythm), and hypertension (blood pressure that is higher than normal). A physician order, initially dated July 24, 2022, indicated that the resident was to receive Norvasc Tablet 2.5 MG (amlodipine besylate) with directions to give one tablet by mouth one time a day related to hypertension (high blood pressure) with instructions to hold the medication if the resident's systolic blood pressure is less than 100 or the resident's heart rate is less than 60 beats per minute. According to the resident's Medication Administration Records Resident 32 received Norvasc Tablet 2.5 mg on 80 days from April 1, 2023, through June 21, 2023 with no evidence that Resident 32's heart rate was monitored prior to administering Norvasc 2.5 mg tablets in accordance with the physician's orders from April 1, 2023 through June 21, 2023. During an interview on June 22, 2023, at approximately 9:00 a.m., the Nursing Home Administrator and Director of Nursing were not able to provide evidence that Resident 32's heart rate was being monitored prior to the administration of Norvasc 2.5 mg in accordance with the physician's orders. 28 Pa. Code 211.12 (a)(c)(d)(1)(3)(5) Nursing Services 28 Pa. Code 211.5 (f)(g)(h) Clinical Records
CONCERN (E)

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

Pressure Ulcer Prevention (Tag F0686)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

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

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on a review of select facility policy and clinical records, observations, and staff and interviews it was determined that the facility failed to consistently provide care and services to prevent the development and promote healing of pressure sores for two of 16 residents sampled (Resident 1 and 43). Findings include: According to the US Department of Health and Human Services, Agency for Healthcare Research & Quality, the pressure ulcer best practice bundle incorporates three critical components in preventing pressure ulcers: Comprehensive skin assessment, Standardized pressure ulcer risk assessment and care planning and implementation to address areas of risk. ACP (The American College of Physicians is a national organization of internists, who specialize in the diagnosis, treatment, and care of adults. The largest medical-specialty organization and second-largest physician group in the United States) Clinical Practice Guidelines indicate that the treatment of pressure ulcers should involve multiple tactics aimed at alleviating the conditions contributing to ulcer development (i.e., support surfaces, repositioning and nutritional support); protecting the wound from contamination and creating and maintaining a clean wound environment; promoting tissue healing via local wound applications, debridement and wound cleansing; using adjunctive therapies; and considering possible surgical repair. A review of facility policy entitled Identification of a Skin Issue last reviewed by the facility November 16, 2022, revealed that it is the policy of the facility to treat any skin issue identified, to promote healing of wound and if resident is not responding to established treatment regimen, the nurse/therapist shall evaluate for: need for treatment change, referral to wound care specialist for wound assessment, referral for consultation by physician or wound clinic, re-assess need for interdisciplinary services and/or appropriate DME (durable medical equipment), and referral for nutritional consult. When a skin issue is identified, the charge nurse is immediately notified. The area will be assessed and reported to the physician. The physician will be contacted, and orders obtained for treatment. The registered nurse will assess the wound. A wound tracking sheet is initiated by the registered nurse for all identified pressure areas. The dietician, therapy department and family are notified by the charge nurse of the issue. The registered nurse assesses and documents on pressure areas weekly. At least every week, the wound assessment and documentation will include measurement of length, width, depth, and undermining and tunneling if present. Presence/absence of odor and drainage should be noted. A review of the clinical record revealed that Resident 43 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses to include heart failure, peripheral vascular disease, and hypertension. On May 17, 2023, Resident 43 was admitted to the hospital and returned to the facility on May 24, 2023, with diagnoses of hydronephrosis with kidney stone obstruction with stent placement and myocardial infarction (heart attack). A review of the resident's Braden scale for predicting pressure sores dated May 24, 2023, revealed the resident was at risk for developing a pressure sore. A review of a significant change Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE], (MDS - a federally mandated standardized assessment process completed periodically to plan resident care) revealed that the resident was required extensive assistance of two people with bed mobility (how the resident moves about in bed), dressing, toilet use, and transfers (how the resident moves between the bed and the chair), and was at risk for developing pressure areas. A review of the resident's plan of care, initially dated January 19, 2022, revealed that the resident had potential for pressure related skin failure related to limited mobility. Interventions planned were to apply preventative barrier cream for skin/incontinence care to bilateral buttocks with AM/PM care and prn (as needed), maintain adequate nutrition and hydration, keep skin clean and dry, weekly body/skin eval on shower days, pressure redistribution mattress, assist resident to turn and reposition every two hours and PRN, as tolerated, and pressure reducing cushion (to chair). A review of Resident 43's readmission assessment dated [DATE], revealed that the resident had bruising to her right hand and right antecubital and a large wart on her chest. No additional skin concerns were identified on the skin portion of the readmission assessment. Review of documentation dated May 24, 2023, at 1:38 PM indicated that the resident's bilateral buttocks were slightly pink and blanchable (skin that remains white or pale for longer than normal when pressed, indication that normal blood flow to a given area does not return promptly). Calmoseptine (multipurpose barrier ointment that protects and helps heal skin irritations) applied. Review of documentation dated May 31, 2023, at 1:56 PM revealed that the resident complained of a sore bottom. According to the documentation, a small excoriated are near coccyx was identified. The area was cleansed and prevention cream put on. There was no evidence that the area was assessed by the registered nurse due to changes in appearance. According to the resident's clinical record, weight loss and poor fluid/food intake was also identified since readmission on [DATE], with interventions implemented by dietitian on May 31, 2023. Review of Documentation Survey Report dated May 2023 revealed that Resident 43 was assisted out of bed once from May 24, 2023 through May 31, 2023. Documentation dated June 5, 2023, at 12:42 PM indicated that the resident's restorative nursing program was discontinued due to frequent refusals, overall decline in condition and currently a hoyer (mechanical lift) for transfers. Documentation dated June 5, 2023, at 2:45 PM by social services revealed that the resident continued to decline and was losing weight. A referral to hospice was discussed with the resident's responsible party. Review of hospice progress note dated June 15, 2023, revealed that there was worsening of buttocks wound and that a request for treatment change would be obtained. Documentation dated June 15, 2023, at 11:32 AM by Employee 1, licensed practical nurse, revealed that a new order was obtained for a pressure ulcer on right medial buttocks. There was no evidence that the registered nurse evaluated the pressure ulcer. Review of hospice progress note dated June 21, 2023, revealed that the resident's wound continued to decline. There was no evidence that the registered nurse evaluated the declining pressure ulcer. Observation of Resident 43 on June 21, 2023, at approximately 10:30 AM revealed resident lying in her bed, flat on her back. The resident was awake, but declined to participate in an interview. She simply closed her eyes. Documentation completed by the registered nurse on June 21, 2023, at 4:28 PM, revealed that a treatment change was ordered to Stage II area on buttocks. The registered nurse further indicated that the resident's wound resembled a Kennedy ulcer between 10 o'clock and 2 o'clock, a deep purple intact area with overall area measuring 9 cm x 9.5 cm x <0.2 cm. According to the documentation, the area encompasses both left and right buttocks and sacral area, pink, non-blanchable, no odor, no drainage, no pain observed. There was no documented evidence prior to June 21, 2023, that Resident 43's declining wound was evaluated or monitored for healing or worsening by the registered nurse. Observation of Resident 43's buttock pressure ulcer on June 22, 2023, at approximately 9:30 AM in the presence of hospice staff and Employee 2, graduate licensed practical nurse, revealed that the resident had an open area on her left buttock which measured approximately 2cm x 0.5cm x <0.1 cm, an unstageable darkened area just above the open area which measure approximately 1cm x 2cm x 0 cm, with surrounding skin reddened. An interview with the Director of Nursing on June 23, 2023, at approximately 1:30 PM confirmed that there was no evidence that Resident 43's declining pressure ulcer was monitored by the facility and was unable to demonstrate implementation of measures to prevent the worsening of pressure ulcers and promote healing for a resident at risk for skin breakdown. A clinical records review revealed that Resident 1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that included dementia (a chronic or persistent disorder of the mental processes caused by brain disease or injury and marked by memory disorders, personality changes, and impaired reasoning), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and heart failure. Resident 1's care plan revealed that the resident had the potential for pressure-related skin failure due to limited mobility initiated in April 2020. According to the resident's care plan, initiated April 20, 2020, staff were to assist the resident to turn and reposition every two hours, as requested, and tolerated . The resident's care plan also included the intervention to apply moisture cream or lotion to the upper and lower extremities with AM and PM care and as needed initiated on April 20, 2020. Resident 1's Moisture Cream Application Task Log revealed 57 blank entries (lacking documentation that intervention was completed) from May 1, 2023, through June 22, 2023, failing to provide evidence that moisture cream was applied to the resident's upper and lower extremities with AM and PM care, or as needed. The resident's most recent Braden Scale assessment (a standardized assessment tool utilized to determine a patient's risk of developing pressure ulcers or injuries) dated February 6, 2023, indicated that Resident 1 was at moderate risk for developing pressure ulcers or injuries. Resident 1's Turn and Reposition Task Log revealed only one documented instance when the resident was turned and repositioned in accordance with the resident's comprehensive care plan from May 1, 2023, through June 22, 2023. There was no nursing documentation indicating that the resident was turned or repositioned at least every two hours on 39 days from May 1, 2023, through June 22, 2023 A clinical records review revealed the physician's orders to admit Resident 1 to hospice care on May 25, 2023. A comprehensive Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE], revealed that Resident 1 required extensive assistance (resident involved in activity; staff provide weight-bearing support) for bed mobility, transfers, dressing, toilet use, eating, and personal hygiene. A Brief Interview of Mental Status assessment, revealed a score of 7, indicating severe cognitive impairment. At the time of the assessment, Resident 1 did not have a pressure injury, but was at risk of developing a pressure ulcer or injury. A facility incident report dated June 17, 2023, indicated that Resident 1 acquired a deep tissue injury measuring 2.5 cm x 4.0 cm with unknown depth to the left heel. The report described the injury as light purple, boggy to the touch, with intact skin and no odor. Nursing progress notes dated June 22, 2023, indicated Resident 1 recently developed a deep tissue injury (a purple or maroon localized area of discolored intact skin or a blood-filled blister due to damage of underlying soft tissue from pressure) to the left heel. Observation on June 23, 2023, at approximately 11:15 a.m. conducted with the facility's Registered Nurse Supervisor, revealed that Resident 1's left heel wound measured 2.0 cm x 2.5 cm. The wound area appeared purple, with the innermost part of the wound appearing more red. The skin was intact and non-blanchable. During an interview on June 23, 2023, at approximately 1:30 p.m., the Director of Nursing (DON) was unable to provide evidence of consistent implementation of care plan interventions, turning and repositioning and application of moisture creams, to deter skin pressure sore development. 28 Pa. Code 211.11 (d) Resident care plan 28 Pa. Code 211.12 (a)(c)(d)(1)(5) Nursing services. 28 Pa. Code 211.5 (f) Clinical records. 28 Pa. Code 211.10(a)(c)(d) Resident care policies
CONCERN (E)

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

Drug Regimen Review (Tag F0756)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on a review of clinical records and staff interview it was determined that the facility failed to ensure the pharmacist co...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on a review of clinical records and staff interview it was determined that the facility failed to ensure the pharmacist conducted drug regimen reviews at least monthly and the attending physician failed to act on the pharmacist's recommendations for 5 out of 16 residents sampled (Residents 1, 41, 47, 10, 46). Findings include: Review of Resident 41's clinical record revealed admission to the facility on April 22, 2021, with diagnoses which included dementia (impaired ability to remember, think, or make decisions that interferes with doing everyday activities). Review of Resident 41's clinical record revealed no documented evidence that the licensed pharmacist conducted drug regimen reviews for irregularities with the resident's medication regimen during the month of October 2022. A review of a pharmacy recommendation dated March 8, 2023, revealed the pharmacist noted irregularities with the resident's medication. A review of the resident's clinical record, conducted during the survey ending June 23, 2023, revealed no documented evidence that the physician had acted on the identified irregularity. Review of Resident 47's clinical record revealed admission to the facility on May 29, 2019, with diagnoses, which included congestive heart failure (chronic condition in which the heart does not pump as well as it should). Review of Resident 47's clinical record revealed no documented evidence that the licensed pharmacist conducted a drug regimen reviews during the months of October 2022 or November 2022. A review of Resident 10's clinical record revealed admission to the facility on November 22, 2022, with diagnoses, which included chronic kidney disease, hypertension, and diabetes. Review of Resident 10's clinical record revealed that the physician failed to respond to a second request pharmacy communication dated January 1, 2023, to identify the level pain for administration of Ultram (narcotic), for application schedule for Lidoderm patch, and for the physician to evaluate the continue need for Pravastatin (high cholesterol medication), Ergocalciferol (vitamin D2), and Plavix (antiplatelet). Review of Resident 10's clinical record revealed that the physician failed to respond to a third request pharmacy communication dated February 11, 2023, to evaluate the continued need for Pravastatin, Ergocalciferol, and Plavix, to identify the level of pain for administration of Ultram, and the application schedule for Lidoderm patch. Review of Resident 10's clinical record revealed that the physician failed to respond to a fourth request pharmacy communication dated April 26, 2023, regarding the need to identify a pain level prior to the administration of Ultram. Review of Resident 10's clinical record revealed that as of June 23, 2023, the physician failed to respond to a pharmacy recommendation dated May 24, 2023, regarding clarification of the current diagnosis for the use of Cymbalta (antidepressant and nerve pain medication). Review of Resident 46's clinical record revealed admission to the facility on October 29, 2018, with diagnoses which included dementia, hypertension, and depression. Review of Resident 46's clinical record revealed that there was no evidence that a monthly pharmacy review was completed by the pharmacist for the months of October 2022, November 2022, and May 2023. A clinical records review revealed that Resident 1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included dementia (impaired ability to remember, think, or make decisions that interferes with doing everyday activities), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and heart failure. A clinical records review revealed no evidence that a licensed pharmacist reviewed Resident 1's medication regimen in October 2022 or in November 2022. A clinical record review revealed a document titled Note to Attending Physician/Prescriber indicating that a monthly medication review for Resident 1 was conducted by a pharmacist on December 5, 2022, with recommendations to clarify medication order directions for the Lidoderm Patch to on 12 hours and off 12 hours. However, clinical record review revealed no documented evidence that the physician acted on this recommendation. A Note to Attending Physician/Prescriber, indicating that a monthly medication review for Resident 1 was conducted by a pharmacist on February 11, 2023, with recommendations to attempt a gradual dose reduction of the psychotropic drug Remeron 30 mg. There was no documented evidence that the physician acted upon this pharmacy recommendation. Interview with the Nursing Home Administrator on June 23, 2023, at approximately 2:15 PM, confirmed that there was no documented evidence that the pharmacist had consistently conducted monthly drug regimen reviews for the residents and confirmed the attending physician did not respond to the pharmacy recommendations made, and failed to document the actions taken in the clinical record. 28 Pa. Code 211.9(a)(1)(k) Pharmacy services. 28 Pa. Code 211.12 (a)(d)(1)(3)(5) Nursing services
CONCERN (E)

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

QAPI Program (Tag F0867)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on review of the facility's plan of correction and the findings of the revisit survey ending August 24, 2023, it was determined that the facility's Quality Assurance Performance Improvement (QAP...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on review of the facility's plan of correction and the findings of the revisit survey ending August 24, 2023, it was determined that the facility's Quality Assurance Performance Improvement (QAPI) committee failed to implement effective corrective action plans to correct quality deficiencies related to the quality of care and physician notification. Findings include: The facility's plan of correction for the deficiencies cited during the survey ending June 23, 2023, revealed that the facility developed quality assurance monitoring systems to ensure that solutions to the deficiencies were sustained. However, at the time of this revisit survey ending on August 24, 2023, continuing quality deficiencies were identified in the area of physician notification and quality of care. The facility's plan of correction for the deficiency cited in the area of quality of care during the survey ending June 23, 2023, revealed that Nursing documentation will be reviewed during morning clinical meetings to ensure residents receive treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the resident's choices. DON (Director of Nursing) or designee will randomly audit nursing documentation to confirm professional standards of practice are maintained to ensure residents receive treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and resident choices. Random audits will be conducted weekly for 4 weeks, then monthly for 3 months. Findings from audits will be reported to the QAPI Committee monthly. Also, the facility's plan of correction in the area of quality of care included Resident 1's blood pressure is being monitored to ensure it is administered per ordered parameters, and Resident 1's Norvasc order was revised to include documentation of heart rate on the electronic medication administration record. However, at the time of the revisit survey ending on August 24, 2023, a clinical record review revealed that the facility failed to identify that Resident 1 was also prescribed an additional medication requiring specific parameters for administration. A physician order, initially dated July 24, 2022, indicated that the resident was to receive Coreg Tablet 12.5 mg (Carvedilol) with directions to give one tablet by mouth two times a day related to hypertension (high blood pressure) and instructions to hold the medication if the resident's systolic blood pressure is less than 100 or the resident's heart rate is less than 60 beats per minute. According to the resident's Medication Administration Records, Resident 1 received a Coreg Tablet 12.5 mg on August 23, 2023, at 5:00 p.m. without evidence that the resident's heart rate was obtained prior to administering the Coreg Tablet 12.5 mg tablet in accordance with the physician's orders. Further clinical review revealed that the facility failed to recognize that Resident 1's Coreg Tablet 12.5 mg medication was administered 22 times during the month of August 2023 without documentation that the resident's heart rate was obtained prior to medication administration in accordance with the physician's orders. In response to the deficiency cited related to notification of changes in the resident's condition cited during the survey ending on June 23, 2023, the facility's plan of correction revealed the Director of Nursing (DON) or designee will randomly audit nursing documentation to ensure physicians and resident representatives have been notified when a change occurs. Random audits will be conducted weekly for 4 weeks, then monthly for 3 months. Findings from audits will be reported to the QAPI Committee monthly. However, a review of the clinical record revealed that on August 7, 2023, Resident 2 experienced unrelieved right arm pain which was categorized as severe, according to nursing documentation. Nursing noted on August 7, 2023, at 8:30 p.m. that Resident 2 was crying out in pain while in geri chair (recliner), yelling out for help. Holding right arm up and the administration of currently prescribed pain medication was ineffective. As of the time of the survey ending August 24, 2023, there was no documented evidence that Resident 2's attending physician had been notified of the resident's severe pain that was not relieved with the prescribed pain medication. The facility's QAPI committee failed to identify that the facility had failed to implement their plan of correction in a manner consistent with the regulatory guidelines for the deficiency cited to ensure that solutions to the problem were sustained. An interview with the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) and Director of Nursing (DON) on August 24, 2023, at 1:30 p.m. confirmed that the facility's QAPI Committee failed to recognize continued deficient practice in the area of quality of care related to the administration of medication and address the failure to notify the physician of Resident 2's acute symptoms of severe pain. Refer F580 & F684 28 Pa. Code 211.12(c)(d)(1)(3)(5) Nursing services 28 Pa. Code 201.18(e)(1)(4) Management
Jan 2023 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 F0849 (Tag F0849)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on a review of clinical records and select facility policy and staff interviews it was determined the facility failed to e...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on a review of clinical records and select facility policy and staff interviews it was determined the facility failed to ensure coordination of care and services between the facility and the Hospice Agency for one of two residents reviewed receiving Hospice services (Resident 1). Findings include: A review of Resident 1's clinical record revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and was admitted to Hospice services on November 16, 2022, related to end stage Alzheimers disease. Facility policy for Hospice Care dated as reviewed October 2022, revealed that Hospice care will be offered to residents, as ordered by the attending physician, to provide additional supportive care to residents with end-stage terminal illness. The procedure included that a schedule for Hospice aides, LPN and/or RN will be provided for facility staff to assure care and ADLs (activities of daily living) are met, medication review is completed, changes are addressed, and all resident needs are met. A review of a hospice/facility care document dated November 16, 2022, and a nursing care plan initiated November 20, 2022 revealed that the hospice agency would provide a nurse aide two times a week to provide care for the resident. The care plan also stated that the facility was to provide nurse aide care when the hospice aide was not available. Neither document identified the specific days the hospice aide was to be at the facility to provide the resident's care. A review of the resident's care plan, last reviewed November 27, 2022, revealed that the resident's care plan also failed to reflect coordination of services between the facility and the Hospice agency in meeting the resident's daily care needs and specific needs related to care and services provided for the resident's terminal diagnosis. There was no documented evidence at the time of the survey ending January 24, 2023, of a Hospice nurse aide schedule for providing Resident 1's ADL care to ensure the resident received timely and necessary ADL care on a daily basis and to allow for effective coordination with facility nurse aide staff. During an interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) on January 24, 2023 at 1 PM, the DON confirmed that there was no schedule for hospice nurse aide services to ensure continuity of care for the resident for the resident on a daily basis. 28 Pa. Code 201.21(c) Use of Outside Resources 28 Pa. Code 211.10 (a) Resident Care Policies 28 Pa. Code 211.11 (b)(d) Resident care plan 28 Pa. Code 211.12 (b)(c)(d)(1)(3) 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

Free from Abuse/Neglect (Tag F0600)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on a review of clinical records, select facility policy and investigative reports it was determined that the facility fail...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on a review of clinical records, select facility policy and investigative reports it was determined that the facility failed to provide necessary care and services to assure that two of five residents sampled were free from neglect (Residents 1 and 2). Findings include: A review of the facility's Resident Abuse policy, last revised June 2022, revealed, it is the policy of the facility to provide each resident with the highest practicable physical, mental and psychological services to meet their individual needs and to promote or maintain the resident at their highest level of well being. Neglect is defined as the failure of the facility, its employees and service providers to provide goods and services to a resident necessary to avoid physical harm, pain, mental anguish, or emotional distress. This includes, but not limited to: failure to inattentiveness, carelessness or omission to provide timely, consistent, safe, adequate and appropriate services, treatment and care including but not limited to: nutrition, medication, therapies and activities of daily living. Clinical record review revealed Resident 1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of Alzheimers disease, hypertension and artery blockage, right lower extremity. The resident was assessed as cognitively impaired. The resident's plan of care dated January 4, 2022, for ADL (activities of daily living) deficit revealed an intervention of assist of one staff with a rollator walker for functional transfers and ambulation. A review of a facility incident investigation dated November 14, 2022, at 5:55 P.M. revealed that staff were transferring Resident 1 from her bed to the wheelchair with the rollator walker the resident's right knee gave and the nurse aide lowered the resident to the floor. A review of a witness statement dated November 14, 2022, from Employee 1, a nurse aide, revealed that the employee stated I was assisting {Resident 1} to transfer her from her wheelchair to her bed. During the transfer, her right knee/leg gave out, so I slowly lowered to the floor. The licensed nurse was called and assessed the resident with no injuries noted. An interdisciplinary team note dated November 14, 2022, revealed that {Resident 1's} right knee/leg gave out during transfer with rollator walker and assist of one staff secondary to compromised vascular status, re: artery blockage right lower extremity. Hospice consult being considered by the family, therapy consult for transfer status and transfer status changed to assist of 2 staff with rollator walker until seen by therapy. The resident's care plan for ADLs was updated November 15, 2022, after the resident's fall and therapy evaluation to assist of two staff with rollator walker for functional transfers A review of a facility incident investigation dated November 28, 2022, at 7:30 P.M. revealed that staff were transferring Resident 1 from the wheelchair to the toilet for P.M. care in the stand-up mechanical lift. The resident wiggled out of the lift and fell to the floor striking the back of her head. The resident sustained 2 small abrasions and a small hematoma to the back of her head. Vital signs were taken, ice applied. The physician was contacted and the resident was sent to the hospital for evaluation and treatment. A review of an employee witness statement dated November 28, 2022 at 7:30 PM, revealed that Employee 2, nurse aide, stated I was getting {Resident 1} ready to be washed up and proceeded to put her on the stand up lift. {Resident 1} wiggled herself out of the harness, falling backwards, hitting her head. The facility's investigative report concluded that Employee 2 was transferring Resident 1 from her wheelchair to the toilet using the stand up mechanical lift. Resident 1 was wiggling in the during the transfer and fell from the lift, striking her head on the floor. The investigation into the incident concluded that Employee 2 transferred Resident 1 alone and did not use a two person assist, as per the resident's care plan. Employee 2 was suspended from employment for 3 days and reeducated upon return to work. A significant change MDS (Minimum Data Set - a federally mandated standardized assessment conducted at specific intervals to plan resident care) dated December 1, 2022 revealed Resident 1 was cognitively impaired and required maximum assistance of two staff with ADLs (activities of daily living) including bed mobility and transfers. During an interview on January 24, 2023, at approximately 1 PM, the Director of Nursing stated Employee 2 stated that she did not look the resident's care [NAME] (nurse aide staff instructions for resident care) prior to providing Resident 1's care and transferring the resident by herself. The DON stated that the resident also should not have been transferred with the stand-up mechanical lift. A review of a facility investigation and information dated January 10, 2023 at 4:30 P.M., submitted by the facility revealed that Resident 1's daughter observed the resident still in bed at 10:45 A.M. on January 9, 2023. The daughter asked nursing staff if her mother had been received breakfast and care that morning. In response to the daughter's inquiry, the facility's investigation into incident revealed that there was a nurse aide had called off duty for the dayshift on January 9, 2023. The call off occurred prior to start of the 7 AM to 3 PM shift on January 9, 2023. Employee 3, an agency nurse aide, picked up the shift for that call-off. Facility documentation indicated that this agency nurse aide had worked several 3 PM to 11 PM and 11 PM to 7 AM shifts at the facility, this was the first 7 AM to 3 PM shift worked in the facility. Employee 3 did not arrive until 8:31 AM on January 9, 2023, at which time she was given her assignment and the facility aides provided her with written guidance. Employee 3 (agency na) started her assignment and was notified by the charge nurse at 10:45 AM that Resident 1 still needed to get out of bed. Employee 3 provided Resident 1 with am care and got her out of bed to her recliner at that time. A telephone interview with Employee 3 revealed that Employee 3 had assumed Resident 1 was finished with her breakfast prior to Employee 3 arriving for work at the facility at 8:30 AM. The facility nurse aides on duty assumed the Employee 3, the Agency Nurse Aide would provide Resident 1 with her breakfast. The LPN/Charge Nurse reported she was in Resident 1's room between approximately 8:30 AM and 9 AM to administer medication to the resident. A review of a witness statement from Employee 4, a nurse aide, revealed that On January 9, 2023, {Employee 5 (nurse aide)} and I were working with {Employee 3 (agency nurse aide)} who was assigned to care for {Resident 1.} {Employee 3} was given her assignment (by us) in the order of get ups. {Employee 5} and I passed our breakfast trays and fed our residents. I did not see {Employee 3} at that time, so I figured she had fed residents as well. A review of a witness statement from Employee 5 (nurse aide) revealed that On January 9, 2023, to my knowledge, {Resident 1} was fed after she was given care. I learned at some time after 10:30 A.M., that she wasn't given care yet, but I was also told that the licensed nurse told {Employee 3} to go in and wash her up. I wrote a paper out (a resident assignment) for {Employee 3}. A review of facility documentation revealed that Employee 3 documented that on January 9, 2023, at the breakfast meal, Resident 1 consumed 100% of her meal. During an interview January 24, 2023 at 2 P.M., the Certified Dietary Manager (CDM) stated that currently, the resident dining rooms are closed and all residents are eating in their rooms due to a COVID outbreak. One hour prior to meals, nurse aides meet with their assigned residents and fill out menu cards for the upcoming meal. At the time of the meal, the nurse aide takes the meal ticket to the dining room. The resident meal trays are served from a steam table located in the resident dining room. The assigned nurse aide will then deliver the resident tray and assist the resident as needed with their meal. The CDM stated that on that date, January 9, 2023, for the breakfast meal, the dietary aides in the dining room were not aware that a breakfast tray was prepared and served to Resident 1. There was no evidence at the time of the survey ending January 24, 2023, that Resident 1 received breakfast or AM care until the resident's daughter made nursing staff aware on January 9, 2023 at 10:45 A.M. During an interview January 24, 2023 at 2 PM, the DON stated that on January 9, 2023, Resident 1 received care approximately 6:30 A.M prior to 11 PM to 7 AM staff completing their shift. The DON stated that a 7 AM to 3 PM nurse aide called off prior to the start of the shift. The agency nurse aide, Employee 3, arrived at the facility at 8:30 A.M. and was given her assignment. Employee 3 did not check with nursing staff to ensure that Resident 1 had received her breakfast meal or AM care. Clinical record review revealed that Resident 2 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses to include spinal stenosis (spinal column narrows and compresses the spinal cord). A quarterly MDS dated [DATE], revealed that Resident 2 was cognitively intact and required maximum assistance of two staff with ADLs (activities of daily living) including bed mobility and transfers. A review of the resident's care plan for activities of daily living, dated September 2, 2022, revealed that the resident requires the use of the stand-up lift for functional transfers. A review of a facility investigation report dated October 18, 2022, at 2:20 PM. revealed that Resident 2 reported that she bumped her eye on the bar of the hoyer lift (mechanical lift). The resident was noted with a bruise near her right eye. The facility's investigation revealed that Resident 2 was having difficulty with the standing lift transfer and the nurse aides used the hoyer lift instead. The resident bumped her right eye on the lift bar. Resident 2 complained of blurriness in her right eye. The physician was contacted and the resident was transferred to the hospital for evaluation. The resident stated that she still had blurry vision upon return from the emergency room. An eye consult was made. The resident had an eye appointment on October 21, 2022 for complaints of blurry vision. The consult reported noted that the resident had an orbital contusion, right eye, no ocular complications, no treatment at this time. The nurse aides failed to use the stand-up lift to transfer the resident according to the resident's care plan. Employees 4 and Employee 6 used the hoyer lift and did not transfer Resident 2 as per the plan of care. During an interview January 24, 2023 at approximately 2:15 P.M. the DON confirmed that Employees 4 and 6 did not follow the resident's plan of care regarding transfers for Resident 2 resulting in a minor injury to the resident. 28 Pa. Code 201.19 Personnel policies and procedures 28 Pa. Code 201.29 (a)(d) Resident rights 28 Pa. Code 211.12 (a)(c)(d)(1)(3)(5) Nursing services
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Life-Threatening (Immediate Jeopardy)
J - Isolated K - Pattern L - Widespread
Actual Harm
G - Isolated H - Pattern I - Widespread
Potential for Harm
D - Isolated E - Pattern F - Widespread
No Harm (Minor)
A - Isolated B - Pattern C - Widespread

Questions to Ask on Your Visit

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

Our Honest Assessment

Strengths
  • • Licensed and certified facility. Meets minimum state requirements.
Concerns
  • • 37 deficiencies on record, including 2 serious (caused harm) violations. Ask about corrective actions taken.
  • • $32,646 in fines. Higher than 94% of Pennsylvania facilities, suggesting repeated compliance issues.
  • • Grade F (35/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
Bottom line: Trust Score of 35/100 indicates significant concerns. Thoroughly evaluate alternatives.

About This Facility

What is Marywood Heights's CMS Rating?

CMS assigns MARYWOOD HEIGHTS an overall rating of 2 out of 5 stars, which is considered below average nationally. Within Pennsylvania, this rating places the facility higher than 0% of the state's 100 nursing homes. A rating at this level reflects concerns identified through health inspections, staffing assessments, or quality measures that families should carefully consider.

How is Marywood Heights Staffed?

CMS rates MARYWOOD HEIGHTS's staffing level at 4 out of 5 stars, which is above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 53%, compared to the Pennsylvania average of 46%.

What Have Inspectors Found at Marywood Heights?

State health inspectors documented 37 deficiencies at MARYWOOD HEIGHTS during 2023 to 2025. These included: 2 that caused actual resident harm and 35 with potential for harm. Deficiencies causing actual harm indicate documented cases where residents experienced negative health consequences.

Who Owns and Operates Marywood Heights?

MARYWOOD HEIGHTS is owned by a for-profit company. For-profit facilities operate as businesses with obligations to shareholders or private owners. The facility operates independently rather than as part of a larger chain. With 72 certified beds and approximately 69 residents (about 96% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in SCRANTON, Pennsylvania.

How Does Marywood Heights Compare to Other Pennsylvania Nursing Homes?

Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Pennsylvania, MARYWOOD HEIGHTS's overall rating (2 stars) is below the state average of 3.0, staff turnover (53%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (3 stars) is at the national benchmark.

What Should Families Ask When Visiting Marywood Heights?

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

Is Marywood Heights Safe?

Based on CMS inspection data, MARYWOOD HEIGHTS has a clean safety record: no substantiated abuse findings (meaning no confirmed cases of resident harm), no Immediate Jeopardy citations (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death), and is not on the Special Focus Facility watch list (a federal program monitoring the lowest-performing 1% of nursing homes). The facility has a 2-star overall rating and ranks #100 of 100 nursing homes in Pennsylvania. While no facility is perfect, families should still ask about staff-to-resident ratios and recent inspection results during their visit.

Do Nurses at Marywood Heights Stick Around?

MARYWOOD HEIGHTS has a staff turnover rate of 53%, which is 7 percentage points above the Pennsylvania average of 46%. Moderate turnover is common in nursing homes, but families should still ask about staff tenure and how the facility maintains care continuity when employees leave.

Was Marywood Heights Ever Fined?

MARYWOOD HEIGHTS has been fined $32,646 across 1 penalty action. This is below the Pennsylvania average of $33,405. 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 Marywood Heights on Any Federal Watch List?

MARYWOOD HEIGHTS 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.