Silver Creek Rehab and Healthcare Center

7 Creek Lane, Bristol, RI 02809 (401) 253-3000
For profit - Limited Liability company 128 Beds GREEN TREE HEALTHCARE MANAGEMENT Data: November 2025 3 Immediate Jeopardy citations
Trust Grade
0/100
#56 of 72 in RI
Last Inspection: October 2024

Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.

Overview

Silver Creek Rehab and Healthcare Center has received a Trust Grade of F, indicating a poor rating with significant concerns regarding resident care. Ranking #56 out of 72 facilities in Rhode Island places it in the bottom half, and it is the lowest-rated facility in Bristol County. Although the facility is improving, having reduced its issues from 10 in 2023 to 7 in 2024, it still reports a concerning number of incidents, including critical failures to protect residents from abuse and a choking incident that resulted in a resident's death. Staffing turnover is impressively low at 0%, but the facility has accumulated $216,258 in fines, which is higher than 90% of similar facilities, suggesting ongoing compliance issues. While RN coverage is average, families should weigh these significant weaknesses against the facility’s good quality measures rating.

Trust Score
F
0/100
In Rhode Island
#56/72
Bottom 23%
Safety Record
High Risk
Review needed
Inspections
Getting Better
10 → 7 violations
Staff Stability
○ Average
Turnover data not reported for this facility.
Penalties
✓ Good
$216,258 in fines. Lower than most Rhode Island facilities. Relatively clean record.
Skilled Nurses
○ Average
Each resident gets 40 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — about average for Rhode Island. RNs are the most trained staff who monitor for health changes.
Violations
⚠ Watch
24 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
★★☆☆☆
2.0
Overall Rating
★★☆☆☆
2.0
Staff Levels
★★★★☆
4.0
Care Quality
★★☆☆☆
2.0
Inspection Score
Stable
2023: 10 issues
2024: 7 issues

The Good

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

Facility shows strength in quality measures, fire safety.

The Bad

2-Star Overall Rating

Below Rhode Island average (3.1)

Below average - review inspection findings carefully

Federal Fines: $216,258

Well above median ($33,413)

Significant penalties indicating serious issues

Chain: GREEN TREE HEALTHCARE MANAGEMENT

Part of a multi-facility chain

Ask about local staffing decisions and management

The Ugly 24 deficiencies on record

3 life-threatening 4 actual harm
Oct 2024 3 deficiencies 1 Harm
SERIOUS (H)

Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures

Deficiency F0691 (Tag F0691)

A resident was harmed · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to provide care consistent with prof...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to provide care consistent with professional standards of practice for 3 of 3 residents reviewed with an ostomy (colostomy/ileostomy; are surgical procedures that reroute the bowel to an opening in the abdomen, called a stoma. A wafer, which is fitted or cut to the individual size of the stoma, and a pouch are attached externally around the stoma, to collect the stool from the intestines), Resident ID #s 24, 60, and 99. Findings are as follows: Review of a facility policy titled, Colostomy and Ileostomy Care last revised on 6/1/2021, states in part, .Applying or changing the pouch .Empty, remove, and discard the old pouch, if applicable .Wipe the stoma and peristomal skin gently with a washcloth or gauze .Carefully wash the peristomal skin with soap and water and dry by patting gently .Allow the skin to dry thoroughly .Inspect the color and skin integrity of the stoma and peristomal skin .Notify physician .of abnormal findings .Apply skin prep or liquid skin sealant around the peristomal area covering the skin surface which will be in contact with the pouching system .If needed, apply a ring of stoma paste or a molded barrier ring around the opening on the back of the skin barrier .Document .date and time pouching system changed or emptied, noting character of drainage including color, amount, type, and consistency .type and size of appliance used .Appearance of the stoma and peristomal skin .Notification of physician .patients response . 1) Record review revealed that Resident ID #99 was readmitted to the facility in March of 2024 with a diagnosis including, but not limited to, necrotizing fasciitis (a serious bacterial infection that results in the death of the body's soft tissue). Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 out of 15, indicating intact cognition. Record review revealed that Resident ID #99 has a colostomy to his/her left lower abdomen. Record review revealed the following progress notes relative to his/her colostomy: - 9/16/2024: Resident ID #99 reported concerns with his/her ostomy site. S/he revealed that s/he is experiencing pain around the edges of the skin/stoma and that both areas are bleeding - 9/17/2024: The stoma site has mild peristomal skin (the skin that the ostomy wafer adheres to) breakdown, largely in part to aperture [stoma appliance and collection device for waste products] cut too large and .irrigation fluids not being drained entirely from [colostomy] bag . - 10/19/2024: The ostomy appliance was changed because it was leaking and the peristomal skin was noted to be irritated - 10/27/2024: The ostomy appliance was changed because it was leaking and the peristomal skin remains irritated Record review failed to reveal evidence that the physician was contacted, and a treatment was implemented for the breakdown of the peristomal skin. Further record review failed to reveal evidence indicating when the ostomy appliances are to be changed or the type and size of appliances that are to be used for the resident. During a surveyor interview on 10/30/2024 at 9:43 AM with Nursing Assistant (NA), Staff B, she revealed that Resident ID #99 has ostomy supplies in his/her room. Staff B revealed that she does not provide ostomy care for the resident although s/he is on her assignment. During a surveyor interview on 10/30/2024 at 12:19 PM with the Director of Nursing Services (DNS), she was unable to explain why a treatment was not in place for Resident ID #99's peristomal skin breakdown and would expect a treatment to be in place. Additionally, she was unable to provide evidence of documentation that would indicate to the facility's staff as to when the ostomy appliances are to be changed or the type and size of appliances that are to be used. She further revealed that she would expect there to be orders to be in place indicating when to change the ostomy appliance, and the type and size of the ostomy appliances to be used. During a surveyor interview on 10/31/2024 at 9:20 AM with the resident, in the presence of the DNS, s/he revealed that the site around his/her stoma is red and sore and indicated that it burns and bleeds at times. Further, the resident revealed that staff only change his/her ostomy when it is leaking stool. At this time, the DNS indicated to Resident ID #99 that a treatment will be put into place moving forward to help with his/her peristomal skin breakdown and burning. 2) Record review revealed that Resident ID #60 was admitted to the facility in December of 2023 with a diagnosis including, but not limited to, ileostomy status. Review of a MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed a BIMS score of 9 out of 15, indicating moderately impaired cognition. Additional record review failed to reveal evidence indicating when the ostomy appliance is to be changed or the type and size of appliance that is to be used for the resident. During a surveyor interview on 10/30/2024 at 11:09 AM with NA, Staff D, she revealed that sometimes she changes Resident ID #60's ostomy appliance and sometimes the nurse will do it. She further revealed that she does not measure the size of the stoma. Further, she picked up Resident ID #60's clean ostomy appliance and indicated she cuts it to 55 millimeters (mm). During a surveyor interview on 10/30/2024 at 12:00 PM with Licensed Practical Nurse, Staff A, she revealed that nurses change the ostomy appliances, and NAs only empty the collection bag. She further revealed there are no specific orders to change the ostomy appliance and she only changes the appliance when it comes loose. Furthermore, she picked up Resident ID #60's clean ostomy appliance and indicated that she cuts it to 32-38 mm. Additionally, she acknowledged that there are no current orders in place indicating when to change the ostomy appliance including the type and size of the appliance to be used. During a surveyor interview on 10/30/2024 at 2:42 PM with Resident ID #60, s/he revealed that s/he is unsure who changes her ostomy appliances or how often staff changes them. 3) Record review revealed that Resident ID #24 was admitted to the facility in August of 2023 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, overactive bladder and the need for assistance with personal care. Record review revealed that Resident ID #24 has a colostomy on his/her left lower abdomen. Additional record review failed to reveal evidence indicating when the ostomy appliance is to be changed or the type and size of appliance that is to be used for the resident. During a surveyor observation and simultaneous interview on 10/30/2024 at 9:45 AM of Resident ID #24's ostomy site with NA, Staff C, Resident ID #24's stoma was noted to be prolapsed. Staff C revealed that Resident ID #24's stoma has been prolapsed. Record review of an order dated 4/17/2024 revealed to apply a small amount of granulated sugar directly to the resident's stoma due to a prolapsed stoma (a complication of ostomy surgery where a piece of the intestine pushes out through the stoma) every 12 hours as needed. Additionally, the order indicated that the sugar should come back out on its own, and to notify the surgeon and in-house physician if it does not. Review of the October 2024 Treatment Administration Record failed reveal evidence that the above-mentioned order was documented as administered. Staff C further revealed on 10/30/2024 at 9:45 AM, that she utilizes the ostomy appliance in Resident ID #24's room for ostomy care and indicated that she cuts the ostomy appliance and applies them to the resident's stoma. Additionally, Staff C was unable to provide specific days or times when Resident ID #24's ostomy appliance should be changed. During a surveyor interview on 10/30/2024 at 12:19 PM with the DNS, she was unable to provide evidence of documentation that would indicate to the facility's staff as to when the ostomy appliances are to be changed or the type and size of appliances that are to be used. Additionally, she revealed that she would expect orders to be in place indicating when to change the ostomy appliance, and the type and size of the ostomy appliances to be used. Furthermore, she revealed that she was unsure of the order to apply granulated sugar to Resident ID #24's prolapsed stoma and would need to reach out to the surgeon. During a surveyor interview on 10/30/2024 at 12:49 PM with the physician, he revealed that he was unaware that the resident had a prolapsed stoma and was unable to explain why sugar should be applied to it. Additionally, he revealed that he was unsure of how much sugar should be applied or how often the sugar should be applied to the prolapsed stoma. A call was placed to Resident ID #24's surgeon by the surveyor on 10/30/2024 at 12:54 PM, a return call has not been received. During a surveyor interview on 10/30/2024 at 1:09 PM with the Regional Clinical Director, she acknowledged that there is not an order in place to change Resident ID #24's ostomy appliances but indicated that staff have been changing the bag. Additionally, she acknowledged that the facility needs to contact the surgeon in order to clarify the granulated sugar. Lastly, she acknowledged that Resident ID #24 does have a prolapsed stoma. During a surveyor interview on 10/31/2024 at 12:33 PM with the DNS, she revealed that after receiving clarification from the surgeon, the sugar is to be applied to the entire stoma if the stoma is greater than 6 centimeters (cm). Review of the revised prolapsed stoma order dated 10/31/2024 states in part, For prolapsed stoma of 6 cm or more: Apply granulated sugar to cover entire area of stoma, allow sugar to sit on stoma, stoma should begin to retract. If stoma is unable to retract to less than 6 cm of prolapse contact general surgeon . Additionally, record review revealed an order dated 10/31/2024 to measure the stoma twice daily, after the concerns were brought to the facility's attention by the surveyor.
CONCERN (D)

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

Pressure Ulcer Prevention (Tag F0686)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to provide necessary treatment and s...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to provide necessary treatment and services, consistent with professional standards of practice, to promote wound healing and prevent new ulcers from developing for 1 of 1 resident reviewed with a deep tissue injury (DTI; a purple or maroon localized area of discolored intact skin or blood-filled blister due to damage of the underlying soft tissue from pressure), Resident ID #76. Findings are as follows: Review of a facility policy titled, Skin Care Protocol states in part, .With each dressing change or at least weekly, the following documentation must be present: location and staging .exudate [drainage] .pain .wound bed .description of wound edges . Record review revealed the resident was readmitted to the facility in March of 2024 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, muscle weakness and obesity. Record review of the care plan revealed the resident is at risk for impaired skin integrity with interventions including, but not limited to, evaluate the wound for size, depth, margins such as, peri-wound skin, undermining, exudate, edema (swelling), granulation (healing tissue), infection, necrosis (dying tissue), eschar (dead tissue often covering a wound bed), gangrene (death of tissue due to lack of blood supply), and document the progress of the wound healing on an ongoing basis. Record review of a skin assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident has a DTI to his/her right heel measuring 2 centimeters (cm) X (by) 2 cm. Additionally, the skin assessment revealed s/he has a DTI to his/her left heel measuring 4 cm X 2 cm. Record review revealed a physician's order dated 10/3/2024 to apply skin prep to the DTIs on the right and left foot daily. Record review failed to reveal evidence of weekly documentation of the DTIs to the resident's left and right heels that included, measurements, staging, exudate, pain, wound bed, or a description of wound edges on 10/10, 10/17 and 10/24/2024. During a surveyor interview with Licensed Practical Nurse, Staff A, on 10/30/2024 at 9:10 AM she was unable to provide evidence of documentation in the medical record to include measurements, staging, exudate, pain, wound bed, or description of the wound edges for three consecutive weeks. During a surveyor interview on 10/30/2024 at 11:34 AM with the Director of Nursing Services, she was unable to provide evidence of documentation of the resident's wounds on 10/10, 10/17 and 10/24/2024. Additionally, she revealed that it is her expectation that the staff document weekly on wounds including, staging, exudate, pain, wound bed, and wound edges.
CONCERN (E)

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

Infection Control (Tag F0880)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on surveyor observation, record review, and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program to help prevent the transmiss...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on surveyor observation, record review, and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program to help prevent the transmission of communicable diseases and infections, relative to Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP; involves using gown and gloves during high-contact resident care activities) for 1 of 1 resident observed for transfers, Resident ID #76, and relative to COVID-19 for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for COVID-19 precautions, Resident ID #78. Findings are as follows: 1) Review of a facility policy titled, Guidelines for Management of MDROs [multi-drug resistant organism] states in part, .Caring for a resident with a MDRO .Enhanced Barrier Precautions expand the use of PPE [personal protective equipment] beyond situations in which exposure to blood and body fluids is anticipated and refers to gown and glove use during high-contact resident care activities for residents with infection or colonization with a targeted MDRO .High risk resident care activities provide opportunities for the transfer of MDROs to staff hands and clothing. Examples of resident care activities requiring gown and glove use for Enhanced Barrier Precautions include: Dressing .Transferring .Providing hygiene . Record review revealed Resident ID #76 was readmitted to the facility in March of 2024 with a diagnosis including, but not limited to, assistance with personal care. Review of a document titled, Lab Results Report dated 9/26/2024 revealed Resident ID #76 was positive for Extended Spectrum Beta Lactamase (ESBL; an MDRO). Record review revealed a physician's order dated 10/25/2024 to maintain EBP as appropriate. During a surveyor observation on 10/28/2024 at 12:16 PM, Nursing Assistant (NA), Staff F, was observed providing morning care to Resident ID #76 in his/her room, without wearing a gown. Further observation revealed signage posted at the resident's door which indicated to wear a gown and gloves during high contact care activities. Additional observation on 10/28/2024 at 12:22 PM, NA, Staff G, was observed transferring Resident ID #76 with Staff F, without wearing a gown. During a surveyor interview on 10/28/2024 at 12:29 PM, with Staff F and G, they acknowledged the signage posted at Resident ID #76's door and revealed that they were unsure about the use of EBP and were unaware if the resident required EBP during care. During a surveyor observation on 10/29/2024 at 11:12 AM, NA, Staff H, was observed fixing Resident ID #76's clothing by pulling up his/her pants and was preparing to transfer him/her, without wearing a gown. Additional observation on 10/29/2024 at 11:16 AM, revealed NA, Staff I, entered Resident ID #76's room and assisted Staff H with transferring the resident, without wearing a gown. During a surveyor interview on 10/29/2024 at 11:23 AM, with Staff H and I, they acknowledged the signage posted at Resident ID #76's door and revealed that they thought the EBP was for the resident's roommate. Further, they acknowledged that they should have been wearing a gown when providing care and transferring him/her. During a surveyor interview on 10/30/2024 at 11:31 AM, with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN), Staff A, she revealed that she would expect staff to wear both gloves and a gown for any physical contact, including providing personal care and transferring a resident who is on EBP. During a surveyor interview on 10/30/2024 at 12:03 PM, with the Director of Nursing Services (DNS), she revealed that she would expect staff to follow the EBP signage and wear the appropriate PPE, during high contact care activities for residents on EBP. 2) Review of facility signage titled, DROPLET CONTACT PRECAUTIONS EVERYONE MUST for COVID-19, providers and staff must wear a mask at all times, wear gloves, a gown, and a face shield prior to entering a resident's room. Record review revealed Resident ID #78 was admitted to the facility in October of 2024 with a diagnosis including, but not limited to, dementia. Record review revealed the resident tested positive for COVID-19 on 10/28/2024 and was placed on droplet contact precautions. During a surveyor observation on 10/30/2024 at 8:08 AM, NA, Staff J, was observed entering Resident ID #78's room without eye protection. During a surveyor interview on 10/30/2024 at 8:20 AM, with Staff J, she acknowledged that she did not wear eye protection, as required, when entering a COVID-19 positive resident room. During a surveyor interview on 10/30/2024 at 8:48 AM, with LPN, Staff K, she revealed that prior to entering a COVID-19 positive room, all staff should be wearing full PPE, which includes a gown, gloves, N95 mask, and eye protection. During a surveyor interview on 10/30/2024 at 12:50 PM, with the DNS, she revealed that she would expect staff to wear full PPE, including a gown, gloves, N95 mask, and eye protection, when entering a COVID-19 positive resident room.
Aug 2024 2 deficiencies 2 IJ
CRITICAL (J) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation

Free from Abuse/Neglect (Tag F0600)

Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident

Based on record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to keep a resident free from physical abuse for 2 of 4 residents reviewed, Resident ID #s 2 and 3. Findings...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to keep a resident free from physical abuse for 2 of 4 residents reviewed, Resident ID #s 2 and 3. Findings are as follows: Review of a facility policy titled, Abuse Prohibition last revised on 10/31/2022 states in part, It is the policy of this facility to ensure that all residents are treated with respect and dignity and that all residents are free from abuse, mistreatment, neglect .Abuse: willful infliction of injury, unreasonable confinement, intimidation, or punishment resulting in physical harm, pain or mental anguish . Review of a facility reported incident received by the Rhode Island Department of Health on 8/2/2024 states in part, On 8/1/24 at or around 9pm staff were made aware of an incident when they heard screaming .[Resident ID #1] was found on top of [Resident ID #2] with a sheet over [his/her] head . Record review revealed that Resident ID #1 (perpetrator) was admitted to the facility in September of 2023 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, dementia, anxiety and depression. Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment for Resident ID #1 dated 7/5/2024 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) Score of 4 out of 15 indicating severe cognitive impairment. Additional review of the MDS revealed s/he transfers and ambulates independently. Record review revealed that Resident ID #2 (victim) was admitted to the facility in September of 2022 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, breast cancer and anxiety. Review of an MDS Assessment for Resident ID #2 dated 7/12/2024 revealed a BIMS score of 0 indicating severe cognitive impairment. Further review of the MDS revealed Resident ID #2 is non-ambulatory and is dependent for all activities of daily living. Additionally, it revealed that s/he is receiving hospice services. During a surveyor interview via telephone on 8/8/2024, at 10:44 AM with Nursing Assistant (NA) Staff B, she revealed that on 8/1/2024 she witnessed Resident ID #1 in Resident ID #2's bed. Resident ID #1 was on top of Resident ID #2 holding a sheet over his/her face, Resident ID #2 was screaming. Review of second facility reported incident received by the Rhode Island Department of Health dated 8/2/2024 states in part, During our initial investigation the facility was made aware of another resident incident. [Resident ID #3] made a supervisor aware [s/he] was afraid of [Resident ID#1] and said something was put over [his/her] head . Record review revealed that Resident ID #3 (victim) was admitted to the facility in June of 2024 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, dementia, anxiety and depression. Review of an MDS Assessment for Resident ID #3 dated 6/11/2024 revealed a BIMS score of 15 out of 15 indicating intact cognition. Additional review of the MDS revealed s/he requires supervision or touching assistance with transfers and ambulation. Review of a facility provided statement authored by Licensed Practical Nurse, Staff A, dated 8/2/2024 revealed that on 7/31/2024 Resident ID #3 reported feeling scared of his/her roommate (Resident ID #1) and felt like s/he was trying to kill him/her and had put a blanket over his/her face. The statement further revealed that the facility moved Resident ID #3 to another room for safety reasons. During a surveyor interview on 8/8/2024 at approximately 10:00 AM with the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADNS) she revealed that she was made aware of the accusations that Resident ID #3 had made against Resident ID #1 on 7/31/2024. Additionally, she revealed that a room change was made for Resident ID #3. The ADNS further revealed that no additional investigation was completed regarding this allegation on 7/31/2024 or 8/1/2024. The ADNS revealed that she was too busy to investigate the allegation any further. During a surveyor interview on 8/8/2024 at 10:22 AM with the Social Worker, Staff C, she revealed that she was made aware of the accusations by Resident ID #3 against Resident ID #1 on 7/31/2024 and that she made a room change for Resident ID #3. Staff C acknowledged moving Resident ID #2 into same room as Resident ID #1, even though there had been an accusation of abuse made against Resident ID #1. Staff C further revealed that she did not interview Resident ID #1 or Resident ID #3 on the day the allegation was made, as she was too busy to investigate the allegation any further. Review of the census report revealed Resident ID #3 and Resident ID #2 switched beds on 7/31/2024. During a surveyor interview on 8/8/2024 at approximately 10:40 AM with the Regional Director of Nursing, she acknowledged that Resident ID #2 was moved into a room with Resident ID #1, even though Resident ID #1 was accused of being abusive on that same day. Additionally, she was unable to provide evidence that Resident ID #2 had been kept free of abuse. Cross reference F610
CRITICAL (J) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation

Investigate Abuse (Tag F0610)

Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident

Based on record review and staff interview it has been determined that the facility failed to provide evidence that an alleged violation of abuse was investigated, relative to an allegation of residen...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and staff interview it has been determined that the facility failed to provide evidence that an alleged violation of abuse was investigated, relative to an allegation of resident-to-resident abuse between Resident ID #s 1 and 3, which in turn resulted in Resident ID #2 sustaining abuse by the same alleged perpetrator, Resident ID #1. Findings are as follows: Review of a facility policy titled, Abuse Prohibition last revised on 10/31/2022 states in part, .Any instance of actual or suspected abuse, neglect, mistreatment, involuntary confinement, misappropriation of resident property, including injuries of unknown origins including bruises, skin tears, or lacerations must be reported immediately to the DNS [Director of Nursing Services]/designee, i.e., supervisor on duty and an incident report is filled out .immediate response to allegations and/or incidents may include as appropriate but not limited to, examination of the victim for physical injury, trauma assessment for psychosocial injury, increased supervision of the victim and others as needed, room changes as needed, provision of ongoing emotional support during the investigation and ongoing as needed . Review of a facility reported incident received by the Rhode Island Department of Health dated 8/1/2024 states in part, On 8/1/24 at or around 9pm staff were made aware of an incident when they heard screaming .[Resident ID #1] was found on top of [Resident ID #2] with a sheet over [his/her] head . Review of a second facility reported incident received by the Rhode Island Department of Health dated 8/2/2024 states in part, During our initial investigation the facility was made aware of another resident incident. [Resident ID #3] made a supervisor aware [s/he] was afraid of [Resident ID#1] and said something was put over [his/her] head . Record review revealed that Resident ID #3 was admitted to the facility in June of 2024 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, dementia, anxiety, and depression. Review of a Minimum Data Set Assessment for Resident ID #3 dated 6/11/2024 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 out of 15, indicating intact cognition. Review of a facility provided statement authored by Licensed Practical Nurse, Staff A, dated 8/2/2024 revealed that on 7/31/2024 Resident ID #3 reported feeling scared of his/her roommate (Resident ID #1) and felt like s/he was trying to kill him/her and had put a blanket over his/her face. The statement further revealed that the facility moved Resident ID #3 to another room for safety reasons. During a surveyor interview on 8/8/2024 at approximately 10:00 AM with the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADNS) she revealed that she was made aware of the accusation that Resident ID #3 had made against Resident ID #1 on 7/31/2024. Additionally, she revealed that a room change was made for Resident ID #3. The ADNS further revealed that no additional investigation was completed regarding the allegation Resident ID #3 made on 7/31/2024. During a surveyor interview on 8/8/2024 at 10:22 AM with the Social Worker, Staff C, she revealed that she was made aware of the accusation of abuse made by Resident ID #3 against Resident ID #1 on 7/31/2024 and that she made a room change for Resident ID #3. Staff C further revealed that she did not interview Resident ID #1 or Resident ID #3 on the day the abuse allegation was made. Additionally, she stated that she and did not initiate any type of investigation regarding this allegation of abuse, because she was too busy. Review of the census report revealed Resident ID #3 and Resident ID #2 switched rooms/beds on 7/31/2024. Review of an MDS Assessment for Resident ID #2 dated 7/12/2024 revealed a BIMS score of 0 indicating severe cognitive impairment. Further review of the MDS revealed Resident ID #2 is non ambulatory and is dependent for all activities of daily living (ADL) and is receiving hospice services. During a surveyor interview via telephone on 8/8/2024, at 10:44 AM with Nursing Assistant (NA) Staff B, she revealed that on 8/1/2024 she witnessed Resident ID #1 in Resident ID #2's bed. Resident ID #1 was on top of Resident ID #2 holding a sheet over his/her face, Resident ID #2 was screaming. Additionally, Staff B revealed that she was unaware of the previous abuse allegation that Resident ID #3 had made against Resident ID #1 and was not made aware of it until after she had witnessed Resident ID #1 on top of Resident ID #2 holding a sheet over his/her face. During a surveyor interview on 8/8/2024 at approximately 10:40 AM with the Regional Director of Nursing she acknowledged that there was not an investigation initiated on 7/31/2024 even though Staff A, Staff C and the ADNS were all aware of the abuse allegation reported by Resident #3. The facility's failure to investigate the allegation of abuse made by Resident ID #3 on 7/31/2024, placed Resident ID #2, a vulnerable resident who was cognitively impaired, unable to ambulate, dependent on staff for all of his/her ADLs and receiving hospice services, placed him/her at risk for serious injury, serious harm, impairment or death. Cross reference F600
Aug 2024 2 deficiencies 1 IJ
CRITICAL (J) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation

Accident Prevention (Tag F0689)

Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and staff interview it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents who require ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and staff interview it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents who require supervision with meals, received supervision when eating, for 1 of 4 residents reviewed, Resident ID #1. Findings are as follows: Review of a facility reported incident received by the Rhode Island Department of Health on 7/25/2024 revealed that Resident ID #1 experienced a choking incident at 4:17 PM, the Heimlich maneuver (first aid method used when a person is choking) was initiated followed by Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR). The facility contacted Emergency Medical Services (EMS) and the resident was transported to the Hospital at 5:00 PM where s/he expired. Record review of the EMS report revealed that they were dispatched to the facility for a resident with airway obstruction, who was unconscious and not breathing. The facility communicated with EMS that the resident was eating pizza for dinner in his/her room when s/he choked causing complete airway obstruction and s/he started turning blue. The resident's roommate called for help and the facility staff found the resident actively choking. The facility staff attempted to perform the Heimlich maneuver without success. At this time the resident became unconscious, and the facility staff assisted Resident ID #1 to the floor and chest compressions were started. Per the EMS report the facility staff attempted to manually remove the foreign body via suctioning without success and then proceeded to call 911. When EMS arrived the resident's airway was completely compromised. High quality CPR was being performed by the facility staff and the automated external defibrillator (a device that can help restart a person's heart during cardiac arrest) was attached to the resident and s/he was being passively ventilated. The suction canister next to the resident had blood and secretions in the tubing after the facility staff attempted removal of the foreign body. EMS took over resuscitation efforts and initiated continuous compressions. EMS removed chucks of melted cheese and bread from his/her airway, and they continued to suction copious (large in quantity) amounts of blood and secretions until the airway was patent (open). The procedure took approximately 10 minutes until the airway was completely clear of the obstruction. EMS was unable to intubate due to the copious amount of blood and secretions. Nine rounds of epinephrine (a medication that is used in an emergency to increase blood circulation and breathing) were administered to the resident with no improvement. Resuscitation continued for 30 minutes at the facility and then the resident was transported to the hospital where s/he was pronounced deceased . Record review revealed that Resident ID #1 was readmitted to the facility in October of 2020 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, Barrett's esophagus (a change in the cellular structure of the esophagus lining in which a patient can develop difficulty swallowing), hemiplegia (paralysis in one side of the body), and hemiparesis (muscle weakness on one side of the body) following a stroke, and dementia. Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 13 out of 15, indicating the resident is cognitively intact. Additionally, the assessment revealed that the resident required supervision of one staff member when eating. Review of a comprehensive care plan revealed the following: -6/14/2024 a focus area indicating that the resident receives a therapeutic mechanically altered diet related in part to dysphagia (difficulty swallowing). Interventions include monitoring, reporting signs and symptoms of dysphagia, and documenting; pocketing, choking, coughing, drooling, holding food in mouth, several attempts at swallowing, refusing to eat and/or appearing concerned during meals. -7/20/2024 a focus area for dental care related to the resident being edentulous (having no teeth). Interventions are to monitor for discomfort or difficulty chewing. Review of a physician's order dated 6/7/2022 revealed a consistent carbohydrate diet (CCD), minced and moist in texture. In addition, it includes directions for low lactose, small portions, built up utensils, a plate guard with meals and no carrots. Review of the Speech Therapy Discharge Summary dated 6/4/2024 authored by Speech Language Pathologist (SLP), Staff A, revealed that the resident had a skilled intervention to follow safe swallowing strategies. Additionally, the summary indicates recommendations for a minced and moist textured diet to safely swallow solid foods. Record review of a nursing assistant task document titled ADL [Activities of Daily Living]-Eating, Question 2 describes the following, EATING: SELF PERFORMANCE-How resident eats and drinks, regardless of skill . revealed the following: From 6/30/2024 through 7/25/2024 -For 9 out of 62 opportunities the resident was documented total dependence, full staff performance for eating. -For 30 out of 62 opportunities the resident was documented as needing supervision, oversight, encouragement or cueing for eating. Record review of the progress notes revealed the following: -6/26/2024, a nutritional/dietary note that revealed a quarterly nutritional assessment indicating the resident requires varying levels of assistance from set up to hands on assistance from staff for meals. -7/25/2024, a nursing note authored by Licensed Practical Nurse, Staff G, states in part, At approximately 1617 [4:17 PM] hours, while passing medications, this writer responded to [Resident ID #1] who called out for water. Upon entering the room, the resident was unable to speak and appeared to be choking. I called for help and immediately initiated the Heimlich maneuver. A code blue was initiated, EMS was called. Nurses throughout the building participated in CPR. EMS arrived at 1627 [4:27 PM] hours and took over resuscitation procedures . During a surveyor interview on 7/26/2024 at 1:20 PM with SLP, Staff A, she revealed that the resident was last seen by speech in June of 2024. She indicated that the resident has no teeth, is impulsive, forgetful, and needed reminders to pace him/herself because s/he tends to eat at a fast rate. Additionally, Staff A revealed that whole pizza slices were not a part of the resident's prescribed diet. She further revealed that the resident required assistance and supervision from staff to remind him/her to swallow their food. During a surveyor interview on 7/29/2024 at 2:40 PM with Nursing Assistant, Staff B, she revealed that the resident required supervision for all meals because s/he has a moist and minced modified diet. In addition, she revealed that when the resident desired to have food that was not minced and moist the resident could be easily redirected to get another snack or meal that was appropriate for his/her prescribed diet. During a surveyor interview on 7/30/2024 at 1:13 PM with the resident's child, s/he revealed that s/he could not understand how another resident was allowed to give his/her parent [Resident ID #1] whole slices of pizza without the staff's knowledge, or why they were not monitoring him/her when s/he was eating the pizza, if they were aware s/he had whole slices of pizza. S/he further indicated that his/her stepchild, who works at a pizzeria, brought in a special made pizza for the resident's birthday approximately a week prior. The pizza was prepared moist and minced, as the family was aware of the resident's modified diet. Furthermore, when the pizza was brought into the facility for the resident on his/her birthday, a nurse approved the pizza prior to the resident's consumption, and the family supervised the resident while s/he ate it in its entirety. During a surveyor interview on 7/30/2024 at 3:04 PM, with Registered Nurse (RN), Staff C, she indicated that on 7/25/2024, while she was receiving a nurse to nurse report and preparing to count medications, she saw a pizza delivery person heading towards Resident ID #2's room. Staff C completed the medication count and proceeded to Resident ID #2's room. She discovered that Resident ID #2 had given 2 slices of whole pizza to Resident ID #1. Staff C found Resident ID #1 in his/her room, with 2 whole pizza slices on a plate. Staff C tried to educate the resident about the potential choking hazards of eating pizza, but the resident reacted defensively. She then left the resident unsupervised and went upstairs to inform RN's, Staff D, and E about the situation. After discussing with them, she went back downstairs and discussed the situation with RN, Staff F. At that time someone suggested getting the speech pathologist. Staff C made her way to the speech pathologist's office, but she was not there. Further interview with RN, Staff C revealed that she then returned to Resident ID #1's room and noticed that the resident had almost finished the pizza, as only the crust remained on the plate. She tried to educate the resident but the resident, stated she had pizza for his/her birthday. Staff C stated that she left the resident with the pizza crust on the plate. Later, while preparing to administer pain medication to another resident, she heard another staff member screaming for help and found 3 other nurses in the resident's room where she observed the resident trying to speak but the words were not clear. The Heimlich maneuver was initiated but was unsuccessful and CPR was started. EMS arrived on site, took over CPR and attempted to intubated and suction the resident. EMS finally transported the resident to the hospital after approximately 43 minutes of resuscitation. Additionally, Staff C acknowledged that she left the resident without supervision in his/her room on 7/25/2024 on two occasions, and that she was aware that the pizza was not approved for his/her modified diet of a minced and moist texture. Record review revealed that Resident ID #2 was readmitted to the facility in May of 2024 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and generalized muscle weakness. Review of an MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed a BIMS score of 15 out of 15, indicating the resident is cognitively intact. During a surveyor interview on 7/26/2024 at 1:40 PM with Resident ID #2, s/he revealed that on 7/25/2024 s/he ordered a pizza. S/he indicated that the delivery person was assisting him/her with the food. Resident ID #1 approached the door and asked for some pizza. Resident ID #2 instructed the delivery person to give 2 slices of pizza to Resident ID #1. Resident ID #1 then took the pizza and returned to his/her room. Resident ID #2 further revealed that s/he informed RN, Staff C, that s/he gave 2 slices of whole pizza to Resident ID #1. Furthermore s/he stated that Staff C told him/her that s/he should not have given the pizza to Resident ID #1. During a surveyor interview on 7/29/2024 at 11:34 AM with the Director of Nursing Services, he acknowledged that the resident expired from choking on slices of whole pizza that the resident consumed. The facility failed to provide Resident ID #1 with adequate supervision while s/he was eating whole pizza slices which is not the resident's ordered diet texture. Staff C was aware that the resident was given whole pizza slices by another resident, and she left the resident unsupervised on two occasions to eat the pizza independently. This failure resulted in Resident ID #1 choking on whole pizza slices, received the Heimlich maneuver and CPR, being suctioned, received 9 rounds of epinephrine and later expired at the hospital.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Free from Abuse/Neglect (Tag F0600)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on record review and staff interview it has been determined that the facility failed to keep a resident free from physical abuse for 1 of 4 residents reviewed, Resident ID #4. Findings are as fo...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and staff interview it has been determined that the facility failed to keep a resident free from physical abuse for 1 of 4 residents reviewed, Resident ID #4. Findings are as follows: Review of the facility policy titled Abuse prohibition states in part, .It is the policy of this facility to ensure that all residents are treated with respect and dignity and that all residents are free from abuse .Definitions: Abuse: Willful infliction of injury .and includes physical, verbal, sexual, and mental abuse. Examples of abuse include but are not limited to the following .Physical-Hitting, punching, pinching, kicking . Record review of a facility incident report submitted to the Rhode Island Department of Health on 6/24/2024, indicates that Resident ID #s 4 and 5 were participating in a coloring activity in a common area and had a disagreement. The perpetrator, Resident ID #5 grabbed a pen and made contact with the victim, Resident ID #4's, hand causing a skin tear that required medical treatment. Record review revealed that Resident ID #4 was admitted to the facility in January of 2021 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, dementia without behavioral disturbances and anxiety. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment for Resident ID #4 dated 7/3/2024, revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 9 out of 15, indicating that the resident's cognition was moderately impaired. Record review of Resident ID #4 progress notes revealed the following: -4/22/2024 a nursing note that revealed that Resident ID #4 was participating in a group coloring activity when Resident ID #5 got upset and aggressive towards him/her for throwing pencils on the ground. Resident ID #5 had pencils in his/her hand and injured Resident ID #4's left hand resulting in a skin tear requiring treatment. Resident ID #5 was also observed by staff to be kicking Resident ID #4 in the legs. -4/23/2024, revealed a social service note authored by Social Worker, Staff I, that indicates she met with Resident ID #4 after the incident with Resident ID #5 and that Resident ID #4 expressed feeling pain in his/her left hand. Record review of a skin observation tool dated 4/22/2024 revealed that Resident ID #4 had a skin tear to the back of his/her left hand measuring 2.5 centimeters (cm) in length by 2.0 cm in width by 0.1 cm in depth. Review of the physician's orders revealed an order dated 4/24/2024 for a skin tear on the left hand to wash with normal saline followed by Medi honey (gel/ointment use to treat wounds) and a dry sterile dressing to be applied in the evening and to discontinue once resolved. The order had a start date of 4/25/2024 and was discontinued on 5/11/2024. Record review revealed that Resident ID #5, was admitted to the facility in July of 2023 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, dementia and depression. Review of a Quarterly MDS Assessment for Resident ID #5 dated 3/22/2024, revealed a BIMS score of 6 out of 15, indicating severe cognitive impairment. Review of Resident ID #5's care plan dated 4/26/2024 failed to reveal evidence that interventions were put into place relative to the incident of physical aggression towards Resident ID #4 on 4/22/2024. Record review of a progress note dated 4/22/2024 for Resident ID #5, revealed that s/he was observed by staff becoming agitated and aggressive with Resident ID #4. Additionally, the progress note revealed that Resident ID #5 grabbed the pencils and caused a skin tear to Resident ID #4's left hand. It further revealed that Resident ID #5 was observed kicking Resident ID #4. During a surveyor interview on 7/30/2024 at 3:34 PM with the Director of Nursing Services, he acknowledged that Resident ID #4 sustained a skin tear caused by Resident ID #5 and that it is considered physical abuse as described in the facility policy. Additionally, he was unable to provide evidence that the facility kept Resident ID #4 free from physical abuse.
Dec 2023 2 deficiencies 2 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

Quality of Care (Tag F0684)

A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on surveyor observation, record review, resident and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to e...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on surveyor observation, record review, resident and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure that each resident receives the necessary care and services to maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for 1 of 1 resident reviewed with congestive heart failure (CHF), who experienced an acute change in condition which resulted in a hospital admission, Resident ID #1. Findings are as follows: Record review of a community reported complaint submitted to the Rhode Island Department of Health on 12/26/2023 alleges the following, .The resident's daughter stated that during [the resident's] stay [s/he] suffered pneumonia, swelling of extremities, and swelling of [his/her] abdomen . Record review of a facility policy titled, Resident Change in Condition dated 10/17/2023, states in part, .POLICY: The facility will ensure that resident changes in condition are identified timely, reported to the Physician .and documentation in the medical record .1.changes in condition require assessment by the RN [Registered Nurse] and notification to the MD [Medical Doctor] . Record review of a facility policy titled, Weight Loss/Gain Protocol and Heights dated 5/1/2022, states in part, . For purposes of this policy, significant weight discrepancy is defined as .2. A loss/gain of 5% or greater within one month .When a significant weight loss/gain is noted .the following interventions must occur .start weekly weights, if not already on . Record review revealed Resident ID #1 was admitted to the facility in November of 2023 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, hypertension, acute respiratory failure with hypercapnia (an increase of arterial carbon dioxide), pneumonia and congestive heart failure (a condition when your heart can't pump blood adequately and fluids collect in your lungs and legs overtime. Symptoms include but are not limited to shortness of breath, swelling in your ankles and legs). Record review of a Brief Interview for Mental Status assessment dated [DATE] reveals a score of 11 out of 15, indicating moderate impaired cognition. Record review revealed a physician order dated 11/14/2023 for daily weights for three days, then weekly weights for 4 weeks. Record review of the Treatment Administration Record for November and December 2023 revealed the following: 11/14/2023 166.0 pounds (lbs.) 11/16/2023 166.0 lbs. 11/17/2023 168.8 lbs. 11/20/2023 168.2 lbs. 11/27/2023 a weight was not obtained 12/4/2023 173.0 lbs. 12/11/2023 174.8 lbs. 12/15/2023 173.0 lbs. Additional record review revealed the resident had a chest x-ray completed on 11/23/2023 which indicated that s/he was in mild CHF. The physician ordered Lasix 20 mg ( a medication given to help treat fluid retention (edema) and swelling that is caused by CHF), to be administered to the resident once a day on 11/23, 11/24 and 11/25/2023. Further record review failed to reveal evidence that the resident's weight was obtained as ordered on 11/27/2023. Lastly, review of the above-mentioned weights revealed that from 11/14/2023 through 12/15/2023 the resident had a 5.4% weight increase, indicating s/he experienced a significant weight gain. Record review of a progress note dated 12/13/2023, authored by the Registered Dietician (RD), revealed the resident triggered for a significant weight gain in 30 days, which was documented as unfavorable. During a surveyor interview on 12/27/2023 at 1:45 PM with the RD, she revealed she had noticed the resident had increased edema and was aware that the resident had experienced a significant weight gain in 30 days. Additional record review failed to reveal evidence that the the RD implemented any new interventions for the resident even though she noticed the resident had edema and experienced a significant weight gain in 30 days. During a surveyor observation and simultaneous interview with the resident on 12/27/2023 at approximately 9:45 AM revealed the resident was lying in bed with the head of the bed elevated and a grimaced look on his/her face. S/he was breathing heavily and appeared short of breath. When questioned about how s/he was feeling, the resident stated, I just want to die. During a surveyor interview on 12/27/2023 at 9:55 AM, with Registered Nurse, Staff A, she revealed that she had not observed Resident ID #1 yet this shift and was prompted by the surveyor to assess the resident and obtain his/her vital signs. During a surveyor observation of the resident with Staff A, vital signs were obtained which revealed the following: -Blood pressure (BP) 220/84 (normal BP 120/80) -Pulse 80 (normal 60-90) -Respirations 26 (normal range 12-20) -Pulse oximetry (a device that indicates the oxygen level in the blood) in room air 65% (normal range 95-100%) Immediately following the above observation, Staff A asked Staff B if she had given the resident his/her morning medications. Staff B then indicated that she had given the resident his/her morning medications and that [the resident] seemed in distress today. During a surveyor interview on 12/27/2023 at 10:01 AM with Staff B, she revealed that when she observed the resident earlier that morning, his/her face appeared distressed. Staff B further revealed that she had then returned to the resident's room at approximately 8:20 AM to see how the resident responded to the Tylenol that was administered on the previous shift and Staff B stated, I felt when I left [s/he] was in distress and [s/he] wasn't comfortable. Additionally, Staff B revealed that she did not inform the nurse that the resident was uncomfortable and appeared to be in distress. During a surveyor interview on 12/27/2023 at approximately 10:15 AM with Staff A, she indicated that Staff B did not make her aware that the resident was observed to be in distress that morning. During a surveyor interview on 12/27/2023 at approximately 11:55 AM with Nursing Assistant (NA), Staff C, she revealed that she removed the resident's meal tray after breakfast and noticed the resident was not [his/her] usual self. Additionally, Staff C acknowledged that she did not report the resident's change in condition to the nurse. Record review of the NA's task list for the resident reveals a task for monitoring him/her for shortness of breath. Record review of the resident's Activities of Daily Living documentation revealed two questions were asked relative to monitoring for shortness of breath: -Did the resident have shortness of breath or trouble breathing with exertion (e.g., walking, bathing transferring)? -Did the resident have shortness of breath or trouble breathing when lying flat? Record review of the documentation for 12/26/2023 at 2:29 PM revealed both answers were documented as yes by Nursing Assistant, Staff D, who had provided care to the Resident that day. During a surveyor interview on 12/27/2023 at 1:38 PM with Staff D, she acknowledged the above-mentioned documentation. Additionally, she acknowledged that she did not inform the nurse that the resident was short of breath when s/he cared for him/her on 12/26/2023. Record review of a progress note dated 12/27/2023 at 10:38 AM revealed the resident was transferred emergently to the hospital via 911. Record review of the Emergency Department history and physical documentation dated 12/27/2023 at 11:29 AM states in part, Chief Complaint shortness of breath .work up in the emergency room .BNP [level over 100 pg [picogram]/ml[milliliter] level of 550 .chest x-ray .bilateral pleural effusions[an unusual amount of fluid around the lungs ] .pCO2[a measure of carbon dioxide within the blood] of 73 ml [normal range 35 to 45] .patient placed on Bipap [noninvasive ventilation to assist with breathing] .patient is to be admitted with acute hypoxic [low oxygen levels], hypercarbic respiratory failure [a serious condition where the lungs cannot remove enough carbon dioxide from the blood] secondary to diastolic CHF .plan for IV [intravenous] diuretics [medication to reduce fluid build-up] this evening . During a surveyor interview on 12/28/2023 at 11:40 AM with the Director of Nursing Services (DNS), she acknowledged the resident experienced a significant weight gain. Additionally, she was unable to provide evidence that Staff D alerted a nurse on 12/26/2023 when she noted the resident to be short of breath, as documented in the resident's record, or that Staff B and C alerted a nurse when they noted the resident to have a change in condition that required the resident to be transferred emergently to the hospital on [DATE]. She further revealed it would be her expectation that staff who identify changes in residents' condition, would report those changes to the nurse so the nurse could further assess the resident, and notify the provider as indicated. Lastly, the DNS was unable to provide evidence that Resident ID #1 received the necessary care and services to maintain his/her highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being.
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

Pressure Ulcer Prevention (Tag F0686)

A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident

Based on surveyor observation, record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to provide necessary treatment and services, consistent with professional standards of...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on surveyor observation, record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to provide necessary treatment and services, consistent with professional standards of practice, to promote healing and prevent new ulcers from developing for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for pressure ulcers (a localized injury to the skin or underlying tissue due to pressure), Resident ID #2. Findings are as follows: Review of the facility policy titled, Skin Care Protocol dated 2/2/2020, states in part, .The facility will follow appropriate standards of care as they relate to residents' skin care; identification of those at risk, appropriate interventions and documentation .Documentation: when a pressure ulcer exists, there must be daily monitoring to maintain awareness of area. Documentation of wound status shall include: an evaluation of the ulcer .the status of the area surrounding the ulcer .The presence of possible complications such as signs of increasing area of the ulceration . Record review revealed Resident ID #2 was admitted to the facility in November of 2023 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, diabetes mellitus (high blood sugar), non-pressure chronic ulcer of the right lower leg and peripheral vascular disease (inadequate circulation of the blood). Record review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 11/14/2023, revealed Section M-Skin conditions indicated the resident was admitted without a pressure ulcer/injury. Additionally, the assessment revealed the resident is at risk of developing a pressure ulcer/injury. Record review of a Skin Observation document dated 11/22/2023 and authored by the Wound Nurse, identified a new Stage 3 (full-thickness tissue loss of the skin) pressure ulcer to his/her coccyx (area over the tailbone) measuring 1.5 cm (centimeters) in length x 0.5 cm in width x 0.2 cm in depth. Additional review of the document failed to reveal evidence of a description of the wound bed and surrounding skin as required per the facility's policy. Record review of a Visit Report dated 11/21/2023, authored by the Wound Physician, revealed a new Stage 3 pressure injury to the resident's buttocks with measurements documented as, 1.5 cm in length x 0.5 cm in width x 0.2 cm in depth. Further description of the wound bed tissue revealed 1-25 % granulation (red tissue with cobblestone or bumpy appearance), 1-25% eschar (dead tissue) and 26-50% slough (non-viable yellow, tan, gray, green or brown tissue). Further review of the Visit Report revealed wound recommendations from the Wound Physician for the new Stage 3 pressure injury as follows: -Cleanse buttocks with normal saline or wound cleanser, apply honey alginate (absorbent wound dressing), cover wound with bordered foam (dressing) and change dressing daily. Record review of the physician orders failed to reveal evidence that the recommendations given by the Wound Physician for the Stage 3 pressure injury were not reviewed with the facility's physician or acted upon. Further review of the physician orders failed to reveal evidence that any treatment was being provided for the resident's Stage 3 pressure injury, indicating the pressure injury was untreated for 5 days. Record review of a subsequent Visit Report, dated 11/28/2023, and authored by the Wound Physician revealed the Stage 3 pressure injury measurements were documented as 2.8 cm in length x 0.4 cm in width x 0.2 cm in depth and the wound bed tissue revealed 1-25 % granulation, 1-25% eschar and 26-50% slough. Additionally, the peri wound (around the wound) was documented as irritation. Further review of the wound document indicated, The wound is deteriorating. Indicating the wound increased in size from 1.5 cm in length to 2.8 cm in length while left untreated. During a surveyor interview on 12/28/2023 at approximately 11:50 AM with the facility's Wound Nurse, Registered Nurse, Staff E, she acknowledged that the resident's wound treatment recommendations given by the Wound Physician were not implemented, until 11/27/2023, which was 5 days after the wound was first identified. Additionally, she revealed she reviews the wound doctor's recommendations with the resident's physician and then implements the ordered treatment. Lastly, she was unable to provide evidence that the recommendations were reviewed with the resident's physician, and she was unable to explain why a wound treatment order for the resident's Stage 3 pressure ulcer was not implemented when it was first identified on 11/21/2023. She further acknowledged the Wound Physician had found that the wound had deteriorated on 11/28/2023 after it was left untreated for 5 days. During a surveyor interview on 12/28/2023 at approximately 12:00 PM with the Director of Nursing Services, she indicated that she would expect that, when a wound is identified, the physician is notified of the wound recommendations and that it is acted upon. Additionally, she was unable to provide evidence that Resident ID #1 was provided necessary treatment and services, consistent with professional standards of practice, to promote healing and prevent new ulcers from developing.
Nov 2023 7 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0658 (Tag F0658)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on record review and staff interview, it has been determined that services provided by the facility failed to meet professional standards of quality relative to physician's orders for 1 of 4 res...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and staff interview, it has been determined that services provided by the facility failed to meet professional standards of quality relative to physician's orders for 1 of 4 residents reviewed for a non-pressure wound treatment order without provider notification, Resident ID #5 and 1 of 1 dialysis resident reviewed for weight variances, Resident ID #87. Findings are as follows: According to Mosby's 4th Edition, Fundamentals of Nursing, page 314 states in part, The physician is responsible for directing medical treatment . 1. Record review revealed Resident ID #5 was admitted to the facility in May of 2022 with a diagnosis including, but not limited to, dementia. Record review of the care plan revealed a focus area dated 9/20/2023 for a right inner thigh wound with interventions for treatment as ordered and to follow up with a wound consultant. Record review of a physician's order dated 9/20/2023 revealed the wound consultant was to assess and measure the wound weekly. Record review revealed a physician's order dated 10/5/2023 to cleanse the right medial thigh wound with normal saline, apply collagen, Medihoney, Bactroban (wound treatments) and cover with a foam dressing daily. Further record review revealed the wound treatment order was discontinued on 10/16/2023 by Licensed Practical Nurse, Staff C. Record review of the wound consultant report dated 10/18/2023 indicates that the wound to the right medial thigh was not healed and new recommendations were made. During a surveyor interview on 10/31/2023 at 2:49 PM with Staff C, she acknowledged she discontinued the wound physician's order on 10/16/2023, without contacting the provider. During a surveyor interview on 11/1/2023 at 10:25 AM with the Wound Physician, she revealed she would expect that staff would not discontinue a wound treatment order without first notifying her. She further revealed she assessed the resident's wound on 10/18/2023 and indicated that the resident's wound was not healed at that time. During a surveyor interview on 11/1/2023 at 11:51 AM with the Director of Nursing Services (DNS), she revealed that her expectation is that staff would not discontinue a wound treatment order for a wound that was being followed by the wound specialist. 2. Record review revealed Resident ID #87 was admitted to the facility in September of 2022 with a diagnosis including, but not limited to, dependence on renal dialysis (a lifesaving treatment for people with kidney failure or end stage renal disease). Record review of a care plan focus area initiated on 9/6/2022 revealed in part, the resident is at risk for edema (swelling caused from excess fluid accumulation in the body tissues) with a known history of fluid retention. Additionally, the care plan indicated that s/he has a history of significant weight changes and is on a fluid restriction. Further review of the care plan revealed interventions that include, but are not limited to, recording post dialysis weights. Record review of a physician's order dated 6/29/2023 revealed to record the resident's post dialysis weights on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays, and to notify the physician of any weight variance of 3 lbs. (pounds). Record review of the October through November 1st, 2023, Treatment Administration Record (TAR) revealed the following dates when the resident's post dialysis weights had a variance of at least 3 pounds, which indicated the staff should have notified the physician per the order: - 10/2, 184.8 pounds (lbs.) - 10/4, 181.7 lbs. - Loss of 3.1 lbs. between 10/2 and 10/4. - 10/9, 179 lbs. - 10/11, 182 lbs. - Gain of 3 lbs. between 11/9 and 10/11. - 10/16, 180.8 lbs. - 10/18, 185 lbs. - Gain of 4.2 lbs. between 10/16 and 10/18. - 10/20, 183 lbs. - 10/23, 180 lbs. - Loss of 3 lbs. between 10/20 and 10/23. - 10/27, 180 lbs. - 10/30, 190 lbs. - Gain of 10 lbs. between 10/27 and 10/30. - 11/1, 187 lbs. - Loss of 3 lbs. between 10/30 and 11/1. Record review failed to reveal evidence that the provider was notified of the above-mentioned weight variances as ordered. During a surveyor interview on 11/2/2023 at 12:50 PM with Registered Nurse, Staff D, she revealed that the nurse documents the resident's post dialysis weight upon return from dialysis. She further revealed that any weight gain or loss of at least 3 lbs. is reported to the physician and documented in the resident's electronic health record. During a surveyor interview on 11/2/2023 at 1:08 PM with Registered Nurse Practitioner, Staff E, she revealed that she would expect to be notified of any weight variance of 3 lbs. or greater as ordered. During a surveyor interview on 11/2/2023 at 1:27 PM with the DNS, she acknowledged that staff failed to follow the physician's order and he would expect staff would have notified the physician of the above-mentioned weight variances as ordered.
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 surveyor observation, record review and staff interview it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents receive treatment and care in accordance with professional sta...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on surveyor observation, record review and staff interview it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents receive treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' choices, relative to reporting a change in a resident's condition timely, following physician's orders relative to oxygen administration and obtaining daily weights, for 1 of 1 resident reviewed with a change of condition relative to the diagnosis of congestive heart failure (CHF- when the heart does not pump adequately), Resident ID #69. Findings are as follows: Review of the facility policy titled, Resident Change in Condition, dated 10/17/2023, states in part, .The facility will ensure that resident changes in condition are identified timely, reported to the Physician (and Representative when applicable), and documented in the medical record timely .1. Changes in condition require assessment by the RN [Registered Nurse] and notification to the MD [Medial Doctor] (both to be done timely). 'Timely' depends on the level/severity of the change and the RN should use professional assessment and judgment to make that decision. Timely is certainly no later than the shift of the change .changes in condition include but may not be limited to .weight .gain not expected .acute change in mental status . Record review revealed the resident was admitted to the facility in January of 2021 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, CHF, cardiomyopathy (a condition that affects the heart muscle making it harder to pump) and pleural effusion (a buildup of fluid between the layers of tissue that line the lungs and chest cavity). 1a. Record review revealed a care plan initiated on 7/6/2022 indicating s/he has altered cardiovascular status related to CHF. Interventions include to obtain weight as ordered, monitor, document and report as needed, any signs or symptoms such as shortness of breath. Further record review revealed a nursing progress note dated 10/7/2023 at 11:43 PM, which indicated that the resident was yelling and complaining of being short of breath. The progress note also indicated that the resident was assisted with repositioning while in bed and that after interventions, s/he continued to scream out continuously. Further record review failed to reveal evidence that the provider was notified of the resident's complaints of shortness of breath and screaming out continuously. 1b. Record review of the October 2023 Treatment Administration Record (TAR) revealed a physician's order dated 8/30/2023 for weekly weights. Additionally, the TAR revealed the following documented weights indicating the resident had a 10 pounds (lbs.) weight gain in 1 week: - 10/4, 164 lbs. - 10/11, 174 lbs. Further record review revealed an assessment was completed on 10/11/2023 by the Physician's Assistant (PA) due to the resident's acute weight change. Additionally, the record revealed the PA documented the resident reported having had shortness of breath in the past few days, had swelling to his/her lower extremities, a blood oxygen saturation level of 88% (normal range is greater the 92%) and implemented the following orders: - 10/11/2023, Lasix 40 milligrams (mg) (medication used to help rid the body of excess water) give an extra dose of 40 mg, in addition to the standing order - 10/11/2023, Potassium Chloride 20 milliequivalents 1 tablet orally one time only for CHF - 10/11/2023, Oxygen (O2) 2 liters per minute (LPM) via nasal cannula (tubing used to deliver oxygen) for 48 hours then reassess for CHF need every shift. For O2 use for 2 days, assess every shift, document LPM used, and pulse oximetry (measurment of the saturation of oxygen in a person's blood) - 10/11/2023, Daily weight for CHF every day shift (7:00 AM - 3:00 PM) - 10/12/2023, Metolazone (medication used to help rid the body of excess water) 2.5 mg, give 1 tablet in the morning for CHF for 3 days Record review of the facility Weight Summary document revealed the following weights for October 2023: - 10/4, 164 lbs. - 10/11, 174 lbs. - 10/12, 173.6 lbs. - 10/13, 174 lbs. - 10/14, 174.2 lbs. - 10/15, 172 lbs. - 10/16 and 10/17, 171 lbs. - 10/18, 170 lbs. - 10/19, 10/20, no weight was documented - 10/21, (resident refused) - 10/22 and 10/23, 165 lbs. - 10/24, 164 lbs. - 10/25, 167 lbs. - 10/26, 164 lbs. - 10/27, 167 lbs. - 10/28, 167 lbs. - 10/29, no weight was documented - 10/30, (resident refused) - 10/31, 169 lbs. During a surveyor interview on 10/31/2023 at 3:58 PM with Registered Nurse Practitioner (RNP), Staff F, she indicated that she would expect staff to notify her if the resident's weight was not obtained as ordered and if s/he had a weight gain of 3 lbs. in 1 day or 5 lbs. in 1 week. Further record review failed to reveal evidence that the provider was notified that the resident's weight was not obtained as ordered on 10/19, 10/20, or 10/29/2023. Additionally, the record failed to reveal evidence the provider was notified when the resident gained 3 lbs. in 1 day on 10/25 and 10/27/2023. 1c. Record review of the October 2023 TAR failed to reveal evidence that the resident received oxygen therapy at 2 liters via nasal cannula as ordered on the following dates and shifts: - 10/11, 11:00 PM - 7:00 AM shift - documentation revealed NA for oxygen liter flow - 10/12, 11:00 PM - 7:00 AM shift - documentation revealed 0 for oxygen liter flow - 10/13, 7:00 AM - 3:00 PM shift- documentation revealed NA for oxygen liter flow - 10/13, 3:00 PM - 11:00 PM shifts- documentation revealed 0 for oxygen liter flow During a surveyor interview on 11/2/2023 at 10:57 AM with the Assistant Director of Nursing Services, she was unable to provide evidence that the resident received oxygen as ordered on the above-mentioned dates and times. During a surveyor interview on 11/2/2023 at 8:53 AM, with RNP, Staff F, she revealed that she would expect staff would notify the provider of the resident's change in condition and expected staff to administer oxygen as ordered. Furthermore, she indicated that her expectation is for staff to notify her when the resident's weight is not obtained.
CONCERN (D)

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

Pressure Ulcer Prevention (Tag F0686)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on surveyor observation, record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to provide nec...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on surveyor observation, record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to provide necessary treatment and services, consistent with professional standards of practice, to promote wound healing and prevent new ulcers from developing for 1 of 4 residents reviewed with pressure ulcers (a localized injury to the skin and/or underlying skin usually over a boney prominence), Resident ID #101. Findings are as follows: According to Mosby's 4th Edition, Fundamentals of Nursing, page 314 states in part, .The physician is responsible for directing medical treatment, Nurses are obligated to follow physician's orders unless they believe the orders are in error or would harm the clients . Record review revealed the resident was admitted to the facility in July of 2023 with a diagnosis including, but not limited to, difficulty with walking. Record review of a Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 15 out of 15, indicating s/he is cognitively intact. Additionally, the MDS revealed that s/he was documented as having two unstageable (the wound bed is covered by a layer of dead tissue that may be yellow, grey, green, brown, or black) pressure ulcers. Record review of a care plan dated 10/27/2023 indicated the resident has impaired skin integrity. Interventions include, but are not limited to, air mattress set to the resident's weight or comfort while in bed. Apply treatments per MD (medical doctor). Record review revealed the resident is followed by the wound care specialist weekly for evaluation of his/her wounds. Additionally, the record revealed that the wound to the resident's left lateral (outer) foot was documented as being unstageable with 76-100% eschar (dead tissue) covering the wound bed on 10/25/2023. Record review of the physician's orders revealed the following: - 8/11/2023 Apply booties while in bed as tolerated every shift . - 8/11/2023 Check air mattress settings, set to residents weight as machine allows and alternating. May adjust for residents comfort every shift . - 10/21/2023 Collagenase Ointment [topical treatment] .Apply to Right 2nd toe .every day shift for Wound . - 10/28/2023 L [left] Lateral Foot: Apply skin prep [a skin protectant wipe] and leave OTA [open to air] .for skin integrity . - 10/28/2023 Right heel Cleanse wound with Normal Saline Protect peri wound with Skin Protectant Wound Dressing Apply Santyl [topical ointment used to remove dead tissue from the wound bed to facilitate healing] Apply Alginate Cover wound with Bordered Foam .Change daily . - 10/28/2023 Right Second Toe Cleanse Wound, with Normal Saline Protect peri wound with skin prep .Change daily . During a surveyor observation on 10/30/2023 at 2:49 PM of Licensed Practical Nurse, Staff C, performing the above-mentioned wound dressing changes, the following was observed: The resident was observed lying in bed with the air mattress setting on 350 pounds (lbs.). Staff C was observed donning gloves and then removed the resident's soiled dressing from his/her right heel. Staff C continued with the dressing change to the resident's right heel and failed to apply the skin prep as ordered. Staff C was observed performing the treatment dressing change to the resident's right toe and during this dressing change she failed to apply skin prep to the wound as ordered. Additionally, the left lateral wound was observed open, with a reddened wound bed. Staff C failed to apply the ordered treatment of skin prep to the left lateral foot wound as ordered, instead she applied Santyl ointment and Alginate cover dressing followed by a bordered gauze dressing. During a surveyor interview immediately following the above-mentioned observation with Staff C, she acknowledged that she did not apply skin prep to the resident's right heel and right toe during the dressing change as ordered. Additionally, she acknowledged that she did not apply skin prep to the resident's left lateral wound as ordered. Staff C further indicated that the left lateral wound was now open, and she acknowledged that she applied Santyl and an Alginate dressing followed by a bordered gauze without a physician's order. Additionally, Staff C acknowledged that the resident's air mattress was set at 350 lbs. and indicated that resident weight was approximately 100 lbs. Further record review revealed the resident's current weight documented on 10/8/2023 is 96 lbs. During a surveyor interview on 10/31/2023 at 12:30 PM with Registered Nurse Practitioner (RNP), Staff E, she revealed that she would expect the nurse to report a change to a wound and obtain an appropriate treatment for that wound before implementing a treatment. Additionally, she indicated that Santyl is not the indicated treatment for the residents newly opened left lateral foot wound, as the wound bed did not reveal dead tissue. Staff E further indicated that she would expect the resident's air mattress to be set according to the resident's weight. During a surveyor interview on 10/31/2023 at 1:26 PM with the Director of Nursing Services (DNS), she indicated that she would expect the nurse would perform an assessment of the resident's wound, which would include measurements and description of the wound bed and then notify the provider to obtain an appropriate treatment order. During surveyor observations on 11/2/2023 at 9:01 AM and 10:19 AM, the resident was observed to be lying in bed with his/her left foot directly on the mattress. Additionally, s/he was observed to be wearing a bootie on his/her right foot and not the left foot. During a surveyor interview on 11/2/2023 at 10:19 AM with Staff G, she indicated that the resident had only one boot. During a surveyor interview and simultaneous observation on 11/2/2023 at 10:33 AM with Registered Nurse, Staff D, the resident was observed lying in bed with his/her left foot resting directly on the mattress. Additionally, s/he had the bootie to the right foot only. Staff D was unable to locate the resident's left bootie. Additionally, she acknowledged the resident had only one bootie to his/her right foot. During a surveyor interview immediately following the above-mentioned observation in the presence of Staff D with the resident. S/he indicated S/he used to have booties for both the right and left foot. Additionally, the resident revealed that s/he would like his/her bootie for the left foot. During a surveyor interview on 11/2/2023 at 11:05 AM with the Assistant DNS, she indicated she would expect both the left and right bootie would be applied to the resident's left and right foot as ordered.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0919 (Tag F0919)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on surveyor observations, record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to be adequately equipped to allow residents to call for staff assistance through a c...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on surveyor observations, record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to be adequately equipped to allow residents to call for staff assistance through a communication system which relays the call directly to a staff member or to a centralized staff work area for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for call lights, Resident ID #67. Findings are as follows: According to, State Operations Manual Appendix PP - Guidance to Surveyors for Long Term Care Facilities last revised 2/3/2023, revealed in part that the facility must be adequately equipped to allow residents to call for staff assistance through a communication system which relays the call directly to a staff member or to a centralized staff work area from each resident's bedside. Guidance dictates that the call system must be accessible to residents while in their bed or other sleeping accommodations within the resident's room. Record review revealed the resident was admitted to the facility in May of 2022 with a diagnosis including, but not limited to, dementia. Surveyor observations on the following dates and times revealed that the resident's call light remained wrapped around the wall unit, therefore making it inaccessible to the resident: - 10/30/2023 at 10:28 AM - 10/31/2023 at 9:25 AM, 1:01 PM, 2:29 PM, and 3:52 PM During two additional surveyor observations on 11/1/2023 at 9:31 AM and 10:42 AM, the resident's call light was observed lying on the floor. During a surveyor interview on 11/1/2023 at 10:42 AM with Nursing Assistant, Staff K, she acknowledged that the resident's call light was lying on the floor and not accessible to the resident. Additionally, she revealed that the call light should be clipped to the resident's bed and always within his/her reach. During a surveyor interview on 11/1/2023 at approximately 11:45 AM with the Director of Nursing Services, she revealed that her expectation would be that all residents' call lights are always visible and accessible. Additionally, she was unable to explain why the resident's call light was not within his/her reach.
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0657 (Tag F0657)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to review and revise the resident's care plan, relative to the presence of an infection for 1 of 2 residents...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to review and revise the resident's care plan, relative to the presence of an infection for 1 of 2 residents reviewed, Resident ID #46. Findings are as follows: Review of The State Operations Manual Appendix PP-Guidance to Surveyors for Long Term Care Facilities, last revised on 2/3/2023, states in part, .care planning drives the type of care and services that a resident receives .the intent is that each resident will have a person-centered comprehensive care plan developed and implemented to meet his/her other preferences and goals and address the resident's medical needs .facilities are required to develop care plans that describe the resident's medical, nursing, and physical needs . Record review revealed the resident was re-admitted to the facility in January of 2023 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, stroke, type 2 diabetes, and depression. Review of the resident's care plan initiated on 6/9/2022 and revised on 9/6/2023, revealed the resident has ESBL (antibiotic resistant infection) in his/her urine. Interventions include, but are not limited to, give medications as ordered and monitor/document for effectiveness, side effects. Record review of a progress note dated 6/17/2022 at 11:24 AM, authored by Registered Nurse, Staff A, revealed that the resident completed his/her treatment for ESBL, s/he was asymptomatic and there was no need for further testing. During a surveyor interview on 11/1/2023 at 12:33 PM with Licensed Practical Nurse, Staff B, when questioned about the resident's ESBL infection, she was uncertain if the resident currently has an ESBL infection and at the time of the interview could not provide the information. Shortly thereafter, Staff B revealed to the surveyor that the resident does not have an active ESBL infection, as is indicated in his/her care plan. During a surveyor interview on 11/1/2023 at 1:28 PM with the Director of Nursing Services (DNS), she revealed the resident is no longer positive for ESBL. The DNS further revealed that the care plan should have been revised to reflect medical diagnoses that are active and applicable. Additionally, she acknowledged the resident's care plan was not accurate as the resident does not have an active ESBL infection as indicated.
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0761 (Tag F0761)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on surveyor observation and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to store and label drugs and biologicals in accordance with currently accepted professional principle...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on surveyor observation and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to store and label drugs and biologicals in accordance with currently accepted professional principles for 1 of 2 medication storage rooms observed and 3 of 3 medication carts observed. Findings are as follows: 1. Surveyor observation on 10/31/2023 at 12:13 PM of the lower-level unit medication room, in the presence of Licensed Practical Nurse, Staff C revealed the following: -one bottle of Peroxide opened and dated 11/30/2022. Additionally, the Peroxide was noted with an expiration date of 10/2023. -one bottle of Vashe Wound Cleanser opened and not dated. Additionally, the Vashe was noted with an expiration date of 7/31/2023. -one bottle of Isopropyl Alcohol 70% opened and not dated. Additionally, the alcohol was noted with an expiration date of 6/2023. During a surveyor interview immediately following the above-mentioned observations, Staff C revealed medications that are opened should be dated and that expired medications should be discarded. 2. Surveyor observation on 10/31/2023 at 12:10 PM of a lower-level unit medication cart, in the presence of Staff C, revealed one bottle of Haldol 2 mg (milligram)/ml (milliliter) opened, and not dated. Manufacturer instructions read to discard 3 months after opening. During a surveyor interview immediately following the above-mentioned observation with Staff C, she revealed that the Haldol medication should have been dated when opened. 3. Surveyor observation on 11/1/2023 at 10:16 AM of an additional lower-level unit medication cart, in the presence of Medication Aide, Staff H, revealed Ipratropium/Albuterol solution 0.5-2.5 mg/3 ml inhalation ampules, opened, and not dated. Additionally, this medication was noted with an expiration date of 9/2023. Manufacturer instructions read that this medication should be used within 2 weeks of opening. During a surveyor interview immediately following the above-mentioned observation, she acknowledged the medication expired and should have been discarded per manufactures instructions. 4. Surveyor observation on 11/1/2023 at 10:44 AM of the East/South unit medication cart, in the presence of Medication Aide, Staff I, revealed Budesonide 0.5 mg/2 ml inhalation ampules in a foil package, opened and not dated. Manufacturer instructions read to use ampules within 2 weeks of opening. During a surveyor interview immediately following the above-mentioned observation with Staff H, she acknowledged the manufacturer's instructions and that the medication was not dated when opened. During a surveyor interview on 11/2/2023 at 2:23 PM with the Director of Nursing Services, she indicated that all medications should be dated when opened and that expired medications should be discarded.
CONCERN (E)

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

Infection Control (Tag F0880)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on surveyor observation, record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to establish a...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on surveyor observation, record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary and comfortable environment to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections relative to the lunch meal service, 1 of 4 residents reviewed for an indwelling catheter, Resident ID #31 and 1 of 5 residents reviewed for wound care, Resident ID #101. Findings are as follows: 1. Record review revealed Resident ID #31 was admitted to the facility in August of 2023 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, obstructive and reflux uropathy (blockage of urinary flow) and overactive bladder. Additionally, s/he has an indwelling catheter (tube that drains urine from the bladder). Record review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) Score of 13 out of 15, indicating the resident is cognitively intact. Surveyor observations on the following dates and times revealed the resident's catheter bag was hanging from his/her trash can and touching the floor: -10/30/2023 at 10:56 AM -10/30/2023 at 12:22 PM -10/31/2023 at 10:50 AM -11/1/2023 at 9:28 AM During a surveyor interview with the resident on 11/1/2023 at 11:59 AM, s/he revealed that the nursing assistant attaches the catheter bag to the trash can. The resident further revealed that s/he was never informed that the catheter bag touching the floor is an infection control concern. During a surveyor interview on 11/1/2023 at 9:48 AM with the Infection Preventionist, she acknowledged the resident's catheter bag was hooked to the trash can and touching the floor. Additionally, she indicated that it is an infection control risk and does not provide for a sanitary environment. 2. Surveyor observations of the North Wing and the upper level Main Dining area during the lunch meal revealed Activity Aide, Staff J, picking up ready to use coffee mugs with her bare hands by touching the top rim of each cup and then inserting her fingers into each of the coffee mugs, prior to pouring and serving the coffee to the residents on the following dates and times: North Wing: -10/302023 at 11:50 AM -10/31/2023 at approximately 12:00 PM Upper level Main Dining Area: 11/1/2023 at 11:52 AM During a surveyor interview on 11/1/2023 at 12:01 PM with Staff J, immediately following the observation, she acknowledged that her fingers were touching the rims of the cups and the inside of the mugs before service. During a surveyor interview on 11/1/2023 at 2:45 PM with the Administrator, she was unable to explain why Staff J handled the coffee mugs in the manor that she did. 3. Record review revealed Resident ID #101 was admitted to the facility in July of 2023 with a diagnosis of stage 3 kidney disease (moderate kidney damage). Additionally, s/he has wounds to his/her left and right foot. Further review of the Quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE], revealed a BIMS Score of 15 out of 15, indicating the resident is cognitively intact. Additionally, the MDS assessment revealed the resident has wounds. During a surveyor observation of the wound treatment change on 10/30/2023 at 2:49 PM with Licensed Practical Nurse, Staff C, she utilized the Sani-hands sanitizer wipes to disinfect the bedside table before and after the dressing change. Additionally, Staff C removed the resident's soiled dressing from his/her right heel and then proceeded to touch the treatment cart drawers twice to retrieve items, without removing her gloves or performing hand hygiene. During a surveyor interview and observation of the Sani-hands sanitizer wipes label with Staff C on 10/31/2023 at 12:46 PM, revealed the product label indicates that the Sani-hands sanitizer wipes are used for hand sanitizing and not to disinfect surfaces. Additionally, she acknowledged that during the wound treatment change she touched the treatment cart drawer with her used gloves and that she did not perform hand hygiene. During a surveyor interview on 10/31/2023 at 1:26 PM with the Director of Nursing Services, she indicated she would have expected Staff C to use the appropriate agent to disinfect the bedside table before and after performing the wound treatment change. Additionally, she acknowledged Staff C did not utilize the proper infection control practices during the treatment dressing change and she failed to provide a clean and sanitary environment.
Aug 2023 1 deficiency 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

Deficiency F0692 (Tag F0692)

A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident

Based on record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure that a resident is offered sufficient fluid intake to maintain proper hydration and health for 1 o...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure that a resident is offered sufficient fluid intake to maintain proper hydration and health for 1 of 4 residents reviewed, Resident ID #1. Findings are as follows: Record review of a community reported complaint submitted to the Rhode Island Department of Health on 8/12/2023 from a hospital social worker alleges in part, .Doctor is concerned about neglect based on patient's medical condition . During a surveyor interview with the complainant on 8/16/2023 at 12:45 PM, she revealed that due to the degree of dehydration the resident was admitted with, the medical team suspected neglect. According to National Library of Medicine, Adult Dehydration, last updated 2022, indicates that dehydration may complicate other medical problems and may cause significant illness. A resident may appear with dark urine or decreased urine output and may be lethargic upon observation in severe cases of dehydration. Failure to treat dehydration in older adults may lead to significant mortality. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention encourages adults to maintain a fluid intake between 2,000 - 3,000 mL (milliliters) per day. Record review revealed the resident was admitted to the facility in May of 2023 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, acute on chronic diastolic heart failure (blockage affecting the heart which may have developed over time), hypertension (high blood pressure), overactive bladder, and lymphedema (swelling that happens when something affects your lymphatic system). Record review of the resident's care plan dated 5/11/2023 revealed that s/he is at risk for fluid imbalances related to his/her history of congestive heart failure, diuretic (medications that cause increased urination) therapy, and lymphedema. Further review revealed an intervention to obtain and monitor laboratory blood tests as ordered. Record review revealed the following blood test results dated 7/26/2023: - BUN (blood urea nitrogen; is a test measure for kidney function). The normal range of BUN is 8-23 mg/dl (milligrams per deciliter). An elevated BUN is an indicator of dehydration. Resident ID #1 had a BUN level of 28 mg/dL. - Sodium (blood test that measure the sodium in the blood). The normal range of Sodium is 135-146 mEq/L (milliequivalents per liter). An elevated sodium is an indicator of dehydration. Resident ID #1 had a Sodium level of of 150 mEq/L. Record review following the above blood test results revealed a physician's order with a start date of 7/26/2023 at 3:00 PM to PUSH fluids every shift for 5 Days. Further record review failed to specify the amount of fluids necessary to push fluids to the resident that would prevent him/her from experiencing dehydration. During a surveyor interview with the Licensed Practical Nurse, Staff A, on 8/16/2023 at 1:00 PM, she was unable to specify the amount required to push fluids to the resident to prevent dehydration. Record review revealed the following total daily fluid intakes for the resident: -1,080 mL on 7/26/2023 - 720 mL on 7/27/2023 - 840 mL on 7/28/2023 -1,400 mL on 7/29/2023 -1,080 mL on 7/30/2023 Further record review revealed the following: -1,300 mL on 7/31/2023 - 840 mL on 8/1/2023 -1,200 mL on 8/2/2023 - 526 mL on 8/3/2023 - 840 mL on 8/4/2023 Additional record review revealed the resident continued taking two diuretics from 7/26/2023 to 8/3/2023; Bumetanide 2 mg daily, and Spironolactone 12.5 mg daily. Record review of multiple progress notes dated 8/5/2023 revealed the resident was discharged to the hospital at approximately 1:00 PM and was admitted with a diagnosis of hypernatremia (high amount of sodium in the blood). Record review of the hospital's physician assessment note for the resident dated 8/5/2023 states in part, .presents with decreased mental status found to have severe hypernatremia. Unclear what caused decreased PO [by mouth] intake in the first place however [s/he] is on diuretics and with decreased PO, hypernatremia likely in the setting of severe dehydration. Additional review of the hospital records revealed the following critical blood test results dated 8/5/2023: - BUN level of 93 mg/dl - Sodium of 184 mEq/L During a surveyor interview with the Director of Nursing Services on 8/16/2023 at 2:15 PM, she was unable to specify the amount of fluids necessary to push fluids to the resident that would prevent dehydration. Additionally, she was unable to provide evidence that the resident received adequate fluids to maintain health. During a surveyor interview on 8/16/2023 at 2:40 PM with the Physician, who implemented the order to push fluids he indicated that he would expect staff to offer more fluids subjectively. However, he would not indicate how much fluid the staff should have provided Resident ID #1 per his order topush fluids.
Jul 2022 7 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

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

Pressure Ulcer Prevention (Tag F0686)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on surveyor observation, record review, and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure that a resident receives care consistent with professional standards of pra...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on surveyor observation, record review, and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure that a resident receives care consistent with professional standards of practice to promote healing and to prevent the development of new pressure ulcer/injury for 3 of 9 residents reviewed for pressure ulcers, Resident ID #'s 3, 46, and 50. Findings are as follows: Review of the facility's policy titled Skin Care Protocol last revised on 2/20/2020 revealed in part, .POLICY: The facility will follow appropriate standards of care as they relate to residents' skin care; identification of those at risk, weekly skin checks, and appropriate interventions and documentation .6. Monitoring: Weekly skin assessments will be done .7. Documentation: When a pressure ulcer does exist, there must be daily awareness of area and weekly measurement and description . 1. Record review for Resident ID #3 revealed that s/he was admitted to the facility in April of 2022 and has diagnoses including, but not limited to, type 2 diabetes mellitus, venous insufficiency (failure of the veins to adequately circulate the blood, especially from the lower extremities), and lymphedema (condition in which extra lymph fluid builds up in tissues and causes swelling typically occurring in an arm or leg if lymph vessels are blocked, damaged, or removed by surgery). Review of a WOUND EVALUATION & MANAGEMENT SUMMARY note dated 7/14/2022 revealed that the resident has a stage 3 pressure wound (full thickness tissue loss, subcutaneous fat may be visible but bone, tendon, or muscle are not exposed) on the left, posterior thigh, measuring 3.8 centimeters (CM) x 2.8 CM x 0.2 CM and a stage 3 pressure wound of the left, posterior, superior thigh measuring 1.2 CM x 1.0 CM x not measurable. Further record review failed to reveal evidence that measurements and a description of the resident's pressure wounds were completed since 7/14/2022. During a surveyor interview with Registered Nurse, Staff A on 7/27/2022 at 12:28 PM, she acknowledged the measurements and the description of the wounds should be obtained and documented weekly. She was unable to provide evidence that measurements and a description of the resident's pressure wounds were completed since 7/14/2022. 2. Record review for Resident ID #46 revealed that s/he was admitted to the facility in April of 2022 and has diagnoses including, but not limited to cirrhosis of the liver (a late-stage liver disease in which healthy liver tissue is replaced with scar tissue and the liver is permanently damaged), and cystitis (inflammation of the urinary bladder). Review of a document titled Skin Incident Report dated 7/19/2022 revealed that the resident had a right heel deep tissue injury (DTI; a purple or maroon localized area of discolored intact skin or blood-filled blister due to damage of underlying soft tissue from pressure and/or shear) measuring 1.5 x 1 CM x not measured. Record review revealed a physician's order dated 7/19/2022 to measure, monitor and document left heel DTI weekly on a Tuesday to start 7/26/2022. Further record review failed to reveal evidence that on the weekly skin assessment completed on 7/26/2022 that measurements and a description of the resident's DTI were obtained. During a surveyor interview with Registered Nurse, Staff B on 7/28/2022 at 9:28 AM, she was unable to provide evidence that on the weekly skin assessment completed on 7/26/2022 that measurements and a description of the DTI were obtained. 3. Record review for Resident ID #50 revealed that s/he was admitted to the facility in August of 2005 and has diagnoses including, but not limited to type 2 diabetes mellitus, chronic kidney disease stage 3, and venous insufficiency. Record review revealed a physician's order dated 6/10/2022 that states in part, Weekly shower & skin assessment complete documentation using the skin observation tool in the resident's assessment tab Review of the resident's weekly skin observation completed on 6/29/2022 , revealed the resident developed a right gluteal fold stage 2 pressure ulcer (partial-thickness skin loss into but no deeper than the dermis). This wound measured 2.5 CM x 1.25 CM x not measured. Further record review failed to reveal evidence that on the weekly skin assessments completed on 7/15 and 7/22/2022 that measurements and a description of the stage two pressure ulcer were obtained. Record review of a weekly skin assessment completed on 7/22/2022 revealed a new stage 2 sacrum wound was identified. This assessment failed to include measurements and a description of the newly identified stage two pressure ulcer. Furthermore, review of the record failed to reveal evidence that the stage two pressure ulcer on the right gluteal fold and the stage two pressure ulcer on the sacrum had a current treatment order in place. During a surveyor interview with Registered Nurse, Staff B on 7/28/2022 at approximately 10:55 AM, she revealed that the resident has a wound to the sacrum and to the right gluteal fold, both being staged as stage 2 pressure ulcers. Staff B acknowledged that on the weekly skin assessments completed on 7/15 and 7/22/2022 that there were no measurements or a description of the stage two pressure ulcer on the gluteal fold. She also acknowledged that after the stage 2 was identified on the sacrum on 7/22/2022 there were no measurements or a description of the wound. During a subsequent interview on 7/28/2022 at 11:34 AM with Staff B, she was unable to provide evidence that there was a treatment order in place for either active wound. During a surveyor interview with the Director of Nursing Services on 7/28/2022 at approximately 11:52 AM, she acknowledged that weekly wound measurements should be obtained per policy and that a treatment order should have been ordered.
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 record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure that pain management is provided consistent with professional standards of practice for 1 of 4 res...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure that pain management is provided consistent with professional standards of practice for 1 of 4 residents reviewed for pain management, Resident ID #449. Findings are as follows: Record review revealed the resident was admitted to the facility in July of 2022 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, osteoarthritis, left hip surgery, and thrombosis (blood clot) of deep veins of right lower leg Review of a care plan dated 7/21/2022 revealed The resident has pain r/t [related to] Arthritis, S/P [status post] left total hip arthroplasty [hip replacement]. Record review of a physician's order dated 7/20/2022 revealed the following: -Oxycodone Hydrochloride (HCI) tablet 5 milligram (mg), give 1 tablet by mouth every 4 hours as needed for moderate pain 3-6 related to aftercare following joint replacement surgery -Oxycodone HCI tablet 5 mg, give 2 tablets by mouth every 4 hours for severe pain 7-10 related to presence of left artificial hip joint. Record review of the July Medication Administration Record revealed the resident incorrectly received Oxycodone 5 mg 1 tablet instead 2 tablets on the following dates and times: - 7/21/2022 at 9:34 PM for pain rated 7 of 10 - 7/23/2022 at 11:44 PM for pain rated 9 of 10 - 7/24/2022 at 00:21 AM for pain rated 8 of 10 During a surveyor interview with the resident on 7/28/2022 at approximately at 11:00 AM, s/he revealed that s/he is receiving pain medication for his/her left hip and right leg and s/he stated, the medication is not really helping, just can't deal with this pain. During a surveyor interview with the Director of Nursing on 7/28/2022 at 11:20 AM, she acknowledged that the resident did not receive the above pain medication as ordered.
CONCERN (D)

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

Laboratory Services (Tag F0770)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to obtain laboratory services to meet the needs of its' residents for 1 of 4 residents reviewed, Resident ID...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to obtain laboratory services to meet the needs of its' residents for 1 of 4 residents reviewed, Resident ID #72. Findings are as follows: Record review revealed the resident was admitted to the facility in February of 2021 with diagnoses of, but not limited to: Alzheimer's disease, urinary tract infection, mood disorder, and atrial fibrillation (an irregular, often rapid heart rate that commonly causes poor blood flow). Review of the physician orders revealed an order dated 7/23/2022 for CBCD (complete blood count with differential) one time only for labs on 7/25/2022. Record review failed to reveal evidence that the CBCD was drawn on 7/25/2022. During a surveyor interview with the Unit Manager on 7/27/2022 at approximately 9:00 AM, she acknowledged the CBCD was not obtained on 7/25/2022.
CONCERN (E)

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

Resident Rights (Tag F0550)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on surveyor observation, record review, and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to care for each resident in an environment that promotes maintenance of his/her qual...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on surveyor observation, record review, and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to care for each resident in an environment that promotes maintenance of his/her quality of life relative to maintaining residents' dignity during the dining experience relative to 1 of 2 dining rooms observed, the downstairs dining room. Findings are as follows: 1) During surveyor observation of the lunch meal on 7/26/2022 revealed Resident ID #23 was sitting at a table with another resident. The resident was served lunch from the first meal truck at approximately 12:10 PM and his/her tablemate was served from the second meal truck at approximately 12:30 PM, 20 minutes later. The resident was observed appearing upset, attempting to give his/her food to his/her tablemate, repeatedly standing up demanding tablemate's food, and refusing to eat until his/her tablemate was served. 2) During a surveyor observation of the lunch meal on 7/25/2022 in the downstairs dining room. Resident ID #89 was witnessed sitting at a table without food while his/her tablemate was eating. The resident expressed being upset about not receiving his/her food at the same time as the other resident. The resident's meal was brought to the dining room by kitchen staff after all other residents had been served. During a surveyor interview with Resident ID #89 on 7/25/2022 at approximately 12:30 PM, s/he expressed s/he was upset due to getting his/her meals last during all mealtimes, as this has been occurring since his/her relocation to the unit on 7/22/2022. Surveyor observation of the lunch meal on 7/26/2022 revealed, Resident ID #89 was sitting at a table with another resident who was served his/her meal at 12:10 PM and the resident was served his/her lunch at 12:38 PM, 28 minutes later. Resident ID #89 was observed crying in the dining area, pushing his/her food away, and initially refused to eat once served. 3) During a surveyor observation of the meal on 7/27/2022 revealed Resident ID #1 was sitting at a table with another resident. The tablemate was already eating at 12:03 PM and Resident ID #1 was not served until 12:23 PM, 20 minutes later. During this period of time the resident asked staff repeatedly about his/her meal. Record review of the facility's meal truck delivery schedule revealed the downstairs dining room is served by unit with an approximately 30-minute gap between each meal truck. However, residents from both units eat in the dining room and are brought to the meal at the same time, prior to the first meal truck being delivered. During a surveyor interview with the Administrator and the Food Service Director on 7/28/2022 at approximately 8:40 AM, they acknowledged that there is a problem with the system for food service delivery now that the residents eat in the dining room. They further acknowledged all residents should be eating at the same time.
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0692 (Tag F0692)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure that a physician's order was implemented for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for fluid restriction, Resid...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure that a physician's order was implemented for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for fluid restriction, Resident ID #3. Findings are as follows: Record review revealed the resident was admitted to the facility in April of 2022 with diagnosis which include, but not limited to end stage renal disease (ESRD) and has been receiving dialysis 3 times/week. Record review revealed a physician's order dated 6/7/2022 which indicates in part, .1000ml [milliliters] FLUID RESTRICTION . Further record review revealed a care plan initiated on 6/7/2022 which indicates in part, .actual/potential alterations in nutrition/hydration status r/t [related to] DX [diagnosis] of ESRD, fluid overload .At risk for edematous [swollen]/fluid imbalances r/t .diuretic therapy, hx [history] of BLE [bilateral lower extremities] edema. Review of the fluid intake report from 6/30 to 7/27/2022 revealed the fluid intake was not monitored for all shifts on 7/10, 7/11 and 7/21/2022. Additionally, record review revealed the resident's intake was more than 1000 ml/day on the following days: -7/2/2022, 1440 ml -7/4/2022, 1320 ml -7/5/2022, 1900 ml -7/8/2022, 1200 ml -7/14/2022, 1200 ml -7/17/2022, 1700 ml -7/22/2022, 1380 ml -7/24/2022, 2520 ml -7/25/2022, 1840 ml -7/27/2022, 1500 ml During a surveyor interview with the charge nurse, Staff C on 7/27/2022 at 12:28 PM, she revealed that she was unaware the resident had an order for a fluid restriction. During a surveyor interview with a nursing assistant, Staff D on 7/27/2022 at 12:30 PM, she revealed she was not aware the resident had an order for a fluid restriction. During a surveyor interview on 7/27/2022 at 12:40 PM, both the Dietician and the Food Service Director revealed they were unaware that the resident had an order for a fluid restriction. During a surveyor interview on 7/27/2022 at 1:48 PM, the resident revealed that staff are providing drinks on his/her meal trays, give him/her a pitcher of water every day and get him/her a drink when s/he requests one. During this interview, the surveyor observed a pitcher of water on the resident's bedside table. During a surveyor interview the Director of Nursing on 7/28/2022 at 12:17 PM, she was unable to provide evidence that the physician's order for the fluid restriction was implemented.
CONCERN (E)

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

Medication Errors (Tag F0758)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure a resident's drug regimen is free from unnecessary psychotropic medication relative to receiving a...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure a resident's drug regimen is free from unnecessary psychotropic medication relative to receiving as needed, psychotropic medication orders extending beyond 14 days without a rational or indication of an intended duration, for 1 of 3 residents reviewed, Resident ID #22. Findings are as follows: Record review for the resident revealed a physician's order dated 6/17/2022 for Diazepam tablet 5 MG (milligrams). Give 0.5 tablet every 8 hours as needed for anxiety. The order failed to reveal a fourteen day stop date or rationale for continuation by the prescribing practitioner. Additional record review also revealed an order dated 6/16/2022 for Seroquel Tablet 25 MG. Give 12.5 mg by mouth as needed, twice a day for panic attack related to anxiety. The order failed to reveal a fourteen day stop date or rationale for continuation by the prescribing physician. A review of the July Medication Administration Record (MAR) from 7/1/2022 through 7/28/2022 revealed that the resident received the above ordered Diazepam on the following dates and times: - 7/1/2022 at 11:33 AM - 7/4/2022 at:45 AM - 7/5/2022 at 5:39 PM - 7/6/2022 at 3:39 AM - 7/7/2022 at 4:06 PM - 7/8/2022 at 4:18 PM - 7/23/2022 at 6:32 AM and 2:40 PM - 7/24/2022 at 10:24 PM - 7/25/2022 at 4:27 PM The MAR further revealed that the resident received the Seroquel on the following dates and times: - 7/3/2022 at 2:18 PM - 7/5/2022 at 5:55 PM - 7/22/2022 at 8:38 PM - 7/24/2022 at 4:27 PM During a surveyor interview with the Director of Nursing 07/28/2022 at 11:15 AM, she was unable to provide evidence that the as needed psychotropic medications were re-evaluated by the prescribing practitioner, or that a rationale for the extended time period for the order was documented in the resident's medical record.
CONCERN (F)

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

Food Safety (Tag F0812)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

Based on surveyor observation, record review, and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure that food is stored, prepared, distributed, and served in accordance with p...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on surveyor observation, record review, and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure that food is stored, prepared, distributed, and served in accordance with professional standards for food service safety relative to the main kitchen and 2 resident unit refrigerators. Findings are as follows: Record review of the facility policy titled, Food Storage, states in part, .All foods will be properly stored in a safe, sanitary manner .Cold Storage .All foods will be stored either wrapped or in closed storage containers and be clearly dated and labeled .Temperatures of the refrigerators and freezers will be recorded on a regular basis. Record review of the Ensure Plus therapeutic nutrition manufacturer's instructions revealed in part, .Once opened, reclose, refrigerate and use within 48 hours . A) During a surveyor observation of the kitchen on 7/25/2022 at 8:40 AM revealed 6 boxes of 3-gallon juices that were open, not dated, and in use. The observation included 1 box of each of the following flavors: - diet fruit juice - orange juice - cranberry juice - apple juice - sugar free lemonade - strawberry kiwi B) During an additional surveyor observation of the kitchen on 7/25/2022 at approximately 8:55 AM revealed the following items in the walk-in refrigerator that were not dated: - 1 pitcher of milk not dated with 2 areas of white matter accumulation noted - 1 glass 32 ounce (oz.) container of nonpareil capers not dated with multiple circular areas of black matter noted The following items were dated and used beyond the recommended time: - 1 box of 8 fluid oz. of Ensure Plus vanilla flavor opened and dated 6/14 - 1 glass 32 oz. container of minced garlic dated 1/7 C) During a surveyor observation of the kitchen walk-in freezer on 7/25/2022 at approximately 9:00 AM revealed the following items were noted to have freezer burn: - 1 Ziploc bag containing potato wedges dated 4/18 - 3 packs of 64 oz. Butterball ground turkey - 1 Ziploc bag containing ham dated 2/21 - 1 corned beef bottom round flat During a surveyor observation on 7/26/2022 at approximately 12:05 PM of the main floor resident freezer revealed 8 containers of facility prepared ice cream cups not dated. An additional surveyor observation on 7/26/2022 at approximately 12:20 PM of the lower-level unit resident freezer revealed 5 containers of facility prepared ice cream cups not dated. Additionally, surveyor observation of the freezer failed to reveal evidence that temperatures were being monitored. During a surveyor interview with the Food Service Director (FSD) on 7/25/2022 at 8:47 AM she acknowledged that they were not dating the 3-gallon juice boxes when opened. In an additional interview on 7/25/2022 at approximately 9:30 AM with the FSD she acknowledged that the above findings in the walk-in refrigerator were improperly stored and should be discarded. Additionally, the FSD acknowledged the above items in the walk-in freezer had freezer burn and should not be served. During a surveyor interview on 7/26/2022 at approximately 12:25 PM with the FSD, she revealed that they have served the facility prepared ice cream cups for the residents and acknowledged that they were not dated as required.
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Life-Threatening (Immediate Jeopardy)
J - Isolated K - Pattern L - Widespread
Actual Harm
G - Isolated H - Pattern I - Widespread
Potential for Harm
D - Isolated E - Pattern F - Widespread
No Harm (Minor)
A - Isolated B - Pattern C - Widespread

Questions to Ask on Your Visit

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

Our Honest Assessment

Strengths
  • • Licensed and certified facility. Meets minimum state requirements.
Concerns
  • • Multiple safety concerns identified: 3 life-threatening violation(s), 4 harm violation(s), $216,258 in fines. Review inspection reports carefully.
  • • 24 deficiencies on record, including 3 critical (life-threatening) violations. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
  • • $216,258 in fines. Extremely high, among the most fined facilities in Rhode Island. Major compliance failures.
  • • Grade F (0/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
Bottom line: This facility has 3 Immediate Jeopardy findings. Serious concerns require careful evaluation.

About This Facility

What is Silver Creek Rehab And Healthcare Center's CMS Rating?

CMS assigns Silver Creek Rehab and Healthcare Center an overall rating of 2 out of 5 stars, which is considered below average nationally. Within Rhode Island, 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 Silver Creek Rehab And Healthcare Center Staffed?

CMS rates Silver Creek Rehab and Healthcare Center's staffing level at 2 out of 5 stars, which is below average compared to other nursing homes.

What Have Inspectors Found at Silver Creek Rehab And Healthcare Center?

State health inspectors documented 24 deficiencies at Silver Creek Rehab and Healthcare Center during 2022 to 2024. These included: 3 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death), 4 that caused actual resident harm, and 17 with potential for harm. Immediate Jeopardy findings are rare and represent the most serious regulatory concerns. They require immediate corrective action.

Who Owns and Operates Silver Creek Rehab And Healthcare Center?

Silver Creek Rehab and Healthcare Center is owned by a for-profit company. For-profit facilities operate as businesses with obligations to shareholders or private owners. The facility is operated by GREEN TREE HEALTHCARE MANAGEMENT, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 128 certified beds and approximately 109 residents (about 85% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in Bristol, Rhode Island.

How Does Silver Creek Rehab And Healthcare Center Compare to Other Rhode Island Nursing Homes?

Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Rhode Island, Silver Creek Rehab and Healthcare Center's overall rating (2 stars) is below the state average of 3.1 and health inspection rating (2 stars) is below the national benchmark.

What Should Families Ask When Visiting Silver Creek Rehab And Healthcare Center?

Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "What changes have been made since the serious inspection findings, and how are you preventing similar issues?" "Can you walk me through typical staffing levels on day, evening, and night shifts?" "Can I visit during a mealtime to observe dining assistance and food quality?" "How do you handle medical emergencies, and what is your hospital transfer rate?" These questions are particularly relevant given the facility's Immediate Jeopardy citations and the below-average staffing rating.

Is Silver Creek Rehab And Healthcare Center Safe?

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

Do Nurses at Silver Creek Rehab And Healthcare Center Stick Around?

Silver Creek Rehab and Healthcare Center has not reported staff turnover data to CMS. Staff turnover matters because consistent caregivers learn residents' individual needs, medications, and preferences. When staff frequently change, this institutional knowledge is lost. Families should ask the facility directly about their staff retention rates and average employee tenure.

Was Silver Creek Rehab And Healthcare Center Ever Fined?

Silver Creek Rehab and Healthcare Center has been fined $216,258 across 5 penalty actions. This is 6.1x the Rhode Island average of $35,241. Fines at this level are uncommon and typically indicate a pattern of serious deficiencies, repeated violations, or failure to correct problems promptly. CMS reserves penalties of this magnitude for facilities that pose significant, documented risk to resident health or safety. Families should request specific documentation of what issues led to these fines and what systemic changes have been implemented.

Is Silver Creek Rehab And Healthcare Center on Any Federal Watch List?

Silver Creek Rehab and Healthcare Center is not on any federal watch list. The most significant is the Special Focus Facility (SFF) program, which identifies the bottom 1% of nursing homes nationally based on persistent, serious quality problems. Not being on this list means the facility has avoided the pattern of deficiencies that triggers enhanced federal oversight. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review the facility's inspection history directly.