Sunny View Nursing Home

83 Corona Street, Warwick, RI 02886 (401) 737-9193
For profit - Limited Liability company 57 Beds EDEN HEALTHCARE Data: November 2025 4 Immediate Jeopardy citations
Trust Grade
0/100
#59 of 72 in RI
Last Inspection: March 2025

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

Overview

Sunny View Nursing Home has received a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns about the facility's quality of care. It ranks #59 out of 72 nursing homes in Rhode Island, placing it in the bottom half of facilities in the state, and #9 out of 11 in Kent County, suggesting limited better options nearby. The facility's trend is worsening, with issues rising from 6 in 2024 to 16 in 2025. Although staffing is rated average with a 3/5 star and a turnover rate of 65%, which is concerning compared to the state average, the nursing home faces serious challenges, including $82,734 in fines, which is higher than 89% of facilities in Rhode Island. Recent inspections revealed critical failures, including inadequate infection control measures for residents and a serious incident where a resident eloped from the facility, resulting in a major injury, highlighting significant safety risks that families should consider when evaluating care options.

Trust Score
F
0/100
In Rhode Island
#59/72
Bottom 19%
Safety Record
High Risk
Review needed
Inspections
Getting Worse
6 → 16 violations
Staff Stability
⚠ Watch
65% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
Penalties
✓ Good
$82,734 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
33 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
★★☆☆☆
2.0
Overall Rating
★★★☆☆
3.0
Staff Levels
★★★★★
5.0
Care Quality
★☆☆☆☆
1.0
Inspection Score
Stable
2024: 6 issues
2025: 16 issues

The Good

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

Facility shows strength in quality measures, fire safety.

The Bad

2-Star Overall Rating

Below Rhode Island average (3.1)

Below average - review inspection findings carefully

Staff Turnover: 65%

18pts above Rhode Island avg (46%)

Frequent staff changes - ask about care continuity

Federal Fines: $82,734

Well above median ($33,413)

Moderate penalties - review what triggered them

Chain: EDEN HEALTHCARE

Part of a multi-facility chain

Ask about local staffing decisions and management

Staff turnover is elevated (65%)

17 points above Rhode Island average of 48%

The Ugly 33 deficiencies on record

4 life-threatening 1 actual harm
Jun 2025 3 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

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 each resident receive...

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 each resident receives assistive devices to prevent accidents relative to the placement of a TekTone device (a device that allows at-risk residents to move freely about a facility, while preventing them from exiting the facility) for 1 of 1 resident who successfully eloped from the facility and sustained a major injury, Resident ID #1. Findings are as follows: Review of the facility policy titled Elopement Assessment dated 10/27/2022 states in part, .It is the facility policy to maintain a safe and secure environment for all residents. In order to achieve this goal residents who are at risk for wandering/elopement need to be identified and a care plan developed with interventions to minimize or eliminate the risk as outlined below .Residents who are at risk for elopement include those with dementia, confusion .may warrant close watching .if the resident is assessed to be at risk for elopement, then the necessary and appropriate intervention must be put in place immediately to keep the resident safe i.e , wander guard bracelet, frequent checks, etc . Review of an additional facility's policy titled Wanderguard [TekTone device] System and Assessments Checks dated 2/7/2025 states in part, .The bracelet will be checked each shift to assure placement, the nurse will sign this as checked in the treatment record . Record review of a facility reported incident sent to the Rhode Island Department on Health on 6/16/2025 revealed that Resident ID #1 was found in the rear parking lot of the facility by a staff on the overnight shift on 6/12/2025. S/he was noted to have a large hematoma above the left eye and his/her left leg was externally rotated and s/he complained of pain. S/he was tranferred to an acute care hospital where s/he was diagnosed with a left hip fracture. Record review revealed Resident ID #1 was admitted to the facility's semi-secure unit in March of 2022 and readmitted in April of 2025 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, altered mental status, cognitive communication deficit, insomnia, and muscle weakness. Review of the Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident scored a 6 out of 15 on his/her Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) assessment, indicating severe cognitive impairment. Record review of a care plan dated 6/9/2025 revealed the resident is at risk for wandering and elopement related to diagnoses of dementia and cognitive decline with a goal for the resident to remain on the unit at all times unless leaving with staff or family. Staff interventions include but are not limited to, Frequent visual checks .Redirect away from exits .Engage in activities if applicable . Record review of a physician's order dated 4/17/2025 revealed to check the placement of the TekTone elopement prevention bracelet every shift. Further review revealed that the frequency of this order was transcribed incorrectly. The order was transcribed to be completed once daily on Mondays, indicating that the placement would be checked one time a week and not every shift as ordered by the physician. Review of the resident's MDS Assessments Summary dated 4/18/2025 section P Restraints and Alarms failed to reveal evidence that the resident was coded as having a TekTone elopement prevention bracelet in place. Review of the June 2025 Treatment Administration Record revealed the resident's TekTone bracelet was last checked on 6/9/2025 during the 11:00 PM to 7:00 AM shift, which was three days prior to the elopement incident on 6/12/2025 night. Record review of a progress note dated 6/13/2025 at 1:36 AM authored by Registered Nurse, Staff A, revealed that the resident was found by staff in the rear parking lot at approximately 11:15 PM lying on the ground. The TekTone monitoring device was not located on the resident. The resident was alert and confused, with a large hematoma (a collection of blood outside of a blood vessel, often caused by injury) above his/her left eye, his/her left leg was noted to be externally rotated and s/he was complaining of pain. Further record review revealed the resident was transferred to an acute care hospital and was diagnosed with a left hip fracture. Review of a physician's order dated 4/23/2025 revealed that the resident is to receive the following medications at bedtime every day: - Melatonin 5 MG (milligrams) for insomnia - Trazodone 12.5 MG for insomnia - Eliquis 2.5 MG for blood clot - Tylenol 1000 MG for pain - Omeprazole 40 MG for stomach ulcer or heart burn - Latanoprost eye drops 0.005% for glaucoma - Methenamine hippurate 1 gram for urinary tract infections prevention. Review of the June 2025 Medication Administration Record failed to reveal evidence that the above-mentioned bedtime medications were signed off as administered on 6/12/2025 before his/her elopement incident. During a surveyor interview on 6/18/2025 at 1:26 PM with Staff A, he indicated that the resident's bedtime medications were not administered because s/he wasn't in his/her room at 11:15 PM at the time of the administration. When Staff A was asked as to why he waited until 11:15 PM to give the resident his/her bedtime medications, he indicated that it was a busy night and that he had not see the resident from the start of his shift (9:00 PM) until s/he was found outside of the facility. Additionally, Staff A, revealed that the resident did not have a TekTone elopement prevention device on when s/he was found on the ground outside of the facility on the night of 6/12/2025. During a surveyor interview with Nursing Assistant (NA), Staff B, on 6/18/2025 at 3:22 PM, he stated that he had last seen the resident in his/her room at approximately 10:30 PM during the rounds on the evening of 6/12/2025. Additionally, Staff B stated that he was unable to recall if the resident had a Tektone monitoring device on him/her during evening rounds. During a surveyor interview with NA, Staff C, on 6/20/2025 at 4:24 PM, he revealed that on 6/12/2025 at approximately 11:40 PM, he was routinely checking the outside of the facility when he saw something on the ground behind the kitchen. However, he thought it was a trash bag that was left out by staff. He indicated that when he got closer, he observed Resident ID #1 laying on the ground, calling for help. Further, Staff C revealed that he ran back into the building to alert the staff on Resident ID #1s unit that s/he was outside. This indicates that approximately 1 hour and 10 minutes had passed since s/he was last seen by staff in the facility. During a surveyor interview on 6/18/2025 at 12:03 PM with Director of Nursing Service, she indicated that she was unsure which door the resident exited the facility from. She indicated that the resident may have exited the building from the exit door closest to his/her room. Additionally, she revealed that all exit doors would have locked if the resident had been wearing a TekTone device. Furthermore, she acknowledged that the resident did not have a TekTone device on when s/he was found on the ground outside of the facility on 6/12/2025 at 11:15 PM. Lastly, she was unable to provide evidence that the facility's policy to check the TekTone device each shift to assure placement was followed. During a surveyor interview on 6/23/2025 at approximately 1:00 PM with the Nurse Practitioner, she revealed that two weeks prior to the elopement, it was reported to her that the resident had taken off the Tektone bracelet. Additionally, she indicated that she would have expected the staff to frequently check the TekTone elopement bracelet every shift daily for the safety of the resident. The facility's failures to follow their policy to ensure placement of the TekTone device every shift, and correctly transcribe the physician's order to verify the placement of a TekTone bracelet three times daily, resulted in a cognitively impaired resident who was identified as a wander risk, not having a TekTone device in place. Because the assistive device was not in place, s/he was able to exit the facility through unlocked doors (that would have locked if s/he had been wearing a TekTone device), placing him/her at risk for more than minimal harm, impairment, or death. Cross reference F 842.
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

Medical Records (Tag F0842)

Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident

Based on record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure that resident records are complete and accurately documented, relative to the monitoring of an elo...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure that resident records are complete and accurately documented, relative to the monitoring of an elopement prevention device, a TekTone device (a device that allows at-risk residents to move freely about a facility, while preventing them from exiting the facility), for 1 of 1 resident reviewed who eloped from the facility and sustained a hip fracture, Resident ID #1. Findings are as follows: Review of a facility's policy titled Wanderguard [TekTone device] System and Assessments checks states in part .The bracelet will be checked each shift to assure placement, the nurse will sign this as checked in the treatment record . Record review of a facility reported incident submitted to the Rhode Island Department on Health on 6/16/2025 revealed that Resident ID #1 was found in the rear parking lot of the facility by a staff on the overnight shift on 6/12/2025. S/he was noted to have a large hematoma above the left eye, his/her left leg was externally rotated and s/he complained of pain. Record review revealed the resident was admitted to a semi-secured unit of the facility in March of 2022 and readmitted in April of 2025 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, altered mental status, cognitive communication deficit, muscle weakness, and insomnia. Review of the Quarterly Minimum Data Set Assessment revealed the resident scored a 6 out of 15 on his/her Brief Interview for Mental Status assessment, indicating severe cognitive impairment. Record review of a care plan dated 6/9/2025 revealed the resident is at risk for wandering and elopement related to diagnoses of dementia and cognitive decline with a goal for the resident to remain on the unit at all times unless leaving with staff or family. Staff interventions include but are not limited to, Frequent visual checks .Redirect away from exits .Engage in activities if applicable . Record review of a physician's order dated 4/17/2025 revealed to check the placement of the TekTone elopement prevention bracelet every shift. Further review revealed that the frequency of this order was transcribed incorrectly. The order was transcribed to be completed once daily on Mondays, indicating that the placement would be checked one time a week and not every shift as ordered by the physician. Record review of the June 2025 Treatment Administration Record revealed the placement of the TekTone device was last checked on 6/9/2025 on the 11:00 PM to 7:00 AM shift which was 3 days prior to the resident's elopement on 6/12/2025. Record review failed to reveal evidence that the resident's TekTone device was being checked every shift as ordered since it was last checked on 6/9/2025. Record review of a progress note dated 6/13/2025 at 1:36 AM authored by Registered Nurse, Staff A, revealed that the resident was found by staff in the rear parking lot at approximately 11:15 PM lying on the ground. The TekTone monitoring device was not located on the resident. The resident was alert and confused, with a large hematoma (a collection of blood outside of a blood vessel, often caused by injury) above his/her left eye, his/her left leg was noted to be externally rotated and s/he was complaining of pain. Further record review revealed the resident was transferred to an acute care hospital and was diagnosed with a left hip fracture. During a surveyor interview on 6/18/2025 at 1:26 PM with Registered Nurse, Staff A, he revealed that the resident didn't have the TekTone elopement prevention device on when s/he was found on the ground outside of the facility on the night of 6/12/2025. During a surveyor interview with Nursing Assistant, Staff A, on 6/18/2025 at 3:22 PM he stated that he was unable to recall if the resident had a TekTone monitoring device on him/her on the last round during the evening shift of 6/12/2025. During a surveyor interview with the Director of Nursing Services, on 6/18/2025 at approximately 3:30 PM, she revealed that the order dated 4/17/2025 was transcribed in error, and the TekTone monitoring device should have been checked for placement every shift, every day. During a surveyor interview on 6/23/2025 at approximately 1:00 PM with the Nurse Practitioner, she revealed that two weeks prior to the resident's elopement, it was reported that the resident had taken off the TekTone elopement prevention device. Additionally, she indicated that she would have expected the staff to follow the physician order which is to check the device placement daily on every shift for the safety of the resident. Due to the facility's failure to accurately transcribe and implement a physician's order regarding the monitoring the placement of the TekTone device, a cognitively impaired resident-identified as a known wander risk, exited the facility, fell and sustained a hip fracture. This failure placed the resident at risk for more than minimal harm, impairment, or death. Cross reference F689
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

Assessment Accuracy (Tag F0641)

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 the Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment accurately reflected the resident's status for 1 of 2 r...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure that the Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment accurately reflected the resident's status for 1 of 2 residents reviewed who are assessed an an elopement risk, Resident ID #5. Findings are as follows: Record review revealed Resident ID #5 was readmitted to the facility's semi-secure unit in March of 2025 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, mild cognitive impairment and muscle weakness. Record review revealed that a care plan was initiated on 6/9/2025 indicating the resident requires the use of a TekTONE elopement prevention bracelet related to episodes of attempting to leave the facility with approaches/interventions including, but not limited to, ensuring that the TekTone elopement prevention bracelet is in place and its functionality, providing visual checks/supervision for safety. Review of the quarterly MDS Assessments dated 2/26/2025 and 4/3/2025 section Restraints and Alarms failed to reveal evidence that the resident was coded as having a TekTone elopement prevention bracelet in place. During a surveyor interview on 6/23/2025 at approximately 1:00 PM with the MDS Coordinator, she acknowledged that the resident wears a TekTone bracelet related to being at risk for elopement. Additionally. she revealed that they was coded inaccurately in the Section P Restraints and Alarms of the MDS. During a surveyor interview on 6/23/2025 at approximately 2:00 PM with the DNS, she was unable to provide evidence that Resident ID #5 was coded as having a TekTone elopement prevention bracelet in the section P of his/her MDS assessment.
May 2025 1 deficiency
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Deficiency F0658 (Tag F0658)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to meet professional standards of quality for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for physician's orders, Resident ID ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to meet professional standards of quality for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for physician's orders, Resident ID #s 1 and 3. Findings are as follows: Mosby's 4th Edition, Fundamentals of Nursing, page 314 states, 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 of a community reported complaint submitted to the Rhode Island Department of Health on 5/5/2025 alleged that Resident ID #1 was complaining of abdominal pain and was observed with large purple bruising extending from his/her upper chest to the upper abdomen. 1. Record review revealed Resident ID #1 was admitted to the facility in February of 2025 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, altered menial status and a fall. Record review revealed a physician's order dated 3/6/2025 to complete a weekly skin evaluation and document the findings under observations. Record review of the April 2025 Medication Administration Record (MAR) revealed the weekly skin evaluation was signed off as completed on 4/26/2025. Record review of the Weekly Skin Evaluation Observations and progress notes failed to reveal evidence that the weekly skin assessment was completed and documented on 4/26/2025, although it was signed off as being completed on the MAR. 2. Record review revealed Resident ID #3 was admitted to the facility in April of 2025 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, Parkinson's Disease, dementia, and fracture of the nasal bones. Record review revealed a physician's order dated 4/27/2025 to complete a weekly skin evaluation and document the findings under observations. Record review of the April and May 2025 MAR revealed the weekly skin evaluations were signed off as completed on 4/28/2025 and 5/5/2025. Record review of the Weekly Skin Evaluation Observations and progress notes failed to reveal evidence that the weekly skin assessments were completed and documented on 4/28/2025 and 5/5/2025, although they were signed off as being completed on the MAR. During a surveyor interview on 5/6/2025 at 2:51 PM with the Director of Nursing Services, she was unable to provide evidence that weekly skin assessments were completed, per the physician's order.
Mar 2025 1 deficiency
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Medical Records (Tag F0842)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on record review, resident, and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to accurately maintain the resident's medical record in accordance with accepted professional sta...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review, resident, and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to accurately maintain the resident's medical record in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices for 1 of 1 resident reviewed with updated medication orders, Resident ID #1. Findings are as follows: Record review of a community reported complaint submitted to the Rhode Island Department of Health on 3/19/2025, alleged that Resident ID #'s 1 medical needs have not been met. Record review revealed that the resident was admitted to the facility in January of 2025 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, exocrine pancreatic insufficiency (a condition in which the pancreas does not produce enough digestive enzymes, leading to problems breaking down food), orthostatic hypotension (a condition when the blood pressure drops significantly when a person stands up from a sitting or lying position), and repeated falls. A. Record review of a progress note dated 3/24/2025 authored by Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN), Staff A, revealed in part, that the Nurse Practitioner (NP), Staff B, visited the resident and increasd his/her dose of Spironolactone (a medication prescribed to reduce fluid in the body and to lower your blood pressure) to 37.5 milligrams (mg) daily from 25 mg. Record review of the physician's orders revealed the following: -Spironolactone tablet; 25 mg, with a start date of 3/14/2025 -Spironolactone tablet; 37.5 mg; with a start date of 3/24/2025 Record review of the May 2025 Medication Administration Record (MAR) revealed that the above-mentioned medications were both administered to the resident on 3/25/2025. During a surveyor interview on 3/25/2025 at 12:56 PM with Staff A, she acknowledged that both of the above mentioned orders for Spironolactone were documented as adminstered. Additionally she denied administering the Spironolactone 25 mg to the resident. During a surveyor interview on 3/25/2025 at approximately 3:15 PM with the Administrator, she indicated that she would expect staff to discontinue the medication and to initiate a new order with the correct medication dose. Additionally, she was unable to provide evidence that the medication administration was documented accurately. B. Record review of a progress note dated 3/24/2025 authored by Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN), Staff A, revealed that the Nurse Practitioner (NP), Staff B, visited the resident and prescribed new orders including in part, tucks pads (a medication used to relive pain caused by hemorrhoids) after each bowel movement and to assess his/her blood pressures (BP) two times a day, for 7 days. Record review revealed failed to reveal evidence that a physician's order was in place for tucks pads and for the BP to be taken twice a day, as ordered. Record review of the BP reports and the progress notes failed to reveal evidence that the resident's BP was assessed after the provider initiated the order on 3/24/2025. During a surveyor interview on 3/25/2025 at approximately 10:30 AM with the resident, s/he revealed that s/he made the NP aware of the pain caused by the hemorrhoids. Additionally s/he stated that has not received any treatment for the pain caused by the hemorrhoids. During a surveyor interview on 3/25/2025 at 1:53 PM with Staff A, she acknowledged that the physician's order initiated on 3/24/2025 for the use of tucks pads after each bowel movement was not transcribed and completed, as ordered. During a surveyor interview on 3/25/2025 at 3:01 PM with Registered Nurse, Staff C she acknowledged that the physician's order initiated on 3/24/2025 for the assessment of BP twice a day for 7 days was not transcribed and completed, as ordered. During a surveyor interview on 3/25/2025 at approximately 3:15 PM with the Administrator, she was unable to provide evidence that the above mentioned orders were transcribed into the resident's record or initiated until the facility staff was made aware by the surveyor.
Mar 2025 10 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0625 (Tag F0625)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to provide written information to the resident or resident's representative that specifies the facility's be...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to provide written information to the resident or resident's representative that specifies the facility's bed-hold payment policy upon transfer to the hospital from the facility for 1 of 2 residents reviewed, Resident ID #42. Findings are as follows: Record review of a facility policy titled, Bed Hold Notification upon Transfer for Hospitalization or upon Taking Therapeutic Leave revealed in part, .Procedure: Whenever a resident is sent to the hospital or takes a therapeutic leave as required by state and federal regulations. Procedure: A copy of the Resident Bed Hold Notice .is to be filled out with the resident's name and the date and time of the hospital transfer by the charge nurse who is preparing the transfer papers .Emergency transfer: a. A copy of the resident's Bed Hold Notice is to be attached to the resident's interagency transfer papers by the charge nurse .b. The person who is responsible for notifying the representative of the emergency transfer .will review the Resident Bed Hold Notice at the time and obtain .representative's decision concerning bed hold at that time .c. The representative response documentation is to be kept in the resident's medical record . Record review revealed that the resident was admitted to the facility in December of 2024 with a diagnosis including, but not limited to, congestive heart failure (a condition when the heart muscle is weakened and cannot pump blood effectively). Record review of the progress notes revealed that the resident was transferred to the hospital on December 16th, 2024. Further record review failed to reveal evidence that a bed hold policy was offered upon transfer to the hospital for Resident ID #42. During a surveyor interview on 3/11/2025 at 1:56 PM with the Administrator, she acknowledged that a bed hold notification was not completed, as required.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0676 (Tag F0676)

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 ensure a resident is given the ap...

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 a resident is given the appropriate treatment and services to maintain his or her ability to carry out activities of daily living, for 1 of 1 resident reviewed with unwanted facial hair, Resident ID #94. Findings are as follows: Record review revealed the resident was admitted to the facility in January of 2025 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, pelvic fracture and osteoarthritis (a form of arthritis, commonly affecting the joints in the hands). Record review of an admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident required supervision or touching assistance for personal hygiene. Further review revealed that assistance may be provided throughout the activity or intermittently. Surveyor observations on 3/10/2025 at 9:34 AM and 3/11/2025 at approximately 1:00 PM, revealed the resident was observed to have a moderate amount of facial hair to his/her chin, approximately a half an inch in length. During a surveyor interview immediately following the observation on 3/11/2025 at 1:01 PM with the resident, s/he revealed that they used to shave their chin, but has since lost his/her razor. The resident further revealed that no one at the facility has assisted them with shaving and that s/he would like their facial hair shaven. During a surveyor interview on 3/11/2025 at approximately 1:15 PM with Nursing Assistant, Staff A, she indicated that she should have assisted the resident with shaving. During a surveyor interview on 3/11/2025 at 1:21 PM with Registered Nurse, Staff B, after observing the resident, she acknowledged the resident's facial hair. Additionally, she indicated that shaving is part of resident care. During a surveyor interview on 3/11/2025 at approximately 2:00 PM with the Director of Nursing Services, she acknowledged that the resident should have been assisted with shaving.
CONCERN (D)

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

Quality of Care (Tag F0684)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

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

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 receive treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for hospitalization, Resident ID #7. Findings are as follows: Record review revealed the resident was re-admitted to the facility in October of 2024 following a hospital stay where s/he was diagnosed with a fecal impaction (hardened stool accumulated in the rectum) and a urinary tract infection. Record review of the provider's progress note dated 10/19/2024 states in part, .re-admission History and Physical .at [hospital], 9 cm [centimeter] ball of stool manually removed from resident, enema and bowel meds given . Record review of the physician's orders revealed an order dated 3/3/2022 which included the following: Bowel Protocol 1. Administer the Prune Juice if no bowel movement (BM) in 2 days 2. Give Milk of Magnesia (MOM) suspension by mouth for no BM in 3 days 3. Administer Dulcolax Suppository per rectum (PR) if no results from MOM by the next shift 4. Administer Fleet Enema PR if no results from suppository 5. Call the provider if there was no results from enema Record review of the bowel record documentation revealed the following: - 9/25/2024 through 10/15/2024 - revealed the resident had a medium BM on 9/25/2024. Documentation failed to reveal evidence that the resident had a subsequent BM until 10/2/2024, indicating s/he went 6 days without a BM. - 10/2/2024 through 10/3/2024 - revealed the resident had a BM on both days, however s/he did not have a subsequent BM until 10/7/2024, indicating the resident went without a BM for 3 days. - Documentation after 10/7/2024 failed to reveal evidence that the resident had a BM until 10/12/2024, indicating the resident went 4 days without a BM. - 10/12/2024 through 10/15/2024 failed to reveal evidence that the resident had a BM since 10/12/2024, indicating the resident went 3 days without a BM. Record review of the September and October 2024 Medication Administration Records (MARs), failed to reveal evidence that the resident was administered any of the bowel protocol medications from 9/26/2024 through 10/15/2024, as ordered. Record review revealed the resident was transferred to the hospital on [DATE]. During a surveyor interview on 3/12/2025 at 9:19 AM with Registered Nurse, Staff D, she was unable to provide evidence that the bowel protocol orders were administered according to the physician's order. During a surveyor interview on 3/12/2025 at 2:02 PM with the Director of Nursing Services, she revealed that the bowel protocol orders were not implemented according to the physician's order.
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 ensure that residents with pressu...

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 with pressure ulcers receive the necessary treatment and services, consistent with professional standards of practice, to promote healing for 1 of 3 residents reviewed with a pressure ulcer (skin and tissue injuries caused by constant pressure to a specific area of the body), Resident ID #196. Findings are as follows: Record review revealed the resident was admitted to the facility in January of 2025 with a diagnosis including, but not limited to, pressure ulcer with unspecified stage. Record review of the wound specialist assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident developed a stage 3 pressure wound (full-thickness skin loss where subcutaneous fat is visible) to the right ischium (lower back part of the hip bone). Further record review revealed a dressing treatment recommendation dated 3/4/2025 to apply a foam silicone dressing (a type of wound dressing) three times, weekly. Record review of a nursing progress note dated 3/5/2025 revealed that above treatment recommendation was reviewed by a provider and an order for the above recommendation was to be put in place. Record review of the March 2025 Treatment Administration Record failed to reveal evidence that the above treatment recommendation was implemented from 3/4/2025 until 3/11/2025, indicating that the resident did not have a treatment in place for his/her Stage 3 pressure wound for 7 days. During a surveyor interview on 3/12/2025 at 12:19 PM with the Director of Nursing Services, she acknowledged that the foam dressing treatment was not implemented until 7 days after the resident was seen by the wound specialist.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0760 (Tag F0760)

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 residents are free of any significant medication errors for 1 of 1 resident reviewed who was recei...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure residents are free of any significant medication errors for 1 of 1 resident reviewed who was receiving the medication Victoza (an injectable medication prescribed to help lower blood sugars), Resident ID #30. Findings are as follows: Record review revealed the resident was admitted to the facility in January of 2024 with a diagnosis including, but not limited to, type 2 diabetes mellitus (high blood sugar caused by the body's inability to produce enough insulin). During the Resident Council Meeting on 3/11/2025 at 1:30 PM, it was revealed that Resident ID #30 did not receive his/her Victoza injection this past weekend. Record review revealed the following physician's orders: -7/3/2024 Humalog Insulin (insulin lispro) insulin pen; 100 unit/milliliter (mL); Amount to Administer: Per Sliding Scale; If Blood Sugar is less than 70, call MD. If Blood Sugar is 200 to 249, give 2 Units. If Blood Sugar is 250 to 300, give 4 Units. If Blood Sugar is 301 to 350, give 6 Units. If Blood Sugar is 351 to 400, give 8 Units. If Blood Sugar is greater than 400, call MD (medical doctor). -12/4/2024 for Victoza pen injector; 0.6 mg/0.1 mL (18 mg/3 mL); amt: 1.8 milligrams (mg) subcutaneous daily in the PM. Record review of the March 2025 Medication Administration Record (MAR) failed to reveal evidence that the Victoza medication was administered on 3/8/2025 or 3/9/2025 as ordered. Further review of the MAR revealed the medication was unavailable and that the medication was ordered from the pharmacy on 3/8/2025. Additional review of the MAR revealed the following elevated blood sugars (BS) and dates and times when the resident was administered extra units of insulin: -3/9/2025 between 11 AM - 1 PM, the resident's BS was 400, 8 units of insulin per the sliding scale. -3/10/2025 between 11 AM - 1 PM, the resident's BS was 540, an extra 6 units of insulin was ordered, in addition to the sliding scale for a total dose of 14 units. -3/11/2025 between 11 AM - 1 PM, the resident's BS was 416, an extra 4 units of insulin was ordered, in addition to the sliding scale for a total dose of 12 units. Record review of the nursing progress notes failed to reveal evidence that the provider was notified that the Victoza was unavailable for administration on 3/9/2025. During a surveyor interview on 3/12/2025 at 1:27 PM with a pharmacy staff member, she revealed that there was no record that the Victoza medication was ordered until 3/10/2025. During a surveyor interview on 3/12/2025 at approximately 2:45 PM with Licensed Practical Nurse, Staff I, she revealed that she did not notify the provider on 3/9/2025 that the Victoza was not available for administration. During a surveyor interview with the Director of Nursing Services on 3/12/2025 at 1:54 PM and at 3:00 PM, she acknowledged that the resident did not receive his/her Victoza on 3/8 and 3/9/2025 as ordered.
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0730 (Tag F0730)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to complete an annual performance review for every nurse aide (NA) at least once every 12 months for 4 of 4 ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to complete an annual performance review for every nurse aide (NA) at least once every 12 months for 4 of 4 NA personnel records reviewed, Staff E, F, G, and H. Findings are as follows: Record review of the personnel files failed to reveal evidence that an annual performance evaluation was completed for the following NA's: -Staff E with a date of hire of 5/30/2023 -Staff F with a date of hire of 9/27/2021 -Staff G with a date of hire of 7/19/2021 -Staff H with a date of hire of 4/16/2023 During a surveyor interview on 3/12/2025 at approximately 10:00 AM with the Administrator, she was unable to provide evidence of a completed performance evaluation within the last 12 months for Staff E, F, G, and H.
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0940 (Tag F0940)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to develop, implement, and maintain an effective training program for annual training for existing employees...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to develop, implement, and maintain an effective training program for annual training for existing employees consistent with their expected roles, relative to education involving abuse, infection control, and dementia, per the facility assessment, for 8 of 10 employees reviewed, Staff E, F, G, H, J, K, L, and M. Findings are as follows: Review of the Facility Assessment, dated 1/1/2024, revealed in part, training topics are completed upon hire and annually for all staff, which include, but are not limited to, abuse and neglect, dementia management, and infection control. Record review revealed Nursing Assistant (NA), Staff E, was hired on 5/30/2023. Review of her training records failed to reveal evidence that she received annual education or training relative to abuse and neglect, or infection control. Record review revealed NA, Staff F, was hired on 9/27/2021. Review of his training records failed to reveal evidence that he received annual education or training relative to abuse and neglect, dementia management, or infection control. Record review revealed NA, Staff G, was hired on 7/19/2021. Review of her training records failed to reveal evidence that she received annual education or training relative to dementia management. Record review revealed NA, Staff H, was hired on 4/16/2023. Review of his training records failed to reveal evidence that he received annual education or training relative to abuse and neglect, dementia management, or infection control. Record review revealed Dietary Cook, Staff J, was hired on 10/25/2023. Review of his training records failed to reveal evidence that he received annual education or training relative to dementia management. Record review revealed NA, Staff K, was hired on 3/28/2024. Review of her training records failed to reveal evidence that she received education or training relative to abuse and neglect, dementia management, or infection control. Record review revealed Licensed Practical Nurse, Staff L, was hired on 3/18/2023. Review of his training records failed to reveal evidence that he received annual education or training relative to abuse and neglect or dementia management. Record review revealed Registered Nurse, Staff M, was hired on 2/17/2024. Review of her training records failed to reveal evidence that she received education or training relative to abuse and neglect, dementia management, or infection control. During a surveyor interview on 3/12/2025 at 3:28 PM with the Administrator, she indicated that she would expect that all training's outlined in the facility assessment should have been completed. Additionally, she was unable to provide evidence that the above-mentioned education and training's were completed for Staff E, F, G, H, J, K, L, and M, per the facility assessment.
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

**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 store, pre...

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 store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety, relative to the main kitchen and the main dining room. Findings are as follows: 1. Review of the Rhode Island Food Code, 2018 Edition, section 3-501.17 states in part, .(B) .refrigerated, ready-to-eat time/temperature control for safety food .shall be clearly marked, at the time the original container is opened in a food establishment .and: (1) the day the original container is opened in the food establishment shall be counted as Day 1; and (2) The day or date marked by the food establishment may not exceed a manufacturer's use-by date . During the initial tour of the main kitchen on 3/10/2025 at approximately 8:25 AM of the reach in refrigerator, the following was observed: -One, 8 pound (lb.) container of Cross Valley Farms Fruit Salad Deluxe in light syrup approximately ¾ full, open and not dated. -One, 1 gallon pitcher of orange liquid approximately ½ full, not labeled or dated. -One, 1.42 liter bottle of Thirster 100% prune juice approximately ½ full, open and not dated. During a surveyor observation of the main dining room kitchenette on 3/10/2025 at approximately 9:00 AM, the following was observed in the refrigerator: -One, ½ gallon container of whole milk, approximately half full, open and not dated. -One, 1.42-liter bottle of Thirster 100% prune juice approximately ½ full, open and not dated. -One, 20-ounce squeeze bottle of Welches concord grape jelly approximately half full, open and not dated. During a surveyor interview with the Food Service Director (FSD) at the time of the above observation, he revealed that he would expect food and beverages to be labeled and dated when opened. 2. The [NAME] Food Code 2018 Edition 3-302-12 Food Storage Containers, Identified with Common Name of Food states in part, .Except for containers holding Food that can be readily and unmistakably recognized .working containers holding Food or Food ingredients that are removed from their original packages for use .shall be identified with the common name of the Food . During a surveyor observation on 3/10/2025 at approximately 8:40 AM of the walk-in refrigerator in the main kitchen, revealed the following: -three white plastic tubes containing food in a metal container dated 3/9/2025, without a label. During a surveyor interview with the FSD at the time of the above observation, he revealed that the white plastic tubes were filled with ground beef. He further acknowledged that the tubes were not labeled with the name of the food. 3. Record review of the Rhode Island Food Code 2018 edition, Section 3-501.16 Time/Temperature Control for Safety, Hot and Cold Holding states in part, .(A) Except during preparation, cooking or cooling .time/temperature control for safety food shall be maintained: (1) At 57 degrees Celsius (135 degrees Fahrenheit [F]) or above . During a surveyor observation on 3/10/2025 at 12:03 PM, at the time the lunch meal was being plated in the kitchen, Dietary Cook, Staff J, obtained the temperature of the foods being served at the request of the surveyor. The steamed broccoli with butter was observed with the temperature of 102 F. During a surveyor interview on 3/10/2025 immediately following the above observation, Staff J, acknowledged that the broccoli was not at the safe hot holding temperature. He further acknowledged that he had already plated one resident's lunch plate that included the broccoli and did not obtain the temperatures of the food prior to plating the lunch meal. During a surveyor interview on 3/10/2025 at approximately 12:10 PM with the FSD, he acknowledged that the broccoli with butter was below the safe holding temperature of 135 F. Additionally, he indicated that he would expect the cook to obtain the temperature of all foods prior to plating.
CONCERN (F)

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

QAPI Program (Tag F0867)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

Based on record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to measure success and track performance of Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) actions to ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to measure success and track performance of Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) actions to ensure that problem areas are identified, and good faith efforts for improvements are achieved and sustained demonstrated by measurable objectives with statistical data documented. Findings are as follows: Record review of the facility's 2025 QAPI plan states in part, .the QAPI Committee will utilize a formal and consistent methodology for planning, designing, measuring, assessing, and improving organizational performance and resident outcomes . Record review of the facility's 2024 and 2025 QAPI binder failed to reveal evidence of any actions, measurements, or tracking to ensure efforts for improvements of identified problem areas within the facility. During a surveyor interview on 3/12/2025 at approximately 12:30 PM with the Administrator, she acknowledged that the facility failed to develop actions, measurements, or tracking systems to measure and track performance of identified problem areas within the facility.
MINOR (B)

Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact

Deficiency F0582 (Tag F0582)

Minor procedural issue · This affected multiple residents

Based on record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to properly provide notice to residents and/or representatives informing when changes in coverage are made t...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to properly provide notice to residents and/or representatives informing when changes in coverage are made to items and services covered by Medicare and/or the state medical plan related to the Skilled Nursing Facility Advanced Beneficiary Notice (SNFABN) of Non-coverage Form for 4 of 5 residents discharged with Medicare Part A Services, Resident ID #s 294, 295, 296, and 297. Findings are as follows: Review of the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Form, CMS 100-55, titled Form Instructions Skilled Nursing Facility Advanced Beneficiary Notice of Non-coverage, states in part, Medicare requires SNFs [Skilled Nursing Facilities] to issue the SNFABN to Original Medicare, also called fee-for-service (FFS) beneficiaries prior to providing care that Medicare usually covers, but may not pay for in this instance because the care is: - not medically reasonable and necessary. - or considered custodial. The SNFABN provides information to the beneficiary so that s/he can decide whether or not to get the care that may not be paid for by Medicare and assume financial responsibility. SNFs must use the SNFABN when applicable for SNF Prospective Payment System services (Medicare Part A) . 1. Record review revealed that Resident ID #294's last covered day of Medicare Part A Services was on 12/5/2024. Further record review failed to reveal evidence that the resident and/or his/her representative was issued the SNFABN form. 2. Record review revealed that Resident ID #295's last covered day of Medicare Part A Services was on 11/11/2024. Further record review failed to reveal evidence that the resident and/or his/her representative was issued the SNFABN form. 3. Record review revealed that Resident ID #296's last covered day of Medicare Part A Services was on 2/18/2025. Further record review failed to reveal evidence that the resident and/or his/her representative was issued the SNFABN form. 4. Record review revealed that Resident ID #297's last covered day of Medicare Part A Services was on 12/29/2024. Further record review failed to reveal evidence that the resident and/or his/her representative was issued the SNFABN form. During a surveyor interview on 3/12/2025 at 8:35 AM with the Administrator, she indicated that Resident ID #s 294, 295, 296, and 297 should have been issued a SNFABN form and was unable to provide evidence that a SNFABN form was completed.
Jan 2025 1 deficiency
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

ADL Care (Tag F0677)

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 provide th...

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 the necessary services to a resident who is unable to carry out activities of daily living relative to weekly scheduled showers for 4 of 4 residents reviewed, Residents ID #s 1, 3, 4, and 5. Findings are as follows: Record review of a community reported complaint sent to the Rhode Island Department of Health on 1/10/2025 alleged that Resident ID #1 was not receiving the appropriate care at the facility. 1. Record review revealed Resident ID #1 was admitted to the facility in December of 2024 with a diagnosis including, but not limited to, multiple fractures of the ribs. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 out of 15, indicating intact cognition. Additionally, s/he is coded as dependent on staff for his/her activities of daily living (ADLs) and indicated that showers are somewhat important to him/her. During a surveyor interview on 1/14/2025 at 11:31 AM with the resident, s/he revealed that s/he is frustrated with the care provided to him/her at the facility. Additionally, s/he revealed that s/he is scheduled to receive a shower once a week, every Friday on the 3:00 PM to 11:00 PM shift, but s/he has to fight for it. Further, s/he indicated that s/he has received only 2 out of 5 scheduled showers since his/her admission because s/he missed the showers on 12/13, 12/20 and 12/27/2024. Record review of the shower schedule revealed that Resident ID #1 is to receive a shower every Friday on the 3:00 PM to 11:00 PM shift. Further record review failed to reveal documentation that s/he received a shower on the above-mentioned dates. During a surveyor interview on 1/14/2025 at 1:47 PM with Nursing Assistant (NA), Staff A, she revealed that she is Resident ID #1's primary NA on the first shift. Additionally, she indicated that Resident ID #1 had asked her for a shower in the morning approximately 2 weeks ago, but she had told the resident that she was unable to assist him/her because s/he is scheduled for an evening shower. Further, Staff A indicated that she does not know if the resident received a shower during the evening shift because the facility does not require documentation of the residents' showers. 2. Record review revealed Resident ID #3 was admitted to the facility in January of 2025 with a diagnosis including, but not limited to, retinitis pigmentosa (genetic disease that causes progressive vision loss). Review of the admission MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed a BIMS score of 13 out of 15, indicating intact cognition. During a surveyor observation on 1/15/2025 at approximately 12:30 PM, Resident ID #3 was overheard complaining to another resident that s/he has not received a shower in days. During a surveyor interview on 1/15/2025 at approximately 1:00 PM with Resident ID #3, s/he revealed that s/he needs a shower and wants to be cleaned. Additionally, s/he asked the surveyor, would you want to go 5 days washing your face with a face cloth only and no shower? Further, s/he indicated that s/he wants a shower, but no one wanted to provide him/her with one because s/he is scheduled once a week. Record review of the resident's shower schedule revealed that s/he is to receive a shower every Tuesday on the 7:00 AM to 3:00 PM shift. Additional record review failed to reveal documentation when s/he last had a shower. During a surveyor interview on 1/15/2025 at approximately 1:15 PM, with NA, Staff B, she indicated that a shower is given once a week. Additionally, she indicated that they do not document when the resident receives a shower and was unable to provide evidence on when Resident ID #3 had last had a shower. Review of a nursing progress note dated 1/15/2025 at 1:37 PM revealed that a shower will be offered to the resident before bedtime, after it was brought to facility's attention by the surveyor. 3. Record review revealed Resident ID #4 was admitted to the facility in September of 2024 with a diagnosis including, but not limited to, depression. Review of the Quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed a BIMS score of 13 out of 15, indicating intact cognition. Additionally, s/he is coded as dependent on staff for his/her ADLs and indicated that showers are very important to him/her. During a surveyor interview on 1/15/2025 at approximately 2:00 PM, with Resident ID #4, s/he revealed that s/he does not get showers. Additionally, s/he indicated that s/he cannot remember the last time s/he had a shower but would like to have one. Record review of Resident ID #4's shower schedule revealed that s/he is to receive a shower once a week, every Friday during the 7:00 AM to 3:00 PM shift. Further record review failed to reveal evidence that the resident was provided a shower within the last month. 4. Record review revealed Resident ID #5 was admitted to the facility in March of 2024 with a diagnosis including, but not limited to, history of falling. Review of the Quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed a BIMS score of 15 out of 15, indicating intact cognition. Additionally, s/he was coded as needing some assistance from staff for his/her ADLs and receiving showers is somewhat important to him/her. During a surveyor interview on 1/15/2025 at 11:57 AM, Resident ID #5, s/he revealed that s/he gets a shower once a week but would like to have one at least twice a week. Additionally, s/he indicated that sometimes s/he must ask the staff to give him/her a shower. During a surveyor interview on 1/15/2025 at 12:03 PM with Licensed Practical Nurse, Staff C, she revealed that there is a shower schedule provided to the NAs with their assignments, however no documentation is required by the facility when a shower is given. During surveyor interviews on 1/14/2025 at approximately 2:47 PM with the DNS in the presence Administrator and on 1/15/2025 at approximately 3:00 PM with the DNS, she was unable to provide evidence that the above residents received their scheduled showers. Additionally, she indicated that she would expect the staff to accommodate the residents when they missed their scheduled shower days or requested additional showers. She also acknowledged that the facility does not currently document when a resident receives a shower.
Mar 2024 6 deficiencies 1 IJ
CRITICAL (J)

Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation

Quality of Care (Tag F0684)

Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident

Based on record review and staff interview if has been determined that the facility failed to provide treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice and failed to promptly id...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and staff interview if has been determined that the facility failed to provide treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice and failed to promptly identify and intervene during an acute change in a resident's condition, related to vomiting and an unknown cardiac event for 1 of 1 resident reviewed, Resident ID #38. Findings are as follows: Review of a facility policy titled, Resident Change in Condition dated 10/17/2023 states in part, .Changes in condition require assessment by the RN [registered nurse] and notification to the MD [Medical Doctor] (both to be done timely). Timely depends upon the level/severity of the change and RN should use professional assessment and judgement to make that decision. Timely is certainly no later than the shift of the change . Record review of a closed record revealed that Resident ID #38, was admitted to the facility in July of 2020 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, vascular dementia and nontraumatic intracerebral hemorrhage (emergency condition in which a blood vessel in the brain ruptures and causes bleeding inside the brain). Review of the progress notes revealed the following: 2/9/2024 at 9:39 PM - Yelling out for assist. 1 episode of vomiting. Vitals stable, taking fluids well. Rapid covid negative. 2/10/2024 at 6:20 AM - Reported from previous shift res [resident] had diarrhea and vomiting previous shift. Res vomited large amount of undigested food x 3. No further diarrhea. Res pale, tired. HOB [head of bed] elevated. Repositioned to side. Call light within reach. Frequent checks 2/10/2024 at 8:21 AM - PT [patient] found unresponsive [at] 7:43am, prior to unresponsive pt was alert, talking and able to make needs known, no complaints. unable to find pulse at that time, CPR [cardiopulmonary resuscitation] started and 911 was called at 7:47am. 911 in and CPR continued, pt is being transferred to [hospital] . Review of the emergency room documentation dated 2/10/2024 at 8:47 AM revealed that the resident had been transferred to the hospital by Emergency Medical Services (EMS) after being found unresponsive and CPR being administered. Additionally, it revealed that when EMS initially assessed the resident s/he was found to be in ventricular fibrillation (life threatening heart rhythm that results in a rapid, inadequate heartbeat). Further review revealed that due to the resident remaining in persistent asystole (heart stops pumping) in the setting of an unwitnessed cardiac arrest, resuscitation efforts were terminated and the resident was declared dead at 8:36 AM. Record review failed to reveal evidence of an assessment completed to include complete vital signs on 2/9/2024 during the 3:00 PM to 11:00 PM shift although the resident had vomited. Further review failed to reveal evidence that a doctor had been notified of the resident's vomiting. During a surveyor interview on 3/21/2024 at 11:45 AM with the Director of Nursing Services (DNS), she acknowledged that she was the nurse on duty on 2/9/2024 during the 3:00 PM to 11:00 PM shift. Additionally, she revealed that she did obtain the residents vital signs however, she did not document them. The DNS further acknowledged that she did not complete a full assessment and did not report the resident vomiting to the physician. Additional record review failed to reveal evidence of an assessment completed to include complete vital signs on 2/10/2024 during the 11:00 PM to 7:00 AM shift although the resident had vomited 3 times and appeared pale and tired. Further review failed to reveal evidence that a doctor had been notified of the residents change in condition. During a surveyor interview on 3/21/2024 at 3:10 PM with RN, Staff A, she revealed that she was the nurse on the 11:00 PM to 7:00 AM shift on 2/10/2024. Additionally, she revealed that the resident was uncomfortable on her shift and was vomiting. Staff A acknowledged that she did not complete a full assessment to include vital signs and she did not report the resident's vomiting to the physician. Furthermore, she revealed that she would have reported abnormal vital signs to the physician but she did not obtain them. During a surveyor interview on 3/21/2024 at 12:30 PM with Nurse Practitioner (NP), Staff B, she revealed that she would consider a resident vomiting a change in condition and would expect the staff to notify her of the change. Additionally, she revealed that if she had been aware of the resident vomiting, she would have ordered the staff to perform an assessment to include a complete set of vital signs. During a surveyor interview on 3/22/2024 at 9:30 AM with the DNS she was unable to provide evidence that the staff completed an assessment after a change in condition or reported the change in condition to the physician by the end of each shift per the policy. The facility's failure to perform an assessment of a resident including vital signs with multiple episodes of vomiting and failure to promptly identify and intervene during an acute change in a resident's condition had the potential to result in the resident's harm or death.
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 record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure a resident receives care consistent with professional standards of practice to prevent pressure ul...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure a resident receives care consistent with professional standards of practice to prevent pressure ulcers unless the individual's clinical condition demonstrates that they were unavoidable for 1 of 4 residents reviewed, Resident ID #36. Findings are as follows: Resident ID #36 was admitted to the facility in January of 2024 with a diagnosis that includes, but is not limited to, traumatic hemorrhage of the cerebrum(brain). Record review revealed a physician's order for, .encourage/assist to offload heels as tolerated, free float heels with pillow/blanket roll .while bed resting .every shift. Record review of a care plan developed on 1/24/2024 revealed in part, .potential for skin breakdown as a result of weakness . Further record review of the care plan revealed an approach including, but not limited to, keep bony prominences from direct contact and to offload heels to reduce pressure. Surveyor observations on the following dates and times revealed the resident in bed resting and his/her heels resting directly on the mattress, not offloaded: -3/20/2024 at approximately 12:25 PM. -3/20/2024 at approximately 3:40 PM. -3/21/2024 at approximately 10:30 AM. -3/21/2024 at approximately 2:00 PM. Record review of documents titled 'Wound Evaluation and Management dated 3/5/2024 and 3/12/2024 failed to reveal evidence of any skin impairment to the resident's right heel. Record review of a facility document titled Wound Management dated 3/19/2024 revealed a right heel pressure ulcer. During a surveyor interview on 3/21/2024 at approximately 2:05 PM with Registered Nurse, Staff C, she acknowledged the resident's heels were not offloaded. During a surveyor interview with the Director of Nursing Services on 3/21/2024 at approximately 3:00 PM, she revealed the expectation is for physician orders to be followed. Additionally, she was unable to provide evidence that the facility provided care consistent with professional standards of practice to prevent pressure ulcers.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0919 (Tag F0919)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

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

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 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 1 resident reviewed for an adaptive call pad, Resident ID #34. 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, cerebrovascular disease (a group of disorders that affects the blood vessels and blood supply to the brain). Review of a Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] revealed that the resident has an upper extremity impairment on one side. Surveyor observations on the following dates and times revealed that the resident's adaptive call pad was noted near the upper right of the mattress and not within the resident's reach: -3/20/2024 at 9:33 AM. -3/22/2024 at 12:20 PM, 1:45 PM, and approximately 4:25 PM. -3/25/2024 at 9:20 AM. During a surveyor observation and simultaneous interview on 3/25/2024 at 9:20 AM with Licensed Practical Nurse, Staff D, she acknowledged that the resident's adaptive call pad was out of his/her reach. She revealed that the adaptive call pad should be placed near his/her hands because s/he has contractures (permanent tightening of the muscles and tendons). Additionally, Staff D placed the adaptive call pad near the resident's hands, and the resident demonstrated s/he was able to trigger the call light once it was within his/her reach. During a surveyor interview on 3/25/2024 at 9:25 AM with the Director of Nursing Services, she revealed that her expectation would be that the resident's adaptive call pad is placed within the resident's reach.
CONCERN (E)

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

Infection Control (Tag F0880)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

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

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review, surveyor observation, 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 a potential gastrointestinal (GI) virus outbreak on 2 of 2 nursing units affecting Resident ID #s 23, 32, 33, and 38. Additionally, the facility staff failed to conduct appropriate infection control practices relative to wound dressing changes for 1 of 2 residents with observed dressing changes, Resident ID #22. Findings are as follows: Review of a facility policy titled, Surveillance Guidelines last revised 1/2018 states in part, .POLICY: It is the policy of this facility to carry out routine, regular surveillance throughout the facility .Outcome Surveillance- a process designed to identify and report evidence of infection. The process involves the collection/documenting of data on individual cases and comparing the collected data to standard written definitions of infections for the purpose of identifying the prevalence of infections at any given time or to help identify new cases. When a resident exhibits signs and symptoms of an infection the charge nurse will: - Record the resident's name, room number, symptoms, and diagnostic tests done, as well as the results of the tests, using the facility inter-shift communication process. - Residents who are being treated for infections are also to be reported together with presence or absence of symptoms until 48 hours after the last dose of antibiotic. - Follow routine procedures for notifying the physician and family and begin close monitoring of vital signs and intake and output. - Document in the nurses progress notes, the presence or absence of symptoms. The Infection Preventionist (IP) will begin gathering data for the formal surveillance process by: - Reviewing the information provided by the facility inter-shift communication process. - Utilization of a standardized surveillance tool . - Starting a line listing of potential nosocomial infections [infections acquired in a hospital or other healthcare facility]. - Reviewing the medical records as necessary to accurately identify infections. - Analyzing the results of the review. - Provide a monthly report of the analysis. - Document corrective actions for incidents identified . During a surveyor interview on 3/21/2024 at 3:10 PM with Registered Nurse, Staff A, she revealed that in February of 2024, there were quite a few residents with one or two episodes of vomiting, approximately five or six residents with the stomach bug. 1a) Record review revealed that Resident ID #38 was admitted to the facility in July of 2020 with a diagnosis including, but not limited to, vascular dementia. Additionally, s/he resided on the South Wing. Review of the following progress notes revealed s/he was exhibiting signs and symptoms of a potential GI illness: - 2/9/2024 at 9:39 PM .1 episode of vomiting . - 2/10/2024 at 6:20 AM .had diarrhea and vomiting previous shift .vomited large amount of undigested food x 3 . Cross Reference F684. 1b) Record review revealed that Resident ID #33 was readmitted to the facility in May of 2023 with a diagnosis including, but not limited to, heart failure. Additionally, s/he resided on the South Wing. Review of the following progress notes revealed s/he was exhibiting signs and symptoms of a potential GI illness: - 2/8/2024 at 6:27 AM .vomited a large amount of undigested food x 1 about 1:30 AM . 1c) Record review revealed that Resident ID #23 was admitted to the facility in January of 2024 with a diagnosis including, but not limited to, adult failure to thrive. Additionally, s/he resided on the South Wing. Review of the following progress notes revealed s/he was exhibiting signs and symptoms of a potential GI illness: - 2/11/2024 at 6:42 PM .Had period of nausea . - 2/15/2024 at 9:24 AM .NP [Nurse Practitioner] in to visit c/o [complains of] nausea . - 2/15/2024 at 3:39 PM .[medication] given .for nausea . 1d) Record review revealed that Resident ID #32 was readmitted to the facility in February of 2024 with a diagnosis including, but not limited to, bacteremia (bacteria in the blood). Additionally, s/he resided on the North Wing. Review of the following progress notes revealed s/he was exhibiting signs and symptoms of a potential GI illness: - 2/13/2024 at 5:15 PM .reporting nausea . Record review failed to reveal evidence that a line list was initiated as per policy after the above-mentioned residents exhibited signs and symptoms of a GI illness between 2/8-2/15/2024. During a surveyor interview on 3/22/2024 at approximately 10:30 AM with the Regional IP during the infection control task, she acknowledged that the facility's outbreak protocol for a GI illness is initiated when 2 or more residents are exhibiting signs and symptoms. She further revealed that a line list of residents would be initiated for appropriate surveillance. Additionally, she revealed a line list was not completed and that she would expect one to be completed. During a surveyor interview on 3/22/2024 at 10:54 AM with the Director of Nursing Services (DNS), she acknowledged that the facility did not create a line list for residents that experienced signs and symptoms of a GI illness in February of 2024. She was unable to provide evidence that the facility maintained an infection prevention and control program to help prevent the transmission of communicable diseases and infections relative to a potential gastrointestinal virus outbreak. 2. Review of a facility policy titled, Clean Dressing Technique states in part, .It is the policy of this facility to prevent the spread of infection by utilizing proper dressing change technique .12. Remove old dressing .13. Remove gloves. Wash Hands. (Hand sanitizer may be used) Apply clean gloves . Record review revealed Resident ID #22 was admitted to the facility in May of 2022 with a diagnosis including, but not limited to, dementia. Record review revealed a physician's order dated 3/20/2024 for Santyl (wound ointment) with special instructions to cleanse the left heel and perform a daily dressing change. During a surveyor observation on 3/20/2024 at 1:09 PM of the resident's left heel wound dressing change, Licensed Practical Nurse, Staff D, was observed to remove the soiled dressing. She proceeded to cleanse the wound and apply a clean dressing using the same gloves she had used to remove the soiled dressing. Staff D failed to remove her dirty gloves, conduct hand hygiene, and don new gloves prior to applying the clean dressing as per policy. Additionally, during the wound dressing change, Staff D touched the resident's wound care supply bag to retrieve an item with her dirty gloves and later returned the bag to a main supply closet containing clean items. During a surveyor interview on 3/20/2024 at approximately 1:20 PM with Staff D, she acknowledged that she did not remove her dirty gloves, perform hand hygiene, nor apply clean gloves prior to applying the clean dressing. Additionally, she acknowledged touching the resident's wound supply bag with her dirty gloves during the dressing change and later returning it to a clean supply closet. She revealed that she should have removed her dirty gloves, performed hand hygiene, and applied clean gloves prior to applying the clean dressing and should not have touched the wound supply bag with her dirty gloves. During a surveyor interview on 3/21/2024 at 2:38 PM with the DNS, she revealed that she would expect the nurse to follow proper infection control practices. Additionally, she was unable to provide evidence that the facility maintained an infection prevention and control program to help prevent the transmission of communicable diseases and infections relative to a wound dressing change.
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 and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to properly store and serve food under sanitary conditions relative to the serving temperatures of a ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on surveyor observation and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to properly store and serve food under sanitary conditions relative to the serving temperatures of a potentially hazardous food item and improper cooling procedures. Findings are as follows: 1. Record review of The State of Rhode Island Food Code 2018 Edition 3-501.6 states in part, .Except during preparation, cooking or cooling .time/temperature control for safety, food shall be maintained at 5 degrees C [Celsius] 41 degrees F [Fahrenheit] or less . During a surveyor observation of the lunch meal in the dining room on 3/22/2024 at approximately 12:13 PM 19 souffle cups of tartar sauce were sitting at ambient temperature. The temperature reading was 62 degrees F. Following the above observation, a temperature recording of the tartar sauce served from the main kitchen had a temperature reading of 50 degrees F. During a surveyor interview on 3/22/2024 at approximately 12:25 PM, with the Food Service Director, he acknowledged the tartar sauce was not at the acceptable cold holding temperature of 41 degrees F or lower. 2. Record review of The Rhode Island Food Code 2018 Edition 3-501.14 reads in part, .cooked/time temperature control for food safety shall be cooled .within 2 hours from 135 degrees Farenheit to 70 degrees F . During a surveyor observation on 3/20/2024 at approximately 9:30 AM of a refrigerator unit, a cooked roast beef with a date of 3/19/2024 was identified. Record review of a facility document titled Cooling Food Temperature Log revealed the following items that did not reach the desired temperature of 70 degrees F within 2 hours as part of the active cooling process: - 2/26/2024 Meatloaf: 2 hour temperature time was 80 degrees F. - 3/13/2024 Turkey: 2 hour temperature time was 85 degrees F. - 3/19/2024 Roast Beef: 2 hour temperature time was 90 degrees F. Record review failed to reveal evidence that the above-mentioned foods were cooled to 70 degrees F within 2 hours per the food code. During a surveyor interview with the Food Service Director on 3/20/2024 at approximately 10:00 AM, he acknowledged the 3 mentioned items did not meet 70 degrees within 2 hours per the Food Code.
MINOR (B)

Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact

Deficiency F0637 (Tag F0637)

Minor procedural issue · This affected multiple residents

Based on record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to complete a significant change in status assessment within 14 days after there has been a significant chan...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to complete a significant change in status assessment within 14 days after there has been a significant change in the resident's physical or mental condition for 4 of 5 sample residents reviewed, Resident ID #s 7, 9, 17, and 30. Findings are as follows: According to the Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) Manual version 3.0, last updated 10/2023 Section A states in part, .If a nursing home resident elects the hospice benefit, the nursing home is required to complete an MDS Significant Change in Status Assessment (SCSA). The nursing home is required to complete an SCSA when the resident comes off the hospice benefit (revoke). See Chapter 2 for details on this requirement. It is a CMS requirement to have an SCSA completed EVERY time the hospice benefit has been elected, even if a recent MDS was done and the only change is the election of the hospice benefit . 1. Record review revealed Resident ID #7 was admitted to the facility in February of 2023 with a diagnosis including, but not limited to, cerebrovascular disease (a group of disorders that affects the blood vessels and blood supply to the brain). Record review revealed Resident ID #7 was admitted to hospice services on 1/1/2024, indicating a significant change in his/her health status. Record review failed to reveal evidence that a significant change in status assessment was completed for the resident after being admitted to hospice services. 2. Record review revealed Resident ID #9 was admitted to the facility in October of 2021 with a diagnosis including, but not limited to, congestive heart failure. Record review revealed Resident ID #9 was admitted to hospice services on 2/25/2024, indicating a significant change in his/her health status. Record review failed to reveal evidence that a significant change in status assessment was completed for the resident after being admitted to hospice services. 3. Record review revealed Resident ID #17 was admitted to the facility in January of 2022 with a diagnosis including, but not limited to, dementia. Record review revealed Resident ID #17 was admitted to hospice services on 12/23/2023, indicating a significant change in his/her health status. Record review failed to reveal evidence that a significant change in status assessment was completed for the resident after being admitted to hospice services. 4. Record review revealed Resident ID #30 was admitted to the facility in January of 2023 with a diagnosis including, but not limited to, adult failure to thrive. Record review revealed Resident ID #30 was admitted to hospice services on 8/6/2023, indicating a significant change in his/her health status. Record review failed to reveal evidence that a significant change in status assessment was completed for the resident after being admitted to hospice services. During a surveyor interview with the Director of Nursing Services on 3/25/2024 at 11:59 AM, she could not provide evidence that a significant change in status assessment was completed for all four residents mentioned above and stated that she would expect it to be completed within 14 days after their admission to hospice services, as required.
Dec 2023 2 deficiencies 1 IJ (1 affecting multiple)
CRITICAL (K) 📢 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

Infection Control (Tag F0880)

Someone could have died · This affected multiple residents

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

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review, surveyor observation 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 Respiratory Syncytial Virus (RSV) for 1 of 2 nursing units and affecting Resident ID #s 1,2,3,4,5, 6 and 7. Findings are as follows: Review of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Appendix A, Guideline for Isolation Precautions: Preventing Transmission of Infectious Agents in Healthcare Settings (2007) revealed precautions for RSV should include standard, droplet and contact precautions throughout the duration of the illness. Review of a facility policy titled, Isolation last reviewed 8/2015 revealed in part, It is the policy of this facility to prevent the spread of infection within the facility through the use of isolation precautions .Transmission Based Precautions, as defined by the CDC, will be employed for known or suspected infections for which the route of transmission/prevention is known . Review of a facility provided document titled, RSV in Adults states in part, .RSV can survive up to 6 hours on surfaces, from cloth gowns and paper tissue for 30-45 min [minutes], and from skin for up to 20 minutes. Good hand hygiene and environmental cleaning is very important to prevent the spread. 1. Record review revealed that Resident ID #2 was admitted to the facility in November in 2023 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and compression fracture of the vertebrae. Review of a progress note dated 12/8/2023 revealed that the resident had abnormal lung sounds with a fever of 102.2 degrees (normal 97.8-100.3), pulse of 156 beats per minute (bpm) (normal 60-100 bpm) and a pulse oximetry level of 85% (normal 90-100) on 4 liters of oxygen. Additionally, it revealed that the resident was transferred to the hospital. Review of a hospital Discharge Summary Final Report dated 12/11/2023 revealed that the resident was admitted to the hospital with positive RSV, bacterial pneumonia, and septic shock on 12/8/2023. Further review revealed the resident expired on 12/11/2023. Review of a facility provided document titled, Respiratory Illness Outbreak: Cumulative Line List for Residents dated November 2023 failed to reveal that Resident ID #2 was on the facility line list for RSV. 2. Record review revealed Resident ID #1 was admitted to the facility in October of 2021 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, hypertension and heart failure. Review of a facility provided document titled, Respiratory Illness Outbreak: Cumulative Line List for Residents dated November 2023 revealed Resident ID #1's date of illness onset was 12/7/2023. Additional record review of a clinical laboratory final report dated 12/8/2023 revealed s/he is positive for RSV. Review of a physician's order dated 3/1/2022 states in part, symptom monitoring for Covid 19: Assess for fever respiratory symptoms (cough, new or worsening, SOB [shortness of breath], sore throat .If symptoms are present initiate contact/droplet precautions . During a surveyor observation on 12/12/2023 at 10:21 AM of the resident's room revealed a sign for droplet precautions for staff entering the room to wear eye protection and a mask. The signage failed to include the need for a gown and gloves per the CDC guidance. During the same surveyor observation, 2 staff members, Staff E and Staff F were observed in the residents room with only a surgical mask in place. During a surveyor interview directly following the above observation with Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA), Staff E, she revealed that she only was required to wear a surgical mask and her personal glasses in the room. Additionally, she was unable to tell the surveyor what the resident was on precautions for. During a subsequent interview with Housekeeper, Staff F, she acknowledged that she did not have the appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) per the sign on the door. Additionally, she was unable to tell the surveyor what the resident was on precautions for. During a surveyor interview on 12/12/2023 at 10:57 AM with the Infection Preventionist (IP) and the Director of Nursing Services (DNS) they were unable to provide evidence that the staff were wearing the proper PPE for a resident with positive RSV. Additionally, they acknowledged that the precautions of only droplet precautions were not adequate to prevent the spread of RSV per the CDC guidelines. 3. Record review revealed that Resident ID #3 was readmitted to the facility in November of 2023 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, dementia, asthma, and pneumonia due to inhalation of food or vomit. Review of a facility provided document titled, Respiratory Illness Outbreak: Cumulative Line List for Residents dated November 2023 revealed Resident ID #3's date of illness onset was 12/10/2023. Review of a physician's order dated 5/2/2023 states in part, symptom monitoring for Covid 19: Assess for fever respiratory symptoms (cough, new or worsening, SOB [shortness of breath], sore throat .If symptoms are present initiate contact/droplet precautions . Review of a progress note dated 12/9/2023 revealed the resident had a fever of 101.5 degrees and a pulse oximetry level of 88% without oxygen. Review of a progress note dated 12/10/2023 revealed s/he required 3 liters of oxygen to maintain an oxygen saturation level of 94%. Review of a clinical laboratory final result document dated 12/12/2023 revealed s/he is positive for RSV. During a surveyor observation on 12/12/2023 at 10:17 AM of the residents room revealed signage for droplet precautions and staff must wear eye protection and a mask. The signage failed to include the need for a gown and gloves per the CDC guidance. During the above surveyor observation, a Speech Therapist, Staff G, was observed in the residents room with only a surgical mask in place. Staff G failed to wear the appropriate PPE to prevent the spread of RSV including a gown, eye protection and gloves. Staff G acknowledged she was not wearing the PPE per the signage on the door. During a surveyor interview on 12/12/2023 at 10:19 AM with RN, Staff H, she revealed that the staff should be wearing respiratory precautions in the resident's rooms with symptoms to include a gown, mask and eye protection. 4. Record review revealed that Resident ID #6 was admitted to the facility in November 2023 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, left femur fracture and pneumonia due to inhalation of food or vomit. Review of a physician's order dated 11/8/2023 states in part, symptom monitoring for Covid 19: Assess for fever respiratory symptoms (cough, new or worsening, SOB [shortness of breath], sore throat .If symptoms are present initiate contact/droplet precautions . Review of a progress note dated 12/11/2023 revealed the resident was transferred to the hospital secondary to increased white blood cell count. Review of a progress note dated 12/12/2023 revealed the resident was admitted to the hospital with septic shock due to positive RSV. Review of a facility provided document titled, Respiratory Illness Outbreak: Cumulative Line List for Residents dated November 2023 revealed Resident ID #6 was not listed on the line list. 5. Record review revealed that Resident ID #4 was admitted to the facility in December of 2023 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, dementia and chronic kidney disease. Review of a facility provided document titled, Respiratory Illness Outbreak: Cumulative Line List for Residents dated November 2023 revealed Resident ID #4's date of illness onset was 12/10/2023. Review of a physician's order dated 12/5/2023 states in part, symptom monitoring for Covid 19: Assess for fever respiratory symptoms (cough, new or worsening, SOB [shortness of breath], sore throat .If symptoms are present initiate contact/droplet precautions . Review of a progress note dated 12/9/2023 revealed the resident was in respiratory distress with use of accessory muscles to breath and pulse oximetry level of 80-82% on room air. Review of a progress note dated 12/10/2023 revealed the resident required 5 liters of oxygen to maintain an oxygen saturation level of 91%. During a surveyor observation on 12/12/2023 at 10:17 AM, of the resident's room revealed signage for droplet precautions and staff must wear eye protection and a mask. The signage failed to include the need for a gown and gloves per the CDC guidance. During the above surveyor observation Staff G was observed in the residents room with only a surgical mask in place. Staff G failed to wear the appropriate PPE to prevent the spread of RSV including a gown, eye protection and gloves. Staff G acknowledged that she was not wearing the PPE per the signage on the door. During a surveyor interview on 12/12/2023 at 10:19 AM with Staff H, she revealed that the staff should be wearing respiratory precautions in the resident's rooms with symptoms to include a gown, mask and eye protection. Review of a clinical laboratory final result document dated 12/12/2023 revealed s/he is negative for RSV however, continues with abnormal respiratory symptoms. 6. Record review revealed that Resident ID #5 was admitted to the facility in December of 2023 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, weakness and Alzheimer's disease. Review of a facility provided document titled, Respiratory Illness Outbreak: Cumulative Line List for Residents dated November 2023 revealed Resident ID #5's date of illness onset was 12/10/2023. Review of a physician's order dated 12/5/2023 states in part, symptom monitoring for Covid 19: Assess for fever respiratory symptoms (cough, new or worsening, SOB [shortness of breath], sore throat .If symptoms are present initiate contact/droplet precautions . Review of a progress note dated 12/9/2023 revealed the resident's oxygen saturation level was 79-81% on room air. Further review revealed the resident required humidified oxygen at 4.5 liters to maintain an oxygen saturation level at 92%. During a surveyor observation on 12/12/2023 at 10:12 AM revealed signage for droplet precautions and staff must wear eye protection and a mask. The signage failed to include the need for a gown and gloves per the CDC guidance. During the above surveyor observation, a Housekeeper, Staff I was observed in the resident's room with a gown, gloves, and surgical mask but without eye protection. During a surveyor interview immediately following the observation Staff I acknowledged that she was not wearing eye protection as the signage states. Additionally, she was unable to tell the surveyor why the resident was on precautions but only that it is not Covid. During a surveyor interview on 12/12/2023 at 10:19 AM with Staff H, she revealed that the staff should be wearing respiratory precautions in the resident's rooms with symptoms to include a gown, mask and eye protection. Review of a clinical laboratory final result document dated 12/12/2023 revealed s/he is negative for RSV however, continues with abnormal respiratory symptoms. 7. Record review revealed that Resident ID #7 was admitted to the facility in November of 2023 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, asthma and urinary tract infection. Review of a physician's order dated 11/28/2023 states in part, symptom monitoring for Covid 19: Assess for fever respiratory symptoms (cough, new or worsening, SOB [shortness of breath], sore throat .If symptoms are present initiate contact/droplet precautions . Review of a progress note dated 12/12/2023 revealed the resident began with a moist nonproductive cough. During a surveyor observation on 12/13/2023 at 8:25 AM the resident was in bed and noted to be coughing. Further observation failed to reveal evidence that the resident had been placed on contact or droplet precautions. During a surveyor interview on 12/13/2023 at approximately 8:30 AM with the DNS, she acknowledged the resident's respiratory symptoms and revealed that the practitioner was made aware and ordered for Covid testing. Review of a clinical laboratory final result document dated 12/13/2023 revealed s/he is positive for RSV. During a surveyor interview on 12/12/2023 at approximately 2:30 PM with the DNS in the presence of the Administrator, she acknowledged the incorrect signage and PPE use to prevent the spread of RSV per CDC guidelines. As a result of the facility's failure to promptly identify respiratory symptoms in ill residents and properly follow the CDC guidance relative to RSV precautions this facility is currently experiencing an RSV outbreak with death resulting.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Deficiency F0776 (Tag F0776)

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 or obtain radiology servic...

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 or obtain radiology services to meet the needs of its residents relative to obtaining a STAT (diagnostic or therapeutic procedure that is to be performed immediately) X-Ray for 1 of 2 residents reviewed, Resident ID #8. Findings are as follows: Record review of a community reported complaint dated 12/7/2023 alleged that Resident ID #8 sustained a fall on 12/3/2023 and did not receive the appropriate medical attention until 12/5/2023. Record review revealed that the resident was admitted to the facility in December of 2023 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, right femur fracture and repeated falls. Review of a progress note dated 12/3/2023 revealed the resident sustained a fall at 4:55 AM. Additionally, it revealed that the resident complained of left groin pain. During a surveyor interview on 12/12/2023 at 11:30 AM with Registered Nurse (RN), Staff A, she revealed that the resident fell on her shift at approximately 4:50 AM. Additionally, she revealed that the resident complained of left groin pain and she did not report it to the physician. Record review reveals the physician was made aware that the resident had a fall on 12/3/2023 but she was not aware that the resident was experiencing any pain. Record review of a progress note dated 12/4/2023 revealed the resident continues to complain of groin pain and has slight bruising from his/her fall. Record review of a progress note dated 12/4/2023 authored by the Nurse Practitioner (NP), Staff B, revealed that the resident did not want to get out of bed and that the residents son was in to visit and revealed s/he was complaining of left hip pain. Record review revealed an order dated 12/4/2023 for a STAT (immediately) X-Ray of his/her bilateral hips and pelvis. Review of a care plan approach dated 12/4/2023 revealed that the resident is to have a bilateral hip and pelvis X-Ray related to complaints of pain and to utilize PRN (as needed) oxycodone for pain control. Review of a facility provided statement authored by RN, Staff C, revealed that he contacted the X-Ray provider at 10:30 PM on 12/4/2023 regarding the STAT X-Ray ordered earlier in the day. According to the statement, Staff C did not inform the provider about the delay in obtaining a STAT X-Ray as ordered. During a surveyor telephone interview on 12/13/2023 at 10:17 AM with the resident's son, he revealed that he visited with the resident on 12/4/2023 and found him/her to be in extreme pain and complaining of his/her left hip and groin. Additionally, he revealed that he was told the resident would be getting an X-Ray of his/her left hip that day to determine if there was an injury. Furthermore, the resident's son revealed that he returned to the facility on [DATE] and was told that the resident had still not gotten an X-Ray to determine an injury to the left hip. The resident's son revealed that the resident continued to complain of pain to the left hip and would yell out in pain whenever the staff would move him/her. During a surveyor interview on 12/13/2023 at 9:00 AM with RN, Staff D, she revealed that she called the X-Ray provider on 12/5/2023 at approximately 7:30 AM when the X-Ray had still not been performed. Additionally, she revealed that a STAT X-Ray should be performed within 4 hours of being ordered by the provider. Review of a Patient Report dated 12/5/2023 revealed the resident has a left femur fracture. Additional review of the document revealed that NP, Staff B ordered to send the resident to the hospital. During a surveyor interview with the NP, Staff B, she revealed that she ordered the bilateral hip X-Ray to be performed STAT due the resident complaining of pain. Additionally, she revealed that she would expect the staff to notify her if the X-Ray could not be performed immediately, to offer the resident and family to be sent to the hospital. Record review of the December 2023 Medication Administration Record revealed that the resident required use of PRN oxycodone 3 times on 12/4/2023. Further review revealed that the resident had only received one dose since his/her admission prior to his/her fall on 12/3/2023. During a surveyor interview on 12/13/2023 at approximately 10:45 AM with the Director of Nursing Services in the presence of the Administrator, she was unable to provide evidence that the facility obtained radiology services to meet the needs of Resident ID #8. Additionally, she acknowledged that the staff did not notify the provider of the delay in obtaining the STAT X-Ray resulting in the residents prolonged pain.
Feb 2023 9 deficiencies 1 Harm
SERIOUS (G)

Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures

Deficiency F0692 (Tag F0692)

A resident was harmed · 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 residents maintain accepta...

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 residents maintain acceptable parameters of nutritional status, such as usual body weight or desirable body weight, and failed to follow their policy relative to weight and weight change for 2 of 9 residents reviewed, Resident ID #s 206 and 304. Findings are as follows: Review of the facility policy titled, Weight and Weight Change states in part, .Policy: Resident weight will be obtained upon admission, weekly x [times] 4, and then at least monthly and recorded in the medical record. Significant weight changes will be addressed by the interdisciplinary care team .4. The weight change report will be audited regularly for significant changes (e.g. [for example], > [more than] 5% in 30 days, > 7.5% in 90 days, >10% in 180 days), and staff will reweigh the resident if applicable. 5. Residents with significant weight changes will be assessed by the IDT [interdisciplinary team] and appropriate recommendations will be documented in the medical record. 1. Record review for Resident ID #206 revealed the resident was re-admitted to the facility in December of 2022 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, osteomyelitis of vertebra (infection of the backbone) and failure to thrive. Review of the resident's weight record revealed the following weights: -12/20/2022 226 pounds (lbs.) -12/27/2022 224 lbs. -1/10/2022 206.4 lbs. -1/14/2023 204.2 lbs. Further record review revealed the resident lost 21.8 lbs. from 12/20/2022 to 1/14/2023, which is a significant weight loss of 9.65%. Record review failed to reveal that the physician or dietitian were notified of the above-mentioned weight loss. Record review of an initial nutritional assessment dated [DATE] documented by the Registered Dietitian (RD), failed to reveal evidence that the resident's weight loss of 21.8 lbs. was addressed. During a surveyor interview on 2/10/2023 at 10:30 AM with the RD, she indicated that she was not aware of the weight loss and could not explain why the resident's significant weight loss was not addressed during the initial nutritional assessment or thereafter. She further stated, my fault. Record review of a progress note dated 2/10/2023 at 12:47 PM authored by the RD, after being made aware of the weight loss by the surveyor, revealed in part, .[resident] has lost approximately 30 # [pounds] since .admission to the facility . 2. Record review for Resident ID #304 revealed the resident was re-admitted to the facility in January of 2023 with a diagnosis including, but not limited to, nutritional deficiency. Review of the facility policy titled, Weight and Weight Change states in part, Each resident's weight .will be obtained upon admission and recorded in the medical record . Record review failed to reveal an admission weight for the resident. Further review revealed a baseline weight of 133 lbs., obtained on 1/18/2023 and recorded 1/27/2023 by Registered Nurse, Staff C. During a surveyor interview on 2/10/2023 at 1:15 PM with Staff C, she acknowledged an admission weight was not obtained for the resident per the facility policy. Additionally, she revealed that the documented weight on 1/18/2023 was taken directly from the hospital admission documentation, and the resident's weight was not obtained at the facility, per facility policy.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0757 (Tag F0757)

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 a resident's drug regimen is free from unnecessary drugs for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for pa...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure that a resident's drug regimen is free from unnecessary drugs for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for pain, Resident ID #304. Record review revealed the resident was admitted to the facility in January of 2023 with a diagnosis including, but not limited to, low back pain. Record review revealed a physician's order initiated on 1/18/2023 for oxycodone 5 mg (milligrams) tablet, as needed every 6 hours for severe pain level of 8-10. Review of the resident's January 2023 Medication Administration Record (MAR) revealed that on the following dates and times the oxycodone was administered to the resident with a pain level outside of the ordered parameters: -1/19/2023 at 12:19 PM, pain level 7 -1/20/2023 at 8:31 AM, pain level 6 -1/20/2023 at 3:24 PM, pain level 7 -1/23/2023 at 6:12 PM, pain level 7 -1/26/2023 at 9:40 AM, pain level 7 -1/27/2023 at 9:21 AM, pain level 7 -1/28/2023 at 4:01 PM, pain level 7 -1/29/2023 at 8:15 PM, pain level 7 -1/31/2023 at 1:58 PM, pain level 7 Review of the resident's February 2023 MAR revealed that on the following dates and times the oxycodone was administered to the resident with a pain level outside of the ordered parameters:: -2/1/2023 at 1:50 PM, pain level 7 -2/2/2023 at 2:11 PM, pain level 6 -2/3/2023 at 7:42 PM, pain level 7 -2/4/2023 at 1:54 PM, pain level 7 -2/5/2023 at 2:31 PM, pain level 6 -2/6/2023 at 6:17 AM, pain level 7 -2/7/2023 at 7:45 AM, pain level 6 During a surveyor interview on 2/10/2023 at 9:00 AM, with the Director of Nursing Services, she acknowledged the resident received the oxycodone for pain levels outside of the physician-ordered parameters on the above mentioned dates and times.
CONCERN (D)

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

Medication Errors (Tag F0758)

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 a resident's drug regimen is free from unnecessary psychotropic medication orders extending beyond...

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 orders extending beyond 14 days without a rationale, for one of four residents reviewed, Resident ID #42. Findings are as follows: Record review revealed that the resident was admitted to the facility in May of 2021 and has diagnoses including, but not limited to, psychotic disorder with delusions and vascular dementia. Record review revealed the following physician's orders: -Lorazepam Intensol (Lorazepam) - Schedule IV concentrate; 2 mg [milligrams]/mL [milliters]; Amount to Administer: 0.5 mg = 0.25ml; oral Every 3 hours - PRN [as needed] As needed for anxiety, agitation, restlessness and fearfulness -With a start date of 12/10/2022 and discontinue date of 1/27/2023 - Lorazepam Intensol (lorazepam) - Schedule IV concentrate; 2 mg/mL; Amount to administer: 0.5 mg = 0.25ml; oral every 3 hours - PRN As needed for anxiety, agitation, restlessness and fearfulness REASSESS NEED FOR PRN IN 3 MONTHS -With a start date of 1/27/2023 and a discontinue date of 4/27/2023 Record review of the pharmacy recommendations titled, RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY FOR MEDICAL DIRECTOR AND DON[Director of Nursing] dated 12/18/2023 and 1/27/2023 revealed Priority: High PRN [as needed] psychotropic orders need a 14 day stop date .Duration greater than 14 days will need physician rationale. Record review of a progress note dated 1/27/2023 revealed, Medication: [Doctor] extended PRN Ativan for 3 months. Further record review failed to reveal evidence of a physician's rationale for the Lorazepam Intensol PRN for a duration greater than 14 days. During a surveyor interview with the Director of Nursing Services on 2/10/2023 at 9:05 AM, she was unable to provide evidence of a physician's rationale for Lorazepam Intensol PRN as required.
CONCERN (D)

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

Unnecessary Medications (Tag F0759)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Deficiency Text Not Available

Read full inspector narrative →
Deficiency Text Not Available
CONCERN (E)

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

Pressure Ulcer Prevention (Tag F0686)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

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

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 3 of 6 residents reviewed for skin conditions, Resident ID #s 36, 4 and 22. Findings are as follows: Review of the facility policy titled, Treatment/Services to Prevent/Heal Pressure Ulcers revealed 1. The facility will ensure that .All residents receive care, consistent with professional standards of practice, to prevent pressure ulcers .3. Interventions will be implemented in the resident's plan of care to prevent pressure sore development when the resident has no areas of concern but are at risk for breakdown . 1. Record review revealed Resident ID #36 was admitted to the facility in April of 2022 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, pressure ulcer (wounds that occur due to prolonged pressure) of left and right heels, muscle weakness, dementia, and peripheral vascular disease (a disease affecting blood vessels). Record review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident required Supervision- defined as oversight, encouragement or cueing for bed mobility. Further review revealed the resident required a Pressure reducing device for bed .Skin and Ulcer/Injury Treatments. Record review of the resident's care plan dated 4/15/2022 revealed POTENTIAL FOR SKIN BREAKDOWN DUE TO DECREASED MOBILITY, H/O [HISTORY OF] STAGE 4 PRESSURE ULCERS [the most severe type of pressure ulcer, a wound exposing muscle and bone] ON HEELS ON admission .offload heels to reduce pressure . Record review of physician's orders revealed an order dated 10/28/2022, OFF-LOAD HEELS .free float heels while bed resting . During surveyor observations on the following dates and times revealed the resident's heels were not off loaded while in bed: -2/8/2023 at 9:15 AM -2/8/2023 at 11:26 AM -2/10/2023 at 11:46 AM During a surveyor interview on 2/10/2023 at 11:46 AM with Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA), Staff A, she acknowledged that the resident's heels were not offloaded as ordered while in bed. During a surveyor interview on 2/10/2023 at 11:49 AM with Registered Nurse (RN) Staff B, she acknowledged the resident should have his/her heels offloaded while in bed. During a surveyor interview on 2/10/2023 at 12:53 PM with the Director of Nursing Services (DNS) she stated that she would expect the resident's heels to be offloaded as ordered. 2. Record review revealed Resident ID #4 was readmitted to the facility in July of 2020 with diagnoses of, but not limited to, vascular dementia and osteoarthritis. Record review of the MDS dated [DATE] revealed the resident's cognitive skills for daily decision making was severely impaired. Further review revealed the resident was totally dependent for bed mobility and transfers. Record review of the resident's care plan dated 4/10/2022 revealed Pressure Ulcer POTENTIAL FOR SKIN BREAKDOWN DUE TO DECREASED MOBILITY .OFFLOAD HEELS TO REDUCE PRESSURE . Record review of physician's orders revealed an order dated 11/30/2022, APPLY SKIN PREP > R [right] HEELS // OFFLOAD WHILE IN BED . During surveyor observations on the following dates and times revealed the resident's heels were not off loaded while in bed: -2/7/2023 at 2:44 PM -2/8/2023 at 9:07 AM -2/8/2023 at 3:10 PM -2/9/2023 at 8:57 AM During a surveyor interview on 2/9/2023 at 8:57 AM with CNA, Staff A, she acknowledged that the resident's heels were not offloaded while in bed. During a surveyor interview on 2/9/2023 at 9:01 AM with RN, Staff B, she acknowledged the resident should have his/her heels offloaded while in bed. During a surveyor interview on 2/9/2023 at 9:24 AM with the DNS she stated that she would expect the resident's heels to be offloaded as ordered. 3. Record review revealed Resident ID #22 was admitted to the facility in May of 2021 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, Alzheimer's disease, adult failure to thrive, and fracture of right femur (upper leg bone). Record review of the MDS dated [DATE] revealed the resident's cognitive skills for daily decision making were severely impaired. Further review revealed the resident required extensive assistance with bed mobility. Record review of physician's orders revealed an order dated 10/22/2022, Off load bilateral heels with pillow or blanket roll/free float heels while in bed resting . During surveyor observations on the following dates and times revealed the resident's heels were not off loaded while in bed: -2/8/2023 at approximately 9:30 AM -2/9/2023 at 9:28 AM -2/9/2023 at 10:00 AM -2/9/2023 at 10:24 AM During a surveyor interview on 2/9/2023 at 10:24 AM with CNA, Staff A, she acknowledged that the resident's heels were not offloaded while in bed. During a surveyor interview on 2/9/2023 at 10:29 AM with RN, Staff B, she acknowledged the resident should have his/her heels offloaded while in bed. During a surveyor interview on 2/9/2023 at 11:57 AM with the DNS, she stated that she would expect the resident's heels to be offloaded as ordered.
CONCERN (E)

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

Respiratory Care (Tag F0695)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

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

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 respiratory care consistent with professional standards of practice for 3 of 5 residents reviewed for oxygen therapy, Resident ID #s 36, 16, and 28. According to Brunner and Sudarth's textbook, Medical and Surgical Nursing, 7th Edition, 1992, p. 524, as with other medications, oxygen is administered with care, and its effects on each patient are carefully assessed. Oxygen is a drug and except in emergency situations is prescribed by a physician. Findings are as follows: Review of the facility policy titled OXYGEN ADMINISTRATION states in part, .Oxygen is generally used for a SpO2 [a measurement of oxygen saturation in the blood] less than 92% .Check the physician's order for liter flow and method of administration .Ensure that there is evidence of oxygen delivery administration for the duration of the therapy. 1. Record review revealed Resident ID #36 was admitted to the facility in April of 2022 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, influenza A virus with other respiratory manifestations, heart failure, muscle weakness, dementia, and peripheral vascular disease (a disease affecting blood vessels). Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 10, indicating moderate cognitive impairment. Record review of the resident's care plan dated 2/3/2023 revealed .UPPER RESPIRATORY CONGESTION .O2 [oxygen] A/O [as ordered] . Record review revealed a physician's order dated 2/6/2023 O2 @ [at] 2 Lpm [liters per minute] via [by way of] nasal cannula [flexible tubing placed under nose] Every Shift Days, Evenings, Nights. Surveyor observation of the resident failed to reveal that s/he was receiving oxygen on the following dates and times: -2/8/2023 at 9:15 AM -2/8/2023 at 11:26 AM -2/8/2023 at 12:01 PM During a surveyor interview with the resident on 12/8/2023 at 12:23 PM while the resident was sitting in his/her room without oxygen, s/he indicated s/he was having trouble breathing. The resident was observed to be breathing loudly and with labored breathing (when breathing is difficult or impaired). During a subsequent interview with the Registered Nurse (RN), Staff B, immediately following the resident interview, she acknowledged that the resident should be wearing oxygen and obtained the resident's SpO2, which was 90% without oxygen. Staff B then applied the oxygen via nasal cannula as ordered. During a surveyor interview with the resident on 2/8/2023 at 12:38 PM s/he indicated that s/he was breathing better with the oxygen. During a surveyor interview with the Director of Nursing Services (DNS) on 2/8/2023 at 12:36 PM, she revealed that she would expect the resident to be administered oxygen as ordered. She further revealed that oxygen should be administered to a resident with a SpO2 of 90% as outlined in the facility's policy. 2. Record review revealed Resident ID #16 was re-admitted to the facility in December of 2022 and has diagnoses including, but not limited to, severe sepsis (the body's extreme response to an infection), acute respiratory disease, hypoxemia (low oxygen levels in the blood), and chronic congestive heart failure (heart muscle does not pump blood as it should). Record review further revealed that the resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 15 indicating that s/he was cognitively intact. Record review revealed a physician's order with a start date of 12/30/2022 for oxygen at 1-4 liters per minute via nasal cannula every shift. Surveyor observation of the resident failed to reveal that s/he was receiving oxygen on the following dates and times: - 2/07/2023 at 9:51 AM - 2/08/2023 at 9:30 AM - 2/08/2023 at 12:30 PM During a surveyor interview with the resident on 2/08/2023 at 12:30 PM, s/he revealed that s/he has not used oxygen in weeks. During a surveyor interview with Registered Nurse (RN) Staff B on 2/8/2023 at 1:17 PM, she acknowledged that the resident has a physician's order for continuous oxygen. She further indicated that the resident has not been receiving oxygen as ordered. During a surveyor interview with the Director of Nursing Services on 2/8/2023 at 1:30 PM, she indicated that she would expect the resident to receive oxygen as ordered. 3. Record review revealed Resident ID #28 was admitted to the facility in January of 2023 with a diagnosis including, but not limited to, acute respiratory failure with hypoxia (low levels of oxygen in body tissue). Record review revealed a physician order initiated 1/23/2023 to change oxygen tubing every 72 hours. Surveyor observation revealed the resident receiving oxygen via a nasal cannula that was not labeled or dated on the following dates and times: -2/8/2023 at 9:25 AM -2/9/2023 at 10:14 AM -2/9/2023 at 11:59 AM During a surveyor interview on 2/9/2023 at 2:10 PM with RN Staff D, she acknowledged the resident's oxygen tubing was not labeled or dated. Staff D also indicated the oxygen tubing should be changed every three days.
CONCERN (F)

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

Menu Adequacy (Tag F0803)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

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

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and staff and resident interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to provide a dietary menu that meets the nutritional needs of residents in accordance with established national guidelines and that was reviewed by a clinically qualified nutritional professional as evidenced by a planned menu which failed to follow the facility diet manual. Findings are as follows: Record review of the facility's diet manual titled, Dietitians of New England-Diet and Dining Manual for Extended Care 2019 Edition, states in part, .the Regular/House diet is planned and established according to the Dietary guideline for older adults . Record review of the Dietary Guidelines for Older Adults established by the USDA (US Department of Agriculture) for 2020-2025, revealed the daily dietary guidelines include, but are not limited to, .2 ½ cups vegetables, 2 cups fruit, 3 cups dairy ., for older adults [AGE] years of age and older. Record review of the facility's planned menu for the week of 2/7/2023 failed to reveal evidence that 2 1/2 cups of vegetables, 2 cups of fruit and 3 servings of dairy were part of the planned written menu per the guidelines mentioned above. Additionally, the planned and written supper meal consisted of soup and sandwiches, no vegetables were planned. During a surveyor interview on 2/8/2023 at 3:00 PM with resident council members, Resident ID#s 1,3,16, 27, 44 and 205, they indicated that the supper meal was inadequate and only soup and sandwiches are served. Additionally, they revealed the menu does not consist of fresh fruit offerings. During a surveyor interview on 2/10/2023 at approximately 10:10 AM with the facility's Registered Dietitian, she revealed that she is not involved in planning the menu. Additionally, she acknowledged the above-mentioned menu was nutritionally inadequate.
CONCERN (F)

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

Deficiency F0805 (Tag F0805)

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 residents receive and consume food in the appropriate form for 5 of 5 ...

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 and consume food in the appropriate form for 5 of 5 residents observed during the lunch meal on 2/9/2023, Resident ID #s 1, 4, 8, 42, and 302. Findings are as follows: Record review of the facility's Diet Manual, Dietitians of New England Diet and Dining Manual for Extended Care 2019 states in part, .Soft/Bized Consistency . Meats & Meat Substitutes .prepared, moistened .including beef .with bites no larger than 1. 5cm [centimeter] x [by] 1. 5cm . Vegetables . Any cooked vegetable fork soft, served in pieces no bigger than 1.5 cm . Record review of the facility lunch menu for Thursday 2/9/2023 revealed the following: Meatloaf Mashed Potato Green Beans Record review revealed that Resident ID #s 1, 4, 8, 42, and 302 had physician's diet orders for .Soft Bite-sized . During a surveyor observation of the lunch meal on 2/9/2023 at approximately 11:45 AM to 12:15 PM the following was revealed: Resident ID #s 1, 4, 8, 42, and 302 were observed to have baked meatloaf that was that was not cut into 1. 5cm X 1. 5cm bites, not moistened, and the green beans were not cut. During a surveyor interview on 2/9/2023 at approximately 12:30 PM with the Food Service Director he acknowledged the meatloaf was not moistened and served in bite size pieces.
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, ,served and distributed, in accordance with profession...

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, ,served and distributed, in accordance with professional standards for food service safety, relative to the main kitchen. Findings are as follows: 1. The Rhode Island Food Code 2018 Edition 4-601.11 states in part, .nonfood contact surfaces of equipment shall be kept free of an accumulation of dirt .and other debris . During a surveyor observation on 2/7/2023 and 2/9/2023 at approximately 9:30 AM revealed the screens under the hood of the stove had a high dust accumulation 2. The Rhode Island Food Code 2018 Edition 2-402.11 reveals in part, .food employees shall wear hair restraints, beard restraints that are designed and worn to effectively keep their hair from contacting exposed food . During a surveyor observation of the main kitchen on 2/9/2023 at 10:06 AM, 12:15 PM, and approximately 3:45 PM, revealed a dietary cook, Staff E, wearing a beard restraint that was at chin length and not covering all of his facial hair. Further surveyor observation on 2/9/2023 at approximately 3:45 PM revealed dietary aide, Staff F was not wearing a hair restraint. 3. The Rhode Island Food Code 4-301.12 Manual Warewashing, Sink Compartment Requirement states in part, .a sink with at least 3 compartments shall be provided for manually washing, rinsing and sanitizing .sink compartments shall be large enough to accommodate the immersion of the largest equipment and utensils . During a surveyor observation on 2/9/2023 at approximately 12:15 PM a full-size sheet pan, a stainless-steel mixing bowl and 6 hotel pan were observed to not be fully immersed in the 3-compartment sink for sanitizing. 4. The Rhode Island Food Code 4-703.11 Hot Water and Chemical reads in part, .(C) chemical application of sanitizing by immersion, using a solution as specified in the Food Code 4-501.114 .(C)a quaternary ammonium solution shall have a concentration as indicated by the manufacturer's use direction . During a surveyor observation on 2/9/2023 at approximately 12:15 PM, Staff E failed to identify and utilize the appropriate sanitizer test strip when asked to test the sanitizing solution of the 3 bay compartment sink containing, Santec Eight (a quaternary ammonium sanitizing agent). During a surveyor interview with the Food Service Director on 2/9/2023 at approximately 1:00 PM he acknowledged the dietary staff members were not wearing hair restraints, the sheet pan, mixing bowl and hotel pan were not properly sanitized.
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Life-Threatening (Immediate Jeopardy)
J - Isolated K - Pattern L - Widespread
Actual Harm
G - Isolated H - Pattern I - Widespread
Potential for Harm
D - Isolated E - Pattern F - Widespread
No Harm (Minor)
A - Isolated B - Pattern C - Widespread

Questions to Ask on Your Visit

  • "What changes have you made since the serious inspection findings?"
  • "Why is there high staff turnover? How do you retain staff?"
  • "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
  • "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"

Our Honest Assessment

Strengths
  • • Licensed and certified facility. Meets minimum state requirements.
Concerns
  • • Multiple safety concerns identified: 4 life-threatening violation(s), 1 harm violation(s), $82,734 in fines, Payment denial on record. Review inspection reports carefully.
  • • 33 deficiencies on record, including 4 critical (life-threatening) violations. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
  • • $82,734 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 4 Immediate Jeopardy findings. Serious concerns require careful evaluation.

About This Facility

What is Sunny View Nursing Home's CMS Rating?

CMS assigns Sunny View Nursing Home 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 Sunny View Nursing Home Staffed?

CMS rates Sunny View Nursing Home's staffing level at 3 out of 5 stars, which is average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 65%, which is 18 percentage points above the Rhode Island average of 46%. High turnover can affect care consistency as new staff learn residents' individual needs. RN turnover specifically is 67%, which is notably high. RNs provide skilled clinical oversight, so turnover in this role can affect medical care quality.

What Have Inspectors Found at Sunny View Nursing Home?

State health inspectors documented 33 deficiencies at Sunny View Nursing Home during 2023 to 2025. These included: 4 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death), 1 that caused actual resident harm, 26 with potential for harm, and 2 minor or isolated issues. Immediate Jeopardy findings are rare and represent the most serious regulatory concerns. They require immediate corrective action.

Who Owns and Operates Sunny View Nursing Home?

Sunny View Nursing Home 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 EDEN HEALTHCARE, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 57 certified beds and approximately 50 residents (about 88% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in Warwick, Rhode Island.

How Does Sunny View Nursing Home Compare to Other Rhode Island Nursing Homes?

Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Rhode Island, Sunny View Nursing Home's overall rating (2 stars) is below the state average of 3.1, staff turnover (65%) is significantly higher than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (1 stars) is much below the national benchmark.

What Should Families Ask When Visiting Sunny View Nursing Home?

Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "What changes have been made since the serious inspection findings, and how are you preventing similar issues?" "How do you ensure continuity of care given staff turnover, and what is your staff retention strategy?" "Can 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 facility's high staff turnover rate.

Is Sunny View Nursing Home Safe?

Based on CMS inspection data, Sunny View Nursing Home has documented safety concerns. Inspectors have issued 4 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 Sunny View Nursing Home Stick Around?

Staff turnover at Sunny View Nursing Home is high. At 65%, the facility is 18 percentage points above the Rhode Island average of 46%. Registered Nurse turnover is particularly concerning at 67%. RNs handle complex medical decisions and coordinate care — frequent RN changes can directly impact care quality. High turnover means new staff may not know residents' individual needs, medications, or preferences. It can also be disorienting for residents, especially those with dementia who rely on familiar faces. Families should ask: What is causing the turnover? What retention programs are in place? How do you ensure care continuity during staff transitions?

Was Sunny View Nursing Home Ever Fined?

Sunny View Nursing Home has been fined $82,734 across 3 penalty actions. This is above the Rhode Island average of $33,906. Fines in this range indicate compliance issues significant enough for CMS to impose meaningful financial consequences. Common causes include delayed correction of deficiencies, repeat violations, or care failures affecting resident safety. Families should ask facility leadership what changes have been made since these penalties.

Is Sunny View Nursing Home on Any Federal Watch List?

Sunny View Nursing Home 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.