Kershaw Health Karesh Long Term Care

40 Lindsay Lane, Camden, SC 29020 (803) 572-8999
Government - County 132 Beds Independent Data: November 2025 1 Immediate Jeopardy citation
Trust Grade
48/100
#78 of 186 in SC
Last Inspection: July 2024

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

Overview

Kershaw Health Karesh Long Term Care has a Trust Grade of D, which means it is below average and has some concerning issues. It ranks #78 out of 186 facilities in South Carolina, placing it in the top half, and is the best option among two facilities in Kershaw County. The facility is showing improvement, with the number of issues decreasing from 2 in 2024 to 1 in 2025. Staffing is a strong point, receiving a 5/5 rating with a turnover rate of 38%, which is better than the state average. However, the facility has $42,385 in fines, which is higher than 82% of facilities in the state, indicating potential compliance problems. Specific concerns include a critical incident where a resident received multiple medications not prescribed to them, leading to hospitalization, and a serious error where another resident's blood pressure dropped after receiving medications meant for someone else. Additionally, the facility failed to maintain an effective Antibiotic Stewardship Program, which is essential for appropriate antibiotic use. While staffing is a clear strength, these safety and compliance issues are significant weaknesses to consider.

Trust Score
D
48/100
In South Carolina
#78/186
Top 41%
Safety Record
High Risk
Review needed
Inspections
Getting Better
2 → 1 violations
Staff Stability
○ Average
38% turnover. Near South Carolina's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
Penalties
✓ Good
$42,385 in fines. Lower than most South Carolina facilities. Relatively clean record.
Skilled Nurses
✓ Good
Each resident gets 53 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than average for South Carolina. RNs are trained to catch health problems early.
Violations
✓ Good
Only 5 deficiencies on record. Cleaner than most facilities. Minor issues only.
★★★☆☆
3.0
Overall Rating
★★★★★
5.0
Staff Levels
★★☆☆☆
2.0
Care Quality
★★☆☆☆
2.0
Inspection Score
Stable
2024: 2 issues
2025: 1 issues

The Good

  • 5-Star Staffing Rating · Excellent nurse staffing levels
  • Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
  • No fines on record
  • Staff turnover below average (38%)

    10 points below South Carolina average of 48%

Facility shows strength in staffing levels, fire safety.

The Bad

3-Star Overall Rating

Near South Carolina average (2.8)

Meets federal standards, typical of most facilities

Staff Turnover: 38%

Near South Carolina avg (46%)

Typical for the industry

Federal Fines: $42,385

Above median ($33,413)

Moderate penalties - review what triggered them

The Ugly 5 deficiencies on record

1 life-threatening 1 actual harm
Jul 2025 1 deficiency 1 IJ
CRITICAL (J) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation

Deficiency F0760 (Tag F0760)

Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on review of facility policies, resident records, and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure that Resident (R)1 w...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on review of facility policies, resident records, and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure that Resident (R)1 was protected from a significant medication error. Specifically, R1 received multiple medications not prescribed to her: Metoprolol, Amiodarone, Digoxin, Eliquis, Fenofibrate, Furosemide, Loratadine and Potassium. This medication administration error resulted in R1 requiring hospitalization for further evaluation and monitoring. On 07/21/25 at 4:13 PM, the State Agency (SA) determined that the facility's non-compliance with one or more federal health, safety, and/or quality regulations could cause serious injury, serious harm, serious impairment, or death.On 07/21/25 at 4:20 PM, the survey team provided the Administrator with a copy of the CMS Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) Template, informing the facility IJ existed as of 06/28/25. The IJ was related to 42 CFR 483.25 - Pharmacy Services.On 07/21/25 the facility provided an acceptable IJ Removal Plan. On 07/21/25 the survey team, validated the facility's corrective actions and determined the facility put forth due diligence in addressing the noncompliance. The IJ is considered at Past Non-Compliance as of 06/29/25.An extended survey was conducted in conjunction with the Complaint Survey for non-compliance at F760, constituting substandard quality of care.Review of the facility policy titled Oral Medication Administration Procedure dated January 14, 2020, revealed, that the purpose of the policy is To administer oral medication in an organized and safe manner. Log into clinical software system (or use appropriate paper record) and find the appropriate resident and note the first medication to administer. Read label three times prior to removing medication. Identify resident before administering the medication. a. checks the arm band or photograph, call the resident by name, or check with other staff members if necessary. Administer medication and remain with resident while medication is swallowed.Review of R1's Face Sheet revealed R1 was re-admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including but not limited to: hypertension, atrial fibrillation, atherosclerotic heart disease of native coronary artery without angina pectoris, and hyperparathyroidism.Review of R1's Orders, revealed that R1 did not have orders for the following: Digoxin 125 (micrograms)mcg, Fenofibrate 160 (milligrams)mg, Amiodarone 200mg, Eliquis 5mg, Vitamin D3 50mcg, Klor-Con (Potassium) 10(milliequivalent)MEQ, Folic Acid 1mg, Loratadine 10mg, Metoprolol 25mg, Pantoprazole 20mg and Vitamin B12 100mcg.Review of R2's Face Sheet revealed R2 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including but not limited to: hypokalemia, primary hypertension, chronic atrial fibrillation, and vitamin d deficiency.Record review of R2's Order Summary Report revealed resident had an order for: Digoxin 125mcg, Fenofibrate 160mg, Amiodarone 200mg, Eliquis 5mg, Vitamin D3 50mcg, Klor-Con (Potassium) 10MEQ, Folic Acid 1mg, Loratadine 10mg, Metoprolol 25mg, Pantoprazole 20mg and Vitamin B12 100mcg.Review of a progress note dated, 06/28/25 at 2:58 PM documented by the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) revealed, MD [Medical Director] notified related to medication. [vital signs]VS: 112/47, 60 [heart rate]HR, 97.5 oral, O2 99% on [room air] RA. Orders to send to [emergency room] ER. RR [resident representative] notified.Review of an Emergency Department (ED) progress note dated 06/28/25 documented by the Doctor of Osteopathy (DO), revealed: HPI [R1] is a [AGE] year-old white female presents the ED today for evaluation after being inadvertently given another patient's medications. Patient received 25 mg metoprolol, 200 mg of amiodarone, 125 mcg of digoxin, 5 mg of Eliquis, fenofibrate, folic acid, 20 mg of furosemide, 20 mg of loratadine, 10 mill equivalents of potassium, vitamin B12 and D3, 20 mg of Protonix as well as some probiotics. Patient unfortunately has advanced dementia and is unable to provide any history. Apparently prior to receiving the medications patient's heart rate was already in the 50s however upon arrival to the ED heart rate in the upper 40s. Pressure acceptable. Here for evaluation given inadvertent administration of another residents medications.Record review of a, Hospitalist Discharge summary dated [DATE] documented by Hospitalist Medical Doctor (HMD), revealed: Brief HPI. Patient is a [AGE] year-old female that is a long-term care resident at a nursing home facility coming into the emergency department due to her getting medications for different patient. It seems that the patient got 25 mg of metoprolol, 200 mg of amiodarone, 125 mcg of digoxin, Eliquis, 20 mg furosemide, vitamins. Patient has advanced dementia and is unable to provide any history. Patient is admitted for observation Hospital Course Patient is a [AGE] year-old female that came into the emergency department due to wrongful medication being administered at the nursing home facility. She received metoprolol, amiodarone, digoxin, Eliquis and Lasix among other medication. Patient was observed in the hospital on telemetry. It seemed that her heart rate was low, seem to be in the 20s, patient received a dose of atropine 1 time. Cardiology was consulted, after reviewing the telemetry strips, cardiology noted that likely a error in read and the actual heart rate was around 40s to 50s at that time. Patient is being discharged back to her nursing home facility. Intensive care specialist recommended a root cause analysis for the incident. We are also recommending holding Nebivolol at the moment due to her bradycardia until she sees her primary.Review of a document titled, ECF/SNF Provider Progress Note dated 06/30/25, revealed, 98 [year old] yo resident sent to the ER because she was given another person(s) medication. She received metoprolol, amiodarone, digoxin, Eliquis and Lasix among other medications. She was placed in the hospital on telemetry. Heart rate was on the low 20's. Patient received atropine. During an interview on 07/21/25 at 1:32 PM, with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN1) regarding a medication administration error involving R1. LPN1 explained that her usual process for administering medications includes identifying the correct resident, checking the orders in the electronic health record, and verifying the medication pack. The medication pack includes the name of the medication, route, frequency, resident's full name, room number, and any special instructions such as whether the medication should be crushed. After this verification process, she proceeds with administering the medication. On the morning of the incident, a cook who was familiar with residents' diets called out of work. This led to Certified Nursing Assistants (CNAs) frequently approaching the nurse station to ask questions about residents' dietary needs. While LPN1 was preparing medications for R2, a CNA asked about R1's specific diet. As a result of this interruption, LPN1 had R1 in mind while preparing R2's medications and accidentally administered R2's medications to R1. Immediately after administering the medications, as she walked back to the medication cart, LPN1 realized that R1 had received the wrong medications. She immediately notified the (Registered Nurse) RN Supervisor, who advised her to contact the MD. While LPN1 was on the phone with the supervisor, a CNA collected a set of vital signs for R1. LPN1 reported that the vital signs were within R1's normal range, noting that the resident typically trends with a lower heart rate and blood pressure. LPN1 documented the list of medications incorrectly administered to R1 and reported the incident to the Medical Director. The MD gave an order to send R1 to the emergency room for evaluation and monitoring. LPN1 contacted Emergency Medical Services, gathered all relevant paperwork including the resident's current medication list and the list of medications given in error, and provided a report to the receiving Emergency Department. The resident's representative was then notified of R1's hospital transfer.During an interview on 07/21/25 at 2:02 PM, the ADON outlined the facility's expectations and standard procedure for safe medication administration. The process includes reviewing the resident's Medication Administration Record (MAR) and assessing medication safety parameters prior to administration. The nurse then pulls the corresponding medication packet, which includes the medication name, route, frequency, the resident's full name, and room number. Once the MAR is verified against the medication packet, the next step is to confirm the identity of the resident using their identification band, MAR photograph, and by asking for the resident's name and date of birth when the resident is alert and oriented. The nurse is also expected to lock the computer screen, ensure no sharps are exposed on the cart, secure the medication cart, enter the resident's room, administer the medication, and document whether the medication was taken. During the incident in question, LPN1 contacted the ADON regarding a medication error. Since it occurred on a Saturday morning, the ADON was not on-site but responded promptly upon being notified. LPN1 explained that she had been distracted throughout the morning by multiple staff inquiries related to residents' dietary needs, following the absence of the scheduled cook. While preparing medication for R2, LPN1 was interrupted by a staff member asking about R1's dietary restrictions. As a result, with R1 on her mind, LPN1 mistakenly administered R2's medication to R1. According to the ADON, LPN1 immediately recognized the error after administration and promptly notified the ADON, the RN Supervisor, and the MD. The MD gave the order to send R1 to the emergency department for evaluation and monitoring, which was carried out without delay. The ADON confirmed that LPN1 did not follow the facility's required medication administration protocol, specifically by failing to verify the resident's identity prior to administering the medication. This constituted a failure to meet the facility's expectations for a safe medication pass. During an interview on 07/21/25 at 2:42 PM, the MD reported that he received a call early Saturday morning notifying him that LPN1 had administered R2's medication to R1. Based on the information provided to him at the time, the MD understood that the error occurred due to the nurse being distracted during medication pass, related to staffing issues in the dietary department. The MD was informed of the specific medications that were incorrectly administered to R1, as well as her vital signs at the time. He noted that R1 had a low heart rate, but clarified that this was typical for her, as she had a history of chronically low heart rate. However, given the nature of the medications involved-specifically cardiac medications such as digoxin, amiodarone, and metoprolol-the MD determined that R1 should be sent to the hospital for closer observation and continuous cardiac monitoring The MD stated that R1 was later readmitted to the facility, and, to date, he has had no further concerns regarding her condition. He emphasized that his expectation for safe medication administration includes verifying that the medication order matches the resident for whom it is intended for and ensuring that proper identity checks are performed prior to administration. In his opinion, the nurse involved did not meet those expectations during the incident. He further emphasized that nurses are expected to remain focused during medication passes and to minimize or eliminate distractions to ensure resident safety.During an interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) and Nursing Home Administrator (LNHA) on 07/21/25 at 3:36PM the DON stated, to practice safe medication administration, it is important for nurses to follow the 5 Rights, right patient, right med, right route, right dose and right time and to do 3 verification checks. Verification checks are done through resident arm bands, resident picture on the electronic chart, and name DOB. To prevent this from happening in the future, leadership team came in on 06/28/25 and re-educated and did a med pass observation with all nurses in the facility during that day. The pharmacy team was then consulted to help with completing med pass observation as part of their monthly review. LPN 1 was checked off by ADON, Pharmacist, and the Pharmacy Nursing Consultant and completed med pass in accordance with safe medication practices. The facility also verified that all residents have legible names and DOBs on arm bands and verified that each residents had pictures on their medication record. After conclusion of facility investigation, all safety systems were in check and revealed that the error was one that isolated.On 7/21/25 at approximately 5:30PM, the facility provided an acceptable IJ Removal Plan, which included the following:1. Immediate Corrective Action for Residents Affected: Resident #1 was given medications that were not prescribed to her, but to Resident #2. Upon returning to the med cart and recognizing the error, the nurse immediately notified the physician to inform him of the error and obtained new orders, which included sending the resident to the ER for evaluation Vital signs were checked of Resident #1 and were within normal ranges for this resident The Resident Representative was notified of the error and the orders to send to ER for evaluation The ADON arrived onsite and immediately began an investigation, which included providing education to the nurse and medication administration observation A medication error report was completed on 6/28/2025 A root cause analysis was initiated on 6/28/20252. Identification of Other Residents Affected or Likely to be Affected: An audit was completed to identify if there were any significant medication errors and there were none noted the last 6 months3. Actions to Prevent Occurrence/Recurrence: Facility administration reviewed policies and procedures on medication administration All nurses were given signs to hang on medication carts that say do not disturb unless emergency to help minimize distractions during medication pass All nurses are encouraged to place medication carts outside of the room of the resident they are working with to help avoid distractions and errors Immediate education of all licensed nurses was initiated by ADON on medication administration. This education began on 6/28/2025. All nurses will be educated by July 1 or prior to their next working day Any new hires will receive education on medication administration during their orientation and complete competency prior to completing their orientation period. This will be completed by the SOC or her designee The [NAME] Oak Pharmacy staff will continue to complete medication administration observations monthly There will be at least 3 observations of licensed nurses performing medication pass completed weekly X4 and then monthly X3 on random shifts completed by the DON, ADON, SOC, Unit Managers, or designated staff4. How the Corrective Action Will be Monitored to Ensure It Will not Recur: The DON will review all findings from medication pass observations and report them to the QAA Committee. The committee will review the findings and make recommendations for changes to policies and procedures, forms used, additional education needed, and/or the need for disciplinary action, if necessaryDate Facility Asserts Likelihood for Serious Harm No Longer Exists: 6/29/2025
Jul 2024 2 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

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

Infection Control (Tag F0880)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review, interview and review of facility policy, the facility failed to follow infection control gu...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review, interview and review of facility policy, the facility failed to follow infection control guidelines for Enhanced Barrier Precautions for 2 of 2 residents (Resident (R)237 and R57) and failed to follow infection control guidelines for 1 of 1 resident out of 29 sampled residents (R72) during a dressing change. Findings include: 1. Review of the facility's policy titled Novel or Targeted MDROs [Multi-Drug Resistant Organisms] dated 10/19 revealed, .Implement Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) for all residents residing on the same neighborhood who have a central line, urinary catheter, feeding tube, tracheostomy, or open wound. Wear gloves and a gown for the following high-contact resident care activities: Dressing - Changing linens, Bathing/showering - Providing hygiene, Transferring - Changing briefs or Assisting with toileting, and Device care or use: central line, urinary catheter, feeding tube, tracheostomy, wound care (any skin opening requiring a dressing) . Review of R237's undated Face Sheet located under the Face Sheet tab in the electronic medical record revealed R237 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including but not limited to: hypertensive chronic kidney disease, Alzheimer's Disease, and sepsis. Review of R237's admission Note located under the Progress Note tab in the EMR revealed an entry dated 07/15/24 at 3:59 PM, which stated, .She [R237] is demented and unable to answer question appropriately . Review of R237's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) revealed the MDS had not been completed at the time of this review. Review of R237's Baseline Care Plan dated 07/15/24, revealed, Foley placed for urinary retention with interventions to encourage fluids, Foley catheter care and output noted. During observations made on 07/17/24 at 3:00 PM and 07/18/24 at 8:30 AM, R237 had a Foley catheter in place with a privacy bag covering the drainage bag. Observations also revealed there was no signage on the door indicating the resident was on Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP). During an interview on 07/18/24 at 1:16 PM, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN)5 confirmed R237 had a Foley catheter in place. When asked if R237 should be on EBP due to having a Foley catheter, LPN5 stated, No, she [R237] doesn't have to be. LPN5 was asked when is a resident placed on Enhanced Barrier Precautions and she stated, When they have ESBL [Extended-spectrum beta-lactamase] or other organisms in the urine. During an interview on 07/18/24 at 1:18 PM, the Unit Manager (UM)1 was asked when is a resident placed on EBP and UM1 stated, When they have something like ESBL in their urine, we put them on precautions. During an interview on 07/18/24 at 1:45 PM, the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) was asked when a resident is placed on Enhanced Barrier Precautions and the ADON stated, Residents are placed on this if they have wounds, Foley catheters, history of any infectious organisms. This is our way of protecting our staff and residents from passing on infections during direct patient care. During an interview on 07/18/24 at 1:48 PM, the Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed that residents are placed on Enhanced Barrier Precautions when they have wounds or indwelling medical devices such as peg tubes or Foley catheters. When asked if R237 should be on Enhanced Barrier Precautions, the DON stated, Yes, she has a Foley catheter. Review of R57's Face Sheet located in the Face Sheet tab of the physical chart revealed R57 was admitted to the facility 10/01/20 with diagnoses including but not limited to: chronic kidney disease stage 3, Bacteremia and calculus of kidney. Review of R57's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 05/14/24, revealed the resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 6 out of 15 which indicated the resident was not cognitively intact. Review of R57's Physician Orders dated July 2024 revealed an order for Enhanced Barrier Precautions (Foley) with start date 07/17/24. During an observation on 07/17/24 at 1:23 PM, revealed R57 had an enhanced barrier precaution sign noted beside the door. The sign was visible and detailed Enhanced Barrier Precaution protocol and directions. Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA)2 was observed going into the room with Hoyer lift and transferring R57 to the bed with just gloves on. CNA2 proceeded to provide incontinence care for R2 with just gloves on. During an interview on 07/17/24 at 3:01 PM, CNA2 stated they were trained on enhanced barrier precautions a few months ago. CNA2 stated they were instructed that they only have to use the directions placed on the resident's door if the resident had an active infection. CNA2 stated R57 did not have an active infection so gloves would suffice for care. During a follow-up interview on 07/18/24 at 2:31 PM, CNA2 stated they were wrong previously, and they were supposed to wear Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) for any resident that had an enhanced barrier precautions sign when providing hands on care. 2. Review of the facility's policy titled Dressing - Non-Sterile dated 08/04, provided by the facility, stated, . Open sterile dressings. Pour prescribed cleaning solutions over needed number of clean (for wound cleaning) and sterile (for wound dressing) gauze pads . Put on non-sterile gloves. Clean wound gently but thoroughly with prepared gauze pads. Clean from top to bottom and from the center outward. Use a separate gauze pad for each stroke. Discard soiled gloves, wash hands, and apply clean gloves . Review of R72's undated Face Sheet located under the Face Sheet tab in the EMR revealed R72 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including but not limited to: dementia, and stage four pressure ulcer to the sacral region. Review of R72's Quarterly MDS with an ARD of 06/18/24, coded the resident as having a stage four pressure ulcer which was present on admission to the facility. Review of R72's Physician Orders located under the Orders tab in the EMR revealed an order, dated 06/25/24, which stated, sacrum: clean with wound cleanser, skin prep to surrounding tissue, apply calcium alginate to bed and pack wound edges, cover with gauze, then apply blue sorbex dressing, ABD, then tape 2 ties (cover all of ABD with tape). This treatment was to be performed every shift every day. Review of R72's Care Plan dated 10/02/23, revealed R72 was at risk for impaired skin integrity related to incontinent of bowel and bladder, immobility, and pressure ulcer present on admission. The interventions in place were to provide incontinence care for episodes of incontinence, ensure proper body alignment, weekly body audit, offer fluids as tolerated, evaluate nutritional status as needed, report changes to medical doctor and obtain treatment orders as indicated, and air mattress to bed. During a wound care observation on 07/19/24 at 11:35 AM, with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN)3 the following observations were made: 1. LPN3 cleaned the overbed table with a Santi Cloth bleach wipe but did not wait the dry time of four minutes before placing barrier on top of it. 2. LPN3 brought scissors from their personal bag into R72's room and cleaned the scissors with an alcohol prep before using them to cut the gauze and packed the gauze in the wound. 3. LPN3 sprayed wound cleanser into the wound and then wiped around the outer edges of the wound with a 4x4. 4. After LPN3 cleaned the wound, he did not discard his dirty gloves and apply clean gloves before cutting the calcium alginate with scissors and begun to dress the wound. During an interview on 07/19/24 at 2:00 PM, LPN3 stated, I thought the dry time of the wipes was two to three minutes. I didn't realize my scissors could not be cleaned with the alcohol preps and I thought I had changed my gloves after I cleaned the wound. When asked how a wound is to be cleaned when performing wound care, LPN3 stated, I did not want to wipe the center of the wound so that I didn't disturb the granulation tissue. During an interview on 07/19/24 at 3:00 PM, the ADON was notified of the observation made of the wound care performed by LPN3 on R72. The ADON stated, You clean the wound from the center to the outer of the wound. The nurse is to clean the scissors with the bleach wipe and not the alcohol wipe and the nurse should have changed his gloves after cleaning the wound, washed his hands and applied cleaned gloves before redressing the wound. During an interview on 07/19/24 at 3:30 PM, Registered Nurse (RN)1 stated, The dry time for the bleach wipes is four minutes. During an interview on 07/19/24 at 3:40 PM, the DON stated her expectation for a nurse that is performing a dressing change is for the nurse to follow the physician orders for the wound care as well as follow infection control guidelines during wound care.
CONCERN (E)

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

Antibiotic Stewardship (Tag F0881)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview, record review, review of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidance, and review of facility p...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview, record review, review of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidance, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to maintain a functional Antibiotic Stewardship Program that ensured criteria was met for the use of antibiotics for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for antibiotics in a sample of 29 residents (Resident (R)119). Findings include: Review of the undated facility policy titled Antibiotic Stewardship Program revealed, . Frequency of meetings . monthly . Medical Director . sets standards for antibiotic prescribing practices for all healthcare providers prescribing antibiotics in the facility . Director of Nursing . Oversees established standards for nursing staff to assess, monitor, and communicates changes in a resident's condition that could impact the need for antibiotics . Infection Preventionist . Oversees facility infection control and Antibiotic Stewardship Programs . Tracks infections control data and reports to . Antibiotic Stewardship Committee . Review of an undated, untitled CDC [Centers for Disease Control and Prevention] document located at http://uprevent.[NAME].com/2855wp/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/nh-hac_mcgreercriteriarevcomp_2012-1.pdf; revealed The Core Elements of Antibiotic Stewardship for Nursing Homes indicated . Improving the use of antibiotics in healthcare to protect patients and reduce the threat of antibiotic resistance is a national priority . Antibiotic stewardship refers to a set of commitments and actions designed to 'optimize the treatment of infections while reducing the adverse events associated with antibiotic use' . CDC also recommends that all nursing homes take steps to improve antibiotic prescribing practices and reduce inappropriate use . Nursing homes monitor both antibiotic use practices and outcomes related to antibiotics in order to guide practice changes and track the impact of new interventions. Below are examples of antibiotic use and outcome measures . Process measures: Tracking how and why antibiotics are prescribed . Antibiotic use measures . Tracking how often and how many antibiotics are prescribed . Antibiotic outcome measures . Tracking the adverse outcomes . Review of R119's undated Face Sheet, located under the Face Sheet tab of the electronic medical record (EMR), revealed R119 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including but not limited to: pneumonia, and acute respiratory failure with hypoxia. Review of R119's Physician Orders revealed an order, dated 07/05/24, for one tablet of Levaquin 500 milligram (mg) daily for ten days for pneumonia. Review of the monthly Antibiotic Stewardship Tracking logs dated July 2023 through April 2024, revealed the logs consisted of name, type of infection, symptom onset, pathogen, if antibiotic used, disposition and status. There was no documentation on the logs which stated the type of antibiotic used, duration of therapy and if the criteria were met for antibiotic usage. Review of the Antibiotic Stewardship Monthly Meeting reports revealed reports for the months of September 2023, November 2023, December 2023, and April 2024. These reports contained residents who were started on antibiotics prior to receiving urinalysis and culture and sensitivity results. Review of the July 2024 Antibiotic Stewardship Monthly Tracking log revealed R77 was listed on the document but did not indicate whether the criteria for antibiotic use was met or not met, which antibiotic was used, and for how long. During an interview on 07/19/24 at 4:00 PM, the Administrator and Director of Nursing (DON) were notified of the above documented findings regarding the antibiotic stewardship tracking, trending, and ordering of antibiotic for R119's pneumonia. The DON stated, We use the McGeer's criteria, and we have areas that can be improved upon. The Infection Preventionist was not available for interview concerning the failure to ensure criteria were met as was indicated on the review the Antibiotic Stewardship logs.
Sept 2023 1 deficiency 1 Harm
SERIOUS (G) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures

Deficiency F0760 (Tag F0760)

A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Amended 03/18/25 Based on interviews, record review, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure significan...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Amended 03/18/25 Based on interviews, record review, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure significant medication errors did not occur for 1 of 1 residents reviewed for medication administration. Specifically, Resident (R)1 received medications intended for another resident. As a result of this failure, R1's blood pressure started trending downward. R1 reported a headache and became increasingly lethargic. R1 was sent to the emergency room for evaluation and stabilization. Findings include: Review of the undated facility policy titled, Oral Medication Administration Procedure, states, Administer oral medications in an organized and safe manner . #7. Only one resident's medication at a time should be prepared and taken into a resident's room. #8. Identify resident before administering medication. Check arms band or photograph, call resident by name, or check with other staff members if necessary. #9. Explain to resident the type of medication to be administered, the resident has the right to be informed of all medications that are administered . #12. Administer medication and remain with resident while medication is swallowed. Review of R1's medical record revealed R1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including, but not limited to dementia, legally blind, hearing loss and chronic congestive heart failure. R1 was admitted to the facility for therapy due to a left femur fracture. Review of R1's ordered medications included: Magnesium Oxide 400 mgs daily, Sertraline 25mgs daily, Eliquis 2.5 mgs, Doxcycline 100 mgs 2 times daily with food, Hydrocodone 5 mgs - 325 mgs every eight hours as needed for pain, Acidophilus 175 mgs 2 times daily, Sucralfate 1 gram 2 times daily, Atorvastatin 10 mgs, Memantine 5 mgs and Ondansetrol HCL 4 mgs every 6 hours as needed for nausea and vomiting. Further review of R1's orders revealed no blood pressure medications or heart medications. Review of R1's hospital stay starting on 09/13/23 revealed after blood pressure dropped to 68/55 with a heart rate of 46, R1 received the following medications at the facility, Eliquis 2.5 mgs, Flecainide 100 mgs, Senna 8.6 mgs, Trelegy, Diltiazem 360 mgs, Losartan 100 mgs, and Toprol XL 25 mgs. (All of these medications were intended for another resident and given to R1). Per chart review patient was not supposed to be on any of these blood pressure medications, was given antiarrhythmic, calcium channel blocker and a beta blocker. Patient endorses fatigue and weakness. Blood pressure has continued to drop where she was required a PICC (Peripherally inserted central catheter) line and Epinepherine intravenously. In an interview on 09/25/23 at 9:15 AM, the Administrator stated, It was an honest mistake, the nurse feels really bad about it. The entire staff of nurses have been in-serviced. Pharmacy comes and watches med pass periodically. The nurse was so upset. She is a really good nurse. In an interview on 09/25/23 at 9:45 AM, R1 stated she did not know what was wrong with her or why she was in the hospital. In an interview on 09/25/23 at 10:00 AM, Registered Nurse (RN)1 stated, I was passing medications to 7 residents. Got to the end of the hallway, I pulled all the medications for the resident in the room next to [R1] and had them in a cup on the medication cart. I was distracted by therapy asking about the resident in the next room. They wanted to know if she had her pain medication and was ready for therapy. I looked on the computer for pain medication for [R1] and informed them that the resident had pain medication earlier from the 3rd shift nurse. I informed therapy that [R1] had Tylenol ordered, so I pulled the 650 mgs of Tylenol and put them in a cup and sat them beside the pills for the resident in the room next to [R1]. I took both cups of pills to R1. I realized immediately that I had given the wrong resident the wrong medications. I went to the day shift nurse and told her what had happened and I stayed with the resident and started taking vital signs immediately. The other RN on the hall stepped away to go get the charge nurse. The charge nurse was in a room with the Physician's Assistant (PA), and the RN came back and said to monitor the vital signs for five hours. So every hour on the hour I check the vital signs. The resident was stable until about noon and her blood pressure dropped to 72/51. I went to the nurse that had ICU (Intensive Care Unit) experience and asked about the half life of the medications I had given to the wrong resident and told her I was concerned about the Cardizem 360 mgs extended release and the Metoprolol Succinate 25 mgs extended release. With the Losartan 100 mgs I knew that 4 hours was most likely the half life and I had given the medications around 8:30 AM. As I was taking her vitals her heart rate got down to 46 and the blood pressure down to 68/55. Her O2 sats (saturation) never went down they stayed in the 90's. I had been giving her water and she received about 500 milliliters between 11:30 AM and 1:30 PM. The Director of Nursing (DON), Charge Nurse and myself were at the bedside, and the resident would not take anymore fluids. [R1] was in the bedside chair and had a large bowel movement on herself so between 1:00 PM and 1:30 PM we asked the PA if we could give IV fluids or send her to the ER and the physician gave the order to send her out to the emergency room (ER) for stabilization. RN1 further stated R1 went from the ER to ICU and she was there a few days before coming back to the facility. In an interview on 09/25/23 at 3:30 PM, the Medical Director (MD) stated, The nurse made a mistake and she let them know she did. My Nurse Practitioner (NP) was there and assessed the resident, I told them to watch the blood pressure every 30 minutes. I feel like they took action, it was a medication error. The resident is ok and the family is ok. I have checked on the resident since she came back from the hospital and she is doing ok. Of course you would expect there to be no med errors, but none of us are perfect. On 09/25/23 at 6:42 PM, the facility presented the following plan: Resident #1 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE], and readmitted on [DATE]. Resident #1's diagnoses, include, but not limited to, displaced intertrochanteric fracture of left femur, difficulty walking, muscle weakness, and dementia. On 09/13/23, Resident #1 received Resident #2's medication by mistake, when Registered Nurse #1 was going to administer Resident #2's medication, and became distracted when Physical Therapy was asking about pain medication for Resident #1. Pain medication and Resident #2's medication were administered to Resident #1. Registered Nurse #1 realized the error and immediately began monitoring Resident #1's blood pressure and heart rate every hour for 5 hours. Resident #1's vitals were monitored on 09/13/2023 as the following: at 8:30 AM - T97.5, P56, R16, B/P 130/79; 9:35 AM - T97.6, P58, R20, BP 98/68; at 10:49 AM - T97, P64, R16, B/P 92/58 and 109/60 ; at 11:49 AM - P 60, R16 BP 78/51; at 12:49 PM - P60, R20, B/P 68/55; 1:49 PM - P96, R20, BP 68/55 and 78/52; and prior to leaving with EMS - B/P 82/65. Resident #1 was sent to the hospital when she reported a headache and became increasingly lethargic. Resident #1's representative was notified of the medication error, change in condition and transfer to the hospital. The Director of Nursing immediately started an in-service on accurately administering medications. Other facility residents can potentially be at risk if given medications intended for another resident. Facility will ensure significant medication errors do not occur for residents. Action: An audit of current residents were completed by the Director of Nursing on 09/13/2023, and revealed no other significant medication errors had occurred for any other resident. The Director of Nursing and Corporate Pharmacy Consultant completed the in-service of accurately administering medications to all current Licensed Nursing staff. Newly hired Licensed Nursing staff will receive this education during their job specific orientation by Staff Development Coordinator. The facility Nursing Administration or Corporate Pharmacy Consultant will monitor by observing 3 Licensed Nurses administering medications weekly for 12 weeks. Identified trends or issues from the monitoring will be discussed during the morning QI meetings, weekly for 12 weeks, and then discussions with the Quality Assurance Committee meetings for further recommendations as needed. The Director of Nursing is responsible for the ongoing compliance of F760. Compliance date is 09/19/2023.
Nov 2020 1 deficiency
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0658 (Tag F0658)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** On 11/03/20 at approximately 8:52 AM Resident #52 was observed in his/her room with multiple pills laying on a paper towel with ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** On 11/03/20 at approximately 8:52 AM Resident #52 was observed in his/her room with multiple pills laying on a paper towel with no nurse present. Resident #52 appeared to be having some difficulty swallowing the medication as he/she took one pill at a time. On 11/03/20 at approximately 8:53 AM RN #1 was interviewed and asked if he/she was allowed to leave residents with medications unattended? RN #1 stated that he/she was not allowed to leave residents with medication unattended. RN#1 confirmed he/she left the Resident #52 with multiple pills laying on paper towel. An observation on 11/03/20 at approximately 8:50 AM revealed Resident #52 with medications lying loosely on a napkin on his/her bedside table. The Resident's medications had been taken out of the medication administration cup and were spread out on the bedside table that was positioned in front of him/her. The Resident was taking his/her pills one at the time. RN #1 was not present when Resident #52 was in their room taking the medications. Based on observations, interview, record review, and review of facility policies Standards of Care, and Oral Medication Administration Procedure, the facility failed to administer oral medications in an organized and professional manner for 1 of 1 reviewed. Resident #52 was given medication by Registered Nurse (RN) #1 in a medication cup and then RN #1 walked away to get additional medication when resident was observed taking medication unsupervised by the nurse. The findings included: During an interview with Registered Nurse (RN) #1 on 11/4/20 at approximately 10:00 AM, h/she stated Resident #52 wanted Mucinex to go along with morning medications and I went to get the Mucinex. Medications were left on a paper towel as that is how Resident #52 likes them with water. Asked RN #1 if Resident #52 started taking any medications prior to being left unattended in the room with medications, and RN # 1 replied, I think h/she started taking them, not sure, may have taken 1 or 2 pills before I left the room to look at the computer to get the Mucinex. I was out of the room [ROOM NUMBER] or 2 minutes. RN # 1 was asked if the remaining un-taken medications were with RN #1 when h/she left the room, RN # replied no. Informed RN # 1 that medications should be taken with them when h/she is not in the room and RN # 1 stated, I know. Review of the facility policy Standard of Care section P revealed that no medications are at the resident's bedside without being determined safe to self-administer by the RPOC team, successful return demonstration, and a physician order. Other medications found to be at bedside will be removed until such time that the RPOC team can make the appropriate determination and physician notified. Review of the facility policy titled Oral Medication Administration Procedure revealed under Procedure # 12: Administer medication and remain with resident while medication swallowed. A) Never leave a medication in a resident's room without orders for self-administration. B) If resident is in bed, head of bed should be elevated prior to administration of medication. Record review of Resident #52 physician order's revealed no order to be left alone to self-administer medications.
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Life-Threatening (Immediate Jeopardy)
J - Isolated K - Pattern L - Widespread
Actual Harm
G - Isolated H - Pattern I - Widespread
Potential for Harm
D - Isolated E - Pattern F - Widespread
No Harm (Minor)
A - Isolated B - Pattern C - Widespread

Questions to Ask on Your Visit

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

Our Honest Assessment

Strengths
  • • 38% turnover. Below South Carolina's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
Concerns
  • • Multiple safety concerns identified: 1 life-threatening violation(s), 1 harm violation(s), $42,385 in fines. Review inspection reports carefully.
  • • 5 deficiencies on record, including 1 critical (life-threatening) violation. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
  • • $42,385 in fines. Higher than 94% of South Carolina facilities, suggesting repeated compliance issues.
  • • Grade D (48/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
Bottom line: Trust Score of 48/100 indicates significant concerns. Thoroughly evaluate alternatives.

About This Facility

What is Kershaw Health Karesh Long Term Care's CMS Rating?

CMS assigns Kershaw Health Karesh Long Term Care an overall rating of 3 out of 5 stars, which is considered average nationally. Within South Carolina, this rating places the facility higher than 99% of the state's 100 nursing homes. This mid-range rating indicates the facility meets federal standards but may have areas for improvement.

How is Kershaw Health Karesh Long Term Care Staffed?

CMS rates Kershaw Health Karesh Long Term Care's staffing level at 5 out of 5 stars, which is much above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 38%, compared to the South Carolina average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.

What Have Inspectors Found at Kershaw Health Karesh Long Term Care?

State health inspectors documented 5 deficiencies at Kershaw Health Karesh Long Term Care during 2020 to 2025. These included: 1 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death), 1 that caused actual resident harm, and 3 with potential for harm. Immediate Jeopardy findings are rare and represent the most serious regulatory concerns. They require immediate corrective action.

Who Owns and Operates Kershaw Health Karesh Long Term Care?

Kershaw Health Karesh Long Term Care is owned by a government entity. Government-operated facilities are typically run by state, county, or municipal agencies. The facility operates independently rather than as part of a larger chain. With 132 certified beds and approximately 125 residents (about 95% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in Camden, South Carolina.

How Does Kershaw Health Karesh Long Term Care Compare to Other South Carolina Nursing Homes?

Compared to the 100 nursing homes in South Carolina, Kershaw Health Karesh Long Term Care's overall rating (3 stars) is above the state average of 2.8, staff turnover (38%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (2 stars) is below the national benchmark.

What Should Families Ask When Visiting Kershaw Health Karesh Long Term Care?

Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "What changes have been made since the serious inspection findings, and how are you preventing similar issues?" "Can I visit during a mealtime to observe dining assistance and food quality?" "How do you handle medical emergencies, and what is your hospital transfer rate?" "Can I speak with family members of current residents about their experience?" These questions are particularly relevant given the facility's Immediate Jeopardy citations.

Is Kershaw Health Karesh Long Term Care Safe?

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

Do Nurses at Kershaw Health Karesh Long Term Care Stick Around?

Kershaw Health Karesh Long Term Care has a staff turnover rate of 38%, which is about average for South Carolina nursing homes (state average: 46%). Moderate turnover is common in nursing homes, but families should still ask about staff tenure and how the facility maintains care continuity when employees leave.

Was Kershaw Health Karesh Long Term Care Ever Fined?

Kershaw Health Karesh Long Term Care has been fined $42,385 across 2 penalty actions. The South Carolina average is $33,503. While any fine indicates a compliance issue, fines under $50,000 are relatively common and typically reflect isolated problems that were subsequently corrected. Families should ask what specific issues led to these fines and confirm they've been resolved.

Is Kershaw Health Karesh Long Term Care on Any Federal Watch List?

Kershaw Health Karesh Long Term Care 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.