J F Hawkins Nursing Home

1330 Kinard Street, Newberry, SC 29108 (803) 276-2601
For profit - Limited Liability company 118 Beds PRESTIGE ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Data: November 2025 1 Immediate Jeopardy citation
Trust Grade
56/100
#39 of 186 in SC
Last Inspection: February 2025

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

Overview

J F Hawkins Nursing Home in Newberry, South Carolina, has a Trust Grade of C, which means it is average and sits in the middle of the pack compared to other facilities. It ranks #39 out of 186 in the state, placing it in the top half, and #2 out of 2 in Newberry County, indicating only one local option is better. The facility's trend is stable, with one serious issue reported in both 2024 and 2025. Staffing is a mixed bag; it has a 3/5 star rating, with a 45% turnover rate, which is slightly better than the state average. However, the nursing home faces some concerning issues, including $8,021 in fines and lower RN coverage than 84% of South Carolina facilities. Specific incidents noted by inspectors include a serious failure to develop a care plan for a resident at risk for pressure ulcers, leading to a severe skin breakdown, and a critical violation involving the unauthorized sharing of resident information on social media, which could cause psychological harm. While the facility has strengths like good health inspection scores, these weaknesses highlight the need for families to carefully consider their options and the quality of care provided.

Trust Score
C
56/100
In South Carolina
#39/186
Top 20%
Safety Record
High Risk
Review needed
Inspections
Holding Steady
1 → 1 violations
Staff Stability
⚠ Watch
45% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
Penalties
✓ Good
$8,021 in fines. Lower than most South Carolina facilities. Relatively clean record.
Skilled Nurses
⚠ Watch
Each resident gets only 21 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for South Carolina. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
Violations
○ Average
7 deficiencies on record. Average for a facility this size. Mostly minor or procedural issues.
★★★★☆
4.0
Overall Rating
★★★☆☆
3.0
Staff Levels
★★★★☆
4.0
Care Quality
★★★★☆
4.0
Inspection Score
Stable
2024: 1 issues
2025: 1 issues

The Good

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

Facility shows strength in quality measures, fire safety.

The Bad

Staff Turnover: 45%

Near South Carolina avg (46%)

Higher turnover may affect care consistency

Federal Fines: $8,021

Below median ($33,413)

Minor penalties assessed

Chain: PRESTIGE ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES

Part of a multi-facility chain

Ask about local staffing decisions and management

The Ugly 7 deficiencies on record

1 life-threatening 2 actual harm
Feb 2025 1 deficiency
CONCERN (D)

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

Respiratory Care (Tag F0695)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observations, interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure a portable compressed oxygen cylinder was safely stored in a secured device for one (Resident (R) 113) of three samp...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observations, interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure a portable compressed oxygen cylinder was safely stored in a secured device for one (Resident (R) 113) of three sampled residents reviewed for oxygen use. The deficient practice had the potential for severe physical harm if the pressurized cylinder was to be knocked over and explode. Findings included: Review of the facility's policy titled, Oxygen Safety, revised 01/01/2022 indicated, Safety is the responsibility of all staff. Hazards or other conditions that could develop into a hazard must be reported to a supervisor. as soon as practical. Anyone may report a hazard or potential hazard. Staff. will be educated on oxygen safety precautions in accordance with their roles and responsibilities related to the use and storage of oxygen. When small-size (A, B, D, or E) cylinders are in use, they shall be attached to a cylinder stand or to a medical equipment designed to receive and hold compressed gas cylinders. Protect cylinders from damage by not storing in locations where heavy objects may strike them or fall on them, or where they can be tipped over by foot traffic or door movement. Observation on 02/03/25 at 12:36 PM revealed the Oxygen (O2) cylinder (Type E) in R113's room was not attached to a cylinder stand or other medical equipment designed to hold a compressed gas cylinder. The compressed O2 cylinder was free standing upright on the floor behind R113 who was in her wheelchair. Observation on 02/02/25 at 12:40 PM of R113's O2 cylinder, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN)1 verified the O2 cylinder should be in a secure device to prevent the cylinder from tipping over. LPN1 stated that R113 just finished therapy. During an interview on 02/05/25 at 9:43 AM, Unit Manager (UM) 1 stated R113 had just returned from therapy and the therapist didn't put a new holder on the wheelchair. UM1 stated the O2 cylinder could be knocked over if not secured and could explode. During an interview on 02/05/25 at 9:59 AM, Director of Physical Therapist (DPT) stated residents have portable O2 cylinders in their room. Once the resident is transferred to their wheelchair, we disconnect them from the O2 concentrator and connect them to the O2 cylinder. DPT stated if a cylinder securing device was not available, they would locate one or hold onto the cylinder. DPT stated the O2 cylinder could tip over if not kept in a secure device. DPT stated O2 cylinders are not to be left standing up without being secured. During an interview on 02/05/25 at 10:10AM, OTR/L stated R113's O2 cylinder was found not in a secure device upon entering R113's room. OTR/L stated he was rushed and figured the cylinder would be situated soon and left it as it was found. OTR/L stated he knew the cylinder needed to be kept in a secure device to keep it from being knocked over. OTR/L stated the cylinder should have been removed from the room. OTR/L stated that if the O2 cylinder fell over, it could become a missile and go shooting During an interview on 02/05/25 at 11:39 AM, the Administrator stated O2 cylinders are required to be kept in a secure device.
Sept 2024 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

Resident Rights (Tag F0550)

Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, interviews, and facility policy, the facility failed to protect confidentiality for Resident (R)1 for on...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, interviews, and facility policy, the facility failed to protect confidentiality for Resident (R)1 for one of one resident reviewed for resident's rights. Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA)1 recorded R1 on her cellphone and the video was posted on the social media platform- Snapchat. On 09/25/24 at 4:57 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 psychosocial harm. On 09/25/24 at 4:57 PM, the survey team provided the Administrator with a copy of the CMS Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) Template, informing the facility IJ existed as of 09/11/24. The IJ was related to 42 CFR 483.10 (a) (1) - Resident Rights. On 09/26/24, the facility provided an acceptable IJ Removal Plan. On 09/26/24 at 1:30 PM, 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 09/18/24. An extended survey was conducted in conjunction with the Complaint Survey for non-compliance at F550, constituting substandard quality of care. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Social Media with a revision date of 01/01/22 revealed, Policy: The Company respects the desire of employees to use Social Media (see definition below) for personal expression. However, employees' use of Social Media can pose risks to the Company's and residents' confidential, proprietary and sensitive information, can harm the Company's reputation in the community, can expose the Company to discrimination and harassment claims, and can jeopardize the Company's compliance with business rules and laws, including but not limited to the Company's compliance with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) and related laws and regulations protecting, residents' protected health information (PHI). Protected Health Information: 1. Standards for Compliance with Related Policies and Agreements b. Social Media should never be used in a way that violates any of the Company's policies or employee obligations. Protecting Resident's PHI 2. Employees are absolutely prohibited from using Social Media in any way that would violate HIP AA or otherwise disclose or compromise residents' PHI. This includes but is not limited to the following: a. DO NOT use Social Media to post, upload, send, or otherwise share or disclose a photo or video of any resident without prior written permission of the resident or the resident's authorized agent as required by applicable law. You must use the Company's authorization form to obtain such prior written permission. This prohibition includes photos and videos where the resident is not easily identifiable It also includes photos or video where the resident is easily identifiable, whether in the photo or video itself or through a caption. 3. Personal electronic devices, including, but not limited to, cellular phones, PDAs, electronic games, MP3 players, iPods, CD/DVD players and pagers will not be allowed in the work area without prior written approval of the Administrator.This includes resident rooms 9. Personal use of Social Media is never permitted on working time. Review of the facility's policy titled, Promoting/Maintaining Resident Dignity with a revision date of 02/12/24 revealed, Policy: It is the practice of this facility to protect and promote resident rights and treat each resident with respect and dignity as well as care for each resident in a manner and in an environment, that maintains or enhances resident's quality of life by recognizing each resident's individuality. Compliance Guidelines: 1. All staff members are involved in providing care to residents to promote and maintain dignity and respect resident rights. 12. Maintain resident privacy. Review of the facility policy titled, Media Release Agreement dated 12/07/21 revealed, .In accordance with the Health Insurance Portability and Affordability Act of 1996 (HIPAA), the photographs, names or written/verbal testimonials given by the above named resident or on behalf of the resident's family members will not be used in a manner that would disclose protected health information, except for the fact that the resident resides at the Facility, unless agreed otherwise . The Facility may use the media for all of the following that are checked off by the Resident/Legal Representative: . Facility Controlled Social Media (e.g. Facebook) . R1's Face Sheet revealed R1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including but not limited to: dementia, anxiety disorder, major depressive disorder and bipolar disorder. Review of R1's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 09/03/24 revealed a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) Score was not completed due to the resident is rarely/never understood. Review of the facility's Personnel Action Request (PAR) form date 09/11/24, revealed CNA1 was involuntary terminated. During an observation and interview on 09/25/24 at 11:20 AM, R1 was observed in bed holding a baby doll. R1 appeared clean and well groomed. R1 was alert but confused and became tearful and stopped talking or answering questions during the conversation. A complete interview was unable to be obtained. During an interview on 09/25/24 at 10:35 AM, the Administrator revealed that they received the video from a third-party source on 09/11/24, inquiring if they knew the CNA in the video. Both the Administrator and the Director of Nursing (DON) revealed that the CNA was a part time employee, who worked whenever they could pick up days. The Administrator explained that the time frame of when the video was taken, was uncertain. The CNA reported that she may have recorded the video in January, but after they reviewed the schedule, the CNA had not been scheduled for any days during that time. Both the Administrator and DON further explained that the CNA was suspended and terminated at the same time and has not been allowed to come back into the building. During an interview on 09/25/24 at 11:25 AM, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN)1 revealed that she is normally the nurse that works with R1 but was not assigned to them today. LPN1 further explained that she was made aware of a CNA taking a video, when she received a call inquiring if they had seen the video. LPN1 stated she was informed that the CNA stated she took the video originally to prove how the resident reacts during care. LPN1 stated she never saw the video. Attempts were made to contact CNA1 with no success. Review of the video recording showed R1 lying in bed, receiving care by CNA1. R1 is kicking her legs, while CNA1 continues to provide a brief change. R1 then sits up and appears to be fussing at CNA1, who continues to provide care, instead of ceasing. During an interview on 09/25/24 at 3:56 PM, R1's Resident Representative (RR) revealed that the resident has a diagnosis of dementia and Alzheimer's, and their disposition can vary from day to day. The RR revealed that they were notified of the incident on 09/11/24 around 3:00 PM and they came to the facility, once they received the call. The RR continued to explain that they did not provide consent for the resident to be videoed in this manner and that if the resident is a very private person and would not have consented to being videoed in this manner either, even if they were in their right mind. The RR continued to explain that they felt R1's rights were breached by the capturing and posting of the video to social media. The RR further explained that during conversations with the Administrator and DON, she was made aware that the CNA is a student, and that the DON made a statement asking why the CNA was by herself. The RR also revealed that the facility did not discuss any interventions that they put in place to protect the resident from this happening again. The facility's removal plan included the following: Resident Names: R1 - BIMS of 1 Description of Quality Concern - On 9-11-24, the administrator received a video of CNA1 providing care to a resident. The video of CNA1 providing care was to a JFH resident, which was later identified as R1. CNA1 is a PT/PRN employee with her employment beginning on 6-22-22. The video was put on a social media platform (Snap Chat) by an unknown source and was shared third hand to the administrator. The video showed CNA1 providing care during a brief change in which the resident was combative. 1. What improvement actions) will be done for residents found to have been affected by the concern(s)? Resident - R1 - Monitor for any changes in behavior/mood. On 9-18-24 the Social Services Director reviewed the resident's behaviors for the prior 30 days and noted there was no change in the resident's baseline. Head to toe assessment was completed by the DON on 9-11-24 and they were no findings of abuse or neglect. Notifications were made to the RP by the facility administrator on 9-11-24. The primary physician, medical director, police, Department of Public Health and the Ombudsman on 9-11-24 by the Director of Nursing. Resident has interventions in place for behaviors, the residents care plan was reviewed by Inter Disciplinary Team and updated on 9-13-24 by the Inter Disciplinary Team. The employee was immediately suspended and terminated on 9-11-24. 2. How facility will identify other residents having potential to be affected by practice AND what improvement action will be taken. On 9-11-24, residents with a BIMS of 8 or greater were interviewed by the DON, ADON/ IP and charge nurses regarding abuse and the staff use of cell phones in patient rooms and staff taking video or pictures of residents. No other issues were identified. On 9-11-24, residents with a BIMS 7 and lower all had body and skin assessments and no signs of abuse noted on residents by the DON, ADON and charges nurses. Staff interviews were conducted between 9-11-24 and 9-13-24 and they asked if they had ever witnessed any type of abuse, HIPPA Violations and social media use. These interviews were conducted by DON and ADON. No issues were identified. The DON reviewed incidents in the last 30-days for any trends and patterns for abuse on 9-14-24 and no concerns were identified. 3. What measures will be put in place or what systemic changes you will make to ensure that the practice does not recur. The DON, ADON/IP, admissions, social services will re-educate all staff in relation to abuse, HIPPA, cell phones and social media. This was started on 9-11-24 when the facility was made aware of the video and continued with shift-to-shift education to ensure education for all employees completed by 9-13-24 with no employee working after 9-13-24 without receiving this education. New hires will receive this education in orientation. A posttest was issued to all employees and was completed by 9-17-24 and all employees had a passing score of 100%. The posttest was completed by the DON, ADON/IP, admissions, and social services for all staff. Administrator reviewed abuse, social media policy and HIPPA policy on 9-12-24 and no concerns were identified. 4. How the corrective action(s) will be monitored to ensure the practices will not recur. i.e. what quality assurance program will be put in place. An Ad HOC QAPI meeting held on 9-13-24 to review facility past non-compliance for concern identified where staff taking pictures/videos of residents and posting on social media which included Administrator, DON, ADON/infection preventionist, Medical Director, Social Services, Marketing and Admissions and MDS. Social Services and the Activity Director will interview/questionnaire five staff members weekly for twelve weeks, to monitor that staff understands the abuse, HIPPA and Social Media Policy. Social Services and the Activity Director will interview/questionnaire five residents weekly for twelve weeks, to monitor that residents do not have any concerns with abuse, HIPPA and Social Media Policy. Starting the week on 9-16-24. Audit findings will be reported by the administrator at QAPI on a monthly basis, for three months or any time concerns are identified for review and further recommendations as deemed appropriate. The QAPI committee will consist of a minimum of the Administrator, DON, ADON/infection preventionist, Medical Director, Social Services, Marketing and Admissions and MDS. Administrator & DON are responsible for overall compliance. The facility alleges substantial compliance on 9-18-24.
Jul 2023 2 deficiencies
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Safe Environment (Tag F0584)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, record review, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure a comfortable, home...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, record review, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure a comfortable, homelike environment for 2 of 38 residents residing on Unit 2. Specifically, the facility failed to maintain resident room temperatures at a safe and comfortable level for Resident (R)1 and R2. Findings Include: Review of the facility policy titled, Safe and Homelike Environment with a revised date of 01/01/22, documented, In accordance with residents' rights, the facility will provide a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, . Definitions: Comfortable and safe temperature levels means that the ambient temperature should be in a relatively narrow range that minimizes residents' susceptibility to loss of body heat and risk of hypothermia/hyperthermia and is comfortable for the residents . Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines: 7. The facility will maintain comfortable and safe temperature levels. a. The facility should strive to keep the temperature in common resident areas between 71 and 81 degrees Fahrenheit. b. If and when a resident prefers his or her room temperature be kept below 71 degrees Fahrenheit, or above 81 degrees Fahrenheit, the facility will assess the safety of this practice on the resident and the resident's roommate. Review of R1's Face Sheet revealed, R1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses to include but not limited to; dementia, atril fibrillation, nocturnal polyuria, and anemia. Review of R1's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 06/05/23, revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) was not conducted due to R1 being rarely/never understood. Review of R2's Face Sheet revealed, R2 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses to include but not limited to; Huntington's Disease, osteoarthritis, atherosclerotic heart disease, and dementia. Review of R2's Quarterly MDS with an ARD of 04/17/23, revealed a BIMS was not conducted due to R2 being rarely/never understood. Observation of room [ROOM NUMBER], which R1 and R2 shared, on 07/24/23, revealed the Administrator took the temperature of the room with an air temperature thermometer, and the reading was 84.1 degrees Fahrenheit. During an interview on 07/24/23 at 5:20 PM, R1 stated, It is hot overnight and I sweat. Sometimes I can't sleep. During an interview on 07/24/23 at 5:21 PM, it was determined that R2 was non-interviewable. During an interview on 07/24/23 at 5:25 PM, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA)1 and CNA2 revealed some of the residents do complaint that it is too hot, mostly at night. During an interview on 07/24/23 at 6:18 PM, the Administrator stated, the resident's [R1] son was here visiting and threatened to call DHEC. I'll add another unit in there.
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

Safe Environment (Tag F0921)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, interviews, observations and review of facility policy, the facility failed to provide a safe, functiona...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, interviews, observations and review of facility policy, the facility failed to provide a safe, functional, and comfortable environment for 7 of 21 rooms located on Unit 2. Specifically, the facility failed to maintain resident room temperatures at a safe and comfortable level. Findings Include: Review of the facility policy titled, Safe and Homelike Environment with a revised date of 01/01/22, documented, In accordance with residents' rights, the facility will provide a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, . Definitions: Comfortable and safe temperature levels means that the ambient temperature should be in a relatively narrow range that minimizes residents' susceptibility to loss of body heat and risk of hypothermia/hyperthermia and is comfortable for the residents . Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines: 7. The facility will maintain comfortable and safe temperature levels. a. The facility should strive to keep the temperature in common resident areas between 71 and 81 degrees Fahrenheit. b. If and when a resident prefers his or her room temperature be kept below 71 degrees Fahrenheit, or above 81 degrees Fahrenheit, the facility will assess the safety of this practice on the resident and the resident's roommate. Observation, with the Administrator, of room temperatures on 07/21/23 at approximately 5:00 PM revealed the following temperature readings (the Administrator used an air thermometer to record these readings): room [ROOM NUMBER] - 82.3 room [ROOM NUMBER] - 81.4 room [ROOM NUMBER] - 84.4 room [ROOM NUMBER] - 81.2 room [ROOM NUMBER] - 84.1 room [ROOM NUMBER] - 82.3 room [ROOM NUMBER] - 84.7 During an interview on 07/21/23 at 1:28 PM, the Administrator revealed the HVAC unit has been out since about April. The Administrator stated, We are currently working with DHEC's Construction (CON) Department to get approval to replace the entire unit. We had to get our engineers involved. It is going to cost a little over one million dollars to replace the unit. We have purchased and rented portable air conditioning units in the meantime. During an interview on 07/24/23 at 5:25 PM, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA)1 and CNA2 revealed the residents do complain about it being too hot, mostly at night. The CNAs stated sometimes it is because the residents have unplugged the unit, or changed the settings, or closed the vent. During an interview on 07/24/23 at 6:18 PM, the Director of Nursing (DON) revealed staff are to keep the water pitchers filled up. They are constantly providing hydration. The DON further revealed that she has never heard any residents complaining about it being too hot. During an interview on 07/24/23 at 6:18 PM, the Administrator revealed, We are running eight industrial units and with all the portable units we are reaching our maximum power capacity, it's tripped fuses and we've had to go in and reset the breaker. The air conditioner broke down in the spring, we started the industrial units in April and the portable units in May. I submitted an application to DHEC's CON due to the cost or replacing the system. I am expecting this project to be completed sometime in September.
Jul 2021 3 deficiencies 2 Harm
SERIOUS (G)

Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures

Comprehensive Care Plan (Tag F0656)

A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, resident record review and review of the facility's policy, the facility failed to develop a pr...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, resident record review and review of the facility's policy, the facility failed to develop a pressure ulcer care plan in accordance with professional standard of quality for one (1) of 19 sampled residents. Resident #190 was assessed to be at risk for developing a pressure ulcer. On 7/16/21 the resident developed an unstageable right outer heel pressure ulcer. The facility failed to develop a care plan with interventions to prevent the development of a pressure ulcer. This standard is cited at harm level. The findings include: 1. Review of the facility's policy titled Comprehensive Care Plan date reviewed/revised 10/19/20 and implemented date 1/1/21 revealed, in part, the following documentation: the care plan is individualized, and resident centered. The compliance guidelines 1. The care plan development process will include a complete assessment of the resident's care needs. 2. The care plan will be developed in seven (7) days after the completion of comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment. All Care Assessment Areas (CAA) triggers are considered in developing the plan of care. 4. The comprehensive care plan will be reviewed and revised by the Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) after each comprehensive and quarterly MDS assessment. Resident #190 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses to include a chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), muscle weakness, bilateral asymptomatic varicose veins, and atherosclerotic heart disease (ASDH). The resident was admitted having a left lower leg venous ulcer. Review of Resident #190's Annual MDS dated [DATE], revealed the resident's Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) was assessed as six (6) indicating severely impaired cognition. The resident was assessed as having no demonstrated behaviors and requiring limited assistance of one (1) person with bed mobility and walking. Resident #190 required extensive assistance of one (1) with transfer, movement on the unit, dressing, and personal hygiene. The resident had no upper or lower extremity impairment with range of motion. The admission assessment revealed that the resident was at risk for pressure ulcers, the intervention treatments were implemented; pressure reducing device for chair and bed. Review of Resident #190's Pressure Care Area Assessment (CAA) dated 4/29/21 revealed the triggers indicating the resident was at risk for developing pressure ulcers. The resident required assistance with activities of daily living, limited assistance with bed mobility, frequent urinary incontinence. The CAA indicated the resident would be care plan for pressure ulcers. Review of Resident #190's most recent Quarterly MDS assessment was in progress dated for 7/26/21. Review of Resident #190's initial care dated 4/23/21 revealed the resident was at risk for developing a pressure ulcer. However, on 4/23/21 the pressure care plan was cancelled. Instead a left leg venous area care plan was initiated dated 4/23/21. The interventions were 1. Monitor for sign and symptoms of infection, failure to heal and maceration. 2. Measure and document measurement of each skin breakdown, type of exudate and notable changes. Review of the admission Braden Scale for Predicting Pressure Score Risk dated 4/23/, 4/30, 5/7, 7/13, 7/16/21 revealed Resident 190's Braden scale score was (15-17) on 4/23/21 indicating at risk for pressure ulcer. Review of Resident #190's facility's Skin Assessment dated 6/19, 6/26, 7/3, 7/10/21 revealed the resident's admitted with a left lower leg (rear) open area, which was vascular in nature and was treated according to the physician orders. Review on 7/16/21 of Resident #190's Pertinent Charting revealed a right outer heel pressure had developed and measured 1.7x1.2x2 centimeter (cm). The charting noted, tissue around the resident's heel pressure was intact. However, no documentation noted regarding drainage or the description of the pressure ulcer. The facility's implemented interventions were to apply heel boots to float heels. The charting indicated, physician and Responsible Party (RP) were notified. The physician ordered the right heel pressure, to be clean with wound cleanser, apply skin prep to wound edges, apply honey gauze, cover with ABD pad, and wrap with Kerlix. Review of Resident #190 Certified Nursing Assistant's (CNA) plan of care dated from 7/10/21 through 7/16/21 revealed the resident's skin was observed, with no identified open area until 7/16/21. On 7/16/21 the care plan identified; the resident's right outer heel had an open area. Further review of the CNA's care plan revealed no heel preventive intervention were noted. Review of the Event Recommendation Form dated 7/16/21 at 11:30 AM revealed a staff noted an area to Resident #190's right outer heel. The wound measurements (1.7x1.2.02) were obtained. The wound was described to be 100% necrotic. The surrounding wound tissue was without peeling, no odor noted. The resident denies pain. The facility obtained witness statements to include CNA #4 and LPN #4. During initial tour on 07/20/21 10:28 AM, Resident #190 was upright in recliner eyes closed, not easily aroused, oxygen at two (2) liters per nasal cannula. The resident was wearing appropriate clothing and bilateral heel boots. The mattress has a pressure reducing device to the bed and chair. On 7/21/21 at 9:45 AM revealed Resident #190 sitting upright in recliner, alert able to answer general questions appropriately. She/he was wearing appropriate clothing and bilateral heel boots. Further observation at 11:45 AM resident showed resident remained in the same position. Interview on 7/21/21 at 10:15 AM with CNA #3 revealed the resident is normally dressed, up in the recliner when s/he starts her/his day. Last cared for Resident #190 on 7/15/21; s/he revealed to her/his knowledge the resident had no skin concerns. S/he revealed CNAs are trained to report any skin concerns to the license nurse immediately. S/he confirmed the resident did not utilize heel boot prior to 7/16/21. Further stated the nurse will inform the CNA when new interventions are developed. Interview on 7/21/21 at 11:10 AM with CNA #4 revealed being knowledgeable of Resident #190's care needs. The CNA described the resident to have limited mobility and sat in recliner most of the day. The CNA recalled caring for Resident #190 on 7/16/21, when the resident requested a shower. The shower was completed, while drying off the resident complained of discomfort at the right outer heel. The CNA observed the right heel closer, to her/his surprise, the resident's right foot had a dark wound with seeping drainage. The CNA immediately notified the nurse. CNA #4 revealed the resident did not have heel protectors until after the wound was identified. Phone interview on 7/21/21 at 11:40 AM was conducted with License Practical Nurse (LPN) #4 revealed the facility trains the CNAs to report any skin concerns to a licensed nurse immediately. LPN #4 revealed the licensed staff assess and monitors residents' skin weekly for sign and symptoms of breakdown. The LPN further revealed when a skin breakdown is identified, the resident's care plan should be developed/updated with interventions. LPN #4 revealed the CNAs are responsible for monitoring skin during showers and anytime care is provided. The LPN revealed CNA#4 notified him/her of Resident #190's right outer heel pressure. S/he indicated the MDS Coordinator was responsible for developing the care plan. Phone interview was conducted with CNA #6 on 7/21/21 at 9:40-9:47 PM revealed the facility trained her/him to observe a resident skin during showers, and when ever care is being provided. The CNA was knowledgeable of Resident #190's care needs. S/he revealed the resident is usually up in the recliner, wearing a hard-sole shoe with the back heel open. Further stated the resident would sit up in the recliner with her/his right foot straight out. The CNA revealed the resident normally goes to bed around 6:30 PM. CNA#6 stated the resident had no specific skin care interventions to follow. Phone interview was conducted with RN #1 on 7/21/21at 9:48-9:55 PM revealed being responsible for Resident #190's weekly skin assessments. S/he revealed on 7/10/21 the resident's weekly skin assessment was intact. The nurse indicated the resident would sit in the recliner with heels dug into the floor. S/he revealed floating the heels even though it was not a care plan intervention. The RN revealed working night shift on 7/12 and 7/13 and was unaware of any skin concerns. Interview with the Wound Nurse on 7/22/21 at 11:20 AM revealed on 7/21/21 Resident #190's wound was assessed as right heel as un-stageable pressure (with sloughing and/or eschar). S/he indicated Resident #190's un-stageable heel pressure was a result from intense and/or prolonged pressure on the heel. The Wound Nurse revealed pressure interventions should have been developed. Phone interview was conducted on 7/22/21 at 2:42 PM with Resident #190's physician, he/she revealed the resident has vascular impairment. The physician revealed the resident was a heavy smoker and oxygen dependent. The physician indicated the right heel wound was a pressure ulcer. He/she indicated the pressure ulcer should heal with consistent treatment. An interview with the MDS Coordinator on 7/22/21 at 3:10 PM revealed the MDS Coordinators expectations are to develop, update, revise the care plan, participate in IDT meetings, capture and care plan resident care needs. The Coordinator revealed the initial pressure ulcer care plan was developed but cancelled when the vascular wound care plan was developed. S/he indicated along with the vascular care plan a pressure prevention care plan should have been implemented. In an interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 7/22/21 at 3:30 PM revealed being made aware of Resident #190's acquired pressure. S/he indicated immediate pressure prevention and skin assessment retraining were implemented. The DON indicated a pressure preventive care plan should have been developed. A phone interview was conducted with the family of Resident #190 on 7/22/21 at 6:25 PM revealing they visited the resident at least twice a week. He/she revealed the resident did not wear protected heel boots until after the pressure developed. The family voiced being very pleased with Resident #190's the care. Resident #190's family member was notified of the pressure and that it developed from the resident's shoe.
SERIOUS (G)

Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures

Pressure Ulcer Prevention (Tag F0686)

A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, resident record review and review of the facility's policy, the facility failed to ensure the r...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, resident record review and review of the facility's policy, the facility failed to ensure the resident received care to prevent development of a pressure ulcer for one (1) of 19 sampled residents. Resident #190 was discovered to have a skin breakdown on the right outer heel on 7/16/21. The facility failed to, monitor the resident's skin to prevent the development of an unstageable pressure ulcer. This standard is cited at harm level. The findings include: 1. Review of the facility's policy titled Pressure Injury Prevention and Management date reviewed/revised 1/30/20 revealed, in part, the following documentation: 'To prevent avoidable pressure injuries and the promotion of healing of existing pressure injuries.' The policy defines: Avoidable means that the resident developed a pressure ulcer/injury that the facility did not do one or more of the following: evaluate the resident's clinical condition and risk factors; define and implement interventions that are consistent with the resident's needs; goals, and professional standards of practice, monitor and evaluate the impact of the interventions; or revise the interventions as appropriate. 2. The policy compliance guidelines: 2. The facility will establish and utilize a systematic approach for pressure injury prevention and management. a. Licensed nurses will conduct a pressure injury risk assessment, using [NAME] or Braden tool on all residents upon admission/re-admission, weekly x4 weeks, then quarterly or whenever the resident's condition changes significantly. b. Licensed nurses will conduct a full body skin assessment on all residents upon admission/ re-admission, weekly, and after any newly identified pressure injury. Findings will be documented in the medical record. c. Assessments of pressure injuries will be performed by licensed nurse and documented in the medical record. d. Nursing assistants will inspect skin during bath and will report any concerns to the resident's nurse immediately after the task. 3. 4. Intervention for Prevention and to Promote Healing a. After completing a thorough assessment/evaluation, the interdisciplinary team shall develop a relevant care plan that includes measurable goals for revention and management of pressure injuries with appropriate interventions. b. Interventions will be based on specific factors identified in the risk assessment, skin assessment, and any pressure injury assessment (e.g. moisture management, impaired mobility, nutritional deficit, staging, wound characteristics). c. Evidence-based interventions for prevention will be implemented for all residents who are assessed at risk for pressure injury. Basic or routine care interventions could include, but are not limited to: (i) Redistribution of pressure (such as repositioning, protecting and/or offloading heels, etc) (ii) Minimize exposure to moisture and keep skin clean, especially of fecal contamination. (f.) Interventions will be documented in the care plan and communicated to all relevant staff. The National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel (NPUAP) defines an unstageable ulcer as, full thickness and tissue loss with exposed or directly palpable fascia, muscle, tendon, ligament, cartilage, or bone in the ulcer. Sloughing and/or eschar may be visible. If eschar or sloughing occur the extent of the tissue loss is an unstageable pressure injury. If the slough or eschar is removed a Stage III or Stage IV Pressure Ulcer will be revealed. Resident #190 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses to include a chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), muscle weakness, bilateral asymptomatic varicose veins, and atherosclerotic heart disease (ASDH). The resident admitted having a left lower leg venous ulcer. Review of Resident #190's Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], revealed the resident's Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) was assessed as six (6) indicating severely impaired cognition. The resident was assessed as having no demonstrated behaviors and requiring limited assistance of one (1) person with bed mobility and walking. Resident #190 required extensive assistance of one (1) with transfer, movement on the unit, dressing, and personal hygiene. The resident had no upper or lower extremity impairment with range of motion. The admission assessment revealed that the resident was at risk for pressure, the intervention treatments were implemented; pressure reducing device for chair and bed. Review of Resident #190's Pressure Care Area Assessment (CAA) dated 4/29/21 revealed the triggers indicating the resident was at risk for developing pressure ulcers. The resident required assistance with activities of daily living, limited assistance with bed mobility, frequent urinary incontinence. The CAA indicated the resident would be care plan for pressure ulcers. Review of Resident #190's most recent Quarterly MDS assessment was in progress dated for 7/26/21. Review of the admission Braden Scale for Predicting Pressure Score Risk dated 4/23, 4/30, 5/7, 7/13, 7/16/21 revealed Resident #190's Braden scale score was (15-17) indicating at risk for pressure. Review of Resident #190's facility's Skin Assessment dated 6/19, 6/26, 7/3, 7/10/21 revealed the resident's admitted with a left lower leg (rear) open area, which was vascular in nature and was treated according to the physician orders. Review on 7/16/21of Resident #190's Pertinent Charting revealed a right outer heel pressure ulcer had developed and measured 1.7x1.2x2 centimeter (cm). The charting noted, tissue around the resident's heel pressure ulcer was intact. However, no documentation noted regarding drainage or the description of the pressure ulcer. The facility's implemented interventions were applied heel boots to float heels. The charting indicated, physician and Responsible Party (RP) were notified. The physician ordered the right heel pressure ulcer, to be clean with wound cleanser, apply skin prep to wound edges, apply honey gauze, cover with ABD pad, and wrap with Kerlix. Review of Resident #190 Certified Nursing Assistant's (CNA) plan of care dated from 7/10/21 through 7/16/21 revealed the resident's skin was observed, with no identified open area until 7/16/21. On 7/16/21, the care plan identified; the resident's right outer heel had an open area. Review of the Event Recommendation Form dated 7/16/21 at 11:30 AM revealed a staff noted an area to Resident #190's right outer heel. The wound measurements (1.7x1.2.02) were obtained. The wound was described to be 100% necrotic. The surrounding wound tissue was without peeling, no odor noted. The resident denies pain. The facility obtained witness statements to include CNA #4 and LPN #4. Review of the physician orders revealed, in part, the following: 7/16/21 clean wound with wound cleanser, pat dry. Apply Honey gauze, skin barrier wipe to peri wound. Cover with ABD and wrap with Kerlix. 7/18/21 clean wound with wound cleanser, pat dry. Apply Honey Alginate, skin barrier wipe to peri wound. Cover with ABD and wrap with Kerlix. 7/18/21-7/25/21 Cephalexin Capsule (cap) 500mg one (1) cap by mouth four (4) times a day for infection/wound to back of left lower leg related to asymptomatic varicose veins of bilateral lower extremities x seven (7) days. Review of Physician Progress Note dated 7/18/21 revealed on 7/16/21 by license nursing staff messaged him that Resident #190 had developed a pressure sore on her/his heel and needed to be evaluated but did not appear to need debridement. During initial tour on 07/20/21 10:28 AM, Resident #190 was upright in recliner eyes closed, not easily aroused, oxygen at two (2) liters per nasal cannula. The resident was wearing appropriate clothing and bilateral heel boots. The mattress had a pressure reducing device to the bed and chair. On 7/21/21 at 9:45 AM revealed Resident #190 sitting upright in recliner, alert able to answer general questions appropriately. S/he was wearing appropriate clothing and bilateral heel boots. Further observation at 11:45 AM resident showed resident remained in the same position. On 7/21/21 at 1:15 PM observation was made of the Infection Preventionist (IP) and Director of Nursing (DON) assessing Resident #190's right outer heel pressure. DON removed the Kerlix wrap, small amount of serous drainage noted. The IP described right outer heel as being round and size of nickel, no odor, wound edges with eschar and wound bed has sloughing. Interview on 7/21/21 at 10:15 AM with Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #3 revealed the resident is normally dressed, up in the recliner when s/he starts her/his day. CNA #3 last cared for Resident #190 on 7/15/21 and revealed to her/his knowledge the resident had no skin concerns. S/he revealed CNAs are trained to report any skin concerns to the licensed nurse immediately. S/he confirmed the resident did not utilize heel boot prior to 7/16/21. Interview on 7/21/21 at 11:10 AM with CNA #4 described the resident to have limited mobility and sat in recliner most of the day. The CNA recalled caring for Resident #190 on 7/16/21, when the resident requested a shower. The shower was completed, while drying off, the resident s/he complained of discomfort at the right outer heel. The CNA observed the right heel closer, to her/his surprise, the resident's right foot had a dark wound with seeping drainage. The CNA immediately notified the nurse. CNA #4 revealed the resident did not have heel protector until after the wound was identify. Phone interview on 7/21/21 at 11:40 AM was conducted with License Practical Nurse (LPN) #4 revealed the facility trains the CNAs to report any skin concerns to the licensed nurse immediately. LPN #4 revealed the licensed staff assess and monitors residents' skin weekly for sign and symptoms of breakdown. The LPN further revealed when a skin breakdown is identified, the resident's care plan should be developed/updated with interventions. LPN #4 revealed the CNAs are responsible for monitoring skin during showers and anytime care is provided. The LPN indicated observing the unit, making frequent rounds, and communicating with CNAs is how s/he ensures resident's care needs are met. The LPN revealed CNA#4 notified her/him of Resident #190's right outer heel pressure. LPN #4 immediately assessed the resident, notified the physician, DON and responsible party. S/he described the right outer heel tissue as being dark in color, but the surrounding tissue was intact. The LPN revealed investigating as to why the foot ulcer occurred, and s/he concluded it was the resident's shoe. Phone interview was conducted with CNA #6 on 7/21/21 at 9:40-9:47 PM revealed the facility trained her/him to observe a resident skin during showers, and whenever care is being provided. The CNA was knowledgeable of Resident #190's care needs. S/he revealed the resident is usually up in the recliner, wearing a hard-sole shoe with the back heel open. Further stated the resident would sit up in the recliner with her/his right foot straight out. The CNA revealed the resident normally goes to bed around 6:30 PM. CNA#6 stated she/he had not cared for the resident for several days prior to the discovery of the foot ulcer. Phone interview was conducted with RN #1 on 7/21/21 at 9:48-9:55 PM revealed being responsible for Resident #190's weekly skin assessments. S/he revealed on 7/10/21 the resident's weekly skin assessment was intact. The nurse indicated the resident sits in recliner with heels dug into the floor. S/he revealed floating the heels even though it was not a care plan intervention. The RN revealed working night shift on 7/12 and 7/13 and was unaware of any skin concerns. Interview on 7/22/21 with Wound Nurse on 7/22/21 at 11:20 AM revealed on 7/21/21 Resident #190's wound was assessed as right heel as un-stageable pressure (with sloughing and/or eschar). S/he indicated Resident #190's un-stageable heel pressure was a result from intense and/or prolonged pressure on the heel. The Wound Nurse revealed pressure interventions should have been developed. Phone interview was conducted on 7/22/21 at 2:42 PM with Resident #190's physician, revealed the resident has vascular impairment. The physician revealed the resident was a heavy smoker and oxygen dependent. The physician indicated the right heel wound was a pressure ulcer. He/she indicated the pressure ulcer should heal with consistent treatment. In an interview with the MDS Coordinator on 7/22/21 at 3:10 PM revealed the MDS Coordinators expectations are to develop, update, revise the care plan, participate in IDT meetings, capture and care plan resident care needs. The Coordinator revealed the initial pressure care plan was developed but cancelled when the vascular wound care plan was developed. She/he indicated along with the vascular care plan a pressure prevention care plan should have been implemented. Interview with the DON on 7/22/21 at 3:30 PM revealed being made aware of Resident #190's acquired pressure. S/he indicated immediate pressure prevention and skin assessment retraining were implemented. The DON indicated a pressure preventive care plan should have been developed. Phone interview was conducted with the family of Resident #190 on 7/22/21 at 6:25 PM revealed visiting the resident at least twice a week. He/she revealed the resident did not wear protected heel boots until after the pressure developed. Resident #190's family member was notified of the pressure ulcer and that it developed from the resident's shoe.
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0698 (Tag F0698)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure ongoing monitoring of dialysis vasc...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure ongoing monitoring of dialysis vascular access and ensure ongoing communication with the dialysis center for two (2) of two (2) sampled residents (Resident #72 and Resident #78) reviewed for dialysis. Findings include: Review of the facility's titled Care Planning Special Needs - Dialysis reviewed/revised on 10/30/2020 and implemented on 1/1/21 revealed Policy: This facility will provide the necessary care and treatment, consistent with professional standards of practice, physician orders, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the resident's goals and preferences, to meet the special medical, nursing, mental and psychosocial needs of residents receiving dialysis. Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines: 3. Interventions will include, but not limited to: a. Documenting and monitoring of complications b. Pre- and post-weights c. Assessing, observing, and documenting care of access sites, as applicable 4. Nursing staff will provide a report to the dialysis provider regarding the resident's condition and treatment provisions each dialysis treatment day, and as needed. 5. If no written report is received upon return from dialysis, nursing staff will call the dialysis provider to receive a report . Review of Resident #72's clinical record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which include Malignant Neoplasm of the Lateral Wall of the Bladder, Dependence on Renal Dialysis, Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia without Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms and Chronic Kidney Disease Stage V. Review of admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #72's Brief Interview for Cognitive Score (BIMS) was 15 indicating the resident was cognitive in skills for daily decision-making. Resident #72 was assessed as requiring limited physical assistance of one (1) staff for bed mobility, dressing, toilet use and personal hygiene; extensive physical assistance of two (2) or more staff for transfers; and physical help limited to transfer only of two (2) or more staff for bathing. Resident #72 was assessed as always continent bladder and bowel. He/she was assessed as having no pressure ulcers and receiving dialysis while/while not a resident. Review of Care Plan initiated on 6/24/21 and revised on 7/2/21 revealed Focus: Resident #72 has hemodialysis related to CKD (Chronic Kidney Disease) Stage V. Goal: The resident will have no S/S (signs/symptoms) of complications from dialysis. Interventions: -do not draw blood or take B/P (blood pressure) in arm with graft. -receives dialysis at the (sic) dialysis center on Monday, Wednesday and Friday. Review of Resident #72's Physician's Orders revealed the following: 6/25/21 - resident has dialysis on M (Monday) - W (Wednesday) - F (Friday) at (sic) Kidney Center 7/12/21 - change dressing to cath (catheter) after shower every day shift every Mon (Monday), Wed (Wednesday) and Fri (Friday). Make sure resident has full tank of O2 (oxygen) before dialysis. Further review revealed no orders for monitoring of catheter site. 7/25/21 - Vital signs every shift. Review of Resident #72's Physician's Orders revealed no orders for monitoring of vascular access. Review of Resident #72's Nurses Notes from 6/24/21 to 7/21/21 revealed no documentation of ongoing monitoring and care of the resident vascular access (fistula, graft or central venous catheter). Review of Resident #72's June 2021 and July 2021 Medication Administration Records (MARs) revealed no documentation of ongoing monitoring of the resident's vascular access (fistula, graft or central venous catheter). Review of Resident #72's Dialysis Communicate Sheets from June 2021 to July 2021 revealed the following: 7/19/21 - dialysis section incomplete; no signature. 7/12/21 - dialysis section incomplete; no signature. 7/7/21 - dialysis section incomplete. 7/21/21 - dialysis section incomplete; no signature. 6/30/21 - dialysis section incomplete. No Dialysis Communication Sheets were found for 7/9/21, 7/14/21 and 7/19/21. Review of Pre- and Post-Dialysis Communication Record revealed documentation for 6/30/21, 7/5/21, 7/7/21, 7/12/21; no documentation noted for 6/28/21; 7/2/21; 7/14/21; 7/16/21; 7/19/21. Resident #78 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included Acute Systolic Congestive Heart Failure; Type two (2) Diabetes Mellitus without Complications; End-Stage Renal Disease; Dependence on Renal Dialysis; Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia without Lower Urinary Tract Infection; Polyneuropathy; Chronic Kidney Disease, Stage 3; and Vascular Dementia without Behavioral Disturbance. Review of Quarterly MDS dated [DATE] revealed Resident #78's Brief Interview for Mental Status score was seven (7) indicating the resident was moderately impaired in cognitive skills for daily decision-making. He/she was assessed as requiring supervision of one person for bed mobility, dressing, toilet use and personal hygiene, independent with supervision for eating and the physical help of one staff in part of bathing activity. He/she was assessed has having no range of motion limitations in the upper or lower extremities. He/she was assessed as occasionally incontinent of bladder and always continent of bowel. He/she received a scheduled pain medication regimen. He/she had no swallowing disorders and no significant weight loss/gain. Resident #78 was at risk for developing pressure ulcers but has no unhealed pressure ulcers. He/she received dialysis while a resident. Review of Care Plan initiated on 9/16/19 and revised on 4/29/20 revealed: Focus: Resident #78 needs dialysis r/t renal failure Goals: The resident will have immediate interventions should any s/sx of complications from dialysis occur through the review date. Target date: 9/9/21 The resident will have no S/S of complications from dialysis through the review date. Target date: 9/9/21 Interventions: - Vital signs per protocol. Notify MD of significant abnormalities. - check and change dressing daily at access site. Document. - diagnostic work as ordered. Report results to MD and follow-up as indicated. - do not draw blood or take B/P in arm with graft. - encourage resident to go for the scheduled dialysis appointments. - monitor for dry skin and apply lotion as needed. - monitor intake and output. - report to MD PRN for s/sx (signs/symptoms) of renal insufficiency: changes in level of consciousness, changes in skin turgor, oral mucosa, changes in heart and lung sounds. - report to MD PRN for s/sx of the following: bleeding, hemorrhage, bacteremia, septic shock. - report to MD PRN new/worsening peripheral edema. - report to MD s/sx of infection to access site: redness, swelling, warmth or drainage. - work with resident to relieve discomfort for side effects of the disease and treatment. (cramping, fatigue, headaches, itching, anemia, bone demineralization, body image change and role disruption.). Review of Resident #78's Physician's Orders revealed no orders for monitoring of vascular access. Further review revealed orders for monitoring vascular access added on 7/22/21 after Surveyor intervention. Review of Nurses Notes from November 2019 to July 2021 revealed: 3/5/21 - Nurses Note: heard resident yelling, looked down hall and noted resident coming down the hall bleeding from shunt. pressure was applied until bleeding stopped and new pressure dressing applied. resident stated it was bleeding through the dressing and then it came off. resident was assisted back to his room. voices no C/O (complaint of) at this time. NP (Nurse Practitioner) made aware 3/5/21 - Nurses Note: received return call from NP; new order for HGB (Hemoglobin) x 1, lab drawn from right hand x 1 stick; resident tolerated well. RP (Responsible Party) informed. 4/16/20 - Nurses Note: Return from Nephrology for fistulagram. Dressing clean and intact, no signs of bleeding. 3/30/20 - Nurses Note: Resident returned from Dialysis at 1545. No s/s (signs/symptoms) of pain or discomfort stated or noted. Dressing dry and intact. 1/24/20 - Nurses Note: Surgical site of left arm ( Fistula) checked Dressing noted intact with no drainage noted. Denied pain or discomfort. No documentation noted of ongoing monitoring and care of the resident's vascular access (fistula, graft, or central venous catheter). Review of Resident #78's June 2021 and July 2021 Medication Administration Records (MARs) revealed no documentation of ongoing monitoring of the resident's vascular access (fistula, graft or central venous catheter). Review of the facility's Pre- and Post- Dialysis Communication Records revealed no documentation for the following days: No Pre- or Post- Dialysis Communication Record for 7/19/21, 7/14/21, 7/9/21, 7/5/21, 6/25/21, 6/21/21, 6/18/21, 6/16/21, 6/11/21, 5/28/21, 5/26/21, 5/24/21, 5/19/21, 5/14/21, 5/5/21, 4/30/21, 4/26/21, 4/21/21, 4/12/21, 4/7/21, 3/26/21, 3/24/21, 3/10/21, 3/5/21, 3/1/21, 2/24/21, 2/19/21 No Post-Dialysis Communication Record for 6/9/21, 5/17/21, 5/7/21, 4/14/21, 3/22/21, 3/19/21 No Pre-Dialysis Communication Record for 6/7/21, 5/10/21. Review of the facility's Dialysis Communication Sheets revealed no documentation for the following days: 7/16/21, 7/9/21, 6/25/21, 6/23/21, 6/16/21, 6/14/21, 5/24/21, 5/21/21, 5/19/21, 5/5/21, 3/31/21, 3/17/21, 3/8/21, 2/24/21, 2/19/21, 2/3/21. Interview on 7/22/21 at 12:00 p.m., RN - Unit Manager #1 stated when a resident goes to dialysis, a Dialysis Communication Sheet is completed and sent with them. He/she stated the top section of the sheet is completed by the facility and the bottom should be filled out by the dialysis center. He/she stated most of the time, We are lucky if it returns back. He/she stated if the sheet does not come back with the resident or is not completed by the dialysis center, the nurses are to call and get the information. He/she stated, after the sheet is completed, the nurse is to go into Point Click Care and complete the Pre and Post Communication Record. He/she stated this should be done for each day the resident goes to dialysis. He/she stated as for daily care, the nurses should be monitoring the site and checking for thrills and bruits. He/she stated Resident #78 has a dialysis fistula and Resident #72 has a catheter. He/she stated the monitoring and checking should be documented on the MARS (Medication Administration Record. RN - Unit Manager #1 looked into Point Click Care for the documentation but was unable to find any. He/she stated he/she thought the night shift was responsible for monitoring and documenting regarding the residents' vascular access sites. Interview with the DON on 7/22/21 at 1:40 p.m. revealed the nurses should be monitoring the resident's vascular sites daily. He/she stated documentation should be done on what they found. He/she stated vital signs should be taken. He/she stated this is what s/he knows regarding taking care of dialysis fistulas and catheters. He/she stated he/she will in-service the nurses and develop a PIP (Performance Improvement Plan) regarding dialysis.
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Life-Threatening (Immediate Jeopardy)
J - Isolated K - Pattern L - Widespread
Actual Harm
G - Isolated H - Pattern I - Widespread
Potential for Harm
D - Isolated E - Pattern F - Widespread
No Harm (Minor)
A - Isolated B - Pattern C - Widespread

Questions to Ask on Your Visit

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

Our Honest Assessment

Strengths
  • • Licensed and certified facility. Meets minimum state requirements.
Concerns
  • • Multiple safety concerns identified: 1 life-threatening violation(s), 2 harm violation(s). Review inspection reports carefully.
  • • 7 deficiencies on record, including 1 critical (life-threatening) violation. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
  • • Grade C (56/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
Bottom line: Mixed indicators with Trust Score of 56/100. Visit in person and ask pointed questions.

About This Facility

What is J F Hawkins Nursing Home's CMS Rating?

CMS assigns J F Hawkins Nursing Home an overall rating of 4 out of 5 stars, which is considered above average nationally. Within South Carolina, this rating places the facility higher than 99% of the state's 100 nursing homes. This rating reflects solid performance across the metrics CMS uses to evaluate nursing home quality.

How is J F Hawkins Nursing Home Staffed?

CMS rates J F Hawkins Nursing Home's staffing level at 3 out of 5 stars, which is average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 45%, compared to the South Carolina average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.

What Have Inspectors Found at J F Hawkins Nursing Home?

State health inspectors documented 7 deficiencies at J F Hawkins Nursing Home during 2021 to 2025. These included: 1 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death), 2 that caused actual resident harm, and 4 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 J F Hawkins Nursing Home?

J F Hawkins 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 PRESTIGE ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 118 certified beds and approximately 114 residents (about 97% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in Newberry, South Carolina.

How Does J F Hawkins Nursing Home Compare to Other South Carolina Nursing Homes?

Compared to the 100 nursing homes in South Carolina, J F Hawkins Nursing Home's overall rating (4 stars) is above the state average of 2.9, staff turnover (45%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (4 stars) is above the national benchmark.

What Should Families Ask When Visiting J F Hawkins 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?" "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 J F Hawkins Nursing Home Safe?

Based on CMS inspection data, J F Hawkins Nursing Home 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 4-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 J F Hawkins Nursing Home Stick Around?

J F Hawkins Nursing Home has a staff turnover rate of 45%, 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 J F Hawkins Nursing Home Ever Fined?

J F Hawkins Nursing Home has been fined $8,021 across 1 penalty action. This is below the South Carolina average of $33,159. 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 J F Hawkins Nursing Home on Any Federal Watch List?

J F Hawkins 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.