CIBOLO CREEK

1440 RIVER RD, BOERNE, TX 78006 (830) 816-5095
Government - Hospital district 120 Beds Independent Data: November 2025 4 Immediate Jeopardy citations
Trust Grade
0/100
#674 of 1168 in TX
Last Inspection: September 2025

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

Overview

Cibolo Creek nursing home has received an F trust grade, indicating significant concerns about the facility's care and operations. Ranking #674 out of 1168 in Texas places it in the bottom half of all nursing homes in the state, while being #3 out of 6 in Kendall County means only two local options are worse. The facility is trending towards improvement, with issues decreasing from 11 in 2024 to 6 in 2025, but still faces challenges, including a concerning staff turnover rate of 69%, which is above the state average of 50%. While the nursing home has good RN coverage, surpassing 90% of Texas facilities, specific incidents have raised alarms, such as a resident being found unsupervised outside for 45 minutes and another resident not receiving timely medical attention when they were unresponsive. Although quality measures are rated 5 out of 5, the overall picture shows both strengths and serious weaknesses that families should carefully consider.

Trust Score
F
0/100
In Texas
#674/1168
Bottom 43%
Safety Record
High Risk
Review needed
Inspections
Getting Better
11 → 6 violations
Staff Stability
⚠ Watch
69% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
Penalties
⚠ Watch
$34,496 in fines. Higher than 79% of Texas facilities, suggesting repeated compliance issues.
Skilled Nurses
○ Average
Each resident gets 36 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — about average for Texas. RNs are the most trained staff who monitor for health changes.
Violations
⚠ Watch
28 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
★★☆☆☆
2.0
Overall Rating
★★★☆☆
3.0
Staff Levels
★★★★★
5.0
Care Quality
★☆☆☆☆
1.0
Inspection Score
Stable
2024: 11 issues
2025: 6 issues

The Good

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

Facility shows strength in quality measures, fire safety.

The Bad

2-Star Overall Rating

Below Texas average (2.8)

Below average - review inspection findings carefully

Staff Turnover: 69%

23pts above Texas avg (46%)

Frequent staff changes - ask about care continuity

Federal Fines: $34,496

Above median ($33,413)

Moderate penalties - review what triggered them

Staff turnover is elevated (69%)

21 points above Texas average of 48%

The Ugly 28 deficiencies on record

4 life-threatening
Sept 2025 6 deficiencies 1 IJ
CRITICAL (J)

Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation

Accident Prevention (Tag F0689)

Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the resident environment remains as free of ac...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the resident environment remains as free of accident hazards as is possible; and to ensure resident receives adequate supervision to prevent accidents for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #70) reviewed for accidents and hazards. The facility failed to ensure Resident #70 received adequate supervision when Resident #70 was missing on 8/28/2025 for approximately 45 minutes and found lying next to her wheelchair outdoors on an enclosed, outdoor patio. An IJ was identified on 9/3/2025. The IJ template was provided to the facility on 9/3/2025 at 12:10 PM. While the IJ was removed on 9/5/2025 at 10:09, the facility remained out of compliance at a scope of isolated and a severity level of no actual harm with potential for more than minimal harm that is not immediate jeopardy because the facility needed to evaluate the effectiveness of the new procedures and training. This failure could place residents at risk of inadequate supervision and monitoring leading to an environment that is not free of accidents/hazards. Findings included:Record review of Resident #70's face sheet (dated 9/02/2025) reflected an [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Relevant diagnoses included Alzheimer's Disease (a progressive neurological disorder affecting reasoning, memory, and cognitive skills), repeated falls, and unspecified dementia (a progressive neurological disorder that causes memory and cognitive decline). Record review of Resident #70's quarterly MDS (submitted 7/08/2025) reflected a BIMS score of 06, indicating moderately impaired cognition. This MDS also reflected in section E Resident #70 exhibited wandering behavior 0 days of the 14-day assessment period. Record review of Resident #70's comprehensive care plan (dated 8/28/2025) reflected the following:The resident is an elopement risk/wanderer r/t impaired safety awareness, resident wanders aimlessly (date initiated 8/28/2025)Record review of Resident #70's progress included the following documentation:This nurse went looking for resident with CNA in order to give her a scheduled shower. When staff was unable to locate resident, Code Green/Missing Resident was activated and all staff searched for resident whereabouts. Resident then was located by PT on an outside patio, lying by her wheelchair. Resident was assessed by nursing staff, hoyered into her wheelchair and taken inside to cool off, rehydrate and for further assessment [sic]. (8/28/2025 7:16 PM by RN A)This nurse was alerted by other staff that resident had been located by PT on a side patio, lying in front of her wheelchair. Resident was assessed for injuries by nursing staff, hoyered back into her wheelchair and taken indoors to cool off, rehydrate and for further assessment. No injuries noted, all notified [sic] (8/28/2025 7:24 PM by RN A)Record review of the facility's incidents log dated 9/2/2025 reflected an elopement incident for Resident #70 on 8/28/2025 at 2:30 PM. Record review of the facility's investigation report related to the elopement incident reflected an undated, typed statement from the Dietician that read as follows: I arrived at [the facility] at approximately 2:10 PM and checked in with the DON. I was in the DON's office for approximately 5-10 minutes. After checking in, I went to the private dining room and set down my belongings, then I went into the kitchen and checked in with the Dietary Manager. I was in the kitchen for approximately 5-10 minutes, and then I returned to the private dining room. There was an alarm going off at the door that connects the private dining room to the outdoor area. I looked through the glass door and did not see any person outside or anything that appeared out of the ordinary, then I disabled the alarm. This occurred prior to 2:28 PM when I sent an email to another Dietician who works for [company]. At approximately 3:30 PM, I became aware that staff was trying to locate a resident. I looked out the windows of the private dining room, and this time I observed a wheelchair outside. I informed a staff member that I saw a wheelchair outside of the private dining room, and that I thought there might be a resident outside in the wheelchair [sic]. In an observation on 9/2/2025 at 2:33 PM, the private dining area was observed to be closed to the main dining area and the hallway with unlocked doors. The exit alarm that is activated upon pushing the door handle was functioning, and the survey team initiated the alarm by pushing on the door handle for approximately 15 seconds, at which time the door lock released and the door opened. A continuous alarm then sounded. A secondary alarm was observed to be attached to the exit door but was not alarming. The survey team remained in the closed private dining area, and no staff responded to the alarm. At 2:38 PM, a surveyor exited the private dining area and observed the alarm was difficult to hear in the hallway through the closed doors of the private dining area due to environmental noise. At 2:41 PM, the survey team opened the doors to the private dining area, at which time the AD responded to the alarm. Resident #70 was interviewed on 9/2/2025 at 11:19 AM, but she was unable to recall the incident or participate in the interview in a meaningful way due to cognitive decline. In an interview with RN A on 9/2/2025 at 2:15 PM, she stated Resident #70 was discovered to be missing when the CNA attempted to give the resident her scheduled shower. She had not witnessed wandering or exit seeking behavior from Resident #70 prior to that day. She stated she did not hear a door alarm on the day Resident #70 was missing. She stated she activated the missing resident protocol and the resident was located by a physical therapist shortly after. She then assessed Resident #70 and found her to have a mild sunburn on her face and she provided the resident with a cool shower to decrease her body temperature. She then notified the physician, and the Admin. had notified Resident #70's family. She stated Resident #70 required no additional treatment. In an interview on 9/2/2025 at 2:43 PM, the DOR stated he was verbally notified by a staff member in the therapy gym that Resident #70 was missing. He located Resident #70 after being notified by an unknown staff member that a wheelchair was observed on the patio next to the private dining area. He stated the door alarm was not alerting when he entered the key code and exited the building. He stated Resident #70 was lying next to her wheelchair and using a sling for the mechanical lift to cover her face from the sun. She was awake and alert, and she told the DOR that her hands, head, and back felt hot. In an interview on 9/2/2025 at 3:00 PM, the Admin. stated Resident #70 left the facility unsupervised through the exit door in the private dining room, and the alarm had sounded but had been disabled by a visiting Dietician. She stated the outdoor patio area was not routinely used, and Resident #70 had not exhibited wandering behavior prior to the incident. She stated Resident #70 told staff she was attempting to get outside to view the horses in the stables located across the street from the facility and fell from her wheelchair but was uninjured. She stated Resident #70 was outside for approximately 30 minutes and after being located was put on observation every fifteen minutes by staff for 72 hours and then downgraded to observation every shift. She stated the facility had also added the secondary alarms to the doors on 9/2/2025 as she felt the existing alarms were too quiet, but she was unsure why the Maint. Dir. had not turned the alarms on. CNA B did not respond to an attempted interview via telephone call/voicemail on 9/3/2025 at 8:57 AM. An IJ was identified on 9/3/2025. The Administrator was notified of the IJ on 9/3/2025 at 12:31 PM and was given a copy of the IJ template and a POR was requested. The facility's POR for the IJ was accepted on 9/04/2025 at 8:06 AM and reflected the following:1. Identification of Residents Affected or Likely to be Affected: The facility took the following actions to address and prevent any additional residents from adverse outcomes. Started on 8/28/25 Completion Date: 9/3/25 Residents directly involved in this deficient practice had their care plan reviewed and updated by the DON or designee and updated to reflect current wandering and elopement risk, dehydration risk completed on all residents. The MDS Coordinator reviewed section E of the MDS and associated CAA for all residents. Care plans were reviewed and updated to ensure they reflect audit findings. Concerns were not identified. The DON, designee(s) and/or MDS Coordinator(s) re-evaluated residents at risk for wandering/elopement and dehydration using an elopement risk assessment tool and dehydration risk tool. Dietary Staff will ensure that there are hydration stations at the courtyard exits and rear patio exit to ensure any resident who wants to sit outside has access to hydration that is easily accessible. Any resident that requires supervision will be offered fluid during their supervised visitation outside as needed. All staff in-serviced on all shifts by in person or over the phone education on wandering, elopement, and resident safety, Accidents and Hazards and Hydration from the Administrator/ DON or designee(s). Any staff on leave will receive education on their next scheduled work day. On 8/29/25 facility purchased Stop Alarms for exit door to improve audible tone of dining room exit door. Alarms on exit doors at 8am on 9/2/25 and staff education was conducted on 9/2/25. Hydration carts have been implemented on 9/3/25 at 5:30pm.2. Actions to Prevent Occurrence/Recurrence: The facility took the following actions to prevent an adverse outcome from reoccurring. (Completion Date: 9/3/25) Elopement and wandering residents' policy and Accidents and Supervision and Hydration Policies were reviewed/revised by [NAME], RN. Administrator or Maintenance Director will conduct weekly alarm response drill to ensure timely response for 6 weeks. The DON or designee will audit new admissions for elopement risk and dehydration risk to ensure appropriate interventions are in place for 6 weeks. The DON or designee will audit completed MDS's to ensure the care plan reflects needs/concerns identified in the CAAs for At risk residents for elopement or dehydration. New hires and agency staff will receive education on wandering, elopement, and resident safety as well as Freedom from Accidents and Hazard and hydration by the Administrator or designee(s). Agency staff will be given access to point click care to view residents identified as requiring additional supervision as well the look at me now binder containing high risk residents. A Quality Assurance Performance Improvement (QAPI) Performance Improvement Project (PIP) was implemented to review and interpret all audit findings. All findings will be discussed at the monthly QAA meeting for a minimum of three months or until the pattern of compliance is maintained.Date Facility Asserts Likelihood for Serious Harm No Longer Exists: 9/3/25Action Plan to Ensure Relevant Recommendations Are Followed:Action/TaskPerson(s) AssignedDate CompletedReview/modify current policies as applicable to ensure appropriate procedures are in place to prevent harm/potential harm.[COO]9/3/25New policies written/implemented when applicable to ensure additional serious harm will be prevented.[COO]9/3/25Checklists and monitoring tools used to verify compliance.[Admin}9/3/25Educate necessary staff on facility procedures with return demonstration, where applicable.[COO, Admin, ADON]9/3/25Document PIP implementation, PIP progress, and QAA Committee Meeting Minutes where PIP is discussed.[Admin, COO]9/3/25 Verification of the facility's POR was as follows: Record review of a document dated 9/3/2025, reflected a signed statement from MDS RN and MDS LVN indicating care plans were updated for residents identified at risk following dehydration and elopement risk assessments.Record review of Resident #70's comprehensive care plan, dated 8/28/2025, reflected the following:The resident is an elopement risk/wanderer r/t impaired safety awareness, resident wanders aimlessly (dated 8/28/2025)Interventions: assess for fall risk, distract resident from wandering by offering pleasant diversions, structured activities, food, conversation, television, book. Resident prefers: (blank); document wandering behavior and attempted diversional interventions in behavior log, identify pattern of wandering: is wandering purposeful, aimless, or escapist? Is resident looking for something? Does it indicate the need for more exercise? Intervene as appropriate.Record review of a facility documented titled Dehydration Risk Evaluation report dated 9/3/2025 reflected risk for dehydration assessments were documented for 79 residents on 9/3/2025, and 56 of the assessed residents had scores indicating a risk for dehydration.Record review of a facility document titled Elopement Evaluation report dated 9/3/2025 reflected elopement/wandering risk assessments were documented for 79 residents on 9/3/2025, and 4 of the assessed residents had scores indicating a risk for elopement or wandering, including Resident #70. Record review of staff development/in-service attendance sheet dated 8/28/2025 reflected in-service topics of exit alarm response; check on residents every 30 minutes when outside; and review of policies: hydration, accidents/hazards, and elopement. Record review of an invoice dated 9/2/2025 reflected an online order for 7 secondary door alarms placed on 8/29/2025. Record review of the facility policies Hydration (undated, copyright 2023), Accidents and Supervision (undated, copyright 2024), and Elopement and Wandering Residents (undated, copyright 2025) reflected the policies were present at the facility. Record review of the facility document titled Action Plan dated 8/28/2025 signed by the Admin. and MD reflected the areas identified as requiring attention were: wandering/elopement, resident care plan review, MDS review of care plans and new admission risk assessment, hydration stations implementation, in-services, and stop alarms. Record review of document titled Action Plan Monitoring for Week 1 of 6 dated 8/29/2025 through 8/31/2025 reflected the following:The DON or designee will audit new admissions for elopement risk and ensure appropriate interventions are in place 5 days per week for 6 week with no issue identifiedThe DON or designee will audit completed MDS' to ensure the care plan reflects needs/concerns identified in the CAAs 5 days per week for 6 weeks with no issue identifiedRecord review of document titled Action Plan Monitoring for Week 2 of 6 dated 9/1/2025 through 9/7/2025 reflected the following: 9/3/2025 Active IJ change to plan of correctionRecord review of document titled Action Plan Monitoring for Week 1 of 6 dated 9/4/2025 through 9/7/2025 The DON or designee will audit new admissions for elopement risk and ensure appropriate interventions are in place 5 days per week for 6 weeks. 9/4/2025 no new admissionsNew hires will receive education on wandering, elopement, and resident safety and Accidents and Hazards by the DON, Director of Social Services, or designees on hire. 9/4/2025 new hire completedThe Admin. or Maint. Dir. will conduct weekly alarm response drills to ensure timely response for 6 weeks.Record review of the facility documented titled New Team Member Orientation Guide dated 1/5/2021 included education regarding the facility's Look at Me program to educate about residents with known elopement/wandering behaviors, as well as education regarding challenging behaviors, types of dementia, and fall prevention. In an observation on 9/4/2025 at 8:39 AM, ice water dispensers and disposable cups were observed in the central courtyard, the two indoor entrances to the courtyard, and the exit doors leading to the patio. In an observation on 9/5/2025 at 9:22 AM, the survey team activated the door alarm in the private dining area. Upon opening, the primary and secondary door alarms activated. 6 staff members responded to the alarm within 1 minute and commenced a search of the exterior area. Staff inside of the facility were observed performing a headcount of all residents. All residents were accounted for after comparing to census. In an observation on 9/4/2025 at 9:43 AM, a hydration cart was observed at the north nurse's station. In an observation on 9/4/2025 at 10:00 AM, a hydration cart was observed at the south nurse's station. In an interview on 9/4/2025 at 10:14 AM, the DM stated she put the hydration carts and stations in place on 9/3/2025 at 5:30 PM. In an observation on 9/4/2025 at 11:35 AM, Look at me Now binders were observed at both nurse's station and at the reception area. In an interview with RN F on 9/4/2025 at 11:35 AM, she stated the Look at Me Now binders were found at every nurse's station and contained information about residents who were identified as wandering/elopement risks. In an interview on 9/4/2025 at 2:54 PM, the MDS RN and MDS LVN stated they reviewed Section E of all residents' MDS to determine if any wandering behavior had been documented on residents, and they did not identify any concerns. They also stated they updated all care plans based on the risk assessments completed by the other nursing staff, to include ensuring access to water, monitoring for signs/symptoms of dehydration, redirection and distraction, and other personalized interventions. In an interview on 9/4/2025 at 3:12 PM, the DON stated all residents at the facility received dehydration and wandering/elopement risk assessments, and Resident #70 had an update to her care plan after the incident on 8/28/2025 to include interventions for the behaviors, as well as the other residents identified as risks for wandering. She stated quite a few residents were identified as at risk for dehydration, and all had their care plans updated to reflect interventions for the risk of dehydration. She reported sending a mass message to all staff employed by the facility summarizing the required in-services for the POR, and she notified them that they will receive the in-service before their next working shift. She stated she had staff at the time clocks performing in-services as staff members were clocking in for their shifts. She stated she had reviewed the relevant policies, and no edits or adjustments were needed. She stated she also will be reviewing the dehydration and elopement risk assessments for every new admission to ensure accuracy and completeness. In an interview on 9/4/2025 at 3:53 PM, the Admin. stated she would be performing a weekly drill on the door alarms and reporting the findings to the facility quality committee. She stated she would confirm verbally with the Maint. Dir. that he had performed the drill on the weeks in which he was assigned the task. She stated all new hires would receive training on wandering/elopement behaviors and resident safety as part of the new hire orientation. She stated the Weekly Audit checklist had been created by the facility to audit their compliance with their action plan and for review internally. 37 total staff members from all departments and shifts were interviewed on 9/4/2025 to ensure required trainings were received (responding to exit alarms, hydration of residents, wandering/elopement behaviors):Activity DirectorMA (morning shift: 1)CNA/Hospitality Aides/Aides in Training (morning shift: 4, evening shift: 4, overnight shift: 1, PRN: 1)Dietary staff (morning shift: 2, evening shift: 1, overnight shift: 1)Housekeeping (morning shift: 2)MDS RN/LVN (2)RN/LVN (morning shift: 3, evening shift: 3, extended shift: 2, overnight shift: 1)Therapy (full time staff: 3, PRN staff: 4)WC Nurse (1)While the IJ was removed on 9/5/2025 at 10:19 AM, the facility remained out of compliance at a scope of isolated and a severity level of no actual harm because the facility needed to evaluate the effectiveness of the POR and complete required staff training.
CONCERN (D)

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

Comprehensive Care Plan (Tag F0656)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview, observation, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a comprehensive care plan was reviewed and rev...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview, observation, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a comprehensive care plan was reviewed and revised by the interdisciplinary team after each assessment, including both the comprehensive and quarterly review assessments for 1 of 8 residents (Resident #9) reviewed for care plans. The facility failed to revise Resident #9's comprehensive care plan to reflect the resident's ADL self-care performance for transfers. These deficient practices could place residents at risk of receiving improper care.The findings were: Record review of Resident #9's admission record, dated 09/04/2025, reflected resident was a [AGE] year-old male initially admitted [DATE] and re admitted [DATE], with diagnoses to include dementia (loss of cognitive functioning that interferes with daily life and activities), muscle weakness, acquired absence of left leg above knee (04/01/2023), and acquired absence of right leg below knee (12/31/2018). Record review of Resident #9's quarterly MDS assessment, dated 08/22/2025, reflected resident had a BIMS score of 06 out of 15, indicating severely impaired cognition. It reflected Resident #9 was dependent (Helper does ALL of the effort. Resident does none of the effort to complete the activity. Or, the assistance of 2 or more helpers is required for the resident to complete the activity) for Chair/bed-to-chair transfer. It revealed Resident #9 had no falls since admission or prior assessment, whichever was more recent. Record review of Resident #9's comprehensive care plan, last review completed on 04/25/25, reflected [Resident #9] has an ADL self-care performance deficit r/t poor cognitive deficit, bil BKA, and decreased function, revised 05/11/2029. Record review of incident and accident report for the past 6 months reflected Resident #9 did not have any falls due to transfers. Observation on 09/02/2025 at 12:13 PM revealed Resident #9 with a sling for a mechanical lift. Attempted to interview Resident #9 but he did not answer any questions. Interview on 09/05/25 at 02:30 PM, RN AE revealed she reviewed care plans for transfers. She revealed things change and that was why care plans were important to get updated for resident care and to keep up with resident changes. She revealed Resident #9 got transferred with a mechanical lift and it should be care planned because it was how they cared for this resident. She revealed he had only one fall within the last year because he was trying to transfer himself from wheelchair to bed without using the call light. She revealed Resident #9 was educated to use the call light and now used the call light for help. Interview on 09/05/25 at 02:49 PM, CNA S revealed he used the Kardex (guidance in the electronic medical record for CNAs) for resident care. He revealed Resident #9 was transferred out of bed via a mechanical lift. Interview on 09/05/25 at 04:37 PM, MDS RN revealed Resident #9 was dependent in transfers per his MDS assessment. She revealed Resident #9 fluctuated from extensive assistance to dependent assistance, but Resident #9 was now dependent for transfers. Interview on 09/05/25 at 5:05 PM, the Interim DON revealed Resident #9's care plan should be updated to reflect he needed to be transferred by a mechanical lift, but sometimes things will change shift to shift with resident care. She revealed it was important for care plans to be updated to reflect the resident's current status. Record review of facility's policy Comprehensive Care Plans, dated 2025, reflected 3. The comprehensive care plan will describe, at a minimum, the following: a. The services that are to be furnished to attain or maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being. 5. The comprehensive care plan will be reviewed and revised by the interdisciplinary team after each comprehensive and quarterly MDS assessment.
CONCERN (E)

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

Abuse Prevention Policies (Tag F0607)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on interviews, and record reviews the facility failed to implement written policies and procedures that Prohibit and prevent abuse, neglect, and exploitation of residents and misappropriation of...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interviews, and record reviews the facility failed to implement written policies and procedures that Prohibit and prevent abuse, neglect, and exploitation of residents and misappropriation of resident property, by not screening staff annually for 3 of 7 staff (MA AG, FSM, AD) employed longer than 1 year in that: Medication Aide (MA AG did not have a current EMR/NAR. FSM did not have a current EMR/NAR. AD did not have a current EMR/NAR. The failure could place residents at risk of being abused, neglected, or exploited by unemployable staff. The finding were: Record review of the policy on Abuse/Neglect and Misappropriation, dated 2025 was documented, the policy of this facility to provide protections for the health, welfare and rights of each resident by developing and implementing written policies and procedures that prohibit and prevent abuse, neglect, exploitation and misappropriation of resident property. Screening, a. Potential employees will be screened for a history of abuse, neglect, exploitation, o misappropriation of resident property. 1. Background,. Checks shall be conducted on potential employees, contracted temporary staff, student affiliated with academic intuitions, volunteers, and consultants. 3. The facility will maintain documentation of proof that the screening occurred. Record review of personal file for MA AG was documented she was hired on 6/4/2012. Record review of MA AG was documented her last EMR/NAR was dated on 1/16/2024.Record review of personal file for FSM was documented she was hired on 2/18/2022. Record review of FSM was documented her last EMR/NAR was dated on 6/27/2024.Record review of personal file for AD was documented she was hired on 6/24/2019. Record review of AD was documented her last EMR/NAR was dated on 6/26/2024.Interview on 9/5/2025 at 1:20 PM with HR stated she ran the reports for all staff in May 2025, but did not have documented proof that staff MA AG, FSM and AD have a current EMR/NAR on their personnel files. Interview with HR stated she did run the EMR/NAR today and the staff showed no concerns for employment. No other response. Interview on 9/5/2025 at 2:46 PM with ADM states the HR was responsible for ensuring staff EMR/NAR were checked upon hire and annually. The importance of checking the EMR/NAR on staff was to ensure resident safety. No other response.
CONCERN (E)

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

Food Safety (Tag F0812)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food for 1 of 1 kitchen in accordance with professional standards for food service safe...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food for 1 of 1 kitchen in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. 1. The facility failed to maintain the temperature of walk-in refrigerator at or below 41 degrees F for the last 3 months2. The facility failed to take temperatures for the cold foods (to include milk for 09/05/25 breakfast and fresh fruit cups for 09/05/25 lunch). 3. The facility failed to ensure food products were labeled with discard dates. These failures could place residents at risk for food borne illness.The findings included:Record review of facility's Resource: Refrigerator/Freezer Temperature Log for the walk-in refrigerator, dated June 2025, reflected the following days had temperatures that were above 41 degrees Fahrenheit:(day: degrees Fahrenheit for morning and/or evening)2: morning 423: evening 434: morning 43 and evening 435: morning 437: morning 428: morning 429: evening 4211: morning 4312: morning 4214: morning 43 and evening 4315: evening 4316: morning 4317: morning 4318: morning 4219: morning 4222: morning 4224: morning 4325: morning 4226: morning 43 and evening 4228: morning 4329: morning 43 Record review of facility's Resource: Refrigerator/Freezer Temperature Log for the walk-in refrigerator, dated July 2025, reflected the following days had temperatures that were above 41 degrees Fahrenheit:(day: degrees Fahrenheit for morning and/or evening)1: evening 432: morning 423: morning 444: morning 426: morning 438: morning 429: morning 4311: morning 4212: morning 4313: morning 4314: morning 42 15: morning 4317: evening 4318: morning 43 and evening 4319: morning 43 and evening 4222: evening 4624: morning 4327: morning 43 and evening 4328: morning 42 and evening 4229: morning 43 and evening 4330: morning 43 and evening 4331 evening 43 Record review of facility's Resource: Refrigerator/Freezer Temperature Log for the walk-in refrigerator, dated August 2025, reflected the following days had temperatures that were above 41 degrees Fahrenheit:(day: degrees Fahrenheit for morning and/or evening)2: evening 444: morning 428: morning 439: morning 4210: morning 4311: evening 4213: morning 43 and evening 4214: morning 43 16: evening 4317: morning 4218: morning 42 and evening 4719: morning 43 20: evening 4324: morning 4325: morning 4227: morning 43 Record review of the Resource: Refrigerator/Freezer Temperature Log from June to July 2025 reflected no action was taken after the temperature was above 41 degrees Fahrenheit. Record review of temperature logs for 08/25-08/31 and 09/01 to 09/07, untitled and copyright 2023, reflected the temperature of milk for breakfast was not taken 08/25-08/31 to 09/01-09/03. Record review of the facility's infection surveillance for the last 3 months reflected there were no cases of foodborne illness in the facility. Observation on 09/01/25 at 10:01 AM reflected there were prepared foods that did not have discard dates on them, to include sliced cheese that was dated 08/25, chocolate pudding that was dated 09/02, [Peanut Butter and Jelly] sandwich dated 09/01/25. It was observed that the microwave had brownish stains and brownish particles to the right-hand side of the inside of the microwave. Interview on 09/02/2025 at 10:15 AM, DA AF and Dietary Manager (DM) revealed they sometimes put discard dates on food labels. DA AF revealed he knew to throw prepared food items after 3 days. He revealed if foods were not discarded on the correct date, then food can get spoiled. They revealed the walk-in refrigerator temperature had been fluctuating and they thought it was because the freezer door would not close all the way. They revealed the refrigerator walk-n refrigerator should not be above 41 degrees Fahrenheit. The Dietary Manager revealed she oversaw ensuring the temperatures in the kitchen were at an appropriate temperature. The DM revealed the only corrective action that was taken was the Maintenance Director coming to fix the freezer but was not doing anything else the meantime. DA AF and DM revealed the microwave they used has always been stained and looked dirty, but they insisted it was not dirty. They revealed if it was dirty, this could cause cross contamination. Combined interview on 09/03/25 at 10:04 AM, [NAME] G revealed he took the morning temperatures of the refrigerator at 06:30 AM. The DM revealed this was to capture the overnight temperature. The DM revealed the temperatures had not been consistent and she would notice some vegetables in the walk-in refrigerator would get frozen and then inedible so she would not cook with these when she was a cook and ensured these food products were thrown out. The DM had become a manager for about a month already. She revealed she did not know the temperatures nor took the temperatures because she worked in the evening. Interview on 09/03/25 at 10:26 AM, the Maintenance Director revealed he did not know about temperatures not being within their proper temperature range until yesterday. He revealed it was the kitchen's responsibility to let him know when kitchen equipment needed repair. He revealed he reviewed the temperature logs yesterday and all the temperatures were within the appropriate range that they needed to be (32 to 45 degrees Fahrenheit). He revealed this was the range for state regulations. Combined interview and observation on 09/03/25 at 11:18 AM, the DM revealed it was important for foods to be in the recommended temperature range to prevent foodborne illness. Observation reflected sour cream was on the line for lunch service and in a pan, on ice. [NAME] G took the temperature of this sour cream, and it was 42 degrees Fahrenheit and had to be put in the reach-in refrigerator to cool down to temperature (below 41 degrees Fahrenheit). [NAME] G revealed he had taken the sour cream out of the walk-in refrigerator about 10 minutes ago. The DM revealed she was in charge of educating the kitchen staff about policies and procedures and she oversaw these were being done, taking corrective action as needed. Interview and observation on 09/03/25 at 11:38 AM, the DM took the temperature of a tomato from the walk-in refrigerator. The walk-in refrigerator was observed to read 41 degrees Fahrenheit. The DM checked the temperature of a tomato, and it was 41 degrees Fahrenheit. The DM checked the temperature of Italian dressing, and it was at 42.6 degrees Fahrenheit, which the DM revealed could have been because they were preparing for lunch service and were going in and out of the walk-in refrigerator. The DM revealed when they served milk for meals, the temperature for the milk was not checked because they took it out of the refrigerator right before service so it would be within the range it needed to be. She revealed there was not corrective action taken for temperature above 41 degrees Fahrenheit because the walk-in refrigerator was not consistently over 41 degrees Fahrenheit, and it was never over 45 degrees. She revealed if either of these situations occurred, they would throw the food out. She revealed they also did not do corrective action when temperatures were above 41 degrees Fahrenheit because the walk-in refrigerator was in the process of getting fixed. The DM was not able to provide any proof of taking multiple temperatures to show the refrigerator was back within proper temperature range. Interview and observation on 09/03/2025 at 12 PM, the DM took the temperature of the sour cream being served for lunch because all the other kitchen staff were busy serving lunch. The temperature of the sour cream was 41.4 degrees. The DM took the temperature of the fruit cups that were being served for lunch service and they were 51 degrees Fahrenheit. She revealed they did not take the temperatures of the fruit cups prior to service because they did not have a sheet where they could document foods like desserts. Interview on 09/03/25 at 01:56 PM, the former Dietary Manager revealed the food temperatures were sometimes out of range. She revealed the maintenance director was told about this but could not remember a specific date and could not remember a specific date when the walk-in refrigerator was giving temperatures above 41 degrees Fahrenheit. She revealed she did not put in a maintenance request in for the refrigerator, but the Maintenance Director was aware. She revealed it was important for the walk-in refrigerator to be within an appropriate temperature so there was no spoiled food, rotten food, or cross contamination. She revealed the RD knew about this and could not remember if they said anything about the temperatures of the walk-in refrigerator. She further revealed the walk-in refrigerator was fine as long as it was below 45 degrees Fahrenheit. Interview on 09/03/25 at 03:41 PM, the Maintenance Director revealed he was not told about the temperatures in the walk-in refrigerator fluctuating. He revealed he contacted someone to inspect the walk-in refrigerator yesterday. He revealed it was found that there was a valve that was stuck in the condensing unit outside. He revealed this valve was moved and now there should be colder air blowing in the walk-in refrigerator to make the walk-in refrigerator cooler than what it was at. Interview on 09/09/25 at 1:11pm the RD revealed discard dates did not need to be put on food labels because it was not a part of their policy. She revealed kitchen staff knew to throw food products out after 3 days. She revealed she only knew there were walk-in refrigerator temperatures above 41 degrees Fahrenheit in the month of August. She revealed the corrective action that was taken was the maintenance director fixing this issue. She revealed there were no other corrective action. She revealed having foods at higher than recommended temperatures could cause food borne illnesses and food spoilage. Record review of the FDA Food Code 2022, U.S. Department of H&HS, revealed 3-501.16 Time/Temperature Control for Safety Food, Hot and Cold Holding. (A) Except during preparation, cooking, or cooling, or when time is used as the public health control as specified under S3-501.19, and except as specified under (B) and in (C) of this section, TIME/TEMPERATURE CONTROL FOR SAFETY FOOD shall be maintained: (2) At 5 C (41 F) or less. Record review of the FDA Food Code 2022, U.S. Department of H&HS, reflected, 3-501.17 Ready-to-Eat, Time/Temperature Control for Safety Food, Date Marking. (A) Except when PACKAGING FOOD using a REDUCED OXYGEN PACKAGING method as specified under S 3-502.12, and except as specified in (E) and (F) of this section, refrigerated, READY-TO-EAT, TIME/TEMPERATURE CONTROL FOR SAFETY FOOD prepared and held in a FOOD ESTABLISHMENT for more than 24 hours shall be clearly marked to indicate the date or day by which the FOOD shall be consumed on the PREMISES, sold, or discarded when held at a temperature of 5 C (41 F) or less for a maximum of 7 days. The day of preparation shall be counted as Day 1 Record review of the facility's policy Food Temperatures, dated 2013, reflected 2. All cold food items must be maintained and served at a temperature of 41 degrees Fahrenheit or below. Record review of the facility's policy General Food Preparation and Handling, dated 2013, reflected 1. The kitchen is kept neat and orderly. a. The kitchen and equipment are clean and sanitized as appropriate. The facility did not have any policy that reflected labeling food products with a discard date, as is reflected in the 2022 FDA Food Code.
CONCERN (E)

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

Medical Records (Tag F0842)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews, and record reviews the facility failed to ensure the medical records. In accordance with accepted professio...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews, and record reviews the facility failed to ensure the medical records. In accordance with accepted professional standards and practices, the facility must maintain medical records on each resident that are Complete; Accurately documented; Readily accessible; and systematically organized for 3 _of 16 (#20, #38, #5) residents reviewed for clinical records in that:1.Resident #20 did not have a current care plan conference meeting documented in her file. 2. Resident #38 did not have a current care plan conference meeting documented in her file. 3. The facility failed to ensure accurate documentation of Resident #5's July MAR per doctor's orders. These failures could place residents at risk of not receiving the care and services needed due to inaccurate or incomplete clinical records.The findings included: Record review of Resident #5's admission record, dated 09/05/2025, reflected resident was a [AGE] year-old male initially admitted [DATE] and re admitted [DATE], with diagnoses to include hypertension (high blood pressure) and congestive heart failure (the heart is unable to pump blood effectively). Record review of Resident #5's admission MDS assessment, dated 06/22/2025, reflected resident had a BIMS score of 14 out of 15, indicating intact cognition. Record review of Resident #5's comprehensive care plan, last review completed on 09/04/25, reflected “The resident has Congestive Heart Failure”, initiated 06/05/2025, with an intervention “Give cardiac medications as ordered.” Record review of doctor’s orders reflected “Furosemide Oral Tablet 20 MG Give 1 tablet by mouth one time a day for diuretic” with start date 06/05/2025 and “Spironolactone Oral Tablet 25 MG Give 1 tablet by mouth one time a day for diuretic…” with start date 06/05/2025. Record review of Resident #5's July MAR reflected DIURETICS-MONITOR FOR THE FOLLOWING: DECREASED PO INTAKE, ACUTE CONFUSION, AGITATION, DELUSIONS, AGGRESSION, LETHARGY, DECREASED SWEATING, TACHYCARDIA, HYPOTENSION, ORTHOSTASIS, GENERALIZED WEAKNESS, AND/OR SUNKEN EYES. every shift Document N if none of the above observed. Y if any of the above observed, notify physician and note findings in progress note, start date 06/04/2025. It further reflected RN AE documented 0 instead of N on 07/04/25 (2p-10p and 10p-6a), 07/05/25 (2p-10p and 10p-6a), 07/06/25 (2p-10p), 07/09/25 (2p-10p), 07/10/25 (2p-10p and 10p-6a), 07/11/25 (2p-10p), 07/12/25 (2p-10p), and 07/13/25 (2p-10p). Interview on 09/05/25 at 02:30 PM, RN AE revealed for Resident #5’s doctor’s orders for diuretics she should have put an “N” instead of a 0 as the doctor’s orders state. She revealed 0 meant no, and she did not have a good reason as to why she did this, and she should have followed the doctor’s orders. She revealed it was important to follow doctor’s orders for resident care. Interview on 09/05/25 at 5:05 PM, the Interim DON revealed in Resident #5’s July MAR nursing staff put a “0” instead of an “N”. She revealed the staff should put an “N” because it was the doctor’s orders. Record review of facility's policy, copyright 2024, Documentation in Medical Record reflected 4. Principles of documentation include, but are not limited to: b. Documentation shall be accurate, relevant, and complete, containing sufficient details about the resident's care and/or responses to care . 1.Record review of Resident #20s admission Record dated 9/5/2025 was documented she was admitted on [DATE], re-admitted on [DATE] with diagnosis of hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction affecting left non-dominant side, Heart Failure, Diabetes II, aphasia and hypertension. Record review of Resident #20's Quarterly MDS dated [DATE] was documented as cognition level was cognitively intact, she mobilized with a wheelchair, had upper/lower impairment on one side, she was set up assistance for eating, oral hygiene and dependent with toileting, upper/lower body dressing and footwear, she had aphasia, hemiplegia/hemiparesis, and cognitive communications deficit. Record review of Resident #20s care plan was dated 8/20/2020 was documented she was a risk for falls, dependent of staff for meeting emotional, intellectual, physical and social needs, she had ADL deficits related to history of occlusion and stenosis of right posterior cerebral artery, wasting atrophy, abnormal posture, unsteady, reduced mobility, and left sided hemiplegia, limited physical mobility, and refuses some showers due to not when she wants it. Record review of Resident #20s care plan conference was not documented on 11/5/2024. Record review of the Resident #20s Care Plan Conference meetings schedule provided by ADM/SW was documented, Resident #20s care plan conference meeting was 2/4/2025 and 5/6/2025. 2. Record review of Resident #38's admission Record dated 9/5/2025 was documented she was admitted on [DATE], re-admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses of osteoarthritis, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chronic kidney disease, mild cognitive impairment and unsteady on feet, Record review of Resident #38's Quarterly MDS dated [DATE] with cognition level was cognitively intact, she was able to mobilize with a walker, for ADLs she was independent with eating, oral hygiene, toileting hygiene, upper/lower body dressing, footwear and personal hygiene, she had mild cognitive impairment, and she was on pain management. Record review of Resident #38's Care Plan dated 6/4/2025 was documented she was a risk for infections, resident independent on staff for meeting emotional, intellectual, physical and social needs, her ADL self-care performance deficit related to fatigue, impaired balance, generalized weakness, she has a potential for communications problem related to mild hearing loss, and risk for falls. Record review of Resident #38s care plan conference was not documented on 5/23/2025. Record review of the Resident #20s Care Plan Conference meetings schedule provided by ADM/SW was documented, Resident #38s care plan conference meeting was 5/21/2025. Interview on 9/5/2020 at 12:02 PM with the ADM/SW stated there was a TEAM of managers that were involved in the resident care plan conference. ADM stated she was one of the staff responsible for resident care plan conferences and stated she did have a care plan conference for Resident #20 and #38 was not documented. The ADM/SW stated the importance was to identify captured all issues with resident and goals, and interventions for each resident. ADM/SW stated the care plane conferences to talk with families and educate with any concerns they have with resident care. ADM/SW stated the care plane conferences were for all staff to know everything about that resident. Record review of Resident #20’s admission Record dated 9/5/2025 was documented she was admitted on [DATE], re-admitted on [DATE] with diagnosis of hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction affecting left non-dominant side (neurological conditions that cause weakness or paralysis on one side of the body), Heart Failure (a condition where the heart muscle cannot pump blood effectively enough to meet the body's needs), Diabetes II ( a chronic condition where the body does not use insulin effectively or does not produce enough insulin to regulate blood sugar levels. ), aphasia language disorder that affects a person's ability to communicate.) and hypertension high blood pressure). Record review of Resident #20's Quarterly MDS dated [DATE] was documented as cognition level was cognitively intact, she mobilized with a wheelchair, had upper/lower impairment on one side, she was set up assistance for eating, oral hygiene and dependent with toileting, upper/lower body dressing and footwear, she had aphasia, hemiplegia/hemiparesis, and cognitive communications deficit. Record review of Resident #20’s care plan was dated 8/20/2020 was documented she was a risk for falls, dependent of staff for meeting emotional, intellectual, physical and social needs, she had ADL deficits related to history of occlusion and stenosis of right posterior cerebral artery, wasting atrophy, abnormal posture, unsteady, reduced mobility, and left sided hemiplegia, limited physical mobility, and refuses some showers due to not when she wants it. Record review of Resident #20s care plan conference was not documented on 11/5/2024. Record review of the Resident #20s Care Plan Conference meetings schedule provided by ADM/SW documented, Resident #20s care plan conference meeting was 2/4/2025 and 5/6/2025. 2. Record review of Resident #38's admission Record dated 9/5/2025 was documented she was admitted on [DATE], re-admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses of osteoarthritis (degenerative joint disease), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (a group of lung diseases that cause breathing difficulties), chronic kidney disease (kidneys gradually lose their ability to filter waste products and excess fluid from the blood, leading to long-term damage), mild cognitive impairment and unsteady on feet. Record review of Resident #38's Quarterly MDS dated [DATE] with cognition level was cognitively intact, she was able to mobilize with a walker, for ADLs she was independent with eating, oral hygiene, toileting hygiene, upper/lower body dressing, footwear and personal hygiene, she had mild cognitive impairment, and she was on pain management. Record review of Resident #38's Care Plan dated 6/4/2025 was documented she was a risk for infections, resident independent on staff for meeting emotional, intellectual, physical and social needs, her ADL self-care performance deficit related to fatigue, impaired balance, generalized weakness, she has a potential for communications problem related to mild hearing loss, and risk for falls. Record review of Resident #38s care plan conference was not documented on 5/23/2025. Record review of the Resident #20s Care Plan Conference meetings schedule provided by ADM/SW was documented, Resident #38s care plan conference meeting was 5/21/2025. Interview on 9/5/2020 at 12:02 PM the ADM/SW stated there was a TEAM of managers that were involved in the resident care plan conference. ADM stated she was one of the staff responsible for resident care plan conferences and stated she did have a care plan conference for Resident #20 and #38 that was not documented. The ADM/SW stated the importance was to identify captured all issues with resident and goals, and interventions for each resident. The ADM/SW stated the care plan conferences to talk with families and educate with any concerns they have with resident care. The ADM/SW stated the care plane conferences were for all staff to know everything about that resident. 3.
CONCERN (E)

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

Room Equipment (Tag F0908)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain all mechanical, electrical, and patient care equipment in safe operating condition for 1 of 1 walk-in refrigerators reviewed for e...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain all mechanical, electrical, and patient care equipment in safe operating condition for 1 of 1 walk-in refrigerators reviewed for essential equipment. The facility failed to ensure the walk-in refrigerator in the kitchen was functioning properly. This failure could place residents at risk for foodborne illness.The findings included:Record review of facility's Resource: Refrigerator/Freezer Temperature Log for the walk-in refrigerator, dated June 2025, reflected the following days had temperatures that were above 41 degrees Fahrenheit:(day: degrees Fahrenheit for morning and/or evening)2: morning 423: evening 434: morning 43 and evening 435: morning 437: morning 428: morning 429: evening 4211: morning 4312: morning 4214: morning 43 and evening 4315: evening 4316: morning 4317: morning 4318: morning 4219: morning 4222: morning 4224: morning 4325: morning 4226: morning 43 and evening 4228: morning 4329: morning 43 Record review of facility's Resource: Refrigerator/Freezer Temperature Log for the walk-in refrigerator, dated July 2025, reflected the following days had temperatures that were above 41 degrees Fahrenheit:(day: degrees Fahrenheit for morning and/or evening)1: evening 432: morning 423: morning 444: morning 426: morning 438: morning 429: morning 4311: morning 4212: morning 4313: morning 4314: morning 42 15: morning 4317: evening 4318: morning 43 and evening 4319: morning 43 and evening 4222: evening 4624: morning 4327: morning 43 and evening 4328: morning 42 and evening 4229: morning 43 and evening 4330: morning 43 and evening 4331 evening 43 Record review of facility's Resource: Refrigerator/Freezer Temperature Log for the walk-in refrigerator, dated August 2025, reflected the following days had temperatures that were above 41 degrees Fahrenheit:(day: degrees Fahrenheit for morning and/or evening)2: evening 444: morning 428: morning 439: morning 4210: morning 4311: evening 4213: morning 43 and evening 4214: morning 43 16: evening 4317: morning 4218: morning 42 and evening 4719: morning 43 20: evening 4324: morning 4325: morning 4227: morning 43 Interview on 09/02/2025 at 10:15 AM, the Dietary Manager (DM) revealed the walk-in refrigerator temperature had been fluctuating and they thought it was because the freezer door would not close all the way. They revealed the refrigerator walk-n refrigerator should not be above 41 degrees Fahrenheit. The Dietary Manager revealed she oversaw ensuring the temperatures in the kitchen were at an appropriate temperature. The DM revealed the only corrective action that was taken was the Maintenance Director coming to fix the freezer but was not doing anything else the meantime. Interview on 09/03/25 at 10:26 AM, the Maintenance Director revealed he did not know about temperatures not being within their proper temperature range until yesterday. He revealed it was the kitchen's duty to let him know if any kitchen equipment needed to be fixed. He revealed he reviewed the temperature logs yesterday and all the temperatures were within the appropriate range that they needed to be (32 to 45 degrees Fahrenheit). He revealed this was the range for state regulations. Interview on 09/03/25 at 01:56 PM, the former Dietary Manager revealed the food temperatures were sometimes out of range. She revealed the maintenance director was told about this but could not remember a specific date and could not remember a specific date when the walk-in refrigerator was giving temperatures above 41 degrees Fahrenheit. She revealed she did not put in a maintenance request in for the refrigerator, but the Maintenance Director was aware. She revealed it was important for the walk-in refrigerator to be within an appropriate temperature so there was no spoiled food, rotten food, or cross contamination. She revealed the RD knew about this and could not remember if they said anything about the temperatures of the walk-in refrigerator. She further revealed the walk-in refrigerator was fine as long as it was below 45 degrees Fahrenheit. Interview on 09/03/25 at 03:41 PM, the Maintenance Director revealed he was not told about the temperatures in the walk-in refrigerator fluctuating. He revealed he contacted someone to inspect the walk-in refrigerator. He revealed it was found that there was a valve that was stuck in the condensing unit outside. He revealed this valve was moved and now there should be colder air blowing in the walk-in refrigerator to make the walk-in refrigerator cooler than what it was at. Record review of the FDA Food Code 2022, U.S. Department of H&HS, revealed 3-501.16 Time/Temperature Control for Safety Food, Hot and Cold Holding. (A) Except during preparation, cooking, or cooling, or when time is used as the public health control as specified under S3-501.19, and except as specified under (B) and in (C) of this section, TIME/TEMPERATURE CONTROL FOR SAFETY FOOD shall be maintained: (2) At 5 C (41 F) or less.Record review of facility's policy, Personal Food Storage, dated 2013, reflected 4. Units must maintain safe internal temperatures in accordance with state and federal standards for safe food storage temperatures.
Nov 2024 6 deficiencies 3 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

Notification of Changes (Tag F0580)

Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review the facility failed to immediately consult with the resident's physician and notify, consis...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review the facility failed to immediately consult with the resident's physician and notify, consistent with his or her authority, the resident representative when there was a significant change in the resident's physical, mental, or psychosocial status in life-threatening conditions for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for change of condition, in that; The facility failed to notify Resident #1's physician and family on 11/18/2024 when she was found sleepier than usual or notify Resident #1's physician and the resident's family when the resident was found unresponsive and twitching with a significant alteration in mental status at approximately 5:00 a.m. on 11/19/2024 and was treated for altered mental status at the hospital. The noncompliance was identified as PNC. The IJ began on 11/18/2024 and ended on 11/19/2024. The facility had corrected the noncompliance before the survey began. This failure could place residents at risk for serious harm, permanent disability and/or death. The findings were: Record review of Resident #1's face sheet dated 11/20/2024 revealed an admission date of 10/15/2024 with diagnoses which included: displaced bimalleolar fracture of left lower leg (broken bone of the ankle), subsequent encounter for closed fracture with routine healing, complete rotator cuff tear or rupture of right shoulder (muscles and tendons which surround the shoulder joint), not specified as traumatic, depression, anxiety disorder and chronic pain syndrome. Record review of Resident #1's admission MDS dated [DATE] revealed she had a BIMs score of 15 which indicated she was cognitively intact and did not have any behaviors. The MDS assessment indicated the resident had a history of frequent pain that occasionally interfered with ADL's. Record review of Resident #1's Care Plan initiated on 10/16/2024 revealed the resident had chronic pain syndrome and was followed by a pain specialist with interventions which included: administer analgesics as per orders. Record review of Resident#1's nurse assessment documented by day shift staff on 11/18/2024 at 5:22 p.m. revealed Resident #1's pain level was assessed at 1 (pain scale of 0-10). The resident was alert and oriented, communicated verbally with clear speech and was neurologically intact. The assessment reflected Resident #1 had no unwanted behaviors witnessed. Record review of Resident #1's nurse progress notes documented by LVN A on 11/19/2024 at 5:55 a.m. revealed, 0530 (5:30 a.m.) walked into room .(Resident #1) lethargic, unable to fully arouse, garbled words incomprehensible. Informed the aid [sic] on the hall .will report to oncoming shift. Record review of Resident #1's medical record revealed there were no further progress notes or assessments to indicate Resident #1's physician or family was notified regarding Resident #1's sudden change in mental status from 11/18/2024-11/19/2024. Record review of Resident #1's hospital records dated 11/19/2024 revealed the resident presented to the ER with an altered mental status. Per EMS the patient (R1) was somnolent (sleepy) when she arrived with pinpoint pupils, some hypopnea (abnormally slow and shallow breathing which decreases the amount of oxygen in the blood), with oxygen saturation in the high 80's (normal 92-100); and they administered 2 mg Narcan IM and 2 mg Narcan IV (opioid reversal agent-a medication used to treat drug overdose) with some transient (only lasting a short time) improvement in mental status. Resident #1's hospital diagnoses was AMS (altered mental status) and hypoxemia (low blood oxygen). Record review of 3613-A Provider Investigative Report dated 11/19/2024 revealed on 7/19/2024 (incorrect date, actual date 11/19/2024), the facility was notified that a nurse (LVN A) found a patient (Resident #1) unresponsive at 5:30 am and called EMS at 6:30 a.m. The facility suspended LVN A for further investigation due to a delay in care. EMS arrived and administered Narcan, and Resident #1 was taken to a local ER and kept overnight for evaluation. Resident #1 was found to have medication at her bedside and hospital records revealed marijuana in her system. Record review of a typed statement from LVN B dated 11/19/2024 indicated at 6:25 a.m. as LVN B was coming onto shift, LVN A was sitting down at the nurse's station. LVN B stated LVN A stated Resident #1 was lethargic and non-arousable since 5 am (11/19/2024). A nurse aide (unknown) from the night shift stated to LVN B that it had been reported to LVN A since 11 p.m. the night before (11/18/2024). When LVN B questioned LVN A if Resident #1 was ever able to voice any response, LVN A stated that Resident #1 was non-arousable at 5 a.m. and that she had not assessed the patient from 11 p.m.- 5 a.m. LVN B questioned LVN A if she had notified the MD (physician) about any change in condition or the family since the patient's baseline was alert and oriented x 4 (cognitively intact). LVN B indicated LVN A responded no. LVN B stated he immediately ran to room to assess the patient along with NA C and CNA E while LVN A remained at the nurse's station. LVN B wrote Resident #1 was breathing but was not arousable, a sternal rub (firm rub to a patient's sternum is a painful stimulus to test a patients consciousness level) was performed with grunting as the response sternal rub and he assured 911 was called immediately. LVN B wrote he also immediately notified the Administrator and Regional RN, and also notified the physician and the family of Resident #1. Record review of a written statement dated 11/19/2024 by LVN A indicated at 5:30 a.m. on 11/19/2024 she entered Resident #1's room to see her right leg hanging off the bed. LVN A wrote Resident #1's eyes were closed, and her respirations were even and unlabored. LVN A called the name of Resident #1 (and her response was) squinting her eyes and garbled speech. LVN A wrote the aides were outside her room and she told them about Resident #1's behaviors. LVN A wrote she had the aides search Resident #1's room and they found a small plastic box with 5-6 round pills and 3 pieces of peach-colored pills. LVN A wrote at 5:45 a.m. she told another nurse (unknown name). LVN A documented a midsternal rub with a very strong facial grimace and vital signs of 101/84 (blood pressure), 55 (unclear if it was HR or RR) and 96% on room air (oxygen saturation) (it was unclear who took vitals or when they were taken). LVN A wrote at 6:15 a.m. she gave report to LVN B. LVN A wrote LVN B did not go into Resident #1's room or assist her, so she went back into Resident #1's room to attempt to arouse Resident #1 again. LVN A wrote she told Resident #1 Look! We need to go! Let's go now! She wrote Resident #1 sat on the edge of the bed but LVN A told Resident #1 to wait and put her back to bed. LVN A wrote she called the Administrator and told the Administrator maybe she would just call 911 to have them come shake her up a bit. LVN A wrote she did call 911 (unknown time). Record review of a written statement (undated) by NA E revealed they (aides) were doing rounds at 10:00 a.m. and they went into Resident #1's room and she was alert and awake. She documented she did not round on Resident #1 during the night. NA E wrote she was in a room across the hall changing another resident when LVN A busted in asking questions about Resident #1 telling the aides to go try and wake her (Resident #1) up. NA E wrote they (aides) went to the Resident #1's room and she was not really responding. She twitched a little and moved her lips. She wrote LVN A did not do vitals or anything until the morning nurse came in. NA E wrote LVN A found Resident #1 like that at 5:00 a.m. when LVN A was passing her medicine. NA E wrote Resident #1 never sat up or spoke when she was in the room. NA E wrote LVN A proceeded to do nothing for the resident and tried to blame them (aides). Record review of a written statement (undated) by NA F wrote at 5:00 a.m. (on 11/19/2024) NA E and NA F were changing another resident when LVN A came rushing in saying Resident #1 would not respond to her. She told them to go into the room and try to wake Resident #1 up. NA F wrote Resident #1 was unresponsive, but still breathing and they found a bag of pills on her bedside table which they gave to LVN A. NA F wrote she let LVN A do the rest and continued her rounds. During an interview on 11/20/2024 at 12:04 p.m., LVN B stated on 11/19/2024 at 6:25 a.m. he came onto duty. He stated night shift nurse LVN A was seated at the nurse's station trying to give him report when he arrived. LVN B stated LVN A said she noticed a change of condition for Resident #1 related to level of consciousness. LVN B stated LVN A said the aides told her about the change of condition at 11:00 p.m. when Resident #1 had visitors and was lethargic. LVN B stated LVN A told him she assessed Resident #1 at 11:00 p.m. (11/18/2024) and found her lethargic but she did not notify anyone and did not notify the doctor. LVN B stated LVN A told him she went into Resident #1's room at 5:00 a.m. to assess the resident and she was not arousable. LVN B stated he questioned LVN A to see if she had notified the physician or transferred the resident to the hospital since Resident #1 was normally A/O x 4 (alert and oriented x 4 which indicated she was cognitively intact). LVN B stated LVN A said she had not notified anyone. LVN B stated as soon as he heard LVN A say that he ran directly to Resident #1's room. He stated he had not yet clocked into work, but he was concerned since LVN A did not seem to know what was going on. LVN B stated LVN A said she thought it might be medication related since the night aides found medication in Resident #1's room. LVN B stated he was alarmed. He stated he had two aides (unknown names) go with him. He stated when he saw Resident #1, he knew immediately something was wrong. He stated Resident #1 was very lethargic and was not able to verbalize anything. He stated she was just grunting. He stated she was breathing, and he obtained vital signs which were stable. He stated he made sure someone stayed with Resident #1 because he knew she needed to go to the hospital. LVN B stated he went to find LVN A and told her to call 911, which she did. He stated he went back to Resident #1's bedside, but LVN A went to her medication cart/ LVN A stated he notified Resident #1's physician and her family. LVN A stated he told the physician Resident #1 was minimally responsive and that EMS had been activated. He stated the physician's response was that a hospital evaluation was appropriate. During an interview on 11/20/2024 at 12:25 p.m. NA C stated on 11/19/2024 at 6:06 a.m. she arrived at the facility for her morning shift. She stated CNA D had approached her and stated she had it up to here with LVN A. NA C stated CNA D stated the LVN A was not listening to her and there was concern for Resident #1. NA C stated she clocked in and went straight to Resident #1's room to check on her. She stated Resident #1 was not responding to her voice. She stated she saw Resident #1 lying on her back with one arm on her chest. NA C stated Resident #1 was twitching. She stated at first, she saw just her lip twitching and then noted that her fingers and her toes were also twitching, and she would not respond. NA C stated she went to LVN A and asked her what was wrong with Resident #1. NA C stated LVN A responded that she had already checked on Resident #1. NA C stated she told LVN A that Resident #1 was not acting normal to which she did not get a response. NA C stated she (NA C) could at least get Resident #1's vitals since she was not acting right. NA C stated she obtained the vitals and saw LVN A talking to LVN B at the nurse's station. NA C stated LVN A was giving LVN B an update on what was going on. NA C stated LVN B was asking LVN A if she had checked on Resident #1 or if she took vitals. NA C stated she showed LVN B the vitals she just took which included an oxygen saturation of 87% (normal 92-100%). NA C stated LVN B ran into Resident #1's room and stated, She is not okay. NA C stated at approximately. 6:30 a.m., LVN B was telling LVN A she was not normal and to call 911. NA C stated LVN B asked LVN A Why did you wait?. NA C stated LVN A did not seemed concerned at all. NA C stated LVN A lied and said she just came out of the room and Resident #1 was sitting on the edge of the bed. NA C stated she walked into the room to see for herself, and Resident #1 had not moved. She was still not responsive and twitching. NA C stated CNA D was with her and also saw what was occurring. NA C stated she asked LVN A why she was lying. She stated LVN A responded that she had a rough day. NA C stated she could not do anything else for Resident #1 because she was just a nurse aide in training, but she stayed with the resident and saw when EMS got there. NA C stated Resident #1 was still unresponsive when she left the facility with EMS. During an interview on 11/20/2024 at 12:52 p.m., CNA D stated she overheard LVN A talking about how Resident #1 was not doing well. CNA D stated LVN A was telling LVN B that she was having issues with Resident #1, and she was not alert. CNA D stated she went to look at the resident to see if she could help. She stated Resident #1 was in bed and she looked asleep. She stated LVN A went into the room with her and was trying to wake up Resident #1. CNA D stated LVN A was lifting Resident #1's eye lids, was giving her a chest rub and was trying to get vitals. CNA D stated Resident #1 was not responding and did not respond to the chest k rub. CNA D stated she thought the chest rub was very aggressive. CNA D stated she was not sure what the vitals were, but another nurse (unknown name) said the blood pressure was not a normal reading. CNA D stated the next thing she knew LVN A was calling EMS, but LVN A was not happy about it and said the same thing had happened to the resident three times last week. CNA D stated LVN A said Resident #1 was a druggy and knew her limits. She stated she had never seen Resident #1 in any other way. CNA D stated LVN A called 911 on the phone and asked if they would come rough house the resident to wake her up. CNA D stated LVN A was neglectful and was not making Resident #1's needs a priority and making it like it was a bother rather than addressing her change of condition. During an interview on 11/20/2024 at 1:06 p.m. NA F stated she worked the overnight shift on 11/18/2024-11/19/2024. She stated she was doing rounds with NA E at approximately 11:00 p.m. and she saw Resident #1 who was normally oriented was up and moving around. NA F stated at 5:00 a.m. they were across the hall when LVN A asked, What happened to Resident #1? NA F stated they said they did not know but LVN A told them to try to help wake Resident #1 up. NA F stated Resident #1 was breathing but was not responsive. She stated she was saying her name really loud, and they were pushing on her and shaking her, but it was not working. NA F stated they found a bag of pills in the room. NA F stated at approximately 5:30 a.m. she told LVN A she should probably call 911 since Resident #1 was unresponsive. NA F stated LVN A said, Well she is a drug addict, so it doesn't matter. NA F stated LVN A then went back to the nurse's station and did not really acknowledge the situation. NA F stated they (aides) stayed with Resident #1. She stated a while later LVN B came in and assessed Resident #1 and called 911. She stated when she saw LVN B he went right into work mode. He immediately went into Resident #1's room, assessed her and took vital signs. NA F stated Resident #1 was still unresponsive, but LVN B got her help right away. She stated the ambulance came about 5 minutes later but the aides stayed with Resident #1 to make sure she did not stop breathing. NA F described Resident #1 as pale but not blue and looking like she was sleeping but would not wake up. NA F stated LVN A's actions and words were very inappropriate. During an interview on 11/20/2024 at 1:37 p.m., NA E stated she worked 10 p.m.- 6 am shift on 11/18/2024. She stated she last saw Resident #1 well at 11:10 p.m. when she brought her an ice pack for her leg. NA E stated she was acting like her normal self. NA E stated at 5:00 a.m., LVN A said Resident #1 was not waking up and she was trying to give her medications. NA E stated she did not know why LVN A was relying on the aides to do something about it when she was the nurse. NA E stated she went into Resident #1's room and tried to wake her up. She stated she tried calling her name, tapping her shoulder, and giving her a chest rub. NA E stated Resident #1 moved her mouth a little, like a twitch. She stated her legs twitched also and she wouldn't wake up. NA E stated Resident #1 never opened her eyes or responded in any verbal way. NA E stated she then left the room because she had other residents to attend to. NA E stated LVN A was frantic, like she did not know what to do and she was relying on the aides. NA E stated she had them search the room with flashlights and they found a small clear case with multiple pills in it which they gave to LVN A. NA E stated the whole time Resident #1 was unconscious and LVN A was not providing care, she did not take vitals, nothing. NA E stated LVN A then went and sat at the nurse's station. NA E stated the aides were lost and did not know what to do but it seemed like LVN A did not care. NA E stated when the next shift arrived, they took over and asked LVN A if she had called the doctor or called 911 and LVN A said no she did not. NA E stated LVN A admitted she did not notify the doctor or 911. NA E stated the aides were all very stressed out. She stated they were trained to notify the nurse which they did. NA E stated they had thought about calling 911 themselves but did not want to get in trouble. She stated she was trained to tell the Administrator because she was the abuse coordinator, but she couldn't think so she called the on-call person who said she would call the Administrator. During an interview on 11/20/2024 at 2:56 p.m., LVN A stated she had been a nurse for 33 years. She stated on the night of 11/18/2024 around approximately 11:00 p.m. she noted that Resident #1 was drowsier than normal but was otherwise alert and oriented. LVN A stated she couldn't remember a lot of about that night, just that she was in bed, that she did not say a lot, but she was resting quietly. LVN A stated on 11/19/2024 at 5:30 a.m. she went into Resident #1's room to give scheduled morphine and noted the resident's right leg hanging off the bed with her head of bed at 45 degrees and her head to the side. LVN A stated Resident #1 was sleeping. She stated she tried to wake Resident #1 up and noted she was hard to wake up. LVN A stated Resident #1 opened her eyes a little and was trying to talk but she could not understand her. LVN A stated she thought Oh my gosh. She stated the aides were just outside the room in the hallway. She stated she couldn't remember who the aides were but there were two of them and she wanted them to come inside the room because Resident #1 would not wake up. LVN A stated Resident #1 was drug seeking so she started searching her room and found 5-6 pills. LVN A stated at 5:45 a.m. she told another nurse (name unknown) that Resident #1 was unresponsive, but that nurse didn't get off her chair or try to help her. LVN A stated she grew up where nurses helped nurses, and they all worked together. She stated LVN B was coming in to relieve her from night shift. LVN A stated LVN B did not go into Resident #1's room one time. She stated she was so upset because no one who worked at the facility, no one helped her. LVN A stated she worked her butt off all night long and she was tired. LVN A stated Resident #1 was not unresponsive. She stated she opened her eyes and garbled something. LVN A stated she kept going in and out of the room and noted Resident #1 gave a big grimace with a sternal rub. LVN A stated when she saw the big grimace she thought Oh God, she is okay and it was the end of her shift, and she was tired. LVN A stated she did not know who to call. She stated the ADON was on vacation and the DON had walked out of the facility. LVN A stated another nurse (name unknown) gave her the phone number for the Administrator, so she called her and told her they needed to discharge Resident #1 from the facility because she was not following the rules. LVN A stated the Administrator did not tell her what to do or give her any idea what to do. LVN A stated she had 35 people to take care of and it was very stressful. LVN A stated after she got off the phone with the Administrator, she called 911 because she thought maybe they could shake her up. LVN A stated she was upset because the Administrator thought she was slow to react, so she found herself suspended. LVN A stated she did not notify Resident #1's physician about her change of condition. She stated she did not notify the physician because she was collecting information, searching her room, and looking up her medication. She stated she also did not call because she thought Resident #1 was going to be okay. She stated she was just gathering information and waiting for the next shift to take over because she herself was tired. LVN A stated was trained to assess, document the assessment, gather information and probably call the doctor for a resident change of condition. LVN A stated she did not know why she deviated from how she was trained other than she was pretty tired and had worked her butt off. She stated, We are all human, right .I was tired. When asked if she was fit for duty if she was too tired to complete her nursing duties, she stated Yes . During an interview on 11/20/2024 at 3:40 p.m., the Corporate RN (VP of Clinical Services) stated the DON left the position approximately 1 month ago and she was monitoring the facility as the RN since that time. The Corporate RN stated one of the ADON's was also an RN and was assisting. The Corporate RN stated on 11/19/2024 she was traveling to the facility and was almost there when she received a call at 7:03 a.m. from LVN B. She stated she called the Administrator and EMS was arriving. The Corporate RN stated she interviewed LVN A who told her she had given pills to Resident #1 at 11:00 p.m. (11/18/2024) and then went in at 5:00 a.m. (11/19/2024) and found the resident lethargic, reporting she did not round on the resident during the night because Resident #1 did not like it. The Corporate RN stated LVN A said she did a sternal rub on Resident #1, who grimaced and then sat up on the side of the bed. LVN A reported that she had NA E and NA F check on the resident. The Corporate RN stated LVN A said she had not made notifications and that she gave report to oncoming nurse LVN B. The Corporate RN stated she interviewed LVN B who stated he assessed Resident #1 and told LVN A to call 911. The Corporate RN stated she interviewed NA E and NA F who both said they told LVN A around 5:00 a.m. Resident #1 was lethargic and nothing was done. The Corporate RN stated the facility then reported it to HHSC because there was a delay in care to Resident #1. She stated there was a delay in providing interventions, in alerting EMS and in notifying the physician . The Corporate RN stated after she interviewed the staff, she did not believe LVN A's account of events was accurate. The Corporate RN stated after notifying HHSC of the event she facility began immediately correcting on 11/19/2024. She stated they had: 1. Immediately started staff in-services on abuse/neglect, medication orders, medication administration, opioid overdose management, responding to suspected overdose, how to use Narcan, no medications at bedside, self-administration of medications assessment in which the IDT had to determine if the resident was safe to self-administer, notifications of change of condition, and PRN medications to all staff that were working and had placed a notice on the time clock preventing any staff from clocking in until they had been in-serviced. She said this was completed immediately on 11/19/2024 and had been top priority 2. The Corporate RN stated a notice had been posted at the time clock and no staff would be allowed to clock in until the in-services had been completed. She stated at the time of this interview all staff had been educated. She stated this was prior to surveyor arrival on 11/19/2024. 3. The Corporate RN stated the facility completed a 100% assessment audit on residents assuring any change of condition was addressed before surveyor arrival on 11/19/2024. 4. The Corporate RN stated the facility completed a 100% audit of medical records to ensure any change of condition had notifications of physicians and families documented. She stated no new change of conditions were identified. She stated this was completed prior to surveyor arrival on 11/19/2024. 5. The Corporate RN stated a 100% rounding of medication carts/medication records was completed on 11/19/2024 before surveyor arrival and another was completed on 11/20/2024 to ensure there were no medication discrepancies. 6. The Corporate RN stated a text alert was sent to all family members that all medications needed to go to the nurses she stated this occurred prior to the 11/19/2024 incident when they first learned Resident #1 was bringing medication by way of visitors into the facility. 7. The Corporate RN stated QA/PIP tools were put in place to include notification of physician for change of condition with actions to address included. She stated this was completed on 11/19/2024 prior to surveyor arrival. 8. The Corporate RN stated the facility notified the Medical Director of the incident and the facility's plan to correct. She stated this occurred on 11/19/2024 before surveyor arrival. 9. The Corporate RN stated LVN A was immediately suspended, and they planned to terminate her employment and refer her nurses license as soon as the investigation was complete. She stated this was completed on 11/19/2024 as soon as LVN A completed her written statement of events and she had been interviewed prior to surveyor arrival. 10. The Corporate RN stated they reviewed facility's policies and ensured they were put out for staff to review. She stated this was completed on 11/19/2024 prior to surveyor arrival. During an interview on 11/20/2024 at 4:14 p.m., the Administrator stated on 11/19/2024 she received a call from the Corporate RN about Resident #1, a suspected overdose and that EMS was on their way to the facility to pick up the resident. She stated she told the Corporate RN to interview staff and find out what was going on. The Administrator stated then LVN A called her. She stated LVN A told her it was a suspected overdose, and that EMS was at the facility because she could not get Resident #1 back to baseline. The Administrator stated she arrived at the facility on 11/19/2024 at 8:15 a.m. at which time interviews were completed and staff in-services had already been started. The Administrator stated based on staff interviews they felt there had been a delay in care and that LVN A did not act promptly so they immediately self-reported to HHSC. The Administrator stated the Corporate RN and herself immediately in-serviced staff in the facility to ensure they were aware and in compliance with facility policy for notification. She stated they worked diligently to correct the error on the morning on 11/19/2024. She stated the Corporate RN had completed the corrections prior to surveyor arrival. The Administrator stated the staff were all pretty upset so she checked on the staff. The Administrator stated she was not a medical person and was not certain what caused Resident #1's change of condition, but she did feel LVN A was neglectful of Resident #1. The Administrator stated she had been trying unsuccessfully to reach LVN A so she could terminate her employment and refer her license. The Administrator stated she had reviewed the facility surveillance video and based on that review there were some non-truths to LVN A's story. The Administrator stated LVN A had poor judgement of character. The Administrator stated she supervised her staff by ensuring monthly in-service training. She stated in meetings they talked a lot of about the facility culture, specifically related to treating people with kindness, acting on kindness and quality of care. She stated the team did a really good job in communicating with the team. She stated she was available 24/7. She stated her number was posted everywhere throughout the facility including by the time clock and on the main bulletin board of the facility and had been posted there prior to this incident. During an interview on 11/20/2024 at 5:34 p.m., Resident #1 stated she could not remember what happened on 11/18/2024-11/19/2024. She stated she normally went to bed around 10:00 p.m. She stated on 11/18/2024 she remembered lying in bed and trying to look at her phone, but her hands were shaking so bad she could not look at it. She stated she did not tell anyone at the facility that was occurring and did not ask for help. She stated she just thought it would diminish on its own and she would check on the shaking in the morning. She stated the next thing she remembered was waking up in the hospital. During an interview on 11/22/2024 at 11:20 a.m., the Corporate RN stated LVN A had completed nurse competencies upon hire in April 2024, although she was not part of the corporation at that time and did not participate in that assessment. She stated the competencies included change of condition and notification of physician for change of condition. The Corporate RN stated as a licensed nurse, LVN A would have to attend a school of nursing where she would be taught those skills. The Corporate RN stated she would have expected LVN A to assess a resident with change of condition and immediately notify EMS, the MD and the RP (family) if a drug overdose was suspected, and to stay with her until she was safely out of the facility. The Corporate RN stated it was important to ensure the patient was provided care and taken care of. The Corporate RN stated she was monitoring staff by looking at PCC (electronic medical record) dashboard, 24-hour reports, reviewing documentation, and frequent rounding. She stated she did not want to speculate on why the situation occurred. During an interview on 11/22/2024 at 12:39 p.m., LVN A stated she had been terminated by the Administrator on 11/22/2024. She stated the Administrator also informed her she was referring her license. During an interview on 11/22/2024 at 3:20 p.m., the MD (Resident #1's physician) stated he had been notified of Resident #1's unresponsiveness and change of condition but he could not remember when that occurred or who notified him. He stated it was just a notification and there was not much of an option at that point. He stated his expectations for the scenario was common sense. He stated unconsciousness was one of the few things they needed to send a resident out for and he would expect that to occur pretty soon. Record review of a facility policy titled Notification of Change of Condition (undated) revealed the facility must inform the resident, consult with the resident's physician and /or notify the resident's family member or legal representative when there is a change requiring such notification .2. Significant change in the resident's physical, mental or psychosocial condition such as deterioration in health, mental or psychosocial status. Record review of facility documents post incident for facility correction: Record review of a facility document (undated) titled Action Plan to Ensure Relevant Recommendations are Followed revealed: 1. Notify Medical Record of Incident was documented as completed by the Administrator on 11/19/2024. 2. Complete Disciplinary Actions was documented as employee (LVN A) suspended on 11/19/2024 and was updated on 11/20/2024 as employee terminated. 3. Complete physical assessments on all residents to identify any change of [TRUNCATED]
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

Quality of Care (Tag F0684)

Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure that residents receive treatment and care in accordance wi...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure that residents receive treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the resident's choices for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for quality of care, in that; The facility failed to immediately assess and intervene when Resident #1 was found unresponsive and twitching on 11/19/2024 at 5:00 a.m. by LVN A until the next shift arrived and LVN B intervened. This change of condition required treatment in a local hospital for altered mental status. The noncompliance was identified as PNC. The IJ began on 11/19/2024 and ended on 11/19/2024. The facility had corrected the noncompliance before the survey began. This deficient practice could affect residents who experience a change of condition and result in a delay in care, significant injury including permanent disability and death. The findings included: Record review of Resident #1's face sheet dated 11/20/2024 revealed an admission date of 10/15/2024 with diagnosis which included: displaced bimalleolar fracture of left lower leg (broken bone of the ankle), subsequent encounter for closed fracture with routine healing, complete rotator cuff tear or rupture of right shoulder (muscles and tendons which surround the shoulder joint), not specified as traumatic, depression, anxiety disorder and chronic pain syndrome. Record review of Resident #1's admission MDS dated [DATE] revealed she had a BIMs score of 15 which indicated she was cognitively intact and did not have any behaviors. The MDS assessment indicated the resident had a history of frequent pain that occasionally interfered with ADL's. Record review of Resident #1's Care Plan initiated on 10/16/2024 revealed the resident had chronic pain syndrome and was followed by a pain specialist with interventions which included: administer analgesics as per orders. Record review of Resident #1's nurse assessment documented on 11/18/2024 at 5:22 p.m. revealed Resident #1's pain level was assessed at 1 (pain scale of 0-10). The resident was alert and oriented, communicated verbally with clear speech and was neurologically intact. The assessment documented Resident #1 had no unwanted behaviors witnessed. Record review of Resident #1's nurse progress notes documented by LVN A on 11/19/2024 at 5:55 a.m. read 0530 (5:30 a.m.) walked into room .(Resident #1) lethargic, unable to fully arouse, garbled words incomprehensible. Informed the aid (sic) on the hall .will report to oncoming shift. Record review of Resident #1's medical record revealed there were no further progress notes or assessments to indicate Resident #1's physician was notified or that 911 was called or that Resident #1's family had been notified of the sudden change in mental status. Record review of Resident #1's hospital records dated 11/19/2024 revealed the resident presented to the ER with an altered mental status. Per EMS the patient (R1) was somnolent (sleepy)when she arrived with pinpoint pupils, some hypopnea (abnormally slow and shallow breathing which decreases the amount of oxygen in the blood), with oxygen saturation in the high 80's. (normal 92-100) and they administered 2 mg Narcan IM and 2 mg Narcan IV (opioid reversal agent-a medication used to treat drug overdose) with some transient (only lasting a short time) improvement in mental status. Resident #1's hospital diagnoses was AMS (altered mental status) and hypoxemia (low blood oxygen). Record review of a typed statement from LVN B dated 11/19/2024 indicated at 6:25 a.m. as LVN B was coming onto shift, LVN A was sitting down at the nurse's station. LVN B stated LVN A stated Resident #1 was lethargic and non-arousable since 5 am (11/19/2024). A nurse aide (unknown) from night shift stated to LVN B that this had been reported to LVN A since 11 p.m. last night (11/18/2024). When LVN B questioned LVN A if patient (Resident #1) was ever able to voice any response, LVN A stated that she (Resident #1) was non-arousable at 5 a.m. and that she had not assessed the patient from 11 p.m.- 5 a.m. LVN B questioned LVN A if she had notified the MD (physician) about any change in condition or the family since the patient's baseline was alert and oriented x 4 (cognitively intact). LVN B indicated LVN A responded no. LVN B stated he immediately ran to the room to assess the patient along with NA C and CNA E while LVN A remained at the nurse's station. LVN B wrote Resident #1 was breathing but was not arousable, a sternal rub was performed with grunting as the response sternal rub (firm rub to a patient's sternum is a painful stimulus to test a patients consciousness level), vital signs were obtained, and he assured 911 was called immediately. LVN B wrote he also immediately notified the Administrator and Regional RN. LVN B documented he re-assessed Resident #1 prior to EMT (EMS), and no change was noted. Record review of a written statement dated 11/19/2024 by LVN A indicated at 5:30 a.m. on 11/19/2024 she entered Resident #1's room to see her right leg hanging off the bed and the head of the bed elevated 35 degrees. LVN A wrote Resident #1's eyes were closed, and her respirations were even and unlabored. LVN A called the name of Resident #1 (and her response was) squinting her eyes and garbled speech. LVN A wrote the aides were outside her room and she told them about Resident #1's behaviors. LVN A wrote she had the aides search Resident #1's room and they found a small plastic box with 5-6 round pills and 3 pieces of peach-colored pills. LVN A wrote at 5:45 a.m. she told another nurse (unknown name). LVN A wrote a midsternal rub with a very strong facial grimace and vital signs of 101/84 (blood pressure) 55 (unclear if it was HR or RR) and 96% on room air (oxygen saturation) (it was unclear who took vitals or when they were taken). LVN A wrote at 6:15 a.m. she gave report to LVN B. LVN A wrote LVN B did not go into Resident #1's room to check on the resident or assist her in LVN A in her need to be done so she went back into Resident #1's room to attempt to arouse Resident #1 again. LVN A wrote she continued going in and out of Resident #1's room. LVN A wrote she told Resident #1 Look! We need to go! Let's go now! She wrote Resident #1 sat on the edge of the bed, but LVN A told Resident #1 to wait and put her back to bed. LVN A wrote she went to get a wheelchair to assist Resident #1 to the nurse's station and told the oncoming nurse (LVN B) that she may be okay because she pulled herself to a sitting position. LVN A wrote LVN B did not want to assist her with an assessment of the situation as to not deal with the situation. LVN A wrote she decided to stay around and she called the Administrator and told the Administrator maybe she would just call 911 to have them come shake her up a bit. LVN A wrote she did call 911 (unknown time) and then went in the room to assist the EMTs in any way she could. Record review of a verbal statement of LVN A given to the Corporate RN which was typed (undated) revealed: at 5:30 a.m. she (LVN A) went to give Resident #1 medications and knew something was not right because the resident was lying with her leg off the bed. LVN A noted that was out of the ordinary for her and the head of the bed was up at 35 degrees. LVN A stated she gave Resident #1 a verbal command and attempted to rouse the resident, she opened her eyes and began speaking in an unclear speech and was lethargic. LVN A stated she took vitals, and they were 101/84 [blood pressure], 96% oxygen saturation 18 respirations and 55 HR (slightly lower than normal of 60-100). LVN A stated she gave Resident #1 a sternal rub and the resident had a facial grimace and then sat up on the side of the bed by herself at 6:00 a.m.LVN A stated she last left the resident around 11 p.m. (11/18/24) and did not check on the resident again until 5:30 a.m. because she was busy doing all her task for the night and the resident did not like to be bothered at night. LVN A stated she searched Resident #1's room and found medications at her bedside. LVN A stated the oncoming nurse came on and she was giving him (LVN B) a report and then he went to look at the resident and they notified 911. Record review of a written statement (undated), NA E wrote they (aides) were doing rounds at 10:00 a.m. they went into Resident #1's room and she was alert and awake. She documented she did not round on Resident #1 during the night because the resident preferred they did not wake her up all night unless she called them, so they did not make rounds on her. NA E wrote she was in a room across the hall changing another resident when LVN A busted in asking questions about Resident #1 telling us (aides) to go try and wake her (Resident #1) up. NA E wrote they (aides) went the resident's room (Resident #1) and she was not really responding. She twitched a little and moved her lips. She wrote LVN A did not do vitals or anything until the morning nurse came in. NA E wrote LVN A found Resident #1 like this at 5:00 a.m. when LVN A was passing her medicine. NA E wrote Resident #1 never sat up or spoke when she was in the room. NA E wrote they found a little box of pills while searching the room and LVN A took them. NA E wrote LVN A proceeded to do nothing for the resident and tried to blame them (aides). Record review of a written statement (undated) by NA F wrote the aides did not do rounds on Resident #1 during the night because her chart says not to as she could go the restroom and move around on her own. NA F wrote at 5:00 a.m. (on 11/19/2024) NA E and NA F were changing another resident when LVN A rushed in and said Resident #1 would not respond to her. She told them to go into the room and try to wake her (Resident #1) up. NA F wrote Resident #1 was unresponsive, but still breathing and they found a bag of pills on her bedside table which they gave to LVN A. NA F wrote she let LVN A to do the rest and continued her rounds because she was not qualified to assist with anything else. During an interview on 11/20/2024 at 12:04 p.m., LVN B stated on 11/19/2024 at 6:25 a.m. he came onto duty. He stated night shift nurse LVN A was seated at the nurse's station trying to give him report when he arrived. LVN B stated LVN A stated she noticed a change of condition for Resident #1 related to level of consciousness. LVN B stated LVN A stated the aides told her about the change of condition at 11:00 p.m. when Resident #1 had visitors and was lethargic. LVN B stated LVN A told him she assessed Resident #1 at 11:00 p.m. (11/18/2024) and found her lethargic but she did not notify anyone and did not notify the doctor. LVN B stated LVN A told him she went into Resident #1's room at 5:00 a.m. to assess the resident and she was not arousable. LVN B stated he questioned LVN A to see if she had notified the physician or transferred the resident to the hospital since Resident #1 was normally A/O x 4 (alert and oriented x 4 which indicated she was cognitively intact). LVN B stated LVN A stated she had not notified anyone. LVN B stated as soon as he heard LVN A say that he ran directly to Resident #1's room. He stated he had not yet clocked into work, but he was concerned since LVN A did not seem to know what was going on. LVN B stated LVN A stated she thought it might be medication related since the night aides found medication in Resident #1's room. LVN B stated he was alarmed. He stated he had two aides go with him. He stated when he saw Resident #1, he knew immediately something was wrong. He stated Resident #1 was very lethargic and was not able to verbalize anything. He stated she was just grunting. He stated she was breathing, and he obtained vital signs which were stable. He stated he made sure someone stayed with Resident #1 because he knew she needed to go to the hospital. LVN B stated he went to find LVN A and told her to call 911, which she did. He stated he went back to Resident #1's bedside but LVN A went to her medication cart. LVN B stated he asked LVN B if she if she did any interventions for Resident #1 and LVN A replied no. He stated that was why he was alarmed because LVN A did not re-assess or address Resident #1's change of condition and she did not go back into the room between 11-5 am to re-ass the resident. LVN B stated it was important to immediately assess and intervene when a resident had a decrease level of consciousness because it could be an emergency situation. He stated the resident should have an immediate assessment and interventions. LVN B stated failure to respond to a resident in need was neglect and he was trained to address the concerns immediately which he did. He stated he immediately notified the Administrator. During an interview on 11/20/2024 at 12:25 p.m. NA C stated on 11/19/2024 at 6:06 a.m. she was arrived at the facility for her morning shift. She stated CNA D had approached her and stated she had it up to here with her (LVN A). NA C stated CNA D stated the nurse (LVN A) was not listening to her and there was concern for Resident #1. NA C stated she clocked in and went straight to Resident #1's room to check on her. She stated Resident #1 was not responding to her voice. She stated she saw Resident #1 laying on her back with one arm on her chest. NA C stated Resident #1 was twitching. She stated at first, she saw just her lip twitching and then noted that her fingers and her toes were also twitching, and she would not respond. NA C stated she went to LVN A and asked her what was wrong with Resident #1? NA C stated LVN A responded that she had already checked on Resident #1. NA C stated she told LVN A that Resident #1 was not acting normal to which she did not get a response. NA C stated she (NA C) could at least get Resident #1's vitals since she was not acting right. NA C stated she obtained the vitals and saw LVN A talking to LVN B at the nurse's station. NA C stated LVN A was giving LVN B an update on what was going on. NA C stated LVN B was asking LVN A if she had checked on her (Resident #1) or if she took vitals. NA C stated she showed LVN B the vitals she just took which included an oxygen saturation of 87% (normal 92-100%). NA C stated LVN B ran into the room and stated, She is not okay. NA C stated at approximately. 6:30 a.m., LVN B was telling LVN A she was not normal and to call 911. NA C stated LVN B said to LVN A Why did you wait? NA C stated LVN A did not seemed concerned at all. NA C stated LVN A lied and said she just came out of the room and Resident #1 was sitting on the edge of the bed. NA C stated she walked into the room to see for herself, and Resident #1 had not moved. She was still not responsive and twitching. NA C stated CNA D was with her and also saw what was occurring. NA C stated she asked LVN A why she was lying? She stated LVN A responded that she had a rough day. NA C stated she could not do anything else for Resident #1 because she was just a nurse aide in training, but she stayed with the resident and saw when EMS got there. NA C stated Resident #1 was still unresponsive when she left the facility with EMS. NA C stated she was trained to report resident change of condition to the nurse right away. During an interview on 11/20/2024 at 12:52 p.m., CNA D stated she overheard LVN A talking about how Resident #1 was not doing well. CNA D stated LVN A was telling LVN B that she was having issues with Resident #1, and she was not alert. CNA D stated she went to look at the resident to see if she could help. She stated Resident #1 was in bed and she looked asleep. She stated LVN A came into the room with her and was trying to wake up Resident #1. CNA D stated LVN A was lifting Resident #1's eye lids and was giving her a chest rub and was trying to get vitals. CNA D stated Resident #1 was not responding and did not respond to the chest rub. CNA D stated she thought the chest rub was very aggressive. CNA D stated she was not sure what the vitals were, but another nurse (unknown name) said the blood pressure was not a normal reading. CNA D stated the next thing she knew LVN A was calling EMS, but she was not happy about it and said the same thing had happened to the resident three times last week. CNA D stated LVN A stated Resident #1 was a druggy and knew her limits. CNA D stated she thought that comment was inappropriate. She stated she had never seen Resident #1 in any other way. CNA D stated LVN A called 911 on the phone and asked if they would come rough house the resident to wake her up. CNA D stated LVN A was neglectful and was not making Resident #1's needs a priority and making it like it was a bother rather than addressing her change of condition. CNA D stated she had been trained to notify the nurse right away for a change of condition. During an interview on 11/20/2024 at 1:06 p.m. NA F stated she worked the overnight shift on 11/18/2024-11/19/2024. She stated she was doing rounds with NA E at approximately 11:00 p.m. she saw Resident #1 who was oriented normally and was up and moving around. NA F stated LVN A told the aides not to go into Resident #1's room during night shift. NA F stated the resident did not need help transferring and was able to do everything on her own. She stated she might peak in at the doorway to ensure the resident was not on the floor but she did not enter the room and could not tell anything else from the doorway. NA F stated the aides were reliant on what the nurse told them to do and there was not anyway to look up the information. NA F stated on the night of the incident she did not open Resident #1's door between 11 p.m. - 5 a.m. NA F stated at 5:00 a.m. they were across the hall when LVN A asked, What happened to Resident #1? NA F stated they said they did not know but LVN A told us to try to help wake her (Resident #1) up. NA F stated Resident #1 was breathing but was not responsive. She stated she was saying her name really loud, and they were pushing on her and shaking her, but it was not working. NA F stated they found a bag of pills in the room. NA F stated at approximately 5:30 a.m. she told LVN A she should probably call 911 since Resident #1 was unresponsive. NA F stated LVN A stated, Well she is a drug addict, so it doesn't matter. NA F stated LVN A then went back to the nurse's station and did not really acknowledge the situation. NA F stated they (aides) stayed with Resident #1. She stated a while later LVN B came in and assessed Resident #1 and called 911. She stated when she saw LVN B he went right into work mode. He immediately went into Resident #1's room, assessed her and took vital signs. NA F stated Resident #1 was still unresponsive, but LVN B got her help right away. She stated the ambulance came about 5 minutes later but the aides stayed with Resident #1 to make sure she did not stop breathing. NA F described Resident #1 as pale but not blue and looking like she was sleeping but would not wake up. NA F stated LVN A's actions and words were very inappropriate. During an interview on 11/20/2024 at 1:37 p.m., NA E stated she worked 10 p.m.- 6 am shift on 11/18/2024. She stated she last saw Resident #1 well at 11:10 p.m. when she brought her an ice pack for her leg. NA E stated she was acting like her normal self. She stated she did not go into the resident room between 11 p.m. and 5 a.m. because the resident preferred to not be woken up. She stated they tell her goodnight, and they would see her again in the morning. NA E stated she relied on the nursing staff to tell them what to do for the resident based on the care plan. NA E stated at 5:00 a.m., LVN A said Resident #1 was not waking up and she was trying to give her medications. NA E stated she did not know why LVN A was relying on the aides to do something about it when she was the nurse. NA E stated she went into Resident #1's room and tried to wake her up. She stated she tried calling her name, tapping her shoulder, and giving her a chest rub. NA E stated Resident #1 moved her mouth a little, like a twitch. She stated her legs twitched also and she wouldn't wake up. NA E stated Resident #1 never opened her eyes or responded in any verbal way. NA E stated she then left the room because she had other residents to attend to. NA E stated LVN A was frantic, like she did not know what to do and she was relying on the aides. NA E stated she had them search the room with flashlights and they found a small clear case with multiple pills in it which they gave to LVN A. NA E stated this whole time Resident #1 was unconscious and LVN A was not proving care, she did not do vitals, nothing. NA E stated LVN A then went and sat at the nurse's station. NA E stated the aides were lost and did not know what to do but it seemed like LVN A did not care. NA E stated when the next shift arrived, they took over and asked LVN A if she had called the doctor or called 911 and LVN A said no she did not. NA E stated LVN A admitted she did not notify the doctor or 911. NA E stated the aides were all very stressed out. She stated they were trained to notify the nurse which they did. NA E stated they had thought about calling 911 themselves but did not want to get in trouble. She stated she was trained to tell the Administrator because she was the abuse coordinator, but she couldn't think so she called the on-call person who said she would call the Administrator. NA E stated she was trained to notify the nurse of change of condition. During an interview on 11/20/2024 at 2:56 p.m., LVN A stated she had been a nurse for 33 years. She stated on the night of 11/18/2024 around approximately 11:00 p.m. she noted that Resident #1 was drowsier than normal but was otherwise alert and oriented. LVN A stated she couldn't remember a lot of about that night, just that she was in bed, that she did not say a lot, but she was resting quietly. LVN A stated she did not check on Resident #1 between 11:00 p.m.-5:20 a.m. She stated the facility policy was to check on residents every 2 hours and the aides were making rounds every 2 hours she suspected although she stated she was not certain. She stated she was busy with other duties. LVN A stated on 11/19/2024 at 5:30 a.m. she went into Resident #1's room to give scheduled morphine and noted the resident's right leg hanging off the bed with her head of bed at 45 degrees with her head to the side. LVN A stated Resident #1 was sleeping. She stated she tried to wake Resident #1 up and noted she was hard to wake up. LVN A stated Resident #1 slit her eyes open a little and was trying to talk but she could not understand her. LVN A stated she thought Oh my gosh. She stated the aides were just outside the room in the hallway. She stated she couldn't remember who the aides were but there were two of them and she wanted them to come inside the room because Resident #1 would not wake up. LVN A stated Resident #1 was drug seeking so she started searching her room and found 5-6 pills. LVN A stated at 5:45 a.m. she told another nurse (name unknown) that Resident #1 was unresponsive, but that nurse didn't get off her chair or try to help her. LVN A stated she grew up where nurses help nurses, and they all work together. She stated LVN B was coming in to relieve her from night shift. LVN A stated LVN B did not go into Resident 1's room one time. She stated she was so upset because no one who worked at the facility, no one helped her. LVN A stated she worked her butt off all night long and she was tired. She stated LVN B just came in and where is his heard, he does not have one. LVN A stated she was livid that she had been suspended and LVN A still had a job. LVN A stated Resident #1 was not unresponsive. She stated she opened her eyes and garbled something. LVN A stated she kept going in and out of the room and noted Resident #1 gave a big grimace with a sternal rub. LVN A stated when she saw the big grimace she thought Oh God, she is okay and it was the end of her shift, and she was tired. LVN A stated she first obtained vitals at approximately 6:00 a.m. and reported they were normal. She stated she did not know why there was a delay in taking Resident #1's vitals signs from the time she found her with a change of condition until 6:00 a.m. She stated she was just getting information to give to day shift so they could take over. LVN A stated she did not know who to call. She stated the ADON was on vacation and the DON had walked out of the facility. LVN A stated another nurse (name unknown) gave her the phone number for the Administrator, so she called her and told her they needed to discharge Resident #1 from the facility because she was not following the rules. LVN A stated the Administrator did not tell her what to do or give her any idea what to do. LVN A stated she had 35 people to take care of and it was very stressful. LVN A stated after she got off the phone with the Administrator, she called 911 because she thought maybe they could shake her up. LVN A stated she was upset because the Administrator thought she was slow to react, so she found herself suspended. LVN A stated she did not notify Resident #1's physician about her change of condition. She stated she did not notify the physician because she was collecting information, searching her room, and looking up her medication. She stated she also did not call because she thought Resident #1 was going to be okay. She stated she was just gathering information and waiting for the next shift to take over because she herself was tired. LVN A stated was trained to assess, document the assessment, gather information and probably call the doctor for resident change of condition. LVN A stated she did not know why she deviated from how she was trained other than she was pretty tired and had worked her butt off. She stated, We are all human, right .I was tired. When asked if she was fit for duty if she was too tired to complete her nursing duties, she stated yes. During an interview on 11/20/2024 at 3:40 p.m., the Corporate RN (VP of Clinical Services) stated the DON left the position approximately 1 month ago and she was monitoring the facility as RN since that time. The Corporate RN stated one of the ADON's was also an RN and was assisting. The Corporate RN stated on 11/19/2024 she was traveling to the facility and was almost there when she received a call at 7:03 a.m. from LVN B. She stated she called the Administrator and EMS was arriving. The Corporate RN stated she interviewed LVN A who told her she had given pills to Resident #1 at 11:00 p.m. (11/18/2024) and then went in at 5:00 a.m. (11/19/2024) and found the resident lethargic, reporting she did not round on the resident during the night because Resident #1 did not like it. The Corporate RN stated LVN A stated she did a sternal rub on Resident #1, who grimaced and then sat up on the side of the bed. LVN A reported that she had NA E and NA F come check on the resident. The Corporate RN stated LVN A said she had not made notifications and that she gave report to oncoming nurse LVN B. The Corporate RN stated she interviewed LVN B who stated he assessed Resident #1 and told LVN A to call 911. The Corporate RN stated she interviewed NA E and NA F who both said they told LVN A around 5:00 a.m. Resident #1 was lethargic and nothing was done. The Corporate RN stated the facility then reported it to HHSC was because there was a delay in care to Resident #1. She stated there was a delay in providing interventions , in alerting EMS and in notifying the physician. The Corporate RN stated after she interviewed the staff, she did not believe LVN A's account of events was accurate. The Corporate RN stated after notifying HHSC of the event she facility began immediately correcting on 11/19/2024 and had completed the correction prior to surveyor arrival. She stated they had: 1. Immediately started staff in-services on abuse/neglect, medication orders, medication administration, opioid overdose management, responding to suspected overdose, how to use Narcan, no medications at bedside, self-administration of medications assessment in which the IDT has to determine if the resident was safe to self-administer, notifications of change of condition, PRN medications. She stated the in-service training for staff in the facility had been completed prior to surveyor arrival on 11/19/2024. 2. The Corporate RN stated a notice had been posted at the time clock and no staff would be allowed to clock in until the in-services had been completed. She stated at the time of this interview all staff had been educated before surveyor arrival on 11/19/2024. 3. The Corporate RN stated the facility completed a 100% assessment audit on residents assuring any change of condition was addressed. She stated this was completed prior to surveyor arrival on 11/19/2024. 4. The Corporate RN stated the facility completed a 100% audit of medical records to ensure any change of condition had notifications of physicians and families documented. She stated no new change of conditions were identified. She stated this was completed prior to surveyor arrival on 11/19/2024. 5. The Corporate RN stated a 100% rounding of medication carts/medication records was completed on 11/19/2024 prior to surveyor arrival and another was completed on 11/20/2024 to ensure there were no medication discrepancies. 6. The Corporate RN stated a text alert was sent to all family members that all medications need to go to the nurses. She stated this was completed prior to the incident on 11/19/2024 in the month on November when Resident #1 had been previously brought in medications from home. 7. The Corporate RN stated QA/PIP tools were put in place to include notification of physician for change of condition with actions to address included. She stated this was completed prior to surveyor arrival on 11/19/2024. 8. The Corporate RN stated the facility notified the Medical Director of the incident and the facility plan to correct. She stated this was completed prior to surveyor arrival on 11/19/2024. 9. The Corporate RN stated LVN A was immediately suspended, and they planned to terminate her employment and refer her nurses license as soon as the investigation was complete. She stated this was completed on 11/19/2024 as soon as LVN A completed her written statement of events and she had been interviewed prior to surveyor arrival. 10. The Corporate RN stated they reviewed facilities policies and ensured they were put out for staff to review. She stated this was completed prior to surveyor arrival on 11/19/2024. During an interview on 11/20/2024 at 4:14 p.m., the Administrator stated on 11/19/2024 she received a call from the Corporate RN about Resident #1, a suspected overdose and that EMS was on their way to the facility to pick up the resident. She stated she told the Corporate RN to interview staff and find out what was going on. The Administrator stated then LVN A called her. She stated LVN A told her it was a suspected overdose, and that EMS were at the facility because she could not get Resident #1 back to baseline. The Administrator stated she arrived at the facility on 11/19/2024 at 8:15 a.m. at which time interviews were completed and staff in-services had already been started. The Administrator stated based on staff interviews they felt there had been a delay in care and that LVN A did not act promptly so they immediately self-reported to HHSC. She stated they worked diligently to correct the error on the morning on 11/19/2024. She stated the Corporate RN had completed the corrections prior to surveyor arrival. The Administrator stated the staff were all pretty upset so she checked on the staff. The Administrator stated she was not a medical person and was not certain what caused Resident #1's change of condition but she did feel LVN A was neglectful of Resident #1. The Administrator stated she had been trying unsuccessfully to reach LVN A so she could terminate her employment and refer her license. The Administrator stated she had reviewed the facility surveillance video and based on that review there were some non-truths to LVN A story. The Administrator stated LVN A had poor judgement of character. The Administrator stated she supervised her staff by ensuring mo[TRUNCATED]
CRITICAL (J) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation

Accident Prevention (Tag F0689)

Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure that each resident received adequate supervision to prevent...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure that each resident received adequate supervision to prevent accidents for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for supervision, in that; The facility failed to adequately supervise Resident #1, who had a history of bringing multiple medications including narcotics into the facility without notifying staff, when she consumed a marijuana laced brownie and was found to have both Ambien and trazadone in an unmarked unlabeled container at bedside on 11/19/2024. On 11/19/2024, Resident #1 was found unresponsive and twitching in her room after staff failed to check on her between 11:00 p.m. on 11/18/2024 to 5:00 a.m. on 11/19/2024 despite seeing an unknown visitor in Resident #1's room on the evening of 11/18/2024 . This failure resulted in the identification of an Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) on 11/22/2024 at 12:50 p.m. The IJ template was provided to the facility on [DATE] at 1:03 p.m. While the IJ was removed on 11/23/24 the facility remained out of compliance at a scope identified as isolated and a severity level of potential for more than minimal harm until interventions were put in place to ensure resident safety because the facility needed to monitor the implementation of the plan of removal. This failure could place residents requiring supervision at risk for consumption of unknown and unregulated medications and illegal substances and place them at risk for an altered mental status, decline in health and/or death. The findings were: Record review of Resident #1's face sheet dated 11/20/2024 revealed an admission date of 10/15/2024 with diagnosis which included: displaced bimalleolar fracture of left lower leg (broken bone of the ankle), subsequent encounter for closed fracture with routine healing, complete rotator cuff tear or rupture of right shoulder (muscles and tendons which surround the shoulder joint), not specified as traumatic, depression, anxiety disorder and chronic pain syndrome. Record review of Resident #1's admission MDS dated [DATE] revealed she had a BIMs score of 15 which indicated she was cognitively intact and did not have any behaviors. The MDS assessment indicated the resident had a history of frequent pain that occasionally interfered with ADL's. Record review of Resident #1's Care Plan initiated on 10/16/2024 revealed the resident had chronic pain syndrome and was followed by a pain specialist with interventions which included: administer analgesics as per orders. The care plan did not address behaviors of polypharmacy or having medications in her room without staff knowledge. Record review of a provider progress note dated 11/08/2024 by PA J revealed: Patient (Resident #1) went to a pain medication doctor and had morphine prescription received, filled at outside pharmacy which she kept in her room and would self-dose. This was discovered and morphine was taken away from her .Denies alcohol, tobacco, drugs of abuse. Record review of Resident #1's nurse progress notes dated 11/09/2024 at 8:28 a.m., documented by LVN K revealed: Guest approached nurse at nursing station expressing concern. The pharmacy had questioned the medication she was picking (up) for a resident (Resident #1), morphine tablets (narcotic) and melodic (anti-inflammatory). The resident had requested she bring her medication with codeine (hydrocodone/acetaminophen 10/325) (narcotic opioid pain reliever) a week prior from a local pharmacy. The resident (Resident #1) explained that she had received the order from her pain management doctor at a previous appointment as the current pain medication was not effective at managing her pain. The nurse educated the patient (Resident #1) to inform her nurse of any new orders from appointments or her PCP so that her doctor at the facility could adjust her medication and make orders to safely assist her healing and rehab goals. The patient expressed understanding and stated she would not self-administer medication without informing the nurse. Record review of Resident #1's nurse progress notes dated 11/10/2024 at 4:43 p.m. documented by LVN H revealed: a CNA (unknown) notified nurse of suspicious activity. A person entered Resident #1's room with a package and immediately left. The incident was reported to the Administrator. Instruction was given to search room for medication, for patient safety. Patient (Resident #1) on narcotics and has a history of asking friends to bring in narcotic(s) and other pain medication prescribed by other providers into the facility and not adhering to facility policy. Patient education given. Will continue to monitor. Notified MD. Record review of a nurse progress note dated 11/11/2024 documented by LVN K revealed: Nurse notified ADON and MD (circumstances unknown). Received orders for Narcan for the patient (Resident #1 ). Record review of Resident #1's provider notes dated 11/14/2024 documented by PA J revealed: Notation was made that patient's family member was requesting she (Resident #1) not be given any narcotics, but no history of opioid abuse was given and patient was felt to have decision-making capacity, with no POA for involved family .Patient (Resident #1) reports her pain is controlled in her right shoulder and left ankle now that morphine prescribed by pain specialist. She has no acute complaints . 11/12 .pain MD wrote for morphine which she (Resident #1) was taking without notification of nurses, who thereafter noted some sedation and found the bottle . Record review of 3613-A Provider Investigative Report dated 11/19/2024 revealed on 7/19/2024 (incorrect date, actual date 11/19/2024), the facility was notified that a nurse (LVN A) found a patient (Resident #1) unresponsive at 5:30 am and called EMS at 6:30 a.m. The facility suspended the nurse (LVN A) for further investigation due to a delay in care. EMS arrived and administered Narcan, and the patient (Resident #1) was taken to a local ER and kept overnight for evaluation. The patient (Resident #1) was found to have medication at bedside and hospital records showed marijuana in (her) system). Record review of Resident #1's nurse assessment documented on 11/18/2024 at 5:22 p.m., revealed Resident #1's pain level was assessed at 1 (pain scale of 0-10). The resident was alert and oriented, communicated verbally with clear speech and was neurologically intact. The assessment documented Resident #1 had no unwanted behaviors witnessed. Record review of Resident #1's nurse progress notes documented by LVN A on 11/19/2024 at 5:55 a.m. read 0530 (5:30 a.m.) walked into room, HOB 35 degrees, right leg hanging off the bed .(Resident #1) lethargic, unable to fully arouse, garbled words incomprehensible. Informed the aid (sic) on the hall. She reports to me a man went (sic) in her room at 11:00 p.m. and left. I asked if she reported to someone. She said the nurse on the Southside was told. I asked why? I am the nurse here on this side. Holding this 6 am dose (unknown medication). Will report to oncoming shift. Record review of Resident #1's medical record revealed there were no further progress notes or assessments to indicate Resident #1's physician was notified or that 911 was called or that Resident #1's family had been notified of the sudden change in mental status. Record review of Resident #1's hospital records dated 11/19/2024 revealed the resident presented to the ER with an altered mental status. Per EMS the patient (R1) was somnolent (sleepy)when she arrived with pinpoint pupils, some hypopnea (abnormally slow and shallow breathing which decreases the amount of oxygen in the blood), with oxygen saturation in the high 80's. (normal 92-100) and they administered 2 mg Narcan IM and 2 mg Narcan IV (opioid reversal agent-a medication used to treat drug overdose) with some transient (only lasting a short time) improvement in mental status. Resident #1's hospital diagnoses was AMS (altered mental status) and hypoxemia (low blood oxygen). Record review of a typed statement from LVN B dated 11/19/2024 indicated at 6:25 a.m. as LVN B was coming onto shift, LVN A was sitting down at the nurse's station. He documented LVN A handed him 6 white pills and 3 peach-colored broken pieces and stated the nurse aide obtained the pills from Resident #1's room at 11:00 p.m. last night. LVN B stated LVN A stated Resident #1 was lethargic and non-arousable since 5 am (11/19/2024). A nurse aide (unknown) from night shift stated to LVN B that this had been reported to LVN A since 11 p.m. last night (11/18/2024). When LVN B questioned LVN A if patient (Resident #1) was ever able to voice any response, LVN A stated that she (Resident #1) was non-arousable at 5 a.m. and that she had not assessed the patient from 11 p.m.- 5 a.m. LVN B questioned LVN A if she had notified the MD (physician) about any change in condition or the family since the patient's baseline was alert and oriented x 4 (cognitively intact). LVN B indicated LVN A responded no. LVN B stated he immediately ran to room to assess the patient along with NA C and CNA E while LVN A remained at the nurse's station. LVN B wrote Resident #1 was breathing but was not arousable, a sternal rub was performed with grunting as the response sternal rub (firm rub to a patient's sternum is a painful stimulus to test a patients consciousness level) and he assured 911 was called immediately. LVN B wrote he also immediately notified the Administrator and Regional RN and notified the physician and the family of Resident #1. Record review of a written statement dated 11/19/2024 by LVN A indicated at 5:30 a.m. on 11/19/2024 she entered Resident #1's room to see her right leg hanging off the bed. LVN A wrote Resident #1's eyes were closed, and her respirations were even and unlabored. LVN A called the name of Resident #1 (and her response was) squinting her eyes and garbled speech. LVN A wrote the aides were outside her room and she told them about Resident #1's behaviors. One aide (unknown) said there was a man that left the residents room at 11:00 p.m. LVN A wrote she had just left (the area) at 11:08 p.m. and did not see anyone so she asked the aide if she had told someone. LVN A wrote the aide reported she told the nurse for this side (unknown). LVN A wrote all three of the staff went into Resident #1's room and searched drawers, cabinets, and closet. LVN A wrote she had the aides search Resident #1's room and they found a small plastic box with 5-6 round pills and 3 pieces of peach-colored pills. LVN A wrote at 5:45 a.m. she told another nurse (unknown name) who identified the pills as trazadone (antipsychotic medication) and tramadol (opioid analgesic used for pain). LVN documented a midsternal rub with a very strong facial grimace and vital signs of 101/84 (blood pressure) 55 (unclear if it was HR or RR) and 96% on room air (oxygen saturation) (it was unclear who took vitals or when they were taken). LVN A wrote at 6:15 a.m. she gave report to LVN B. LVN A wrote LVN B did not go into Resident #1's room or assist her so she went back into Resident #1's room to attempt to arouse Resident #1 again. LVN A wrote she told Resident #1 Look! We need to go! Let's go now! She wrote Resident #1 sat on the edge but LVN A told Resident #1 to wait and put her back to bed. LVN A wrote she called the Administrator and told the Administrator maybe she would just call 911 to have them come shake her up a bit. LVN A wrote she did call 911(unknown time). Record review of a written statement (undated) by NA E read when the (aides) were doing rounds at 10:00 p.m. at the start of their shift, a man walked out of the resident room with a to-go container in a plastic bag. She wrote they did not think anything of it. NA E wrote she told LVN A a weird guy was in the resident's room, but supposedly she did not hear what she said. NA E wrote she also reported it to the nurse on the other side (unknown). NA E wrote the man left at 11 (p.m.). NA E wrote they went into Resident #1's room and she was alert and awake. She documented she did not round on Resident #1 during the night because the resident preferred, they did not wake her up all night with every round unless she called them. NA E wrote she was in a room across the hall changing another resident when LVN A busted in asking questions about Resident #1 telling us (aides) to go try and wake her (Resident #1) up. NA E wrote they (aides) went the resident's room (Resident #1) and she was not really responding. She twitched a little and moved her lips. She wrote LVN A did not do vitals or anything until the morning nurse came in. NA E wrote LVN A found Resident #1 like this at 5:00 a.m. when LVN A was passing her medicine. NA E wrote Resident #1 never sat up or spoke when she was in the room. NA E wrote they found a little box of pills while searching and LVN A took them. NA E wrote LVN A proceeded to do nothing for the resident and tried to blame them (aides). Record review of a written statement (undated) by NA F wrote she was making rounds with NA E; in another resident's room they noticed a guy walk out of (Resident #1's) room across the hall. NA F documented they saw him re-enter Resident #1's room a few minutes later with what looked like a to-go container. NA F documented she notified LVN A along with NA E that there was a man coming in and out of the resident's room. She wrote she continued making rounds and saw the man leave at approximately 11:00 p.m. NA F documented they did not make rounds on Resident #1 during the night because her chart says not to as she can go to the restroom and move around on her own. NA F documented at 5:00 a.m. (on 11/19/2024) NA E and NA F were changing another resident when LVN A rushing in saying Resident #1 would not respond to her. She told them to go into the room and try to wake her (Resident #1) up. NA F wrote Resident #1 was unresponsive, but still breathing and they found a bag of pills on her bedside table which they gave to LVN A. NA F wrote she let LVN A to do the rest and continued her rounds. During an interview on 11/19/2024 at 1:39 p.m., the Administrator stated. A nurse (identified as LVN A) found Resident #1 lethargic and not responding like she should have, so EMS was called who administered Narcan twice. She stated Resident #1 also received Narcan via IV at the hospital. The Administrator stated they found a clear container with mixed pills in the resident's room which they had locked up in the DON's office. She said some of the medications were cut in half and unidentifiable and one was trazadone. The Administrator stated a couple of weeks prior they found medications in Resident #1's room, confiscated it and gave the resident education. She stated one of the medications they found was morphine and she could not remember what the other one was. She stated they contacted the resident's physician and gave education. The Administrator stated they also gave education to visitors. She stated the education was documented in PCC under progress notes for Resident #1. She stated a nurse, LVN A was suspended because they thought there was a delay in her response time. During an interview on 11/20/2024 at 10:14 a.m., the Administrator stated they had learned Resident #1 tested positive for both opioids (she had a prescription for opioid medication, so it was an expected outcome) and marijuana. She stated based on this information they conducted another search of Resident #1's room and the strong smell of something odd that was consistent with marijuana was discovered. She stated they identified a brownie on Resident #1's TV stand that had the strong odor. She stated they notified the local police who came and destroyed the brownie. The Administrator stated the original plan was for Resident #1 to discharge tomorrow (11/21/2024) after her doctor appointment and that was still the plan. She stated the facility was accepting Resident #1 back from the hospital today (11/20/2024) because they did not believe in dumping. She stated a discharge notice had never been given to the resident. The Administrator stated she communicated with the staff in person, text and she preferred phone calls. She stated she attended both morning and clinical meetings with staff. She stated during those meetings they did discuss that a CNA found a bottle of prescription medication containing morphine in Resident #1's room. She stated they made the required notifications including to family, physician and they educated the staff and visitors. She stated they do not routinely search residents' rooms or visitors for medications. She stated the resident had both a right to receive visitors and packages. The Administrator stated in lieu of searching Resident #1's room which showed lack of character judgement, LVN A should have provided medical care to Resident #1. The Administrator stated she ensured staff had the knowledge on how to response by in-service training. She stated the facility notified the Medical Director who was also Resident #1's physician of the incident on 11/19/2024. During an interview on 11/20/2024 at 10:45 a.m., Resident #1's family member stated Resident #1 had an accident and broke her foot and prior to that had surgery on her shoulder. The family member stated Resident #1 was currently hospitalized because she was found very lethargic and unresponsive. He stated the doctors at the hospital said she was taking a lot of medications. He stated he was not sure what medications she was taking. He stated Resident #1 was seeing a pain medication doctor, an orthopedic surgeon and had a doctor at the facility but he didn't know who the doctors were and did not know the prescriptions. The family member stated he did not know Resident #1 was getting medications from multiple physicians and multiple pharmacies and did not know why she was now testing positive for marijuana. He stated a few days before she was admitted to the facility, she took a vacation to the Caribbean and spent some time in Chicago and may have had access to marijuana at either of those places. He stated he had no knowledge of any other illegal drug usage. He stated to his knowledge Resident #1 had not had any visitors at the facility. He stated Resident #1 did not have a significant other/boyfriend that he was aware of. He stated there was another family member locally, but that person had no contact with Resident #1. He stated he had minimal contact with Resident #1 and had only visited her twice at the facility. He stated he was unable, unwilling and did not have the capacity to give Resident #1 support. He stated Resident #1 did not leave the facility other than for doctors' appointments, but she did have local grocery and food deliveries at the facility. He stated he did not visit Resident #1 the night of the incident on 11/18/2024-11/19/2024. During an interview on 11/20/2024 at 12:04 p.m., LVN B stated on 11/19/2024 at 6:25 a.m. he came onto duty. He stated night shift nurse LVN A was seated at the nurse's station trying to give him report when he arrived. LVN B stated LVN A stated she noticed a change of condition for Resident #1 related to level of consciousness. LVN B stated LVN A stated the aides told her about the change of condition at 11:00 p.m. when Resident #1 had visitors and was lethargic. LVN B stated LVN A told him she assessed Resident #1 at 11:00 p.m. (11/18/2024) and found her lethargic but she did not notify anyone and did not notify the doctor. LVN B stated LVN A told him she went into Resident #1's room at 5:00 a.m. to assess the resident and she was not arousable. LVN B stated he questioned LVN A to see if she had notified the physician or transferred the resident to the hospital since Resident #1 was normally A/O x 4 (alert and oriented x 4 which indicated she was cognitively intact). LVN B stated LVN A stated she had not notified anyone. LVN B stated as soon as he heard LVN A say that he ran directly to Resident #1's room. He stated he had not yet clocked into work, but he was concerned since LVN A did not seem to know what was going on. LVN B stated LVN A stated she thought it might be medication related since the night aides found medication in Resident #1's room. LVN B stated he was alarmed. He stated he had two aides go with him. He stated when he saw Resident #1, he knew immediately something was wrong. He stated Resident #1 was very lethargic and was not able to verbalize anything. He stated she was just grunting. He stated she was breathing, and he obtained vital signs which were stable. He stated he made sure someone stayed with Resident #1 because he knew she needed to go to the hospital. LVN B stated he went to find LVN A and told her to call 911, which she did. He stated he went back to Resident #1's bed side but LVN A went to her medication cart. LVN B stated he notified Resident #1's physician and her family. LVN A stated he told the physician Resident #1 was minimally responsive and that EMS had been activated. He stated the physician's response was that a hospital evaluation was appropriate. LVN A stated he had never witnessed any medications in Resident #1's room and had never smelled or identified marijuana in her room. During an interview on 11/20/2024 at 12:25 p.m., NA C stated on 11/19/2024 at 6:06 a.m. she arrived at the facility for her morning shift. She stated CNA D had approached her and stated she had it up to here with her (LVN A). NA C stated CNA D stated the nurse (LVN A) was not listening to her and there was concern for Resident #1. NA C stated CNA D said a random guy went into Resident #1's room but she did not know what happened. NA C stated she clocked in and went straight to Resident #1's room to check on her. She stated Resident #1 was not responding to her voice. She stated she saw Resident #1 laying on her back with one arm on her chest. NA C stated Resident #1 was twitching. She stated at first, she saw just her lip twitching and then noted that her fingers and her toes were also twitching, and she would not respond. NA C stated she went to LVN A and asked her what was wrong with Resident #1? NA C stated LVN A responded that she had already checked on Resident #1. NA C stated she told LVN A that Resident #1 was not acting normal to which she did not get a response. NA C stated she (NA C) could at least get Resident #1's vitals since she was not acting right. NA C stated she obtained the vitals and saw LVN A talking to LVN B at the nurse's station. NA C stated LVN A was giving LVN B an update on what was going on. NA C stated LVN B was asking LVN A if she had checked on her (Resident #1) or if she took vitals. NA C stated she showed LVN B the vitals she just took which included an oxygen saturation of 87% (normal 92-100%). NA C stated LVN B ran into the room and stated, she is not okay. NA C stated at approximately. 6:30 a.m., LVN B was telling LVN A she was not normal and to call 911. NA C stated LVN B said to LVN A Why did you wait? NA C stated LVN A did not seemed concerned at all. NA C stated LVN A lied and said she just came out of the room and Resident #1 was sitting on the edge of the bed. NA C stated she walked into the room to see for herself, and Resident #1 had not moved. She was still not responsive and twitching. NA C stated CNA D was with her and also saw what was occurring. NA C stated she asked LVN A why she was lying? She stated LVN A responded that she had a rough day. NA C stated she had never seen any medications or drugs lying around in any resident room. She stated they were not able to identify the visitor. She stated the front doors are locked at night and require a code to access the facility. NA C stated if she saw medications lying around, she was trained to give them to the nurse. She stated she had training in opioid abuse, administration of Narcan and what to do in case of change of condition. During an interview on 11/20/2024 at 12:52 p.m., CNA D stated she overheard LVN A talking about how Resident #1 was not doing well. CNA D stated LVN A was telling LVN B that she was having issues with Resident #1, and she was not alert. CNA D stated she went to look at the resident to see if she could help. She stated Resident #1 was in bed and she looked asleep. She stated LVN A came into the room with her and was trying to wake up Resident #1. CNA D stated LVN A was lifting Resident #1's eye lids and was giving her a chest rub and was trying to get vitals. CNA D stated Resident #1 was not responding and did not respond to the chest rub. CNA D stated she thought the chest rub was very aggressive. CNA D stated she was not sure what the vitals were, but another nurse (unknown name) said the blood pressure was not a normal reading. CNA D stated the next thing she knew LVN A was calling EMS, but she was not happy about it and said the same thing had happened to the resident three times last week. CNA D stated LVN A stated Resident #1 was a druggy and knew her limits. CNA D stated she thought that comment was inappropriate. She stated she had never seen Resident #1 in any other way. CNA D stated LVN A told 911 on the phone and asked if they would come rough house the resident to wake her up. CNA D stated LVN A was neglectful and was not making Resident #1's needs a priority and making it like it was a bother rather than addressing her change of condition. CNA D stated the whole situation was a surprise to her. She stated Resident #1 was normally independent, up and about, and alert. She stated she had never seen the resident in any other way. She stated she had never seen any medications or drugs lying around in resident rooms. She stated she was trained to notify the nurse and go up the chain of command if necessary. She stated she had received in-service training on abuse/neglect, medication administration and change of condition following the event. During an interview on 11/20/2024 at 1:06 p.m., NA F stated she worked the overnight shift on 11/18/2024-11/19/2024. She stated she was doing rounds with NA E at approximately 11:00 p.m. she saw a man they did not know come out of Resident #1's room. She stated she also saw Resident #1 who was oriented normally and was up and moving around and asked for ice for her ankle. NA F stated at 5:00 a.m. they were across the hall when LVN A asked, What happened to Resident #1? NA F stated they said they did not know but LVN A told us to try to help wake her (Resident #1) up. NA F stated Resident #1 was breathing but was not responsive. She stated she was saying her name really loud, and they were pushing on her and shaking her, but it was not working. NA F stated they found a bag of pills in the room. NA F stated at approximately 5:30 a.m. she told LVN A she should probably call 911 since Resident #1 was unresponsive. NA F stated LVN A stated, Well she is a drug addict, so it doesn't matter. NA F stated LVN A then went back to the nurse's station and did not really acknowledge the situation. NA F stated they (aides) stayed with Resident #1. She stated a while later LVN B came in and assessed Resident #1 and called 911. She stated when she saw LVN B he went right into work mode. He immediately went into Resident #1's room, assessed her and took vital signs. NA F stated Resident #1 was still unresponsive, but LVN B got her help right away. She stated the ambulance came about 5 minutes later but the aides stayed with Resident #1 to make sure she did not stop breathing. NA F described Resident #1 as pale but not blue and looking like she was sleeping but would not wake up. NA F stated LVN A's actions and words were very inappropriate. NA F stated it was her first overnight shift. She stated she did not know the typical protocol door nighttime, just what LVN A had told her. She stated LVN A told her the aides not to go into Resident #1's room during the night, that it was on her chart not to go in because she was independent, and she could do everything on her own. She stated they might peak into her room from the door but wouldn't enter the room if it looked like the resident was sleeping. NA F stated she didn't have any way to verify what LVN A told her about the chart, they just had to take her word for it. She stated she did not open Resident #1's door between 11 p.m. - 5 am. NA F stated since the incident she had received training on opioid abuse, how to handle an overdose, change of condition and abuse/neglect. During an interview on 11/20/2024 at 1:37 p.m., NA E stated she worked 10 p.m.- 6 am shift on 11/18/2024. She stated at the beginning of her shift she saw a gentleman visitor come from outside to Resident #1's room. She stated she did not question the visitor because other staff had said the visitor had been there since 6:00 p.m. NA E stated the outside doors of the facility are locked and require a code to access or Resident #1 may have given the code to the visitor. NA E stated she saw the visitor leave and come back in with a food to go box in a clear plastic bag. She stated she assumed it was food that was delivered to the facility for her. She stated families do it all the time. NA E stated the visitor left at approximately 10:45 p.m. She stated she last saw Resident #1 well at 11:10 p.m. when she brought her an ice pack for her leg. NA E stated she was acting like her normal self. NA E stated at 5:00 a.m., LVN A said Resident #1 was not waking up and she was trying to give her medications. NA E stated she did not know why LVN A was relying on the aides to do something about it when she was the nurse. NA E stated she went into Resident #1's room and tried to wake her up. She stated she tried calling her name, tapping her shoulder, and giving her a chest rub. NA E stated Resident #1 moved her mouth a little, like a twitch. She stated her legs twitched also and she wouldn't wake up. NA E stated Resident #1 never opened her eyes or responded in any verbal way. NA E stated she then left the room because she had other residents to attend to. NA E stated LVN A was frantic, like she did not know what to do. NA E stated she had them search the room with flashlights and they found a small clear case with multiple pills in it which they gave to LVN A. NA E stated this whole time Resident #1 was unconscious and LVN A was not proving care, she did not do vitals, nothing. NA E stated LVN A then went and sat at the nurse's station. NA E stated the aides were lost and did not know what to do but it seemed like LVN A did not care. NA E stated when they next shift arrived, they took over and asked LVN A if she had called the doctor or called 911 and LVN A said no she did not. NA E stated LVN A admitted she did not notify the doctor or 911. NA E stated the aides were all very stressed out. She stated they were trained to notify the nurse which they did. NA E stated they had thought about calling 911 themselves but did not want to get in trouble. She stated she was trained to tell the Administrator because she was the abuse coordinator, but she couldn't think so she called the on-call person who said she would call the Administrator. During an interview on 11/20/2024 at 2:56 p.m., LVN A stated she had been a nurse for 33 years. She stated on the night of 11/18/2024 around approximately 11:08 p.m. she noted that Resident #1 was drowsier than normal but was otherwise alert and oriented. LVN A stated she couldn't remember a lot of about that night, just that she was in bed, that she did not say a lot, but she was resting quietly. LVN A stated on 11/19/2024 at 5:30 a.m. she went into Resident #1's room to give scheduled morphine and noted the resident's right leg handing off the bed with her head of bed at 45 degrees with her head to the side. LVN A stated Resident #1 was sleeping. She stated she tried to wake Resident #1 up and noted she was hard to wake up. LVN A stated Resident #1 slit her eyes open a little and was trying to talk but she could not understand her. LVN A stated she thought Oh my gosh. She stated the aides were just outside the room in the hallway. She stated she couldn't remember who the aides were but there were two of them and she wanted them to come inside the room because Resident #1 would not wake up. LVN A stated Resident #1 was drug seeking so she started searching her room and found 5-6 pills a piece of peach-colored pills. S[TRUNCATED]
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

Comprehensive Care Plan (Tag F0656)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, consistent with the resident rights, that includes measurable objective and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs that are identified in the comprehensive assessment for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for care plans, in that; The facility failed to develop a person-centered care plan with interventions that addressed Resident #1's behaviors of bringing in medications from home, from other providers and from visitors and self-medicating without telling staff. This failure could place residents at risk for not having their needs and preferences met. The findings were: Record review of Resident #1's face sheet dated 11/20/2024 revealed an admission date of 10/15/2024 with diagnosis which included: displaced bimalleolar fracture of left lower leg (broken bone of the ankle), subsequent encounter for closed fracture with routine healing, complete rotator cuff tear or rupture of right shoulder (muscles and tendons which surround the shoulder joint), not specified as traumatic, depression, anxiety disorder and chronic pain syndrome. Record review of Resident #1's admission MDS dated [DATE] revealed she had a BIMs score of 15 which indicated she was cognitively intact and did not have any behaviors. The MDS assessment indicated the resident had a history of frequent pain that occasionally interfered with ADL's. Record review of Resident #1's Care Plan initiated on 10/16/2024, revealed the resident had chronic pain syndrome and was followed by a pain specialist with interventions which included: administer analgesics as per orders. The care plan did not address behaviors of polypharmacy, having visitors bring in medications or having medications in her room and self-administering medications without staff knowledge. Record review of a provider progress note dated 11/08/2024 by PA J revealed: Patient (Resident #1) went to a pain medication doctor and had morphine prescription received, filled at outside pharmacy which she kept in her room and would self-dose. This was discovered and morphine was taken away from her .Denies alcohol, tobacco, drugs of abuse. Record review of Resident #1's nurse progress notes dated 11/09/2024 at 8:28 a.m. documented by LVN K revealed: Guest approached nurse at nursing station expressing concern. The pharmacy had questioned the medication she was picking (up) for a resident (Resident #1), morphine tablets (narcotic) and melodic (anti-inflammatory). The resident had requested she bring her medication with codeine (hydrocodone/acetaminophen 10/325) (narcotic opioid pain reliever) a week prior from a local pharmacy. The resident (Resident #1) explained that she had received the order from her pain management doctor at a previous appointment as the current pain medication was not effective at managing her pain. The nurse educated the patient (Resident #1) to inform her nurse of any new orders from appointments or her PCP so that her doctor at the facility could adjust her medication and make orders to safely assist her healing and rehab goals. The patient expressed understanding and stated she would not self-administer medication without informing the nurse. Record review of Resident #1's nurse progress notes dated 11/10/2024 at 4:43 p.m., documented by LVN H revealed: a CNA (unknown) notified nurse of suspicious activity. A person entered Resident #1's room with a package and immediately left. The incident was reported to the Administrator. Instruction was given to search room for medication, for patient safety. Patient (Resident #1) on narcotics and has a history of asking friends to bring in narcotic(s) and other pain medication prescribed by other providers into the facility and not adhering to facility policy. Patient education given. During an interview on 11/21/2024 at 4:46 p.m., RN MDS Coordinator M stated Resident #1's care plan did not address Resident #1's behaviors of bringing in medications from outside the facility and no interventions were put in place. She stated it had never really dawned on her to put it in the care plan. She stated the floor nurses were aware of the behaviors because they were the ones who documented it and she did not believe it happened frequently. RN MDS Coordinator M stated she first learned of the behaviors during morning meeting (unknown date) when she heard the nurses talk about it. She stated in hindsight she should have done it. She stated the purpose of the care plan was to disseminate information to staff such as things the resident was at risk for and their likes/dislikes. She stated it was important because it was a behavior and should have been in the care plan when it occurred so it would have been visible on the [NAME] for staff review. During an interview on 11/23/2024 at 2:06 p.m., the Regional RN stated the MDS Coordinator and herself were responsible for care plan updates and completion. She stated during her review of Resident #1's care plan post 11/19/2024 incident and hospitalization was the first time she noted issues with the care plan. She stated Resident #1's behaviors of bringing in medication was something she would have expected to be included in that care plan. She stated it was important, so everyone was aware of the what the plan of care was and how they were to take care of the resident. Record review of a facility policy, titled Comprehensive Care Plans (undated) revealed: The comprehensive care plan will be developed within 7 days after completion of the comprehensive MDS assessment. Other factors identified by the interdisciplinary team, or in accordance with the resident's preferences, will also be address in the plan of care.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Medical Records (Tag F0842)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews, and record review, the facility failed to maintain medical records, in accordance with accepted professiona...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews, and record review, the facility failed to maintain medical records, in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices, that are complete; and accurately documented for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for medical records, in that; The facility failed to ensure staff documented Resident #1's unresponsiveness and SBAR assessment, the pills found in her room on 11/19/2024 or interventions for her change of condition including notification/activation of 911 and transfer to the hospital for treatment. This failure could result in residents not having an accurate overall view of their care and services. The findings were: Record review of Resident #1's face sheet dated 11/20/2024 revealed an admission date of 10/15/2024 with diagnosis which included: displaced bimalleolar fracture of left lower leg (broken bone of the ankle), subsequent encounter for closed fracture with routine healing, complete rotator cuff tear or rupture of right shoulder (muscles and tendons which surround the shoulder joint), not specified as traumatic, depression, anxiety disorder and chronic pain syndrome. Record review of Resident #1's Care Plan initiated on 10/16/2024 revealed the resident had chronic pain syndrome and was followed by a pain specialist with interventions which included: administer analgesics as per orders. The care plan did not address behaviors of polypharmacy or having medications in her room without staff knowledge. Record review of Resident #1's admission MDS dated [DATE] revealed she had a BIMs score of 15 which indicated she was cognitively intact and did not have any behaviors. The MDS assessment indicated the resident had a history of frequent pain that occasionally interfered with ADL's. Record review of Resident #1's nurse progress notes documented by LVN A on 11/19/2024 at 5:55 a.m. read 0530 (5:30 a.m.) walked into room, HOB 35 degrees, right leg hanging off the bed .(Resident #1) lethargic, unable to fully arouse, garbled words incomprehensible. Informed the aid (sic) on the hall. She reports to me a man went (sic) in her room at 11:00 p.m. and left. I asked if she reported to someone. She said the nurse on the Southside was told. I asked why? I am the nurse here on this side. Holding this 6 am dose (unknown medication). Will report to oncoming shift. Record review of Resident #1's medical record revealed there were no further progress notes or assessments to indicate any further assessments or that 911 was called or that Resident #1 was transferred to the hospital for a significant change in mental status. Record review of 3613-A Provider Investigative Report dated 11/19/2024 revealed on 7/19/2024 (incorrect date, actual date 11/19/2024), the facility was notified that a nurse (LVN A) found a patient (Resident #1) unresponsive at 5:30 am and called EMS at 6:30 a.m. The facility suspended the nurse (LVN A) for further investigation due to a delay in care. EMS arrived and administered Narcan, and the patient (Resident #1) was taken to a local ER and kept overnight for evaluation. The patient (Resident #1) was found to have medication at bedside and hospital records showed marijuana in (her) system). During an interview on 11/20/2024 at 12:04 p.m., LVN B stated on 11/19/2024 at 6:25 a.m. he came onto duty. He stated night shift nurse LVN A was seated at the nurse's station trying to give him report when he arrived. LVN B stated LVN A stated she noticed a change of condition for Resident #1 related to level of consciousness. LVN B stated LVN A stated the aides told her about the change of condition at 11:00 p.m. when Resident #1 had visitors and was lethargic. LVN B stated LVN A told him she assessed Resident #1 at 11:00 p.m. (11/18/2024) and found her lethargic. LVN B stated LVN A told him she went into Resident #1's room at 5:00 a.m. to assess the resident and she was not arousable. LVN B stated he questioned LVN A to see if she had notified the physician or transferred the resident to the hospital since Resident #1 was normally A/O x 4 (alert and oriented x 4 which indicated she was cognitively intact). LVN B stated LVN A stated she had not notified anyone. LVN B stated as soon as he heard LVN A say that he ran directly to Resident #1's room. He stated he had not yet clocked into work, but he was concerned since LVN A did not seem to know what was going on. LVN B stated LVN A stated she thought it might be medication related since the night aides found medication in Resident #1's room. LVN B stated he was alarmed. He stated he had two aides go with him. He stated when he saw Resident #1, he knew immediately something was wrong. He stated Resident #1 was very lethargic and was not able to verbalize anything. He stated she was just grunting. He stated she was breathing, and he obtained vital signs which were stable. He stated he made sure someone stayed with Resident #1 because he knew she needed to go to the hospital. LVN B stated he went to find LVN A and told her to call 911, which she did. He stated he went back to Resident #1's bedside but LVN A went to her medication card. LVN A stated he notified Resident #1's physician and her family. LVN A stated he told the physician Resident #1 was minimally responsive and that EMS had been activated. During an interview on 11/20/2024 at 2:56 p.m., LVN A stated on the night of 11/18/2024 around approximately 11:08 p.m. she noted that Resident #1 was drowsier than normal but was otherwise alert and oriented. LVN A stated on 11/19/2024 at 5:30 a.m. she went into Resident #1's room to give scheduled morphine and noted the resident's right leg handing off the bed with her head of bed at 45 degrees with her head to the side. LVN A stated Resident #1 was sleeping. She stated she tried to walk Resident #1 up and noted she was hard to wake up. LVN A stated Resident #1 slit her eyes open a little and was trying to talk but she could not understand her. LVN A stated she thought Oh my gosh. She stated the aides were just outside the room in the hallway. She stated she couldn't remember who the aides were but there were two of them and she wanted them to come inside the room because Resident #1 would not wake up. LVN A stated Resident #1 was drug seeking so she started searching her room and found 5-6 pills a piece of peach-colored pills. LVN A stated Resident #1 was not unresponsive. She stated she opened her eyes and garbled something. LVN A stated she kept going in and out of the room and noted Resident #1 gave a big grimace with a sternal rub. LVN A stated when she saw the big grimace she thought Oh God, she is okay and it was the end of her shift, and she was tired. LVN A stated she called 911 because she thought maybe they could shake her up. LVN A stated was trained to assess, document assessment for resident change of condition. LVN A stated she did not know why she deviated from how she was trained other than she was pretty tired and had worked her butt off. During an interview on 11/21/2024 at 9:56 a.m., LVN B stated there was no SBAR or other assessment documented in Resident #1's medical record for her change of condition that occurred on 11/19/2024 or any notifications. He stated he was trained to do an SBAR assessment with change of condition and document it in the medical record. He stated he was also trained to document in the progress notes the assessment and assessed vitals. He stated he did not document his assessment because he gave the information to LVN A. He stated he should have documented when Resident #1 was transferred to the hospital. LVN B stated it was important to document pertinent information in the medical record because it was a confirmation of work done. He stated he had received training by the facility on documentation on an unknown date. During an interview on 11/22/2024 at 11:20 a.m., the Regional RN stated staff were trained to document the SBAR assessment located under documents for resident change of condition. She stated they were trained to document change of condition which included the assessment, vitals, and notifications also in the progress notes. She stated the whole chain of events should be included in the notes including any new orders, transfers, etc. She stated it was important to document so there was continuity of care. Record review of a facility policy, titled Documentation in the Medical Record (undated) revealed: Each resident's medical record shall contain an accurate representation of the actual experiences of the resident and include enough information to provide a picture of the resident's progress through complete, accurate, and timely documentation. 1. Licensed staff and interdisciplinary team members shall document all assessments, observations, and services provided in the resident's medical record in accordance with state law and facility policy. 2. Documentation shall be completed at the time of service, but no later than the shift in which the assessment, observation or care service occurred. 4. Principles of documentation include but are not limited to: a. Documentation shall be factual, objective, and resident centered i. False information shall not be documented.
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Pharmacy Services (Tag F0755)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services (including procedures ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services (including procedures that assure the accurate acquiring, receiving, dispensing, and administering of all drugs and biologicals) to meet the needs of each resident for 2 of 6 residents (Residents #2 and #3) reviewed for medications and pharmacy services, in that: The facility failed to ensure Resident #2 clobetasol propionate 0.05% prescription shampoo and over-the-counter polysporin were secured when they were left in the resident's room. The facility failed to ensure Resident #3's Simbrinza ophthalmic suspension x 2 bottles and 5 medication cups of an unknown ointment were secured when the resident was not in the room. These deficient practices could put residents at risk for inaccurate or inappropriate administration of medications. The findings were: 1. Record review of Resident #2's face sheet dated 11/23/2024 revealed an admission date of 11/09/2024 with diagnoses which included: atrial fibrillation (irregular heart rhythm), adult failure to thrive (weight loss and general decline) and muscle weakness. Record review of Resident #2's care plan initiated on 11/10/2024 revealed no relevant care areas. Record review of Resident #2's admission MDS revealed it was still in progress and had not been completed. Record review of Resident #2's physician order summary dated 11/23/2024 revealed he did not have orders for clobetasol shampoo or over-the-counter polysporin. Record review of Resident #2's medical record revealed he had not been assessed for self-administration of medication. During an observation and interview on 11/19/2024 at 1:57 p.m., Resident #2 was observed in bed awake without staff in attendance. A box of clobetasol propionate 0.05% prescription shampoo and over-the-counter polysporin ointment (antibiotic ointment) was observed on his dresser. Resident #2 did not answer any questions about the medications and it was unclear if he was cognitively intact. He stated, leave those there please. During an observation and interview on 11/19/2024 at 3:12 p.m., LVN B stated Resident #2 could not keep the clobetasol shampoo in his room or the polysporin. He confirmed the shampoo was a prescription. He stated the staff inspect the rooms and teach the patients, so they know to bring medications to the nurses. He described Resident #2 was cognitively intact. LVN B took the shampoo and polysporin ointment with him while exiting the room and informed Resident #2 he needed to talk to his doctor about the medications. 2. Record review of Resident #3's face sheet dated 11/21/2024 revealed an admission date of 11/16/2020 with readmission date of 5/29/2024 with diagnoses which included: epilepsy, pain in right knee, right shoulder and dementia. Record review of Resident #3's quarterly MDS dated [DATE] revealed a BIMs score of 14 which indicated the resident was cognitively intact and without behaviors. Record review of Resident #3's Self-Medication Administration assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had been assessed and determined to be able to self-administer medications. Record review of Resident #3's Care Plan initiated on 8/02/2024 revealed the resident could self-administer specific medications with interventions which included: keep medications in a lockbox. Remind as needed to use box only for medication and to lock up in between uses. Record review of Resident #3's physician order summary revealed the following orders: 1. Simbrinza ophthalmic suspension 1-0-2% (brinzolamide-brimonidine tartrate) instill 1 drop in both eyes two times a day for glaucoma. 2. Voltaren arthritis pain external gel 1% (diclofenac sodium) topical ointment: apply to knees, painful sites topically two times a day every Tues, Thurs, Sat for pain as unsupervised self administration whenever patient reports pain, 3. Zoryve External cream 0.3% (roflumilast) topical, apply to right thigh topically every day shift for rash During an observation on 11/19/2024 at 2:33 p.m. two bottles of prescription Simbrinza ophthalmic suspension 1-0-2% and 5 medication cups labeled with different body parts such as groin, knee, leg with a white creamy substance assumed to be a medicated ointment were on the over bed table. Resident #3 was not in the room and no staff were in the room. Multiple gloves were also noted on the table. There was a small clear lockbox on the over bed table that had the key in the lock. The clear lockbox contained individual jelly packets too numerous to count. During an observation and interview on 11/19/2024 at 2:43 p.m. CNA D stated medications were to be administered by the med tech or the nurse. She stated she did not know what the medications were in Resident #3's room. She stated she was not aware of any residents in the facility who were self-administering medication. She stated she was trained to take up the medications and notify the nurse. She stated those medications (referring to the eye drops and multiple medication cups of ointment) need to be picked up. She exited the room leaving the medications in the room unattended. During an observation and interview on 11/19/2024 at 2:51 p.m., LVN P stated Resident #3 self-administered some of his medications. She stated he had been assessed for self-administration. LVN P stated they could leave medications in Resident #3's room but the medications should be in a locked drawer and the resident keeps the key. She stated the nursing staff did not have to observe Resident #3 administering his medication. She stated Resident #3 had pain medication and eye drops that he kept in his room. She stated the rest of his medications were kept in the locked medication cart. She stated unless a resident had been assessed for safe self-administration all medications were to be locked up. Upon observing the eye drops and multiple medication cups with the white gel in them, LVN P stated the white medication was either knee pain gel, a prescription cream for his thighs or moisturizer but she was not certain what was in the medication cups. She stated Resident #3 should be keeping his medications in the locked box and keeping the key with him and not using it to lock up jelly. She stated she was not certain why he had two bottles of the Simbrinza in his room. LVN P stated it was important to keep medications locked up because they have some residents who wander who might be confused and think medications were candy. She stated the eye drops and ointment/pain gel should also be locked up whenever the resident was not in the room. She exited the room and left the medication on the overhead table. During an interview on 11/22/2024 at 8:02 a.m., RN ADON L stated the CNAs should report any medications found in a resident room to the nurse. She stated any medications in a resident room should be removed. Record review of a facility policy titled Medication Administration (undated) revealed the policy did not address storage of medications. Record review of a facility policy titled Resident Self-Administration of Medication (undated) revealed: 3. When determining if self-administration is clinically appropriate for a resident, the interdisciplinary team should at minimum consider the following: g. The residents ability to ensure that medication is stored safely and securely.
Aug 2024 5 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0583 (Tag F0583)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents have a right to personal privacy for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #18) reviewed for privacy, in that: ADON A d...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents have a right to personal privacy for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #18) reviewed for privacy, in that: ADON A did not close completely Resident #18's privacy curtain while providing wound care. This deficient practice could place residents at-risk of loss of dignity due to lack of privacy. The findings include: 1. Record review of Resident #18's face sheet, dated 08/01/2024, reflected an admission date of 06/18/2024 and, a readmission date of 07/18/2024, with diagnoses which included: Osteomyelitis (infection of bone) left ankle and foot, Moderate intellectual disability, Osteoporosis (Systemic loss of bone mass resulting in fragile bones), Pressure ulcer of heel, stage 4 (wound exposing the bone). Record review of Resident #18's Significant change of status MDS assessment, dated 07/25/2024, reflected the resident had a BIMS score of 05, indicating she was severely cognitively impaired. Resident #18 was always incontinent of bladder and bowel and, required extensive assistance to total care with her ADLs. Record review of Resident #18's care plan, dated 06/23/2024, reflected a problem of The resident is at risk for pressure injury related to History of Pressure Injuries, Incontinence, Reduced Mobility, Sheering/ friction problems, with an intervention of Perform and document weekly assessment form of skin for changes or observations. Observation on 08/01/2024 at 10:14 a.m. reflected ADON A did not completely close the privacy curtains while she provided wound care for Resident #18, exposing the resident who could be seen from the room's door. Further observation revealed a Hospice services nurse entered the room during care and was able to see the resident receiving wound care. During an interview with ADON A on 08/01/2024 at 10:40 a.m., ADON A verbally confirmed the privacy curtains was not completely closed while she provided care for Resident #18, but it should have been. She stated she received resident rights training within the year. During an interview with the DON on 08/01/2024 at 4:18 p.m., the DON stated privacy must be provided during nursing care and Resident #18's privacy curtains should have been closed completely. She stated the staff had received training on resident rights within the year and the training was provided by the DON. They also check the staff skills annually and as needed. Review of the facility's policy titled Promoting/Maintaining Resident Dignity, undated, reflected, Maintain resident privacy.
CONCERN (D)

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

Assessment Accuracy (Tag F0641)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure the assessment accurately reflected the resident's status ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure the assessment accurately reflected the resident's status for 1 of 18 residents (Resident #52) whose assessments were reviewed, in that: Resident #52's Significant change MDS, dated [DATE], incorrectly documented the resident as receiving an injection of insulin. This failure could place residents at-risk for inadequate care and services due to an inaccurate assessments. The findings were: 1. Record review of Resident #52's face sheet, dated 07/31/2024, revealed an admission date of 06/17/2021 and, a readmission date of 06/20/2024 with diagnoses that included: Dementia (General decline in cognitive ability), Hemiplegia (Weakness of one entire side of the body), Alpers disease (Genetic disorder causing brain and liver damages), Type 2 diabetes mellitus (High blood sugar levels). Record review of Resident #52's Physician orders and Medication administration record for June 2024 revealed orders for: Trulicity Subcutaneous Solution Pen-injector 1.5 MG/0.85ML (Dulaglutide) Inject 1 application subcutaneously one time a day every Thursday for Diabetes Mellitus. Record review of Resident #52's Medication Administration Record for the month of June 2024 revealed Resident #52 received Trulicity Subcutaneous Solution Pen-injector once, as per order, between 06/13/2024 and 06/20/2024. Record review of Resident #52's Significant change MDS, dated [DATE], revealed the assessment indicated Resident #52 received an injection of insulin. During an interview with the MDS nurse E on 08/02/2024 2:30 p.m., MDS nurse E verbally confirmed Resident #52's Significant change MDS was coded as the resident having received an injection of insulin when Resident #52 had received Trulicity (not an insulin) . She verbally Trulicity was not an insulin and should not have been coded as an insulin. The MDS nurse stated the RAI was used as reference for the MDS and she had access electronically to the RAI on her computer. Record review of, Long-Term Care Facility Resident Assessment Instrument 3.0 User's Manual, Version 1.18.11, October 2023, revealed, Enter in Item N0350A, the number of days during the 7-day look-back period (or since admission/entry or reentry if less than 7 days) that insulin injections were received.
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0558 (Tag F0558)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure residents received services in the facility with...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure residents received services in the facility with reasonable accommodation of resident needs for 3 of 8 residents (Residents #19, #21 and #49) who were observed for call light placement. The facility failed to ensure the call light was within reach for Residents #19, #21, and #49. This deficient practice could affect any resident and keep them from calling for help as needed. The findings included: Record review of Resident #19's face sheet, dated 08/01/2024, reflected she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included: unspecified dementia, unspecified severity, without behavioral disturbance, psychotic disturbance, and anxiety, age-related osteoporosis without current pathological fracture, hemiplegia and hemiparesis following unspecified cerebrovascular disease affecting, unspecified side, weakness, and other abnormalities of gait and mobility. Record review of Resident #19's Quarterly MDS assessment, dated 06/24/2024, reflected the resident's BIMS score was 03, which indicated severe cognitive impairment. The Quarterly MDS assessment further revealed Resident #19 required substantial/maximal assistance (helper does more than half the effort) for mobility roll left and right, sit to lying, sit to stand, chair/bed to chair transfer, lying to sitting on side of bed, dependent (helper does all the effort) for toileting hygiene, shower/bathe self, lower body dressing. Record review of Resident #19's care plan, revision date of 07/31/2024, reflected Focus: [resident name] is High risk for falls history of falls dementia, generalized weakness, left sided weakness . with Interventions: Be sure the resident's call light is within reach and encourage the resident to use it for assistance as needed, the resident needs prompt response to all requests for assistance. Observation on 08/01/24 4:28 p.m. revealed Resident #19 with her call light located on the floor under the side of her bed near the nightstand. During an interview on 08/01/2024 at 4:31 p.m. MA D stated Resident #19 did use her call light sometimes and placed resident's call light back on the bed. MA D further stated whoever assisted residents or laid them down were supposed to make sure residents could reach them. MA D stated residents used call lights if they need anything or had an emergency for their safety. Record review of Resident #21's face sheet, dated 08/01/2024, reflected she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included: Alzheimer's disease, acute kidney failure, unspecified, weakness, and cognitive communication deficit. Record review of Resident #21's Quarterly MDS assessment, dated 07/25/2024, reflected the resident's BIMS score was 02, which indicated severe cognitive impairment. The Quarterly MDS assessment further revealed Resident #21 required substantial/maximal assistance (helper does more than half the effort) for mobility sit to lying, sit to stand, chair/bed to chair transfer, lying to sitting on side of bed, shower/bathe self, lower body dressing and dependent (helper does all the effort) for toileting hygiene. Record review of Resident #21's care plan, revision date of 07/19/2024, reflected Focus: [resident name] is High risk for falls history of falls r/t cognitive impairment, wears glasses, unsteady gait/balance. with Interventions: Be sure the resident's call light is within reach and encourage the resident to use it for assistance as needed, the resident needs prompt response to all requests for assistance. Observation and interview on 07/30/2024 at 11:12 a.m. revealed Resident #21's call light was on the floor next to her bed. CNA C stated she did not believe Resident #21 used her call light, but the call light should have been within reach of Resident #21. CNA C placed call light under Resident #21's hand after picking it up off the floor. Observation on 08/01/2024 at 4:28 p.m. revealed Resident #21 with call light located on the floor near the head of bed. During an interview on 08/01/2024 at 4:31 p.m. MA D stated Resident #21 did use her call light sometimes and placed resident's call light back on the bed. MA D further stated whoever assisted residents or laid them down were supposed to make sure residents could reach them. MA D stated residents used call lights if they need anything or had an emergency for their safety. Record review of Resident #49's face sheet, dated 07/10/2024, reflected she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included: metabolic encephalopathy, unspecified dementia, unspecified severity, without behavioral disturbance, psychotic disturbance, mood disturbance and anxiety, unsteadiness on feet, and other abnormalities of gait and mobility. Record review of Resident #49's admission MDS assessment, dated 06/03/2024, reflected the resident's BIMS score was 03, which indicated severe cognitive impairment. The admission MDS assessment further revealed Resident #49 required substantial/maximal assistance (helper does more than half the effort) for sit to lying, dependent (helper does all the effort for toileting hygiene, shower/bathe self, upper body dressing, lower body dressing, roll left and right, lying to sitting on the side of bed, and chair/bed-to-chair transfer. Record review of Resident #49's care plan, revision date of 07/29/2024, reflected Focus: The resident is at risk for falls r/t advanced dementia with associated risk of decreased safety awareness and impulsivity, Deconditioning, Gait/balance problems, Incontinent episodes (highly prefers having BM in toilet potential risk for self-transfer attempt) . with Interventions: Be sure The resident's call light is within reach and encourage the resident to use it for assistance as needed. The resident needs prompt response to all requests for assistance. Observation and interview on 07/30/2024 at 10:50 a.m. revealed Resident #49 sitting in w/c next to her bed wearing her oxygen with her soft touch call light hanging on the quarter rail of her bed behind Resident #49. Resident #49 stated she did push it sometimes and further stated she could not reach it right then. During an interview on 07/30/2024 at 10:58 a.m. CNA C stated Resident #49 she did not believe used the call light, however, the residents were to always have it with them. CNA C further stated it was important for residents to be able to reach their call lights so the residents could call for help. Observation and interview on 08/01/2024 at 4:37 p.m. revealed Resident #49 lying in bed with the head of her bed elevated and call light on the floor next to the bed. ADON A entered the room, picked up the call light off the floor and placed across resident. ADON A stated Resident #49 would not have been able to reach it, and this was why she picked it up and gave it to Resident #49. During an interview on 08/01/2024 at 5:15 p.m. the DON stated anybody who was in the room should ensure the call lights were in reach when leaving the rooms. The DON further stated call lights are part of their fall prevention measures. The DON stated call lights were used by residents for emergencies, in any situation they needed assistance, and she knew many did not use the call light, but the call light should still be in place. Record review of facility's Call Lights: Accessibility and Timely Response policy, no revised date, read Policy the purpose of this policy is to assure the facility is adequately equipped with a call light at each residents' bedside, toilet, and bathing facility to allow residents to call for assistances . Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines: 5. Staff will ensure the call light is within reach of resident and secured, as needed. 6. The call system will be accessible to residents while in their bed or other sleeping accommodations within the resident's room.
CONCERN (E)

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

Food Safety (Tag F0812)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store and prepare food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed, in that...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store and prepare food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed, in that: 1. [NAME] I was not wearing a moustache or beard guard while preparing food. 2. The walk-in refrigerator and walk in freezer both contained improperly stored food items. These deficient practices could place residents who consumed meals and/or snacks from the kitchen at risk for food borne illness. The findings were: 1. Observation on 07/30/2024 at 9:36 a.m. revealed [NAME] I was standing at the kitchen range and preparing the lunchtime meal. Further observation revealed three containers of food were on the kitchen range and were uncovered. Additional observation revealed [NAME] I had a moustache and a beard and was not wearing a moustache restraint or a beard restraint. During an interview, at the same time as the observation, [NAME] I stated that he does not wear moustache or beard restraints, had never been directed to do so, and said, I don't know if we have any [restraints]. During an interview with the Dietary Manager on 07/30/2024 at 9:45 a.m., the Dietary Manager stated that it was the policy for kitchen staff to utilize moustache and beard restraint to cover facial hair while inside the kitchen. Record review of the facility policy, Dietary Employee Personal Hygiene, undated, revealed, 4. Hair Restraints a. All dietary staff must wear hair restraints (e.g., hairnet, hat, and/or beard restraint) to prevent hair from contacting food. Record review of the Food Code, U.S. Public Health Service, U.S. FDA, 2017, U.S. Department of H&HS, 2-402.11, revealed, (A) Except as provided in (B) of this section, Food employees shall wear hair restraints such as hats, hair coverings or nets, beard restraints, and clothing that covers body hair, that are designed and worn to effectively keep their hair from contacting exposed food; clean equipment, utensils, and linens; and unwrapped single service and single-use articles. Record review of the Food Code, U.S. Public Health Service, U.S. FDA, 2017, U.S. Department of H&HS, 3-305.14 Food Preparation, During preparation, unpackaged food shall be protected from environmental sources of contamination. 2. Observation on 08/01/2024 at 3:00 p.m. inside the walk-in refrigerator revealed a cardboard container of lunchmeat on the top shelf. The bottom and part of the lower section on the side of the container were wet and the cardboard was coming apart. Further observation inside the walk-in refrigerator revealed a cardboard container with approximately 10 blocks of butter wrapped in wax paper. The cardboard container did not have a lid and there were multiple loose pieces of butter on the inside of the container and on the wrapped blocks of butter. Observation on 08/01/2024 at 3:05 p.m. inside the walk-in freezer revealed three unsealed cardboard containers: one with tater tots, one with vegetable medley, and the last with cinnamon roll pinwheels. Each food item was inside a plastic bag which was also unsealed, and the food items were exposed to the air. During an interview with the Dietary Manager on 08/01/2024 at 3:15 p.m., the Dietary Manager stated that the above listed food items should have been stored in sealed containers to protect them from freezer burn and contaminates. Record review of the facility policy, Food Safety Requirements, undated, revealed, Food will also be stored, prepared, distributed, and served n accordance with professional standards for food service safety. Record review of the Food Code, U.S. Public Health Service, U.S. FDA, 2017, U.S. Department of H&HS, revealed 3-305.1, Food Storage, (A) Food shall be protected from contamination by storing the food: (1) in a clean, dry location; (2) Where it is not exposited to splash, dust, or other contamination.
CONCERN (E)

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

Infection Control (Tag F0880)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain an Infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain an Infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable disease and infection for 3 of 9 residents (Residents #4, #30 and, #24) reviewed for infection control, in that: 1. Medication Aide F did not sanitize the blood pressure cuff between Residents #4 and #30. 2. While providing catheter care for Resident #24, CNA G and CNA H did not change their gloves or wash their hands after touching the privacy curtain and the environment outside of the room. These deficient practices could place residents at-risk for infection due to improper care practices. The findings include: 1. Record review of Resident #4's face sheet, dated 08/01/2024, revealed an admission date of 03/25/2022 with diagnoses which included: Dementia (General decline in cognitive ability), Major depressive disorder (Mood disorder characterized by pervasive low mood, low self-esteem, and loss of interest in doing activities), Hypertension (High blood pressure). Record review of Resident #4's physician's orders for August 2024 revealed an order for hydroCHLOROthiazide Tablet 12.5 MG Give 1 tablet by mouth one time a day for Hypertension, edema hold for Systolic Blood Pressure less than 110. Record review of Resident #30's face sheet, dated 08/01/2024, revealed an admission date of 08/31/2016, and a readmission date of 07/19/2017 with diagnoses which included: Major depressive disorder (Mood disorder characterized by pervasive low mood, low self-esteem and loss of interest in doing activities), Hypertension (High blood pressure), Hypothyroidism (Thyroid gland does not produce enough thyroid hormone), Hyperlipidemia (High level of lipids(fat) in the blood). Record review of Resident #30's physicians' orders for August 2024 revealed an order for, Losartan Potassium Tablet 100 MG. Give 1 tablet by mouth one time a day for hypertension HOLD IF Systolic Blood Pressure less than 110 Observation on 08/01/2024 at 8:38 a.m. revealed, while administering medications, Medication Aide took the blood pressure and pulse of Residents #30, and #21 with the same blood pressure/pulse cuff. Medication Aide A did not sanitize the blood pressure/pulse cuff in between the residents. During an interview with Medication Aide F on 08/01/2024 at 9:04 a.m., Medication Aide F confirmed she used the blood pressure cuff on the 2 residents to measure their blood pressure. Medication Aide F confirmed she forgot to use a disinfecting wipe to disinfect the blood pressure cuff in between each resident but should have done it to avoid risk of cross contamination. Medication Aide F confirmed receiving infection control within the year. During an interview on 08/01/2024 at 4:18 p.m., the DON verbally confirmed the medication aide should have sanitized the blood pressure/pulse cuff in between the residents to avoid cross contamination. The DON revealed infection control training was provided to the staff multiple times a year. The DON revealed the staff's skills were checked annually. The DON further stated the ADONs did spot check of the staff for skills and infection control knowledge. Review of facility policy, titled Cleaning and disinfection of resident -care equipment, undated, revealed Multiple-resident use equipment shall be cleaned and disinfected after each use. 2. Record review of Resident #24's face sheet, dated 08/01/2024, revealed an admission date of 06/03/2024 with diagnoses which included: Osteomyelitis (infection of the bone) of left and right ankle and foot, Type 2 diabetes mellitus (High level of sugar in the blood), Hypothyroidism (Thyroid gland does not produce enough thyroid hormones), Hyperlipidemia (High level of lipids(fat) in the blood), Parkinson's disease (progressive disorder affecting the nervous system and causes movement problems), Hypertension (High blood pressure). Record review of Resident #24's MDS admission assessment, dated 06/10/2024, revealed the resident had a BIMS score of 12, indicating moderate impairment. Resident #24 required limited to extensive assistance, had an indwelling catheter and, was always incontinent of bowel. Record review of Resident #24's care plan revealed a care plan initiated 06/04/2024 with a problem of resident is on Enhanced Barrier Precautions related to Indwelling Medical device (Foley), +VRE (Infection with bacteria that are resistant to antibiotic called vancomycin), Wound. with a goal of will remain on Enhanced Barrier Precautions with no complications through next review. Observation on 08/01/2024 10 a.m., revealed while providing catheter care for Resident #24, CNA G and CNA H went to wash their hands in the common bathroom (outside of Resident #24's room), opened the door of the bathroom then went to the resident room. They put their gowns and gloves on without sanitizing their hands (resident is on enhanced barrier protection). They, then opened the door of the resident room, closed it and closed the privacy curtain. Without changing gloves and sanitizing their hands they started to provide care to Resident #24. During an interview on 08/01/2024 at 10:10 a.m., CNA G and CNA H confirmed they touched the bathroom door after washing their hands. The confirmed they should have sanitized their hands prior to don their gloves and gown. CNA G and CNA H confirmed they touched the privacy curtain after putting their gloves on. CNAs G and H confirmed the environment around the resident was considered dirty and they should have changed their gloves and sanitized their hands. CNA G and CNA H confirmed receiving infection control training within the year. During an interview on 08/01/2024 at 4:18 p.m., the DON confirmed the environment outside of the resident's room and around the residents was considered contaminated and the staff should have changed gloves and wash their hands after touching the doors and privacy curtain prior to touching the resident. The DON revealed infection control training was provided to the staff multiple times a year. The DON revealed the staff's skills were checked annually and sport checked by the ADONs. Review of facility policy, titled Hand Hygiene, undated, revealed, Staff will perform hand hygiene when indicated, using proper technique consistent with accepted standard of practice. Interview with the DON, on 08/02/2024 at 9 a.m. revealed the hand hygiene was the only policy the facility had regarding hand hygiene during care.
Dec 2023 3 deficiencies
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Deficiency F0602 (Tag F0602)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure residents had the right to be free from abuse, neglect, misap...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure residents had the right to be free from abuse, neglect, misappropriation of resident property, and exploitation for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for misappropriation. The facility failed to prevent misappropriation of property when CNA B took money via cash app and directly from a bank card from Resident #1 in the amount of $920.99 dollars. The non compliance was identified as past noncompliance. The noncompliance began on 09/29/23 and ended on 09/29/23. The facility had corrected the noncompliance before the survey began. This failure could place residents at risk of misappropriation which could lead to further exploitation of other residents. Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's electronic face sheet, dated 12/29/2023, indicated Resident #1 was a [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included mechanical complication of nephrostomy catheter (small tube draining urine from kidney), infection and inflammatory reaction due to indwelling urethral catheter (tube that drains urine), diabetes mellitus (too much sugar in the blood) due to underlying condition with severe non-proliferative diabetic retinopathy (weakened blood vessels in retina) with macular edema (blood vessels leaking into part of the retina called the macula), bilateral, and chronic kidney disease, Stage 3. Record review of the MDS SNF Discharge Assessment, dated 10/28/2023, indicated Resident #1 had a BIMS score of 15, which indicated the resident was cognitively intact. During an interview on 12/27/23 at 2:30 LVN A stated Resident #1 had lost his phone so Resident #1 asked to use her phone to call his bank. Resident #1 had it on speaker and when he heard his balance, he wanted to know the last 5 withdrawals since the balance did not seem correct to him. LVN A overheard the last 5 withdrawals which included 2 Cash Apps to CNA B with her name on the app and another withdrawal to a company with whom Resident #1 was not familiar. LVN A stated she immediately went to get the ADM and they called the bank again to verify the amounts. LVN A was asked how CNA B could have accessed Resident #1's account. LVN A stated, Resident #1 had just returned from the hospital and he had left his bank card on the bedside table. LVN A stated, He was more hurt by the allegation since CNA B was a good aide. LVN A stated Resident #1 has not had any negative psychological effects from this situation. LVN A stated she conducted the in-service with employees regarding misappropriation of property on 09/29/23. Resident #1 was interviewed on 12/27/23 at 3:18 pm. Resident #1 stated he had been in the facility about 5 years. Regarding the incident, Resident #1 said he had his wallet on his overbed table with his bank card in it. He had to go to the ER, so the wallet was left on his table. Resident #1 stated he was surprised about learning of the theft and said he was very pleased with the facility's response. Resident #1 stated they reimbursed him right away. Resident #1 stated he was pressing charges and was waiting to hear from the police department about the case. Resident #1 stated that if he must leave the facility, he would either take his wallet with him or lock it up in the ADM office. Resident #1 stated he was very satisfied with care and plans to stay at the facility permanently. A review of CNA B's personnel file contained the Criminal History check that was conducted on 05/01/23. CNA B was hired on 04/28/23. The Criminal History revealed 6 arrests for theft including a robbery charge on 10/22/12 in which she was convicted of a 2nd degree felony . During an interview with ADM on 12/28/23 at 9:47, the ADM stated she was employed at the facility on 08/28/23. ADM stated We run criminal history checks prior to hire and if something comes up then the ADM looks at it. If I would have seen this prior to hire, then I would not have hired her. ADM stated, The HR Person who ran the check at the time is no longer here and I was not employed here at the time. ADM stated the aide had been fired and the resident was pressing charges. ADM stated the facility immediately reimbursed the resident for the stolen funds rather than wait for the bank to do it. Record review of a copy of the check from the facility to Resident #1 in the amount of $920.99 dated 10/02/23 verified the facility reimbursed the resident for the lost funds in a timely manner. The facility reported this incident to HHSC and an Abuse and Neglect and Misappropriation Inservice was conducted on 9/29/23 by LVN A who was the ADON at the time. A phone interview was conducted on 12/28/23 at 11:00 am with the Detective in the Police Department assigned to this case. Det C stated they were still trying to tie the Cash App charges to CNA B. The Cash App company said they did not have anyone with the name given on the app. The other payment was a car payment that was also under a different name. Det C stated, This is an active investigation. Det C stated she contacted CNA B and at first, she said she would come in to talk with the PD but then changed her mind and now does not answer calls. CNA B said she was working elsewhere but it was unknown where she was working. In an interview on 12/28/23 at 11:30 am with RN D, she stated she had worked for this company for 2 years. RN D stated HR runs the criminal history checks. If any type of infraction is indicated on the check, the results are given to the ADM so the ADM can make a decision about hiring. The HR person or ADM may go to the President of the company if further investigation is needed on whether a person is employable. RN D stated, I am unable to look at criminal histories since only HR and ADM have approved access. During an interview on 12/28/23 at 1:34 with the HR/Payroll Manager, she explained she is authorized to run criminal history checks. The HR/Payroll Manager stated, If anything comes back with any type of infraction, I have to let the ADM review it. We sometimes give the applicant the opportunity to explain. I don't have the final say in bars to employment. After years of theft, I would not have hired her. We have strong processes and if anything is flagged, it is escalated to the ADM. I did my training with the Corporate HR but she is no longer there . A phone interview was conducted with the previous ADM on 12/29/23 at 12:23 pm. ADM 2 stated she did remember the identified CNA but did not remember if she checked her background. She said the facility had gone through several HR people during the year, so she did not know who had run the background check. She said if an issue was flagged the HR person either gave it to her or to the company's President who offices in the facility. ADM 2 said if she was the one who checked it, she would have initialed and dated the first page of the form to indicate she had reviewed it. There were no initials on the background check provided so it could not be determined if anyone had checked it prior to the employee being hired. ADM 2 stated she was not aware that the employee had an arrest that would be a bar to employment. Record review of Staff Development/Inservice Attendance sheet dated 09/29/23 revealed staff were inserviced on the Abuse Prevention policy which included Misappropriation of Funds. A review of an undated facility policy titled Background Investigations, revealed the following guidelines: 1. The Human Resource department will conduct all applicable background investigation(s) on each individual making application for employment with this company and on any current employee if such background investigation is appropriate for position for which the individual has applied . 2. For all applicants applying for a position as a certified nurse aide, the human resources department will contact the nurse aide registry of the state in which the individual is certified and/or previously employed to verify that the applicant's certification is in good standing. 5. The facility will not employ individuals who: a. Have been found guilty of abuse, neglect, exploitation, misappropriation of property, or mistreatment by a court of law. b. Have had a finding entered into the state nurse aide registry concerning abuse, neglect, exploitation, mistreatment of residents, or misappropriation of resident property.
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

Abuse Prevention Policies (Tag F0607)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to follow its written policies and procedures to prohibit and prevent ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to follow its written policies and procedures to prohibit and prevent abuse, neglect, and exploitation of residents and misappropriation of property . The facility failed to follow its hiring policy and hired a nurse aide who had an extensive criminal history of theft and had a bar to employment of robbery on her record which resulted in the misappropriation of property of Resident #1. The non compliance was identified as past noncompliance. The noncompliance began on 09/29/23 and ended on 09/29/23. The facility had corrected the noncompliance before the survey began. This failure could place residents at risk of abuse, neglect, and exploitation due to staff not properly screened for employability. The findings included: Record review of Resident #1's electronic face sheet, dated 12/29/2023, indicated Resident #1 was a [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included mechanical complication of nephrostomy catheter (small tube draining urine from kidney), infection and inflammatory reaction due to indwelling urethral catheter (tube that drains urine), diabetes mellitus (too much sugar in the blood) due to underlying condition with severe nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy (weakened blood vessels in retina) with macular edema (blood vessels leaking into part of the retina called the macula), bilateral, and chronic kidney disease, Stage 3. Record review of the MDS, dated [DATE], indicated Resident #1 had a BIMS of 15, which indicated the resident was cognitively intact. During an interview on 12/27/23 at 2:30 LVN A stated Resident #1 had lost his phone so asked to use her phone to call his bank. Resident #1 had it on speaker and when he heard his balance, he wanted to know the last 5 withdrawals since the balance did not seem correct to him. LVN A overheard the last 5 withdrawals which included 2 Cash Apps to CNA B and another withdrawal to a company with whom Resident #1 was not familiar. LVN A stated she immediately went to get the ADM and they called the bank again to verify the amounts. LVN A was asked how CNA B could have accessed Resident #1's account. LVN A stated, Resident #1 had just returned from hospital and he had left his bank card on the bedside table. LVN A stated she had conducted the inservice with employees on the abuse policy prohibiting misappropriation of resident funds. A record review of CNA B's personnel file contained the Criminal History check that was conducted on 05/01/23. CNA B was hired on 04/28/23. The Criminal History revealed 6 arrests for theft including a robbery charge on 10/22/12 in which she was convicted of a 2nd degree felony. A record review of the Texas Health and Human Services Employability Status Check Search Results dated 04/27/23 revealed that the CNA B had an active NAR Status and was not considered to be unemployable. During an interview with ADM on 12/28/23 at 9:47, ADM stated she was employed at the facility on 08/28/23. ADM stated We run Criminal History checks prior to hire and if something comes up then the ADM looks at it. If I would have seen this prior to hire, then I would not have hired her. ADM further stated, The HR Person who ran the check at the time is no longer here and I was not employed here at the time. ADM stated the aide had been fired and the resident was pressing charges. ADM stated the facility immediately reimbursed the resident for the stolen funds rather than wait for the bank to do it. During an interview on 12/28/23 at 1:34 with the HR/Payroll Manager, she explained she is authorized to run Criminal History checks. The HR stated, If anything comes back with any type of infraction I have to let the ADM review it. We sometimes give the applicant the opportunity to explain. I don't have the final say in Bars to Employment. After years of theft, I would not have hired her. We have strong processes and if anything is flagged, it is escalated to the ADM. I did my training with the Corp HR but she is no longer there. A phone interview was conducted with the previous ADM on 12/29/23 at 12:23 pm. ADM 2 was asked about the hiring practices during her administration in regard to checking the criminal histories of potential employees. She stated she did remember the identified CNA but did not remember if she checked her background check. She said the facility had gone through several HR people during the year so she did not know who had actually run the background check. She said if an issue was flagged the HR person either gave it to her or to the company's President who offices in the facility. ADM 2 said if she was the one who checked it, she would have initialed and dated the first page of the form to indicate she had reviewed it. There were no initials on the background check provided so it could not be determined if anyone had checked it prior to the employee being hired. ADM 2 stated she was not aware that the employee had an arrest that would be a bar to employment. Record review of Staff Development/Inserv ice Attendance sheet dated 09/29/23 revealed that staff were inserviced on abuse, neglect and misappropriation of funds. A review of an undated facility policy titled Background Investigations, revealed the following guidelines: 1. The Human Resource department will conduct all applicable background investigation(s) on each individual making application for employment with this company and on any current employee if such background investigation is appropriate for position for which the individual has applied . 2. For all applicants applying for a position as a certified nurse aide, the human resources department will contact the nurse aide registry of the state in which the individual is certified and/or previously employed to verify that the applicant's certification is in good standing. 5. The facility will not employ individuals who: a. Have been found guilty of abuse, neglect, exploitation, misappropriation of property, or mistreatment by a court of law. b. Have had a finding entered into the state nurse aide registry concerning abuse, neglect, exploitation, mistreatment of residents, or misappropriation of resident property.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Pharmacy Services (Tag F0755)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services (including procedure...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services (including procedures that assure the accurate acquiring, receiving, dispensing, and administering of all drugs and biologicals) to meet the needs of each resident for two of two residents (Residents #2 and #3) out of 13 residents reviewed for medication administration., in that: The facility failed to ensure Resident #2 was discharged from the facility with only his prescribed medication. The facility failed to ensure Resident #3 was given his prescribed medication prior to his discharge. The non compliance was identified as past noncompliance. The noncompliance began on 10/05/23 and ended on 10/07/23. The facility had corrected the noncompliance before the survey began. These failures could place residents at risk for not receiving the appropriate care and services to maintain their health and safety. The findings included: Record review of Resident #2's admission Record dated 12/28/23 documented an 84- year- old male admitted to facility 09/20/23. His diagnoses included presence of cardiac pacemaker (device to control irregular heartbeats), paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (rapid, erratic heart rate that begins suddenly and then stops on its own), and difficulty in walking, not elsewhere specified. Record review of Resident #2's Discharge MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed a BIMS score of 14 indicating he was cognitively intact. Record review of Nurses Notes revealed Resident #2 was discharged home on [DATE] with all his medications and personal belongings. On 10/07/23 he called the facility to report that last night he took one of the medications, Quetapine 400 mg , although his name was not on the card of medications. He had a fall and could not get himself up. A neighbor found him the next day. He refused to go to the ER and said he was fine. He called the facility to report what had happened. The nurse advised him to go to the ER, but he stated he did not need to do that. He stated his neighbor was giving him fluids and getting him something to eat. The nurse reported the call to the ADM and corporate nurse. Record review of Medication Administration Record dated 10/01/23 to 10/31/23 for Resident #3 revealed a [AGE] year old male admitted to facility 09/21/23 with diagnosis that included schizophrenia. The Administration Record showed a missed dose of Seroquel Oral Tablet 400 mg (Quetiapine Fumerate) on 10/06/23. Resident #3 discharged on 10/07/23. The MAR also indicated that monitoring for side effects or adverse effects of the antipsychotic medication did not show any evidence of adverse effects. During an interview with ADM on 12/27/23 at 10:27 am, the ADM stated she and the corporate nurse went to Resident #2's home after learning about his phone call to the facility. ADM stated they picked up the incorrect medication and made sure he was alright. Resident #2 told them he had no adverse effects from taking the incorrect medication. The ADM stated they did a Medication Error on Resident #3 since he missed the dose from the medication card that was given to Resident #2. Resident #3 had also discharged the day following Resident #2's discharge. The nurse who conducted the discharge was an agency nurse and was placed on a Do Not Return list . In an interview with LVN A on 12/27/23 at 11:06 am, LVN A stated the neighbor called and reported that Resident #2 had taken a pill from the card that had another person's name on it. LVN A stated she called Resident #2 and encouraged him to go to the ER but he refused. LVN A stated he did not want anyone to call his son since his son lived out of town. LVN A stated the facility did an in-service with the nurses to make sure medications were checked prior to discharge. They now have a system where two nurses will check medications prior to discharge. LVN A stated that Resident #3 had missed 2 doses of the medication that were accidentally given to Resident #2. He did not report any adverse effects from missing the doses. When Resident #3 discharged , LVN A stated she called his pharmacy to order his medication since he discharged prior to the ADM bringing the medication card back to the facility . On 12/28/23 at 9:50 am, an interview was conducted via phone with LVN E. LVN E stated she had worked at the facility several times but did not receive any training on discharge protocol. LVN E stated she did remember discharging Resident #2 but was not aware she sent the wrong medication with him. LVN E stated she always does her own discharges since the other nurse has her own residents to tend to. LVN E stated she got the medications from the Medication Aide. LVN E stated she usually checked the med list and the discharge list in the electronic record system. LVN E could not explain how the error happened. LVN E stated she was not aware she was on a Do Not Return list for this facility . During an interview on 12/28/23 at 10:20 am, LVN A stated there was a book of instructions for agency personnel. LVN A showed the manual to the state surveyor. The manual included instructions on how to discharge a resident. LVN A stated it was updated after this incident to include that 2 nurses would have to check the medications prior to discharge. Record review of undated Transfer and Discharge Policy stated: b. A member of the interdisciplinary team completes relevant sections of the Discharge Summary. The nurse caring for the resident at the time of discharge is responsible for ensuring the Discharge Summary is complete and includes, but not limited to, the following: i. A recap of the resident's stay that includes diagnoses, course of illness/treatment or therapy, and pertinent lab, radiology and consultation results. ii. A final summary of the resident's status. iii. Reconciliation of all pre-discharge medications with the resident's post-discharge medications (both prescribed and over the counter).
May 2023 7 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

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

ADL Care (Tag F0677)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure residents who were unable to carry out activiti...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure residents who were unable to carry out activities of daily living [ADLs] were provided with the necessary services to maintain good personal hygiene for one resident of six reviewed (Resident #44) for ADL care, in that The facility failed to ensure Resident #44 was provided bathing as scheduled: Resident #44 was not provided 6 of 11 scheduled showers. This deficient practice could place residents who require assistance from staff for personal hygiene at risk of not receiving care and services to meet their needs and not reaching their highest practicable physical and psychosocial well-being. The findings were: Record review of the admission record dated 5/26/2023, revealed Resident #44 was a [AGE] year-old female with an initial admission date of 7/19/2019. Record review of the comprehensive MDS assessment dated [DATE], revealed Resident #44 was admitted under the primary medical condition category of other neurological conditions related to encephalopathy. Other active diagnoses included diabetes mellitus, other fracture, anxiety, depression, morbid obesity, edema, and pruritus [severe itching of the skin]. Resident #44's summary BIMS score was 15, which was indicative of intact cognition. Resident #44 required physical help in part of bathing with one staff assistance. Resident #44 was occasionally incontinent of urine and frequently incontinent of bowel. A formal, clinical assessment was conducted that revealed Resident #44 was at risk of developing pressure injuries. Resident #44 required a pressure reducing device for bed. Resident #44 required supplemental oxygen therapy, and intravenous medications in the 7 days of the prior look back period of the assessment. Record review of the comprehensive care plan, dated 4/30/2023, revealed Resident #44 add a focus area of ADL self-care performance deficit with the following associated interventions: bathing - extensive assistance by one staff initiated on 7/20/2019. Additionally, Resident #44 had a focus area of potential for impairment to skin integrity with the following associated interventions: keep skin clean and dry; use lotion on dry skin. Resident #44 had a focus area of incontinence, but interventions did not address hygiene maintenance, or skin break down prevention. Record review of the ADLs task sheet revealed Resident #44 was scheduled for bathing on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays on the 6:00 AM to 2:00 PM shift. Further review revealed Resident #44 did not receive a scheduled shower on 5/03/2023, 5/05/2023, 5/08/2023, 5/17/2023, 5/19/2023, and 5/22/2023. In an observation on 5/23/2023 at 11:42 AM, Resident #44 was sitting upright in her bed requesting assistance from staff. Resident #44 presented with a shiny face and greasy, uncombed hair. In an interview on 5/24/2023 at 2:10 PM, Resident #44 stated she missed about 5 showers a month for most of the time she has lived here. Resident #44 stated this made her feel dirty and she did not want to participate in social engagements when this happened. Resident #44 stated there was no pattern that she could discern as to when she would most likely miss a shower. Resident #44 stated she had never been offered a shower on an unscheduled day after missing a scheduled shower. Resident #44 stated her scheduled shower days were Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays. Resident #44 stated it was particularly frustrating if she missed a Friday shower, knowing she would not get another opportunity to shower until after the weekend. Resident #44 stated she felt that waiting 3 days between showers was too long for sanitary reasons. In an interview on 5/25/2023 at 9:40 AM, CNA A stated paper forms are given to the nurse at the end of the shift but also there was documentation in the electronic health record. CNA A stated either one would indicate if the resident refused or was not in the facility. CNA A stated she was not aware of any resident missing any showers. CNA A stated no resident had mentioned to her needing a shower on a different day because of a missed scheduled shower. In an interview on 5/25/2023 at 5:30 PM, the DON stated showers should be documented in the electronic health record. The DON stated the expectation was for the paper body sheets be submitted by the CNA to the nurse as a means of communicating any skin issues. The DON stated some of the agency staff may not have been aware to submit the paper form and document in the electronic health record, or that showers may have been intermittently missed and not communicated to staff for follow up. The DON stated she did not think that happened very often. The DON stated a skin condition or hygiene issue could have delayed assessment and treatment if showers were missed. Record review of the policy entitled Resident Showers, copyrighted 2022, revealed the facility's policy was to . Assist residents with bathing to maintain proper hygiene, stimulate circulation, and help prevent skin issues . Under the section entitled Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines: 1.) . provided showers as per request, or as per facility schedule protocols, and based upon resident safety. 11.) Assist the resident was showering as needed.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0761 (Tag F0761)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store all drugs and biologicals in locked compartments in 1 of 2 medication rooms (south unit medication room) reviewed for s...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store all drugs and biologicals in locked compartments in 1 of 2 medication rooms (south unit medication room) reviewed for storage of drugs, in that; One narcotic lock box was not secured to the refrigerator in the south unit medication room. This deficient practice could affect residents who have medications in the medication room and could result in lost medications, drug diversion, or harm due to accidental ingestion of unprescribed medications. Findings included: In an observation on 5/25/2023 at 3:53 PM with LVN F present, the locked narcotic box was attached to a removable middle wire rack of the refrigerator. Medication in the narcotic box included Marinol, which was a schedule III medication used for nausea and appetite stimulation. In an interview on 5/25/2023 at 3:58 PM ADON B stated she did not realize the wire rack was removable and she would see what needed to be done for it to be considered secured. In an interview and observation on 5/25/2023 at 5:11 PM, the ADM stated she had consulted with her corporate liaisons and found a way to secure the shelf to the refrigerator. The shelf now had a thin long length of chain threaded through the wire rack and shelving frame at the back of the refrigerator. The chain was secured with a small, keyed padlock. The wire shelf could not be removed from the refrigerator. Record review of the facility's Medication Storage, copyrighted 2022, revealed policy statements, .all medications .will be stored .sufficient to ensure proper .segregation and security. In step 1. General Guidelines: a.stored in locked compartments (i.e., .refrigerators, medication rooms) . 2. Narcotics and Controlled Substances: a. Schedule II drugs and back-up stock of Scheduled III, IV, and V medications are stored under double-lock and key.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0808 (Tag F0808)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to assure that residents receive a therapeutic diet as ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to assure that residents receive a therapeutic diet as prescribed by the physician for 1 of 1 resident (#52) reviewed for diets in that: Resident #52 was prescribed a renal diet (A renal diet is one that was low in sodium, phosphorous, and protein. A renal diet also emphasizes the importance of consuming high-quality protein and usually limiting fluids. Some patients may also need to limit potassium and calcium) and was provided a regular diet which did not meet his special dietary needs. This failure could affect residents who are prescribed renal diets and could result in potassium building up in the blood stream and could result in a heart attack. The findings were: Review of Resident #52's electronic face sheet dated 05/26/2023 reflected a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including: WEDGE COMPRESSION FRACTURE OF THIRD LUMBAR VERTEBRA, SUBSEQUENT ENCOUNTER FOR FRACTURE WITH ROUTINE HEALING (spinal fracture) , CHRONIC KIDNEY DISEASE, STAGE 4 (SEVERE) (a shutdown of the kidneys.) Record review of Resident #52's physician's orders reflected LCS, Renal Diet that was dated 3/5/22 with additional directions of Fluid restriction 1500mL Q24hrs. Nursing to provide: 420mL (6a-2p=180mL 2p-10p=180mL 10p-6=60mL. Dietary to provide 1080mL (Bkft=360mL Lunch=360mL Dinner=360mL) LOW POTASSIUM, LOW CALCIUM (NO MILK, NO CHEESE) Review of Resident #52's comprehensive person-centered care plan dated 05/26/2023 reflected under Focus . Provide, serve diet as ordered. Monitor intake and record q meal. Review of Resident #52's tray ticket dated 5/24/23 reflected Diet . Renal Review of the facility Week 5 Day 32, Fall/Winter 2023 diet spreadsheet revealed Lunch .Renal .chicken breast, turnip green beans. Observation on 05/24/2023 at 12:30 PM of lunch service revealed a meal tray intended for Resident #52 contained sausage, the standard diet for the day. The tray was observed to be inspected by the DON within the dining room, carted to hall 600, and provided to Resident #52. Observation and interview on 05/24/2023 at 12:35 PM of Resident #52 revealed the tray was to be handed to Resident #52. Resident #52 stated I just eat what they give me, but sometimes my stomach hurts after I eat. Interview on 05/24/23 at 12:40 PM, the DON stated Resident #52 received a regular diet instead of a renal diet and that Resident #52 received a renal diet meal once she was notified. The DON stated that the staff have a copy of the diet extension and that was where the therapeutic diet was listed. The DON stated the diet went unnoticed on the meal slip, because the term renal was not in bold like the other diets on the meal slips. The DON stated that Resident #52's renal failure could be affected by the wrong diet. Interview on 05/24/23 at 3:02 PM, the Dietary Manager stated the meal slips place the diet texture in bold but the renal diet slips are in the title line and can potentially be missed if the dietary aide does not notice it and the nurses also happen to miss it. The Dietary Manager stated the dietary aide who missed the renal diet normally worked on the other side of the food service line and got confused during observation by the surveyor. The Dietary Manager stated the risk associated with providing the wrong diet to a resident needing a renal diet could hurt their quality of care. Review of the facility's policy and procedure titled Therapeutic Diet Orders, undated, reflected: dietary and nursing are responsible for providing therapeutic diets in the appropriate form and/or the appropriate nutritive content as prescribed.
CONCERN (D)

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

Food Safety (Tag F0812)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for 1 of 1 kitche...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed for kitchen sanitation in that: 1. The facility failed to maintain the cleanliness of the ice maker found within the kitchen. 2. The facility failed to prevent residents from receiving food that had made contact with an un-sanitized work surface. These failures could place residents at risk for cross-contamination and foodborne illnesses. The findings included: Observation on 5/24/23 at 10:51 AM revealed black substance build-up within the ice maker in the kitchen. Interview on 5/24/2022 at 11:11 AM, the DM stated the kitchen staff was responsible for emptying and cleaning out the ice maker every 3 months by draining and emptying the ice maker and cleaning it from the inside. He stated once every 6 months the MS will come and do a deep clean of the ice maker if it was required to do a deeper clean. The DM stated he did not notice the black substance build-up and could not identify what it was. The DM stated the ice maker should be cleaned and will contact his MS to have it partially disassembled to remove the black substance build up as the substance can cause foodborne illness in residents who consume ice from the ice maker. Observation and interview on 5/24/23 at 11:56 AM, DA A picked up a cut sausage patty that had fallen on the kitchen counter and place it on a resident's tray. DA A stated she did not notice any loose sausage patty and did not place anything on the resident's tray. Interview on 5/24/23 at 3:02 PM, the DM stated he was not in the kitchen when DA A was observed to have placed the sausage on the resident's tray. The DM stated DA A was nervous and likely instinctually placed it back on the tray as the cook was sliding trays across the serving line to be time efficient. He stated the risk associated with serving food that contacted un-sanitized surfaces was that it may cause foodborne illness. Record review of the facility nutritional policy titled Foodhandling, dated revised July 2014, reflected All employees who handle, prepare or serve food will be trained in the practices of safe food handling and preventing foodborne illness. and This facility recognizes that the critical factors implicated in foodborne illness are: . c. Contaminated equipment. Record review of US FDA Food Code, dated 2022, revealed Surfaces of utensils and equipment contacting food that is not time/temperature control for safety food such as . ice makers, and ice bins must be cleaned on a routine basis to prevent the development of slime, mold, or soil residues that may contribute to an accumulation of microorganisms. Some equipment manufacturers and industry associations, e.g., within the tea industry, develop guidelines for regular cleaning and sanitizing of equipment . And 3-304.11 Food Contact with Equipment and Utensils. FOOD shall only contact surfaces of: (A) EQUIPMENT and UTENSILS that are cleaned as specified under Part 4-6 of this Code and SANITIZED as specified under Part 4-7 of this Code; P (B) Single-service and single-use articles.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0848 (Tag F0848)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on record review and interview the facility failed to ensure the Arbitration Agreement contained all the required elements for 1 of 1 facility. The facility failed to ensure the arbitration agr...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and interview the facility failed to ensure the Arbitration Agreement contained all the required elements for 1 of 1 facility. The facility failed to ensure the arbitration agreement contained the selection of a neutral venue that is convenient for both parties. This failure could place the residents and their representatives at risk of being uninformed about their rights regarding binding arbitration and less able to defend their rights related to disputes, controversy or claims arising out of or related to the services provided by the nursing facility. The findings included: During the entrance conference on 5/23/2023 at 9:03 AM with the ADM, a blank copy of the facility's admission packet and the binding Arbitration Agreement were requested, and these were received by the survey team on 5/23/2023 by 5:00 PM. The ADM stated during the entrance conference that the facility did not utilize arbitration agreements in admission. Record review of the facility's admission agreement, undated, reflected an Arbitration Agreement located on page 11 through 13 of 15 of the admission and Financial Agreement. The Arbitration Agreement did not state nor reference the selection of a neutral venue that is convenient for both parties. Interview on 5/25/2023 at 9:34 AM, the Admissions Director stated she has been operating as the Admissions Director since October of 2022 and has used the same Admissions Agreement and Arbitration Agreement since at least October of 2022. The AD stated she was unaware of the Arbitration Agreement being in the Admissions Agreement whatsoever and during the admissions process would read the agreement verbatim to the prospective residents or their representatives and any questions that they had would be directed to her BOM. Interview on 05/26/2023 at 9:54 AM, the AD stated she could not find the missing element identified in within the agreement and was not certain whether the agreement included the missing element and would consult with her BOM as to how the agreement can be changed to meet compliance. Telephone interview on 05/26/2023 at 10:06 AM, the BOM stated she has supported the admissions packets since 2020. The BOM stated when she began supporting the admissions packet in 2020 the agreement had been the same then as it was during the interview. The BOM stated she did not identify the Arbitration Agreement to contain the missing element identified in record review and questioned whether the facility required Arbitration Agreements at all. The BOM stated no residents had attempted to utilize the Binding Arbitration process since 2020. The BOM stated the risk associated with the Arbitration Agreements to not include this element would be that prospective residents or their representatives would be unaware of their rights. The facility did not provide a policy on admission agreements or specifically Arbitration Agreements prior to exit.
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0760 (Tag F0760)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that residents were free of any significant med...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that residents were free of any significant medication errors for 3 (Resident #234, #233, and #75) of 6 residents reviewed for safe administration of midodrine [a medication intended to raise systolic blood pressure], in that: 1. Resident #234 was administered midodrine on 4 instances outside of the parameters established by the Primary Care Physician (PCP) to hold if greater than 160 systolic blood pressure between 5/01/2023-5/25/2023; 2.Resident #233 was administered midodrine on 3 instances outside of the parameters established by the Primary Care Physician (PCP) to hold if greater than 160 systolic blood pressure between 5/01/2023-5/25/2023; 3.Resident #75 was administered midodrine on 4 instances outside of the parameters established by the Primary Care Physician (PCP) to hold if greater than 160 systolic blood pressure between 4/01/2023-5/25/2023; This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving the intended therapeutic benefit of drugs and biologics, worsening or exacerbation of chronic medical conditions, and place residents at risk for serious injuries up to and including strokes. The findings include: 1.Record review of the admission Record dated 5/25/2023 revealed Resident #234 was a [AGE] year-old female admitted [DATE]. Record review of the annual MDS assessment revealed Resident #234 primary medical condition for admission was disability, cardiorespiratory conditions related to respiratory failure with hypoxia. Other active diagnoses included atrial fibrillation or other dysrhythmias (e.g., bradycardia or tachycardias) heart failure, hypertension, cardiomegaly [enlarged heart]. Resident #234 required supplemental oxygen therapy. Record review of the Care Plan revealed Resident #234 had a focus area of Congestive Heart Failure initiated 5/21/2021 with the following interventions: give cardiac medications as ordered. Additional focus areas included risk for altered cardiovascular status, initiate 1/17/2023 with the following interventions: administer medications as ordered and directed. Record review of the Order Summary, active as of 5/25/2023, revealed Resident #234 had a physician's order for midodrine tablet 5 milligrams; give one tablet by mouth two times a day before breakfast and after dinner; hold for systolic blood pressure greater than 160, dated 3/19/2023. Record review of the medication administration record for the month of May 2023 revealed Resident #234 received midodrine outside of the established parameters on the following dates: *5/02/2023 at 7:30 AM when systolic blood pressure was 162 administered by MA B; *5/02/2023 at 4:00 PM when systolic blood pressure was 162 administered by MA B; *5/05/2023 at 7:30 AM when systolic blood pressure was 188 administered by MA B; and *5/24/2023 at 4:00 PM when systolic blood pressure was 175 administered by LVN D. In an observation and interview on 5/25/2023 between 8:20 and 8:34 AM, LVN E stated Resident #234 was not her normal self and could not consent to having her blood pressure taken [a prerequisite prior to administering midodrine]. Resident #234 was sitting in bed, with the head of bead elevated between 45-60 degrees, eyes were open and would track movement, but Resident #234 did not respond to verbal stimuli from LVN E. LVN E stated she was going to try again once Resident #234 was a little more awake. In an interview on 5/25/2023 at 12:50 PM via telephone, MA B stated she could not recall if she administered medications to Resident #234 without being able to view the chart. MA B stated if vital signs are out of the parameters set by the physician, she does not administer the medication, documents the reason code and immediately notifies the nurse of those details. MA B stated the nurse would make the decision to contact the doctor for instructions to administer the medications if the residents' vital signs were within a few points of the parameters. MA B stated she did not know what the parameters were for midodrine and would need to see the electronic health record or electronic medication administration record for clarity. MA B stated she did not know what harm could happen if medications were administered when vital signs were out of parameters. In an interview on 5/25/2023 at 2:00 PM, LVN C stated she does not typically administer midodrine, as the medication aides are responsible for that. LVN C stated an alert does pop-up on her screen when an MA holds a medication due to the residents' vital signs not being within the parameters designated. LVN C stated the expectation was for the MA to also report this information verbally to the nurse. LVN C stated that the nurse would then re-check the vital signs and assess the residents' condition and follow up with the physician. In an interview on 5/25/2023 at 5:20 PM, ADON A stated she had worked a double, but the morning shift had been on another hallway. ADON A stated she was now assigned the hallway where Resident #234 lived. ADON A stated she had not had the chance to see Resident #234 prior to her being sent out via ambulance to the local emergency room. ADON A Stated Resident #234 was sent to the emergency room around 11 in the morning [5/25/2023]. ADON A obtained a verbal report from the emergency room that Resident #234 was stable, but under continued monitoring and would most likely be admitted and transferred to the hospital. In an interview on 5/25/2023 at 6:00 PM, with agency nurse LVN D, she stated that midodrine was a medication that increases a resident's blood pressure. LVN D stated midodrine would have individualized parameters set by the physician to hold the medication if the residents blood pressure was at or above a particular number. LVN D stated midodrine was to be held typically if the systolic blood pressure was above 160. LVN D stated that raising the blood pressure above that point by administering midodrine could have an adverse effect on a resident. LVN D accessed the electronic medication administration record for Resident #234 and stated that she should not have administered the midodrine yesterday [5/24/2023] when the systolic blood pressure reading for Resident #234 was 175 on 5/24/2023. LVN D stated midodrine should have been held. LVN D stated that 5/24/2023 was her first day at the facility. LVN D stated she had been given a brief tour of the unit and a one-page written report on all the residents she would be responsible for prior to being given responsibility to administer medications. LVN D stated the sheet listed the residents' preferences such as must crush medications, or pudding versus applesauce only. Attempted interview on 5/26/2023 at 10:55 AM with primary care physician, but not receive a response for the primary care physician. In an interview via telephone on 5/26/2023 at 11:32 AM, the Medical Director stated Resident #234 was not one of his assigned residents, and that it would be best to speak to the primary care physician of record [Attempted interview with primary care physician but did not receive call back]. The Medical Director stated, How would I be able to answer any questions on this patient. I would not be able to tell you anything that isn't already in the chart you have access to. The Medical Director ended the telephone call. 2. Record review of the admission Record revealed Resident #233 was a [AGE] year-old male admitted [DATE]. Diagnoses included hypotension (low blood pressure), presence of cardiac defibrillator, heart disease with angina pectoris [a condition marked by severe pain in the chest, often spreading to the shoulders, arms or neck, caused by an inadequate blood supply to the heart]. Record review of the Care Plan, initiated 5/16/2023, revealed Resident #233 did not include a focus area or interventions related to hypotension. Record review of the Order Summary, active as of 5/25/2023, revealed Resident #233 had a physician's order for midodrine tablet 5 milligram; give 2.5 tablet by mouth two times a day; hold for systolic blood pressure greater than 140, dated 5/19/2023. Record review of the medication administration record for the month of May 2023 revealed Resident #233 received midodrine outside of the established parameters on the following dates: *5/19/2023 at 6:00 PM when systolic blood pressure was 173 administered by an unidentified staff; *5/24/2023 at 6:00 PM when systolic blood pressure was 149 administered by MA B; and *5/25/2023 at 9:00 AM when systolic blood pressure was 166 administered by an unidentified staff. 3.Record review of the admission Record dated 5/25/2023 revealed Resident #75 was a [AGE] year-old male admitted [DATE]. Record review of the quarterly MDS assessment, dated 4/12/2023, revealed Resident #75 primary medical condition for admission was medically complex conditions related to acute kidney failure. Other active diagnosis included orthostatic hypotension. Record review of the Care Plan revealed Resident #75 had a focus area of hypertension, initiated 2/01/2023 with the following interventions: give medications as ordered; monitor any signs or symptoms of malignant hypertension (headache, confusion, disorientation, lethargy, difficulty breathing); obtain blood pressure readings. Additional focus area included coronary artery disease with the following interventions: give all cardiac meds as ordered; monitor blood pressure. Record review of the Order Summary, active as of 5/25/2023, revealed Resident #75 had a physician's order for midodrine tablet 10 milligrams; give one tablet by mouth three times a day; hold if blood pressure greater than 160/110, dated 2/07/2023. Record review of the medication administration record for the months of April and May 2023 revealed Resident #75 received midodrine outside of the established parameters on the following dates: *4/05/2023 at 3:00 PM when blood pressure was 188/53 administered by an unidentified staff; *5/02/2023 at 3:00 PM when blood pressure was 168/96 administered by MA B; *5/02/2023 at 9:00 PM when blood pressure was 168/96 administered by MA B; and *5/03/2023 at 9:00 AM when blood pressure was 168/96 administered by MA B. In an interview on 5/26/2023 at 11:41 AM, the Pharmacist stated midodrine regulates orthostatic hypotension [a drop in blood pressure when the person changes position from lying or seated to standing]. The Pharmacist stated the medication can raise systolic blood pressure around 15 points about an hour after taking it. The Pharmacist stated it was possible that one might experience more anxiousness and anxiety if their blood pressure was higher than their normal baseline. The Pharmacist stated that if a residents' systolic blood pressure was between 180 and 200, it would be possible a physician might order a one-time dose of Clonidine to lower the blood pressure. The pharmacist stated she would not normally be notified, but the expectation would be for the nurses to notify the physician if the systolic blood pressure was above the residence baseline or if the medication was given despite an already elevated blood pressure. The Pharmacist stated she would expect that follow up orders from the physician would include monitoring for probably 8 hours following the administration of the medication in the presence of an elevated systolic blood pressure. Record review of the facility's Medication Administration, copyrighted 2022, revealed policy statement of medications were to be administered .as ordered by the physician and in accordance with professional standards of practice. In step 8. Obtain and record vital signs, when applicable or per physician orders. When applicable, hold medication for those vital signs outside of the physician's prescribed parameters. In step 17. For those medications requiring vital signs, record the vital signs onto the medication administration record.
CONCERN (F)

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

Deficiency F0847 (Tag F0847)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

Based on record review and interview the facility failed to ensure the Arbitration Agreement contained all the required elements for 1 of 1 facility. The facility failed to ensure the arbitration agr...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and interview the facility failed to ensure the Arbitration Agreement contained all the required elements for 1 of 1 facility. The facility failed to ensure the arbitration agreement contained the required elements: 1. The non-compulsory condition of admission in signing the arbitration agreement. 2. The acknowledgment of understanding the arbitration agreement. 3. The right to rescind the agreement within 30 calendar days of signing. 4. The retained ability to contact advocates and government representatives. This failure could place the residents and their representatives at risk of being uninformed about their rights regarding binding arbitration and less able to defend their rights related to disputes, controversy or claims arising out of or related to the services provided by the nursing facility. The findings included: During the entrance conference on 5/23/2023 at 9:03 AM with the ADM, a blank copy of the facility's admission packet and the binding Arbitration Agreement were requested, and these were received by the survey team on 5/23/2023 by 5:00 PM. The ADM stated during the entrance conference that the facility did not utilize arbitration agreements in admission. Record review of the facility's admission agreement, undated, reflected an Arbitration Agreement located on page 11 through 13 of 15 of the admission and Financial Agreement. The Arbitration Agreement did not state nor reference: *The ability for a prospective resident or representative to not sign the agreement or that the agreement was required as a condition of admission; *The affirmation of understanding the agreement by the prospective resident or representative; *The right to rescind the binding Arbitration Agreement within 30 calendar days of signing the agreement, and; *The retained ability to contact advocates and government representatives. Interview on 5/25/2023 at 9:34 AM, the Admissions Director stated she has been operating as the Admissions Director since October of 2022 and has used the same Admissions Agreement and Arbitration Agreement since at least October of 2022. The AD stated she was unaware of the Arbitration Agreement being in the Admissions Agreement whatsoever and during the admissions process would read the agreement verbatim to the prospective residents or their representatives and any questions that they had would be directed to her BOM. Interview on 05/26/2023 at 9:54 AM, the AD stated she could not find the missing elements identified in within the agreement and was not certain whether the agreement included the missing elements and would consult with her BOM as to how the agreement can be changed to meet compliance. Telephone interview on 05/26/2023 at 10:06 AM, the BOM stated she has supported the admissions packets since 2020. The BOM stated when she began supporting the admissions packet in 2020 the agreement had been the same then as it was during the interview. The BOM stated she did not identify the Arbitration Agreement to contain the missing elements identified in record review and questioned whether the facility required Arbitration Agreements at all. The BOM stated no residents had attempted to utilize the Binding Arbitration process since 2020. The BOM stated the risk associated with the Arbitration Agreements to not include these elements would be that prospective residents or their representatives would be unaware of their rights. The facility did not provide a policy on admission agreements or specifically Arbitration Agreements prior to exit.
Apr 2023 1 deficiency
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Deficiency F0578 (Tag F0578)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents' right to formulate an advance directive for 1 of ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents' right to formulate an advance directive for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #1) reviewed for advanced directives, in that: The facility failed to ensure Resident #1, a competent adult, signed his own OOH-DNR and allowed the resident's Medical Power of Attorney (MPOA) to complete the document. This failure could place residents at-risk of having their end of life wishes dishonored. The findings were: Record review of Resident #1's face sheet, dated [DATE], revealed the resident was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included: olecranon bursitis (inflammation of the bursa or fluid filled sacs that reduce friction between moving parts in the body's joints) of left elbow, Parkinson's Disease (progressive nervous system disorder that affects movement), benign neoplasm (abnormal but noncancerous collection of cells) of lower jawbone and neurocognitive disorder with Lewy Bodies (abnormal aggregations of protein that develop inside nerve cells). Further review of Resident #1's face sheet, dated [DATE], revealed under the section ADVANCE DIRECTIVE: DNR Record review of Resident #1's admission MDS, dated [DATE], revealed a BIMS score of 15, which indicated the resident was cognitively intact. Record review of Resident #1's Care Plan, print date [DATE], revealed a focus area, Resident does not want CPR performed. Fully executed OOH DNR in place. Date initiated [DATE] Record review of Resident #1's electronic medical record Order Summary Report, Active Orders as of [DATE], revealed an order dated [DATE] for DNR. Further review revealed an OOH-DNR signed by Resident #1's family member in section C, Declaration by a qualified relative of the adult person who is incompetent or otherwise incapable of communication. The OOH-DNR was signed by the physician and two witnesses, witness #2 was the facility SW. Record review of the INSTRUCTIONS FOR ISSUING AN OOH-DNR ORDER, revised [DATE], by the Texas Department of State Health Services, revealed If an adult person is competent and at least [AGE] years of age, he/she will sign and date the Order in Section A. If the adult person in incompetent or otherwise mentally or physically incapable of communication and does not have a guardian, agent, or proxy, then a qualified relative may execute the OOH-DNR Order by signing and dating it in Section C. Record review of the ADVANCE DIRECTIVE ACKNOWLEGMENT form included in the Admissions Agreement, dated [DATE], signed by Resident #1 revealed I DO NOT possess an Advance Directive and DO NOT WISH TO INITIATE A DNR. In a record review and interview with the SW on [DATE] at 2:30 p.m., the SW revealed that when Resident #1 was admitted he had an OOH-DNR that was completed incorrectly and mentioned this to the family member who said because she was Resident #1's MPOA she would sign a new OOH-DNR. The SW revealed Resident #1's family member later came to her office and completed the OOH-DNR that was in Resident #1's electronic record. The SW also revealed she had interviewed Resident #1 and completed a BIMS assessment with him on two occasions, [DATE] and [DATE] in which Resident #1 scored a 15 each time. The SW confirmed a score of 15 indicated the resident to be cognitively intact. The SW was asked if the OOH-DNR was valid with the family member's signature if Resident #1 is competent and the SW stated technically, I guess it's not legal. The SW was asked if a conversation had occurred with Resident #1 regarding his wishes and the SW stated she would need to have that conversation to determine if he wanted to sign a new OOH-DNR. When asked about the potential harm of having someone other than a competent resident sign the OOH-DNR, the SW stated the resident's wishes may not be known or followed. In an interview with the DON on [DATE] at 2:45 p.m., the DON confirmed Resident #1's OOH-DNR to not be valid and revealed she would follow up immediately with the SW to ensure Resident #1's wishes were known, and his code status correct. In an interview with the Administrator on [DATE] at 3:10 p.m., the Administrator revealed the SW had informed her that Resident #1's OOH-DNR was not valid, and the SW was meeting with him to discuss his rights and assist with completing a new OOH-DNR if that was his wishes. Record review of the facility's policy titled, Residents' Rights Regarding Treatment and Advance Directives, undated, It is the policy of this facility to support and facilitate a resident's right to request, refuse and/or discontinue medical or surgical treatment and to formulate an advance directive.
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Life-Threatening (Immediate Jeopardy)
J - Isolated K - Pattern L - Widespread
Actual Harm
G - Isolated H - Pattern I - Widespread
Potential for Harm
D - Isolated E - Pattern F - Widespread
No Harm (Minor)
A - Isolated B - Pattern C - Widespread

Questions to Ask on Your Visit

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

Our Honest Assessment

Strengths
  • • Licensed and certified facility. Meets minimum state requirements.
Concerns
  • • Multiple safety concerns identified: 4 life-threatening violation(s), $34,496 in fines. Review inspection reports carefully.
  • • 28 deficiencies on record, including 4 critical (life-threatening) violations. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
  • • $34,496 in fines. Higher than 94% of Texas facilities, suggesting repeated compliance issues.
  • • Grade F (0/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
Bottom line: This facility has 4 Immediate Jeopardy findings. Serious concerns require careful evaluation.

About This Facility

What is Cibolo Creek's CMS Rating?

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

How is Cibolo Creek Staffed?

CMS rates CIBOLO CREEK's staffing level at 3 out of 5 stars, which is average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 69%, which is 23 percentage points above the Texas average of 46%. High turnover can affect care consistency as new staff learn residents' individual needs.

What Have Inspectors Found at Cibolo Creek?

State health inspectors documented 28 deficiencies at CIBOLO CREEK during 2023 to 2025. These included: 4 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death) and 24 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 Cibolo Creek?

CIBOLO CREEK 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 120 certified beds and approximately 81 residents (about 68% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in BOERNE, Texas.

How Does Cibolo Creek Compare to Other Texas Nursing Homes?

Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Texas, CIBOLO CREEK's overall rating (2 stars) is below the state average of 2.8, staff turnover (69%) is significantly higher than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (1 stars) is much below the national benchmark.

What Should Families Ask When Visiting Cibolo Creek?

Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "What changes have been made since the serious inspection findings, and how are you preventing similar issues?" "How do you ensure continuity of care given staff turnover, and what is your staff retention strategy?" "Can I visit during a mealtime to observe dining assistance and food quality?" "How do you handle medical emergencies, and what is your hospital transfer rate?" These questions are particularly relevant given the facility's Immediate Jeopardy citations and the facility's high staff turnover rate.

Is Cibolo Creek Safe?

Based on CMS inspection data, CIBOLO CREEK has documented safety concerns. Inspectors have issued 4 Immediate Jeopardy citations (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death). The facility has a 2-star overall rating and ranks #100 of 100 nursing homes in Texas. Families considering this facility should ask detailed questions about what corrective actions have been taken since these incidents.

Do Nurses at Cibolo Creek Stick Around?

Staff turnover at CIBOLO CREEK is high. At 69%, the facility is 23 percentage points above the Texas average of 46%. High turnover means new staff may not know residents' individual needs, medications, or preferences. It can also be disorienting for residents, especially those with dementia who rely on familiar faces. Families should ask: What is causing the turnover? What retention programs are in place? How do you ensure care continuity during staff transitions?

Was Cibolo Creek Ever Fined?

CIBOLO CREEK has been fined $34,496 across 4 penalty actions. The Texas average is $33,424. 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 Cibolo Creek on Any Federal Watch List?

CIBOLO CREEK 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.