SERIOUS
(G)
Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures
Pressure Ulcer Prevention
(Tag F0686)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure residents with pressure ulcers received the nec...
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 with pressure ulcers received the necessary treatment and services, consistent with professional standards of practice, to promote healing, prevent infection, and prevent new ulcers from developing for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #160) reviewed for pressure injury.
The facility failed to reposition Resident #160.
The facility failed to have a low air loss mattress (is a mattress designed to prevent and treat pressure wounds) on admission for Resident #160.
The facility failed to follow up on nutritional labs (albumin (is protein in your blood plasma) and total protein (test measures the sum of all types of proteins in the blood. Proteins are fundamental to the functioning of the body)) results for Resident #160.
The facility failed to ensure Resident #160 did not have a wound infection.
These failures could place residents at risk for deterioration of wound and untreated wound infection.
Findings included:
Record review of a face sheet dated 06/26/23 indicated Resident #160 was a [AGE] year-old male admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including pressure ulcer of sacral region, stage 4 (The wound penetrates all three layers of skin, exposing muscles, tendons, and bones in your musculoskeletal system), pain, Type 2 diabetes mellitus (is a disease in which your blood glucose, or blood sugar, levels are too high), nicotine dependence (is an addiction to tobacco products caused by the drug nicotine), congestive heart failure (the heart muscle doesn't pump blood as well as it should), and peripheral vascular disease (is an accumulation of plaque (fats and cholesterol) in the arteries in your legs or arms). The face sheet indicated Resident #160 was admitted from a skilled nursing facility.
Record review of the previous facility consolidated physician order dated 06/16/23 indicated Resident #160 had a wound culture lab, once.
Record review of the consolidated physician order dated 06/16/23 indicated Resident #160 was admitted to the facility under the care of MD Q with primary admitting diagnosis: Pressure ulcer of sacral region, stage 4. The consolidated physician order dated 06/16/23 indicated pressure reducing mattress (redistribute a patient's weight so as to relieve pressure points) to bed.
Record review of the consolidated physician order dated 06/20/23 indicated Resident #160 may have air loss mattress with alternating pressure.
Record review of the MDS revealed Resident #160 was admitted to the facility less than 21 days ago. No MDS for Resident #160 was completed prior to exit.
Record review of a baseline care plan dated 06/16/23, edited on 06/23/23 indicated Resident #160 had a pressure ulcer of sacral region, stage 4 and was at risk for worsening of wound. Interventions included low air loss mattress with alternating pressure and turn and reposition frequently throughout the shift.
Record review of a baseline care plan dated 06/16/23, created on 06/20/23 indicated Resident #160 required dependent assistance for toileting, dressing, and mobility.
Record review of a baseline care plan dated 06/16/23, created on 06/20/23 indicated Resident #160 had an infection of the wound. Interventions included receive medications as ordered, be observed or report any worsening signs or symptoms of infection to my caregivers and physician/NP and contact isolation (that everyone coming into a patient's room is asked to wear a gown and gloves) and standard precautions (the basic level of infection control that should be used in the care of all patients all of the time) to prevent transmission as appropriate.
Record review of a progress note dated 06/16/23 at 1:55 p.m., by ADON B indicated .Resident #160 admitted with stage 4 pressure ulcer to sacrum 12.5x12xUTD (Length x Width x Depth) .
Record review of a progress note dated 06/18/23 at 2:08 p.m., by RN L indicated .Resident #160 being monitored for an active infection .standard precaution and contact precaution .sacral region infection .purulent discharge or drainage from wound .
Record review of a progress note dated 06/19/23 at 11:43 a.m., by ADON B indicated .Resident #160 admitted with stage 4 pressure ulcer to sacrum 12.5x12.2xUTD .
Record review of a progress note dated 06/19/23 at 12:26 a.m., by LVN R indicated .Resident #160 being monitored for an active infection .standard precaution and contact precaution .sacral region infection .purulent discharge or drainage from wound .
Record review of a progress note dated 06/20/23 at 4:13 p.m., by ADON B indicated .sacrum pressure ulcer IV 14.5x9x2cm .low air loss mattress alternating pressure ordered by this nurse to be delivered today .
Record review of a progress note dated 06/22/23 at 4:13 p.m., by ADON C indicated .results were communicated to MD Q on 06/22/23 at 4:13 p.m . total protein 5.5 .albumin 1.9 .reported results to MD Q, awaiting orders . No progress note found indicated MD Q returned phone call for new orders.
Record review of a wound consultation dated 06/20/23 indicated . new consult . awaiting wound culture results will continue Dakin's (is a broad-spectrum antiseptic, antimicrobial, antibacterial, antifungal, and antiviral wound care solution for acute and chronic wounds) for preventative . stage 4 sacrum pressure .14.5x9x2 .odor .peri wound (is tissue surrounding a wound) no signs/symptoms of infection .recommendations of offload/reposition, optimize nutrition, low air loss mattress .
Record review of a wound consultation dated 06/28/23 indicated .pre-admit wound culture has not been received .collected wound culture today .no overt signs/symptoms of infection .will continue Dakin's for preventative until culture results received .will defer starting antibiotics due to no signs/symptoms of infection to wound .stage 4 sacrum pressure .14.5x9x2.3 .odor .peri wound no signs/symptoms of infection .
During an observation on 06/26/23 at 11:58 a.m., Resident #160 asleep in the bed with the position wedge on the right side of his body but not underneath him.
During an observation on 06/26/23 at 2:10 p.m., Resident #160 asleep in the bed with the position wedge on the right side of his body but not underneath him.
During an observation and interview on 06/26/23 at 2:25 p.m., Resident #160 was in bed with the position wedge on the right side of his body but not underneath him. Resident #160 said he had a sore on his bottom and staff turned him sometimes.
During an observation on 06/27/23 at 9:00 a.m., Resident #160 was laying on his back with no positioning aides.
During an observation and interview on 06/27/23 at 10:30 a.m., Resident #160 was laying on his back with no positioning aides. Dressing change performed by ADON B, the wound care nurse. ADON B said gown and gloves were worn during dressing changes because paperwork from another facility indicated Resident #160 had an infection. She said the facility was waiting on the wound culture results obtained by the transferring facility. ADON B said it was precautionary until they received results. Resident #160 was placed on left side with the wedge underneath him.
During an observation on 06/27/23 at 1:22 p.m., Resident #160 was on his left side but had slid partially off the wedge and was partially laying sideways in the bed.
During an observation and interview on 06/27/23 at 3:25 p.m., Resident #160 was on his left side but had mostly slid off the wedge and was askew in the bed. A family member of Resident #160 was at the bedside and said when she visited him, he was always flat om his back. The family member of Resident #160 said she visited daily.
During an interview on 06/28/23 at 1:53 p.m., CNA A said she worked Hall 1 on Monday (06/26/23) and took care of Resident #160. She said Resident #160 liked to lay flat on his back. CNA A said she did not even notice a positioning wedge in his bed on Monday (06/26/23). She said Hall 1 was a demanding hall, but she felt like she repositioned Resident #160 at least 2-3 times. CNA A said she knew Resident #160 needed to be repositioned frequently to help heal his pressure ulcer. She said not repositioning Resident #160 could cause the wound to get worse.
During an interview on 06/28/23 at 2:10 p.m., ADON B, the wound care nurse, said Resident #160 was admitted to the facility on antibiotics and he completed the doses. She said on admission the facility attempted to contact the hospital and transferring facility about his possible wound infection with no luck. ADON B said the wound had an odor, but the facility waited until today to obtain another wound culture. She said another wound culture could have been obtained prior to today. ADON B said she did not know why on the two days it was documented Resident #160 had purulent drainage, an order was not obtained to get another wound culture. She said RN L was no longer employed by the facility to ask about the purulent drainage. ADON B said the facility utilized offloading, low air loss mattresses, wound care, and the dietician to prevent and heal pressure wounds. ADON B said Resident #160 was admitted from a sister facility and the facility was aware on before admission he had a stage 4 sacrum pressure ulcer. She said she did not know why a low air loss mattress was not available on admission. She said the dietician rounded the 1st of every month and made recommendations. ADON B said the dietician was in the facility today and she needed to notify her to see Resident #160. ADON B said Resident #160's lab results should have been followed up by the charge nurse to receive orders from the doctor. She said interventions were placed to prevent wounds from getting worse or cause sepsis which could kill a resident.
During an interview on 06/29/23 at 10:50 a.m., ADON C said she was responsible for routine labs and to ensure nurses followed up on other lab results. She said she did notify MD Q about Resident #160 lab results. ADON C said she sent a picture of Resident #160's previous and new lab results, and MD Q said, it dropped. She said I called MD Q on 06/28/23 to address the low total protein and albumin and he order to repeat labs in two weeks. ADON C said she did not document contact with MD Q after her progress note on 06/22/23. She said nursing staff who worked after the progress note on 06/22/23 could have also contact MD Q to get a response. ADON C said Resident #160's lab results needed to be addressed because they could affect his wound healing.
On 06/29/23 at 12:00 p.m., the DON was unavailable for interview due to being on leave.
During an interview on 06/29/23 at 12:13 p.m., the Registered Dietician said she was not the normal RD who rounded at the facility. She said this was her third time being at the facility. The RD said the regular RD usually rounded earlier in the month, but she came at the end of the month. The RD said some facilities emailed the RD with new admission who needed to be seen as soon as possible but she did not know the facility's procedure.
During an interview on 06/29/23 at 12:15 p.m., the Administrator said regarding pressure ulcers she expected the nursing staff to follow physician orders for treatment. She said she expected nursing staff to notify physicians of lab results. The administrator said she expect if the lab results were critical, nursing staff would continue to contact the physician until they received a response. She said she expected any communication regarding the lab results with physician should be documented in the resident chart. The Administrator said the facility communicated lab results with physician by text messages and phone calls. She said the physician needed to be contacted to know if the lab results needed to be addressed.
On 06/29/23 at 12:30 p.m., attempted to contact MD Q by phone. No return call prior to exit.
Record review of CNA A's proficiency audit checkoff dated 09/29/22 for turns/repositions residents timely/correctly was satisfactory.
Record review of a facility Prevention of Pressure Injuries policy dated 05/22 indicated .conduct nutritional screenings for resident at risk .provide optimal hydration, nutrient, protein, and calorie requirement .include nutritional supplements in the resident's diet to increase calories and protein . reposition all residents with or at risk of pressure injuries on an individualized schedule .select appropriate support surfaces based the resident's risk factors .
Record review of an undated facility Laboratory Guidelines policy indicated .purpose .to enable prompt communication between the laboratory, facility staff and physician on all laboratory work drawn on residents in the facility and to ensure residents receive appropriate interventions as justified by any abnormal lab values .the lab results will be given to the DON/designee for review .the attending physician will be notified on any abnormal values .there will be follow-up documentation in the medical record .
Review of Evaluation of a low-air-loss mattress system in the treatment of patients with pressure ulcers (1995) by M A [NAME], J Oldenbrook, C [NAME], www.pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7612140 was accessed on 07/06/2023 indicated .our observation indicate that use of the low-air-loss mattress system reduces the size and facilitates the healing of previously stable, chronic pressure ulcers .
Review of Effects of Albumin Infusion on Serum Levels of Albumin .and Wound Healing (May 20, 2020) by [NAME] Utariani, [NAME] Rahardjo, and [NAME] Perdanakusuma, www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7256723 was accessed on 07/06/2023 indicated . albumin infusion and dietary proteins play vital roles in accelerating the wound healing process .malnourished patients with protein deficiency have a high risk of infection, impaired wound healing .
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0561
(Tag F0561)
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 promote resident self-determination through support of...
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 promote resident self-determination through support of resident choice for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for self-determination. (Resident #45)
The facility did not assist Resident #45 out of bed when he requested.
This failure could place dependent residents at risk for feelings of lack of self-determination and decreased quality of life.
Findings included:
Record review of the face sheet dated 06/26/23 indicated Resident #45 was a [AGE] year-old male and admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including generalized muscle weakness, congestive heart failure (the heart muscle doesn't pump blood as well as it should.), cerebral infarction (stroke), nicotine dependence (is an addiction to tobacco products caused by the drug nicotine), and flaccid (loose or floppy) hemiplegia (weakness or paralysis of one side of the body) affecting right dominant side.
Record review of the quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] indicated Resident #45 was understood and understood others. The MDS indicated Resident #45 had a BIMS score of 09 which indicated moderately impaired cognition and required extensive assistance for bed mobility and total dependence with two plus persons for transfer.
Record review of a care plan dated 06/21/23 indicated Resident #45 required a mechanical lift to transfer to chair/bed which puts me at risk for injury, Intervention included please have two people to safely transfer from bed to chair using mechanical lift.
Record review of a care plan dated 03/01/22 and revised on 06/12/23 indicated Resident #45 was at risk for psychosocial well-being disturbed related to mood disorder and schizophrenia (is a serious mental illness that affects how a person thinks, feels, and behaves). Intervention included allow to participant in daily care and decision/goals making. The care plan indicated Resident #45 had ADL function/rehab potential risk related to being bedfast. Intervention included ambulation/transfers amount of assist x2 persons.
During an observation on 06/26/23 at 10:54 a.m., CNA A walked out of Resident #45's room and said I don't know if I will have time today to get you. We will have to see.
During an observation and interview on 06/26/23 at 11:23 a.m., Resident #45 was in bed. Resident #45 said he asked to get out of the bed since morning. He said staff did not always get him out of bed when he asked, he depended on if the facility had enough staff working the floor. Resident #45 said he was a smoker and had not been able to smoke yet.
During an observation on 06/26/23 at 11:45 a.m., CNA A dropped Resident #45's lunch tray on his bedside table. Resident #45 asked her if he would be able to get out of bed after lunch and CNA A said, I said I would try.
During an observation and interview on 06/26/23 at 2:06 p.m., Resident #45 was in the bed watching television. He said he had not been out of bed today.
During an observation on 06/26/23 at 5:00 p.m., Resident #45 was in the bed watching television.
During an interview on 06/28/23 at 1:53 p.m., CNA A said she worked for the facility for 2 years. She said she worked Hall 1 and 2 on Monday (06/26/23) and Hall 1 was where Resident #45 resided. CNA A said on Monday (06/26/23) she did not have time to get Resident #45 out of bed due to only 3 CNAs working the halls. She said Resident #45 required a mechanical lift with 2 people assist and no one had time to help her. CNA A said Resident #45 did ask to get out of bed daily. She said she explained to Resident #45 why she could not get him out of bed because lack of staff. CNA A said he knew the facility had low staffing some days so Resident #45 should not be upset. She said Resident #45 wanted to get up to smoke too but currently did not have cigarettes. CNA A said it probably upset Resident #45 to not get out of bed after he asked several times. She said she had recent training on resident rights. CNA A said denying Resident #45 could cause him to try getting up by himself and fall.
During an interview on 06/28/23 at 4:05 p.m., LVN D said Resident #45 had the right to get out of when he asked. She said Resident #45 should not have been told he could not get out due to lack of staffing. LVN D said not honoring Resident #45's wish to get up could cause him to stop asking and isolate himself in his room or feel like he was not important. She said it was nursing staff's responsibility to honor a resident right to get out bed when asked to.
During an interview on 06/29/23 at 10:29 a.m., the ADON B said Resident #45 had the right to get out of bed unless there was an important reason not to. She said not getting Resident #45 out of the bed when he asked violated his rights. ADON B said Resident #45 should not have been told he could not get out due to lack of staffing. She said CNAs and LVNs were responsible for helping residents with their ADLs which included transfers. ADON B said it probably did not make Resident #45 feel good being denied getting out bed which risked skin issues, emotional distress, and decrease in quality of life.
During an interview on 06/29/23 at 12:15 p.m., the Administrator said if a resident requested to get out of bed, it should be honored as soon as possible. She said it was Resident #45's resident right to be gotten out of the bed when asked. The Administrator said all staff had resident's right training and should follow the resident rights policy.
Record review of CNA A's training file indicated she had Resident Rights training on 05/24/23.
Record review of a facility Resident Rights policy dated 02/21 indicated, .employees shall treat all residents with kindness, respect, and dignity .certain basic rights to all resident of the facility .these rights include the resident's right to .self-determination .be supported by the facility in exercising his or her rights .
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Free from Abuse/Neglect
(Tag F0600)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from abuse for 1 of 24 residents (Reside...
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 were free from abuse for 1 of 24 residents (Resident #18) reviewed for resident abuse.
The facility did not ensure Resident #18 was free from abuse, as a result Resident #18 was verbally abused by DA J.
This failure could place residents at risk of physical harm, mental anguish, and/or emotional distress.
The findings included:
Record review of Resident #18's face sheet, dated 6/28/23, revealed he was a [AGE] year-old male who admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of schizoaffective disorder, bipolar type (mental illness that affects thoughts, mood, and behavior with mania-extremely elevated & excitable mood, psychosis-thoughts and emotions that resident losses contact with reality, and depression-persistent sadness) and cognitive communication deficit (difficulty with thinking and how someone uses language).
Record review of Resident #18's quarterly MDS assessment, dated 6/12/23, revealed he had clear speech and was understood by staff. The MDS revealed Resident #18 was able to understand others. The MDS revealed Resident #18 had a BIMS score of 12, which indicated moderate cognitive impairment. The MDS revealed Resident #18 had fluctuating behaviors of inattention and disorganized thinking. Resident #18 had daily verbal behavioral symptoms, such as threatening others, screaming at others, and cursing at others. Resident #18 refused care at times.
Record review of Resident #18's comprehensive care plan, last reviewed on 6/06/23, revealed Resident #18 was at risk for behavioral symptoms. Resident #18 had schizoaffective disorder and would speak loudly and pace the hallways. Resident #18 would curse staff and other residents. Resident #18 was easily anxious and agitated. The interventions included: always ask for help if resident becomes abusive/resistant, convey acceptance of resident during periods of inappropriate behavior, encourage diversional activities, keep environment calm and relaxed, redirect resident as needed, and remove from public area when behavior is unacceptable.
During an interview on 6/26/23 at 10:56 AM, Resident #18 spoke to surveyor when spoken to, but was unable or unwilling to answer questions. Resident #18 said he did not know what the surveyor was talking about.
During a phone interview and record review on 6/28/23 at 9:37 AM, RN L said she no longer worked at the facility. RN L said she may not remember all the details of the incident between Resident #18 and DA J and asked surveyor to refer to her nurse notes. Reviewed 4/01/23 at 3:17 PM nurse note with RN L and she said the documentation was correct. Per her nurse note on 4/01/23 at 3:17 PM Resident #18 had demonstrated aggressive/combative behavior toward DA J. RN L said Resident #18 demonstrated very loud aggressive verbal attacks toward DA J and DA J engaged in loud aggressive cursive verbal exchanges with Resident #18. RN L said Resident #18 attempted to hit DA J and RN L intervened between Resident #18 and DA J and Resident #18 was assisted to the floor. RN L said ADON B had come into the dining room and assisted Resident #18 to ADON B's office for redirection and calming of the resident. RN L said Resident #18 was a difficult resident and was easily agitated and often cussed staff and/or residents.
During a phone interview on 6/29/23 at 8:20 AM, [NAME] K said she was in the kitchen with the door propped open on 4/01/23 when she heard Resident #18 hollering and cussing. [NAME] K said Resident #18 had been overly agitated that day and had been hollering and cussing throughout the facility all day. [NAME] K said DA J had gone on break to get a coke from the vending machine in the dining room. [NAME] K said she only heard Resident #18 yelling and cussing and did not hear DA J say anything. [NAME] K said she heard Resident #18 yelling and cussing, and she went to the door of the kitchen and tried to step between Resident #18 and DA J. [NAME] K said Resident #18 then tried to swing at DA J and DA J put his arm up to block himself from being hit. [NAME] K said Resident #18 lost his balance when he tried to hit DA J and [NAME] K caught Resident #18 and lowered him to the floor. [NAME] K said RN L came in and assessed Resident #18. [NAME] K said she had received many in-services on how to deal with difficult residents and abuse. [NAME] K said you could redirect a difficult resident, but sometimes redirecting them did not help. [NAME] K said she would have just walked away from a situation like that and gone into the kitchen and shut the door or tell a nurse to come assess the resident. [NAME] K was able to verbalize what abuse was and said the Abuse Coordinator was the Administrator.
During a phone interview on 6/29/23 at 8:40 AM, DA J said he worked at the facility for almost two years as a dietary aide on Saturday and Sundays. DA J said Resident #18 had been messing with him all day. DA J said earlier during the day on 4/01/23, he was going to the restroom in the hallway and Resident #18 stepped into his lane and Resident #18 was cussing at him and then Resident #18 hit him on his shoulder. DA J said he just ignored it and walked away and did not report it. DA J said a little later, he was going to the freezer across the hall from the dining room and Resident #18 followed him cussing at him. DA J said he just told him to be quiet and went on about his business. DA J said then he was going on break and went to get a coke from the vending machine in the dining room. DA J said Resident #18 was also in the dining and he continued to cuss at DA J and talk trash. DA J said you can only take so much. DA J said Resident #18 got between him and the kitchen door and he did not remember what Resident #18 was saying. DA J said he lost his cool, but he did not remember cussing at Resident #18. DA J said for two years he did not have to deal with stuff like that because they did not have residents like Resident #18. DA J said he did not remember what trainings he had related to abuse or dealing with difficult residents prior to the incident with Resident #18 on 4/01/23. DA J said he was trying to walk away when Resident #18 stepped in his lane when he was trying to go back in the kitchen. DA J said then Resident #18 tried to swing his fist at DA J and DA J just put his arm up to block Resident #18 from hitting him. DA J said Resident #18 lost his balance and fell backwards, but the nurse caught him.
During an interview on 6/29/23 at 10:16 AM, CNA E said she had worked at the facility for sixteen years. CNA E said she usually worked Hall 1 and filled in on the other halls when needed. CNA E said she had received trainings on Abuse and Dealing with difficult residents and was able to verbalize the different types of abuse. CNA E said the abuse coordinator was the Administrator. CNA E said staff should not holler or curse at a resident because it would be verbal abuse. CNA E said staff should walk away from a difficult resident and not engage them and report to the nurse.
During an interview on 6/29/2023 at 11:06 AM, RN N said she had worked at the facility since April of 2023. RN N said she was in an Administrator in Training Internship but worked the floor some to help. RN N said she had received training on abuse, dealing with difficult residents and residents with dementia. RN N said the Abuse Coordinator was the Administrator. RN N said she would go get someone else if a resident was directing their aggression toward her to help deescalate the situation or she would redirect the resident. RN N said a staff member should never holler or curse back at resident, because it would be verbal abuse of the resident. RN N said a staff member should walk away from a situation and not holler or curse at a resident.
During an interview on 6/29/23 at 11:30 AM, ADON B said she had worked at the facility for eight and half years. ADON B said she did not remember all the details of the incident on 4/01/23 with Resident #18 and DA J and asked surveyor to refer to her statement. ADON B said she heard shouting, and it sounded like Resident #18 and DA J. ADON B said she did not know exactly what was said, but she did hear DA J raise his voice. ADON B said Resident #18 was one of the most difficult residents to deal with and easily aggravated and hard to redirect. ADON B said DA J should not have raised his voice at Resident #18 and it was against the resident's rights to be hollered at. ADON B said DA J was a great staff member, but she did not know what happened that day. ADON B said DA J should have walked away from the situation and gone into the kitchen.
During an interview on 6/29/23 at 12:50 PM, the Chief Nursing Officer said the DON was on vacation and she could respond to general questions. The Chief Nursing Officer said staff should not holler or curse at a resident, even if the resident was difficult. She said staff should walk away, ask for help, and/or redirect the resident.
During an interview on 6/29/23 at 1:06 PM, the Administrator said she was the Abuse Coordinator. The Administrator said Resident #18 had been very agitated on 4/01/23 and had been cursing at the dietary staff for no reason most of the day. The Administrator said DA J had left the kitchen and gone to the vending machine in the dining room to get a coke. The Administrator said Resident #18 was in the dining room and started yelling and cursing at DA J. The Administrator said DA J reacted and started screaming back at Resident #18. The Administrator said DA J should have walked away from the situation and gone to get a nurse. The Administrator said DA J yelling back at Resident #18 was verbal abuse. The Administrator said DA J had received abuse training prior to the incident with Resident #18 in a group setting, but she now realized that was not the best setting for DA J to learn. The Administrator said DA J was a good employee and had never exhibited that type of behavior before. The Administrator said she had done one-on-one training with DA J following the incident and felt it was effective, on Abuse Prevention on 4/06/23, How to keep your cool when dealing with a difficult resident on 5/01/23, Dealing with Difficult Patients and Anxiety and Agitation on 4/24/23, Conflict Resolution and Resident to Resident Altercations on 4/16/23.
Record review of the Event Report dated 4/01/23 revealed Resident #18 had revealed aggressive/combative behavior toward DA J. Resident #18 had demonstrated very loud aggressive verbal attacks toward DA J and DA J engaged in loud aggressive cursive verbal exchange with Resident #18. Resident #18 tried to swing at DA J and nurse intervened between resident and DA J.
Record review of [NAME] K's signed statement from 4/01/23 said she was in the kitchen when she heard Resident #18 yelling at DA J when DA J left the kitchen to get a drink. [NAME] K said she heard the commotion getting louder between the two of them and she ran out to the dining room. [NAME] K said she tried to get Resident #18 out of the dining room and DA J into the kitchen, when Resident #18 swung at DA J. [NAME] K said DA J was able to block Resident #18's punch. [NAME] K said she was able to get between Resident #18 and DA J and was successfully assisted by RN L in separating them. [NAME] K said no one was hit or hurt. [NAME] K said Resident #18 was calmed then redirected by ADON B.
Record review of ADON B's signed statement from 4/01/23 revealed she was in her office and heard yelling coming from the dining room. ADON B overheard DA J yelling Get the hell out of my face at Resident #18. ADON B said Resident #18 was yelling back, but she did not understand his communication. ADON B said she entered the dining area and observed RN L on the floor with Resident #18. ADON B said she instructed DA J to go in the kitchen and close door. ADON B said she then redirected Resident #18 to her office.
Record review of an All-Staff in-service sign-in sheet, titled Dealing with Difficult Residents, dated 3/15/23, revealed DA J had not signed the in-service.
Record review of DA J's personnel file revealed he had worked at the facility since February 2022, and he had signed the abuse training upon hire.
Record review of the facility's abuse police, titled Abuse Prevention Program, dated revised June 2021 revealed . residents have the right to be free from abuse, neglect, misappropriation of resident property and exploitation . includes but not limited to freedom from corporal punishment, involuntary seclusion, verbal, mental, sexual or physical abuse, and physical or chemical restraint not required to treat the resident's symptoms . Center will implement and permanently maintain an effective training program for all staff, which includes, at a minimum, training on abuse, neglect, exploitation, misappropriation of resident property that is appropriate and effective, as determined by staff need and the Center assessment .
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 interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure assessments accurately reflected the status for 2 of 2 resid...
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 assessments accurately reflected the status for 2 of 2 residents reviewed for assessments. (Resident #6 and Resident #34)
The facility failed ensure Resident #6's MDS assessment was properly coded for PASRR and medication classification.
The facility failed to ensure Resident #34's MDS assessment was properly coded for having an indwelling catheter.
These failures could place residents at risk of not having individual needs met.
Findings included:
1. Record review of a face sheet dated 06/26/23 indicated Resident #6 was a [AGE] year-old male admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including Type 2 diabetes mellitus (is a common condition that causes the level of sugar (glucose) in the blood to become too high), psychotic disorder (is a mental health problem that causes people to perceive or interpret things differently to those around them) with hallucinations (is a false perception of objects or events involving your senses: sight, sound, smell, touch and taste), major depressive disorder (is a mood disorder that causes a persistent feeling of sadness and loss of interest), and mild intellectual disabilities (refers to students with an IQ in the range of 55-70). The face sheet indicated Resident #6 was PASRR positive.
Record review of Resident #6's consolidated physician order dated 03/22/22 indicated Trulicity (is an injectable diabetes medicine that helps control blood sugar levels; is an antidiabetic medicine that is different to insulin) 1.5mg subcutaneous (the injection is given in the fatty tissue, just under the skin), Once a day on Wednesday.
Record review of the annual MDS assessment dated [DATE] indicated Resident #6 was not currently considered by the state level II PASRR process to have serious mental illness and/or intellectual disability or related condition. The MDS revealed Resident #6 was understood and understood others. The MDS revealed Resident #6 had a BIMS score of 11 which indicated moderately impaired cognition and required supervision for all ADLs. The MDS revealed Resident #6 received insulin injections 1 day during the assessment period.
Record review of a care plan dated 05/13/23 indicated Resident #6 PASRR had been identified and he needed Specialized Services due to diagnosis of intellectual disability. Intervention included report any need to evaluate or change my habilitative services to maintain my level of functioning.
Record review of care plan dated 05/13/23 indicated Resident #6 took glyburide (is an oral diabetes medicine that helps control blood sugar levels) and at risk for side effects while taking this medication. Intervention included monitor and report side effects.
Record review of Resident #6's PASRR level 1 screening dated 03/28/19 indicated evidence or indicator of mental illness and intellectual disability.
2. Record review of a face sheet dated 06/26/23 indicated Resident #34 was a [AGE] year-old female admitted with diagnosis including neuromuscular dysfunction of bladder (is when a person lacks bladder control due to brain, spinal cord, or nerve problems).
Record review of Resident #34's consolidated physician order dated 05/30/22 indicated Foley catheter, size 10ml, 18 fr, diagnosis: neuromuscular dysfunction of bladder.
Record review of an annual MDS assessment dated [DATE] indicated Resident #34 was understood and understood others. The MDS indicated Resident #34 had a BIMS score of 06 which indicated severe cognitive impairment and required extensive assistance for dressing, toilet use, and personal hygiene and total dependence for bed mobility, transfer, and bathing. The MDS indicated Resident #34 did not have an indwelling catheter for a bladder and bowel appliance.
Record review of a care plan dated 05/25/22, edited on 06/13/23 indicated Resident #34 had bowel/bladder incontinence. The care plan indicated Resident #34 had an indwelling catheter. Intervention included observe the indwelling catheter.
During an observation on 06/26/23 at 2:11 p.m., Resident #34 was in the bed with an indwelling catheter clipped on the side of the bed.
During an interview on 06/27/23 at 1:36 p.m., the MDS coordinator with the Regional MDS coordinator present said she accidently did not mark Resident #6 as being PASRR positive on his annual MDS assessment dated [DATE]. The MDS coordinator said Resident #34 did have an indwelling catheter during the MDS assessment period dated 04/12/23 but she did not mark it. The MDS coordinator said there was no system in place to notify her if a resident was marked for a care area the MDS prior but not on the current MDS assessment submitted to CMS. The Regional MDS coordinator said she did 1 PASRR audits quarterly and Resident #6's PASRR status probably had not been audited. The Regional MDS coordinator said she did audit MDS assessments every 3-6 months to ensure accuracy. The Regional MDS coordinator said Trulicity was a tricky medication to classify. The Regional MDS coordinator said Trulicity was a diabetic medication but not insulin. The Regional MDS coordinator said the MDS coordinator should research medication drug classification if she was not familiar with the medication. The MDS coordinator said resident assessments should be accurate to transmit correct information to CMS.
On 06/29/23 at 12:00 p.m., DON unavailable for interview due to being on leave.
During an interview on 06/29/23 at 12:15 p.m., the Administrator said she expected the MDS coordinator to complete and submit accurate MDS assessments in a timely manner.
Record review of a facility Certifying Accuracy of the Resident Assessment policy dated 11/19 revealed .the information captured on the assessment reflects the status of the resident during the observation period for that assessment .the Resident Assessment Coordinator is responsible for ensuring that an MDS assessment has been completed for each resident
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0655
(Tag F0655)
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 the baseline care plan that included the instructions for re...
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 the baseline care plan that included the instructions for resident care needed to provide effective and person-centered care was completed and provided to the resident and/or their representative for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for new admissions (Resident #160).
The facility failed to complete Resident #160's baseline care plan within 48 hours of admission.
This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving care and services to meet their needs.
Findings included:
Record review of a face sheet dated 06/26/23 indicated Resident #160 was a [AGE] year-old male admitted on [DATE] with diagnosis including pressure ulcer of sacral region, stage 4 (The wound penetrates all three layers of skin, exposing muscles, tendons, and bones in your musculoskeletal system), pain, Type 2 diabetes mellitus (is a disease in which your blood glucose, or blood sugar, levels are too high), nicotine dependence (is an addiction to tobacco products caused by the drug nicotine), congestive heart failure (the heart muscle doesn't pump blood as well as it should), and peripheral vascular disease (is an accumulation of plaque (fats and cholesterol) in the arteries in your legs or arms).
Record review of the MDS revealed Resident #160 was admitted to the facility less than 21 days ago. No MDS for Resident #160 was completed prior to exit.
Record review of a care plan dated 06/16/23, created on 06/20/23 by ADON B indicated Resident #160 required a baseline care identifying care needs, risks, strengths, and goals with the first 48 hours. Intervention included activities of daily living, anticoagulation therapy (medicines that help prevent blood clots), bowel and bladder, cognition, communication, hearing, infection, nutrition, pain, safety, skin concerns, and vision.
Record review of a progress note dated 06/16/23 at 1:55 p.m., by ADON B indicated .Resident #160 admitted with stage 4 pressure ulcer to sacrum 12.5x12xUTD (Length x Width x Depth) .
Record review of a progress note dated 06/18/23 at 2:08 p.m., by RN L indicated .Resident #160 being monitored for an active infection .standard precaution and contact precaution .sacral region infection .purulent discharge or drainage from wound .
Record review of a progress note dated 06/19/23 at 11:43 a.m., by ADON B indicated .Resident #160 admitted with stage 4 pressure ulcer to sacrum 12.5x12.2xUTD .
Record review of a progress note dated 06/19/23 at 12:26 a.m., by LVN R indicated .Resident #160 being monitored for an active infection .standard precaution and contact precaution .sacral region infection .purulent discharge or drainage from wound .
Record review of a progress note dated 06/20/23 at 4:13 p.m., by ADON B indicated .sacrum pressure ulcer IV 14.5x9x2cm .low air loss mattress alternating pressure ordered by this nurse to be delivered today .
During an interview on 06/29/23 at 10:50 a.m., ADON B said she completed Resident 160's baseline care plan as soon as possible. She said Resident #160 was admitted on Friday (06/16/23) by RN L, who was no longer employed by the facility, and it was not completed until Tuesday (06/20/23). ADON B said she tried to review new admission charts to make sure things were done but she was only one person. She said she thought only RNs could complete baseline care plans, but she did not know the facility's policy. ADON B said Resident #160 had a lot of complex issues on admission and a baseline care plan was important. She said baseline care plans were important to address issues, have interventions in place, and know if those interventions needed to be revised. ADON B said residents were at risk for not getting appropriate care without a baseline care plan.
On 06/29/23 at 12:00 p.m., the DON was unavailable for interview due to being on leave.
During an interview on 06/29/23 at 12:15 p.m., the Administrator said she believed baseline care plans had to be completed within 72 hours of admission. She said charge nurses were responsible for initiation and completion, but he did not have to be a RN.
Record review of a facility Care Plans-Baseline policy dated 12/16 indicated, .a baseline plan of care to meet the resident's immediate needs shall be developed for each resident within forty-eight (48) hours of admission .to assure that the resident's immediate care needs are met and maintained .the interdisciplinary team will review the healthcare practitioner's orders and implement a baseline care plan .
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, and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan to...
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 to meet each resident's medical, nursing, mental and psychosocial needs for 1 of 17 residents reviewed for care plans. (Resident #13)
The facility failed to implement the comprehensive person-centered care plan for Resident #13 by not weighing the resident weekly.
This failure could place residents at risk of not having individual needs met, a decreased quality of life, and cause residents not to receive needed services
Findings include:
Record review of a face sheet dated 06/27/23 revealed Resident #13 was [AGE] years old and was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including dementia, abnormal weight loss, and heart failure.
Record review of physician's orders for Resident #13 dated 06/27/23 indicated an order for weekly weights for 30 days with a start date of 06/05/23 and an end date of 07/05/23.
Record review of the most recent MDS dated [DATE] indicated Resident #13 was understood and understood others. The MDS indicated a BIMS of 12 indicating moderate cognitive impairment for Resident #13. The MDS indicated Resident #13 had a weight loss of 5% or more in the last month or of 10% or more in the last 6 months.
Record review of a care plan dated 03/15/23 indicated Resident #13 had a problem with a start date of 06/02/23 of an unplanned weight loss. This problem was reviewed and revised on 06/02/23 by ADON C. There was an intervention for weekly weights until stable.
Record review of weights from 03/02/23 - 06/14/23 for Resident #13 indicated:
03/02/23 Resident #13 weighed 129.5 pounds
04/03/23 Resident #13 weighed 125 pounds
05/03/23 Resident #13 weighed 123 pounds
06/05/23 the resident weighed 122.8 pounds
06/26/23, Resident #13 weighed 123.8 pounds
The weights dated 06/05/23 and 06/26/23 were recorded by ADON C. The electronic medical record for Resident #13 did not indicate any other weights for 06/23.
During an interview on 06/28/23 at 2:12 p.m., ADON C said she did not realize she had made an entry into Resident 13's care plan on 6/2/2023. She said she had just taken over being responsible for weighing the residents. She said June was her first month for this responsibility. She said according to the care plan, Resident #13 should have also been weighed on 06/12/23 and 6/19/23. She said she thought she had weighed Resident Pool the week of 06/19/23 She said in the past there had been a lot of weight discrepancies. She said she was trying to weigh all of the residents herself and she must have missed weighing Resident #13 She said by the intervention being on the care plan dated 06/02/23 the weights should have been done weekly. She said the resident not being weighed could cause the staff to not be aware of her true weight and she could continue to lose weight.
During an interview on 06/29/23 at 10:05 a.m., the Regional Clinical Resource Nurse said care plans were used to guide in the care and services of the residents. He said he expected staff to follow the interventions listed in the care plan. He said he would have expected Resident #13 to have had weekly weights as indicated in the care plan. He said not having weekly weights could affect setting a new weight baseline to see if the resident had further weight loss or gain.
During an interview on 06/29/23 at 11:06 a.m., the Administrator said the care plans tell staff how the residents are to be cared for. She said she would have expected a resident to be weighed weekly if they had a doctor's order and it was care planned for the resident to be weighed weekly.
Review of a Care Plans, Comprehensive Person-Centered facility policy dated December 2020 indicated, .A comprehensive person-centered care plan that includes measurable objectives and timetables to meet resident's physical, psychosocial and functional needs is developed and implemented for each resident .
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 provide the necessary services to maintain personal h...
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 the necessary services to maintain personal hygiene for 2 of 12 residents reviewed for ADLs (Residents #43 and Resident #30).
1.
The facility did not clean or trim Resident #43's fingernails.
2.
The facility did not shave Resident # 30's facial hair.
These failures could place residents who required assistance from staff for ADLs at risk of not receiving care and services to meet their needs which could result in poor care, risk for skin breakdown, feelings of poor self-esteem, lack of dignity and health.
The findings were:
1. Record review of an electronic face sheet dated 06/27/23 revealed Resident #43 was an [AGE] year-old male admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including quadriplegia (paralysis of all four limbs), urinary tract infections (an infection in any part of the urinary system), Constipation (not passing stools regularly or you're unable to completely empty your bowel), Neuromuscular dysfunction of bladder (the bladder may not fill or empty correctly), Diarrhea (stools are loose and watery).
Record review of Resident #43's annual MDS dated [DATE] revealed a BIMS with a score of 11, which indicated resident #43 had moderately impaired cognition. The MDS also revealed, Resident #43, required extensive assistance with personal hygiene. Resident #43 required two-person physical assistance with personal hygiene, including nail hygiene.
During an observation and interview on 06/26/23 at 11:08 a.m., Resident #43 was observed lying in his bed. He appeared unkempt and had long dirty fingernails. Resident #43 stated that the staff did not trim his fingernails, but that he would like them trimmed. He stated that he had not had his fingernails trimmed for over a month. He stated that he did not like that his nails were long and that there was dirt underneath the nail.
During an observation on 06/26/23 at 3:24 p.m., Resident #43 was observed with long and dirty fingernails, unchanged from first observation.
During an observation on 06/27/23 at 8:22 a.m., Resident #43 was observed with long and dirty fingernails, unchanged from first observation.
During an observation on 06/28/23 at 9:12 a.m., Resident #43 was observed with long and dirty fingernails, unchanged from first observation.
2. Record review of an electronic face sheet dated 06/27/23 revealed Resident #30 was an [AGE] year-old female admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including Cerebral infarction (occurs as a result of disrupted blood flow to the brain due to problems with the blood vessels that supply it), Age related nuclear cataract (major cause of blindness), history of falling, unsteadiness on feet, and Alzheimer's disease (common type of dementia.)
Record review of Resident #30's annual MDS dated [DATE] revealed a BIMS with a score of 6, which indicated resident #30 has severely impaired cognition. The MDS also revealed, Resident #30, required extensive assistance with personal hygiene. Resident #30 required one-person physical assistance with personal hygiene, including nail hygiene. Resident #30 required extensive assistance with nail hygiene.
During an observation and interview on 06/27/23 at 11:15 a.m., Resident #30 was observed with half inch long mustache hairs. She stated that she prefers a clean shave and would like her upper lip to be shaved.
During an observation and interview on 06/28/23 at 9:12 a.m., Resident #30 was observed with a mustache, and she said she would still like it to be shaved. She stated that she did not know how long it had been since she was shaved but it may have been at least a week.
During an interview on 06/29/23 at 10:30 a.m., the Administrator said she expected her staff to ensure residents that required assistance with their ADLs to follow the residents care plan schedule regarding grooming and hygiene.
During an interview with the ADON on 06/29/23 at 9:20 a.m. she stated there should be a schedule for resident fingernails to be cleaned and trimmed. She stated that resident's nails should be cleaned and trimmed per the resident's schedule on their care plan. She stated that trimming of nails is an infection control issue. She stated that if a resident had long and dirty nails or beds they would be placed at risk for infection or disease. She stated that residents should not have dirty nails or nail beds and should be cleaned by staff if a resident's nails are observed to be dirty. She stated that a resident's facial hair should be shaved if they choose to be clean shaved. She stated that shaving a resident is a dignity and self-esteem issue. She stated that a resident could be placed at risk of losing self-esteem and feeling undignified if they had an outward appearance that was embarrassing to them.
Review of the facility policy and procedure on care of Fingernails/Toenails, care of revised February 2018 revealed that The purpose of the procedure is to clean the nail bed, to keep nails trimmed, and to prevent infections. Under General Guidelines, nail care includes daily cleaning and regular trimming. Proper nail care can aid in the prevention of skin problems around the nail bed.
Review of the facility policy and procedure on care of Activities of Daily Living (ADLs), Supporting revised March 2018 revealed that, Residents will be provided with care, treatment and services as appropriate to maintain or improve their ability to cany out activities of daily living (ADLs). Residents who are unable to cany out activities of daily living independently will receive the services necessary to maintain good nutrition, grooming and personal and oral hygiene.
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0698
(Tag F0698)
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 dialysis service were provided consistently with professiona...
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 dialysis service were provided consistently with professional standards of practice for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for dialysis services. (Resident #159)
The facility failed to consistently document on Resident #159's dialysis communication form.
This failure could place residents who received dialysis at risk for complications and not receiving proper care and treatment to meet their needs.
Findings included:
Record review of a face sheet date 06/26/23 indicated Resident #159 was [AGE] year-old male and admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including dependence on renal dialysis (is a procedure to remove waste products and excess fluid from the blood when the kidneys stop working properly) and end stage renal disease (occurs when the kidneys are no longer able to work at a level needed for day-to-day life).
Record review of the MDS revealed Resident #159 was admitted to the facility less than 21 days ago. No MDS for Resident #159 was completed prior to exit.
Record review of a care plan dated 06/13/23, created on 06/15/23 indicated Resident #159 had benign hypertension (high blood pressure) with ESRD requiring hemodialysis (is a procedure where a dialysis machine and a special filter called an artificial kidney, or a dialyzer, are used to clean your blood). I have an arteriovenous fistula (is an irregular connection between an artery and a vein) to right arm. I attend a local dialysis center MWF for management of my dialysis. Intervention monitor bruit (noise)/thrill (buzz) each shift.
Record review of Resident #159's dialysis communication record dated 06/14/23 and 06/23/23 indicated no information documented on prior to dialysis such as vital signs, medication administered, shunt location site, pain, any concerns, change in condition since last visit, physician order changes since last visit, and new labs since last visit.
Record review of Resident #159's dialysis communication record dated 06/16/23, 06/21/23, 06/23/23 indicated no information documented upon return from dialysis such as vital signs, pain, access site, bruit/thrill present, and bleeding.
During an interview on 06/28/23 at 07:20 a.m., Dialysis RN said she was a travel nurse and worked at the dialysis center for the last two weeks. She said the dialysis communication form was not always filled out for Resident #159.
During an interview on 06/28/23 at 4:05 p.m., LVN D said prior to sending residents to dialysis, vital signs should be checked, see if the resident ate a meal, check access site for bruit/thrill, and fill out communication sheet. She said when a resident returned from dialysis vital signs checked, check access cite, note resident's dry weight, and check bruit/thrill. LVN D said the nurse who sent and received the resident from dialysis should complete the communication form. She said it was important to fill out the communication form for continuity of care. LVN D said not completing the form could cause staff to miss vital information of the resident. She said resident could get sick after dialysis or access site bleeding and clot which could cause hospitalization or placement of new access site.
During an interview on 06/29/23 at 10:29 a.m., ADON B said nursing staff should fill the communication form out before the resident left and returned. She said the communication form had important information such as vital signs and if or what medications were administered. ADON B said the charge nurses were responsible for filling out the dialysis communication forms. She said the communication forms communicated the resident's condition. ADON B said all nursing staff were aware to complete the dialysis communication forms on all dialysis residents.
On 06/29/23 at 12:00 p.m., the DON was unavailable for interview due to being on leave.
During an interview on 06/29/23 at 12:15 p.m., the Administrator said her understanding was a binder went with the dialysis residents and returned with them. She said she knew the nurses should complete designated areas on the form.
Record review of a facility End-Stage Renal Disease, Care of a Resident with policy dated 09/10 indicated .residents with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) will be cared for according to currently recognized standards of care .education and training of staff includes, specifically .the type of assessment data that is to be gathered about the resident's condition on a daily or per shift basis .how information will be exchanged between the facilities .
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Unnecessary Medications
(Tag F0759)
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 a medication error rate of less than 5 percent...
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 a medication error rate of less than 5 percent. There were 4 errors out of 26 opportunities, resulting in an 15.38% percent medication error involving 1 of 6 residents reviewed for medication pass. (Resident #45)
The facility failed to administer scheduled medications in a timely manner for Resident #45.
This failure could place residents at risk for inaccurate drug administration.
The findings were:
Record review of a face sheet dated 06/27/23 revealed Resident #45 was [AGE] years old and was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including heart failure, high blood pressure, chronic atrial fibrillation (an irregular, often rapid, heart rate that commonly causes poor blood flow), and cerebral infarction (stroke).
Record review of consolidated physician orders for Resident #45 dated 06/27/23 indicated an order with a start date of 02/28/22 for Eliquis (a blood thinner used in people with an irregular heartbeat to lower the risk of strokes and blood clots) 5 milligrams once a day, two times a day at 7:00 a.m. and 6 p.m. There was an order dated 04/20/22 for Hydrochlorothiazide (a diuretic used to treat high blood pressure and fluid retention) 12.5 milligrams, once a day at 7:00 a.m. There was an order dated 04/20/22 for Lisinopril (a medication used to treat high blood pressure and heart failure) 40 milligrams, once a day at 7:00 a.m. There was an order for Metoprolol Tartrate (a medication used to treat high blood pressure, chest pain, and heart failure) 25 mg, ½ a tablet twice a day at 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m.
Record review of an MDS dated [DATE] indicated Resident #45 had a BIMS of score of 9 which indicated moderate cognitive impairment. The MDS indicated Resident #45 had received an anti-coagulant and a diuretic in the previous 7 days.
Record review of a care plan dated 06/21/23 indicated Resident #45 was at risk for cardiac complications related to high blood pressure and atrial fibrillation. There was an intervention to administer medications as prescribed. The care plan indicated Resident #45 took the anti-coagulant Eliquis. There was an intervention to administer medication as prescribed.
Record review of medication administration record dated 06/01/23 - 06/27/23 for Resident #45 indicated Eliquis 5 milligrams, Hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 milligrams, Lisinopril 40 milligrams, and Metoprolol 25 milligrams (1/2 tab) were administered by Medication Aide G. The exact time of administration was not indicated.
During an observation on 06/27/23 at 8:45 a.m., Medication Aide G administered Eliquis 5 milligrams, Hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 milligrams, Lisinopril 40 milligrams, and Metoprolol 25 milligrams (1/2 tab) to Resident #45.
During an interview on 06/28/23 at 11:52 a.m., Medication Aide G said medications popped up on the computer an hour before they were scheduled. She said this was how she knew which medications were due. She said residents with medications that were scheduled at 7:00 a.m. should have gotten their medications no later than 8:00 a.m. She said Resident #45's medications were late because she was the only medication aide in the building. She said daily she had to pass medications late to residents because she was the only medication aide in the building and because they would not change the scheduled times. She said she always came in to work at 5:00 a.m. to try to pass medications on time.
During an interview on 06/29/23 at 10:05 a.m., the Regional Clinical Resource Nurse said unless a facility had a liberalized medication pass time policy, medications should be passed at the scheduled time. He said a medication scheduled at 7:00 a.m. should be passed between 6:00 a.m. and 8:00 a.m. He said the four medications for Resident #45 were late because they were administered 1 hour and 45 minutes past the scheduled time. He said this facility did not have liberalized medication pass times. He said there could be a negative outcome by a resident not getting their medications at the scheduled times.
During an interview on 06/29/23 at 11:06 a.m., the Administrator said their medication administration policy said medications could be passed 1 hour before or up to 1 hour after the medications were scheduled. She said she would have expected Resident #45's medication to have been passed per policy. She said his medications should have been passed between 6:00 a.m. and 8:00 a.m.
Review of a facility Medication Administration policy dated April 2019 indicated, .Medications are administered in a safe and timely manner, and as prescribed .Medications are administered in accordance with prescribers orders, including any required time frames .
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program d...
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 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 diseases and infections for 2 of 5 residents (Residents #43, Resident #160) reviewed for infection control practices.
The facility failed to ensure CNA A kept Resident #160's indwelling catheter off the floor.
The facility failed to ensure Resident #43 was provided water in a sanitary manner.
These failures placed residents at risk for cross contamination and infection.
Findings included:
1. Record review of a face sheet dated 06/27/23 revealed Resident #43 was a [AGE] year-old male admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including quadriplegia (paralysis of all four limbs), urinary tract infections (an infection in any part of the urinary system), Constipation (not passing stools regularly or you're unable to completely empty your bowel), Neuromuscular dysfunction of bladder (the bladder may not fill or empty correctly.)
Record review of Resident #43's annual MDS dated [DATE] revealed a BIMS with a score of 11, which indicated resident #43 has moderately impaired cognition. The MDS also revealed, Resident #43, required total dependence with his hydration needs. Resident #43 required one-person physical assistance with hydrating.
Record review of a care plan dated 06/26/23 entered into electronic health record at 3:53 p.m., after surveyor intervention revealed Resident #43 I am quadriplegic and am unable to drink independently. For this reason. I developed and used a drinking tube to allow me to be as independent as possible in managing my quadriplegia, UTI potential and dignity. I have been explained the potential risks related to my drinking tube and have been allowed time to process the information. I feel the benefits do outweigh the risks. Staff will change my drinking tune dressing weekly or sooner if an infection concern is noted.
During an observation and interview on 06/26/23 at 11:08 a.m., Resident #43 was observed with oxygen tubing taped in three places to his hand, wrist, and midway up his forearm with medical tape that also had duct tape securing the medical tape. The tape was wrapped all the way around his arm and hand. The tape on oxygen tubing was being used for the resident to drink water from the oxygen tubing. The oxygen tubing ended in a water cup that was stored in the bottom dresser drawer next to his bed. The oxygen tubing was duct taped to the water cup. His fingernails were long, approximately a half inch in length, and had a black substance underneath the nails. His nails appeared to be dirty and were close to the oxygen tubing used to drink from. Resident #43 stated that he can use his hand to put it to his mouth and drink water. He stated that the tape was not tight, and it was just securing the tubing to his arm and hand. He said that he was not in any pain or discomfort.
During an observation and interview on 06/26/23 at 02:14 PM, Resident # 43 stated that he asked a nurse to set his cup up the way he has it. He stated that he prefers is cup to be fashioned in this manner so that he can drink whenever he wanted. He stated that he was able to use his call light button. He stated that he is not in any pain and that this was the way he had his water cup set up at home. Resident showed surveyor he could press his call light button. Call light functioned and was responded to by staff. Surveyor opened the lid to the cup which showed that there was a straw attached to the oxygen tubing submerged in the water. The oxygen tubing line and straw were secured to each other by medical tape which was also submerged under water. An unknown substance was observed on the oxygen tubing that was entering the lid of the water cup. This section of tubing was also in contact with the duct tape that secured the lid and oxygen tubing together.
During an interview on 06/26/23 at 02:20 p.m., RN N stated that it was the idea of Resident # 43 to set his water cup up in the fashion that it is now. She said that an aide helped him to run the oxygen lines to his water cup. She stated that she is sure that staff do offer frequent fluids and fill Resident # 43's water cup when it is empty.
During an interview on 06/26/23 at 03:18 p.m., LVN P She stated that Resident # 43's water line is changed once every couple of weeks. She stated that she or someone else can change his water line after it becomes soiled. She said there is no scheduled times to replace the line and they must reconstruct the setup each time they change the lines.
During an interview on 06/29/23 at 9:20 a.m., the ADON said she expected the nursing staff to maintain infection control practices and follow facility policy regarding infection control. She stated that hydration for residents was important and that residents should have access to clean water. The ADON said infections placed residents at risk for harm. She stated that Resident # 43's cup is to be changed and oxygen tubing changed every week. She stated that Resident #43 is hard to deal with because he wants to keep his water cup in the fashion that it is and has refused change. She stated that they try to explain to him the risks regarding infections. She stated that he still refuses any other ideas to get him his water and wants to have this situation where the cup and oxygen tubing are taped together.
During an interview on 06/29/23 at 10:30 a.m., the administrator said she expected her staff to ensure infection prevention control methods were in place. She stated that would include the sanitary methods at which a resident took in water and maintained their hydration.
2. Record review of a face sheet dated 06/26/23 indicated Resident #160 was a [AGE] year-old male admitted on [DATE] with diagnosis including pressure ulcer of sacral region, stage 4 (The wound penetrates all three layers of skin, exposing muscles, tendons, and bones in your musculoskeletal system), pain, Type 2 diabetes mellitus (is a disease in which your blood glucose, or blood sugar, levels are too high), nicotine dependence (is an addiction to tobacco products caused by the drug nicotine), congestive heart failure (the heart muscle doesn't pump blood as well as it should), and peripheral vascular disease (is an accumulation of plaque (fats and cholesterol) in the arteries in your legs or arms).
Record review of the MDS revealed Resident #160 was admitted to the facility less than 21 days ago. No MDS for Resident #160 was completed prior to exit.
Record review of a baseline care plan dated 06/16/23, created on 06/20/23 indicated Resident #160 had indwelling foley catheter for urine and toileting. Resident #160 was at risk for complications with indwelling catheter and bowel incontinence and required assistance to remain dry and clean.
During an observation on 06/26/23 at 11:58 a.m., Resident #160 asleep in the bed with the position wedge on the right side of his body but not underneath him. Resident #160's indwelling catheter was on the floor.
During an observation on 06/26/23 at 2:10 p.m., Resident #160 asleep in the bed with the position wedge on the right side of his body but not underneath him. Resident #160's indwelling catheter was on the floor.
During an observation and interview on 06/26/23 at 2:25 p.m., Resident #160 was in bed with the position wedge on the right side of his body but not underneath him. Resident #160 said he had a sore on his bottom and staff turned him sometimes. Resident #160's indwelling catheter was on the floor.
During an interview on 06/28/23 at 1:53 p.m., CNA A said Resident #160's indwelling catheter was on the floor but there was no other way to keep his bed in the lowest position to prevent falls. She said the facility was strict about beds being low to the ground for fall risk residents which caused Resident #160's indwelling catheter to be on the floor. CNA A said she had not consulted with a nurse about a better solution today but other times she had asked for guidance and did not get much help. She said the indwelling catheter should not be on the floor due to infection control risk which could cause a kidney or urinary tract infection. CNA A said a resident getting an infection could cause the need of antibiotics or hospitalization. She said she had received training on infection control and prevention.
During an interview on 06/28/23 at 4:05 p.m., LVN D said Resident #160's indwelling catheter bag should not be on the floor because it placed the resident at risk for urinary tract infection and dislodgement. She said no CNAs had asked her about a solution to keep fall risk resident in the lowest position but keep the indwelling catheter off the floor.
During an interview on 06/29/23 at 10:29 a.m., the ADON B said she was the infection control preventionist. She said it was not appropriate for Resident #160's indwelling catheter to be directly on the floor. The ADON B said for residents would need to be low to the ground but had an indwelling catheter, an acceptable practice was to put the catheter in a privacy bag, so it did not directly touch the floor. She said the catheter being on the floor without a privacy bag was an infection control risk. The ADON B said all staff were responsible for infection control. She said Resident #160's catheter being on the could cause a urinary tract infection or injury. She said all nursing staff had training on infection control and prevention.
During an interview on 06/29/23 at 12:15 p.m., the Administrator said it was an appropriate facility practice the place indwelling catheters on the floor. She said it was an infection control risk.
Record of CNA A's competency audit checkoff dated 09/29/22 indicated satisfactory for infection control awareness.
Record review of a facility Catheter Care, Urinary policy dated 09/14 indicated .the purpose of this procedure is to prevent catheter-associated urinary tract infection .infection control .be sure the catheter tubing and drainage bag are kept off the floor .
Review of facility policy revised February 2022 titled, Infection Prevention and Control Committee revealed that the objectives of the Infection Prevention Control Committee are to Assist in development and implementation of written policies and procedures for the prevention and control of infections among residents and personnel. Provide facility guidelines for a safe and sanitary environment.
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Resident Rights
(Tag F0550)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, record reviews, and interviews, the facility failed to protect and promote the rights of the resident in ...
Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, record reviews, and interviews, the facility failed to protect and promote the rights of the resident in an environment that promoted maintenance or enhancement of his or her quality of life for Anonymous Residents #1-6 and 2 of 18 residents (Resident #33 and Resident #46) reviewed for resident rights.
The facility failed to protect and value Anonymous Residents #1-6, Resident #33, and Resident #46's private spaces from Residents #39 and Resident #52, who frequently wandered into residents' rooms and went through their belongings.
This failure could place residents at risk for decreased quality of life, increased anxiety, and increased stress.
Findings included:
During a group meeting on 6/27/23 at 2:30 PM, Anonymous Residents #1-6 said Resident #39 and Resident #52 bothered them. Anonymous Residents #1-6 said Resident #39 and Resident #52 wandered the facility the entire day. Anonymous Residents #1-6 said Resident #39 and Resident #52 caused trouble everywhere they went. Anonymous Residents #1-6 said Resident #39 and Resident #52 would wander into their rooms at night and just stand there and did nothing or stood next to their bed. Anonymous Residents #1-6 said they had never been harmed by either resident, but they were creeped out by them when woke up and them being in their room. Anonymous Residents #1-6 said they do not feel comfortable with Resident #39 and Resident #52 entering their rooms while they were sleeping. Anonymous Residents #1-6 said the staff knew Resident #39 and Resident #52 were wandering around and causing trouble. Anonymous Residents #1-6 said they would typically shoo Resident #39 and Resident #52 away when they came into their rooms, and they would leave.
1.Record review of Resident #33's face sheet dated 6/28/23 indicated he was [AGE] years old and admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including history of hypertension (high blood pressure), depression (persistent sadness), and right sided hemiplegia (severe loss of function to right side of the body), and intracranial hemorrhage (brain bleed-stroke).
Record review of Resident #33's quarterly MDS dated [DATE] indicated he was understood and understood others. The MDS indicated a BIMS score of 10 which indicated Resident #33 had moderate cognitive impairment. The MDS indicated Resident #33 did not have behavioral symptoms. The MDS indicated Resident #33 required extensive to total assistance from staff for most activities of daily living and used a wheelchair device for mobility when out of the bed.
2.Record review of Resident #46's face sheet dated 6/28/23 indicated she was [AGE] years old and admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including cerebral infarction (disruption of blood to the brain cells and causes parts of the brain to die), altered mental status, weakness, hypertension (high blood pressure), mood disorder with depressive features (persistent sadness), and lack of coordination.
Record review of Resident #46's quarterly MDS dated [DATE] indicated she was understood and understood others. The MDS indicated a BIMS score of 12 which indicated Resident #46 had moderate cognitive impairment. The MDS indicated Resident #46 required supervision from staff for most activities of daily living and used a walker.
3.Record review of Resident #39's face sheet dated 6/28/23 indicated he was [AGE] years old and admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including vascular dementia (changes in memory, thinking, and behavior due to impaired blood supply to the brain) and hypertension.
Record review of Resident #39's admission MDS dated [DATE] indicated he was understood and understood others. The MDS indicated a BIMS score of 8 which indicated Resident #39 had moderate cognitive impairment. The MDS indicated Resident #39 did not have behavioral symptoms. The MDS indicated Resident #39 wandered daily but he did not significantly intrude on the privacy or activities of others. The MDS indicated Resident #39 required supervision to limited assistance from staff for most activities of daily living and did not use an assistive device for mobility.
Record review of Resident #39's care plan initiated 4/19/23 revealed he wandered and was at risk of injury related to dementia and wandering and he was at risk for behavioral symptoms related to dementia and history of agitation. Interventions included to remove resident from other resident's rooms and unsafe situations and redirect resident as needed.
Record review of Resident #39's progress notes ranging from 4/18/23-6/27/23 revealed multiple notes of resident wandering in the facility and required frequent redirecting and on 4/25/23 revealed he required redirecting for going into other residents' room.
4.Record review of Resident #52's face sheet dated 6/26/23 indicated she was [AGE] years old and admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including dementia, depression, anxiety (feeling of worry, nervousness, unease), mild cognitive impairment, and a mood disorder.
Record review of Resident #52's quarterly MDS dated [DATE] indicated she was understood and understood others. The MDS indicated a BIMS score of 7 which indicated Resident #52 had severe cognitive impairment. The MDS indicated Resident #52 had fluctuating disorganized thinking, did not reject care, and did not wander. The MDS indicated Resident #52 required supervision to limited assistance from staff for most activities of daily living and ambulated without the use of an assistive device.
Record review of Resident #52's revised care plan dated 6/21/23 revealed she had anxiety, paced, and wandered the hallways. Resident #52 was at risk of injury due to wandering. Interventions included to redirect when attempting to wander into an unsafe environment, monitor whereabouts to assure resident safety, and wander guard in place.
Record review of Resident #52's progress notes ranging from 5/02/23-6/23/23 revealed:
5/24/23 Resident #52 continued to pace and wander throughout the facility and demonstrated severe anxiety with intermittent episodes of agitation; 5/26/23 Resident #52 continued to wander about the facility with her male friend: 5/28/23 Resident #52 observed to wander throughout the facility with occasional rises in anxiety levels, redirection and comfort provided and was somewhat effective; 6/08/23 Resident self ambulates and wanders about the facility during waking hours; 6/23/23 at 12:50 PM Resident #52 continued to wander throughout the facility with intermittent episodes of increased anxiety and crying, redirection and soothing efforts ineffective; and the 6/23/23 5:54 PM progress note revealed Resid6nt #52 wandered into another resident's room.
During an observation on 6/26/23 at 12:08 PM Resident #52 was in the dining room during mealtime. Resident #52 was ambulatory and was constantly redirected by staff to sit down at the table to eat meal. Resident #52 was not easily redirected and grabbed at the Resident #39's shirt that was sitting at the same table as Resident #52 stood and did not want to sit down. Resident #52 was redirected to sit down to eat, and she ate very little and then left the dining area.
During an observation on 6/26/23 at 3:50 PM Resident #52 was wandering in hallways and tossed trash onto the floor of another resident's room and was not redirected by staff.
During an observation on 6/27/23 at 1:30 PM Resident #52 and Resident #39 were wandering in the hallways holding hands.
During a phone interview on 6/28/23 at 9:37 AM, RN L said Resident #52 wandered the facility all the time and was constantly going in and out of resident rooms. RN L said Resident #52 had to be redirected frequently, but it did not last long, and she would be back wandering in the hallways and into other residents' rooms. RN L said residents had told her they did like Resident #39 and Resident #52 coming into their rooms and going through their personal belongings. RN L said it was an invasion of the other residents' privacy.
During an interview on 6/28/23 at 1:52 PM, Resident #33 said Resident #39 and Resident #52 would often come into his room. Resident #33 said Resident #52 would go through his stuff on his bedside shelving and one time she came into his room and opened his cupcakes and stuck her fingers in them and then licked her fingers. Resident #33 said he had to throw all his cupcakes in the trash. Resident #33 said he felt imposed on and it aggravated him to constantly have Resident #39 and/or Resident #52 coming into his room. Resident #33 said the staff usually did not have a clue Resident #39 and/or Resident #52 were in residents' rooms until they hear someone holler at them to get out of their room. Resident #33 said Resident #39 and/or Resident #52 would usually leave his room after he hollered at them to get out of his room, but sometimes he would have to use his call light to get the nursing staff to come get them.
During an interview on 6/28/23 at 3:00 PM, LVN D said she had worked at the facility since November 2022. LVN D said Resident #52 wandered constantly and went into every single other resident's rooms and would go through the other residents' things. LVN D said Resident #52 could be redirected but it would only last for a second and she would be headed off somewhere else and was often accompanied by Resident #39. LVN D said on 6/23/23 Resident #46 came back to her room and found Resident #52 in her room going through her things. LVN D said she did not know Resident #52 was in Resident #46's room until she saw Resident #46 fall outside her doorway. LVN D said residents could keep their doors shut as a deterrent, but it did not stop Resident #52 and Resident #39 from entering the rooms. LVN D said residents were frustrated and did not like Resident #52 and Resident #39 coming into their rooms. LVN D said Resident #52 had progressively gotten more difficult to redirect over the last month.
During an interview of 6/28/23 at 4:08 PM, Resident #46 said Resident #39 and Resident #52 came into her room frequently and went through her things. Resident #46 said staff did not know residents were in her room until she hollers. Resident #46 said she had even woken up at night to see Resident #39 standing over her bed. Resident #46 said Resident #39 had never done anything to her, but it was scary to see him standing over her bed when she woke up. Resident #46 said on 6/23/23 she had returned to her room from smoking and saw Resident #52 and Resident #39 in her room going through her dresser. Resident #46 said she told them that it was not their room and to get out. Resident #46 said she took Resident #52 by the arm and tried to escort her out of her room, when Resident #52 pushed her, and Resident #46 said she lost her balance and fell at her doorway. Resident #46 said she was not hurt.
During an interview on 6/29/23 at 9:47 AM, CNA A said she had worked at the facility for two years. CNA A said Resident #52 wandered everywhere and often went into other residents' rooms and was often accompanied by Resident #39. CNA A said the other residents would yell at Resident #52 and Resident #39 to get out of their rooms. CNA A said Resident #39 usually did not enter other residents' rooms unless he was with Resident #52. CNA A said if she saw Resident #39 and/or Resident #52 in other residents' room, she would redirect them, but it didn't last long. CNA A said she did not feel there was enough staff to monitor the residents that wandered appropriately. CNA A said it was an invasion of the other residents' privacy and it would make them feel uneasy having someone go through their belongings.
During an interview on 6/29/23 at 10:16 AM, CNA E said she had worked at the facility for sixteen years. CNA E said she had witnessed Resident #39, and Resident #52 go into other residents' rooms and throughout the facility. CNA E said Resident #39 and Resident #52 had to be redirected. CNA E said residents had voiced their concerns that the residents were tired of Resident #39 and Resident #52 coming into their rooms and the facility needed to do something about it. CNA E said it affected the other residents' privacy. CNA E said she did not feel the facility had enough staff to monitor the residents that wandered. CNA E said the staff could only redirect them if you catch them in your eyesight. CNA E said they usually did not know Resident #39 and Resident #52 were in another resident's room until the other resident hollered out and told them.
During an interview on 6/29/23 at 10:51 AM, LVN P said she had worked at the facility for 24 years. LVN P said Resident #52 wandered all over the facility and they could not keep up with her. LVN P said other residents had verbalized to her they did not like Resident #52 coming into their rooms and going through their stuff. LVN P said on 6/23/23 Resident #52 had been found in Resident #46's room by Resident #46. LVN P said she did not know Resident #52 was in Resident #46's room until she saw Resident #46 fall outside her doorway. LVN P said it was aggravating to the other residents and affected their privacy. LVN P said it was the responsibility of all staff to monitor the residents that wandered.
During an interview on 6/29/23 at 11:06 AM, RN N said she had worked at the facility since April 2023 in an internship as an Administrator in Training but worked the floor sometimes to help. RN N said Resident #39 and Resident #52 wandered the facility. RN N said Resident #52 was worse and was hard to redirect. RN N said she had witnessed Resident #39, and Resident #52 go into other residents' rooms. RN N said when they saw them go into other residents' rooms, they would go redirect out. RN N said the other residents said it was an invasion of their privacy and they did not like Resident #39 and Resident #52 going into their rooms. RN N said it was the responsibility of all the staff to ensure the privacy of the other residents and redirect the residents that wandered.
During an interview on 6/29/23 at 11:30 AM, ADON B said she had worked at the facility for over eight years. ADON B said Resident #52 wandered the facility and had gone into other residents' rooms and had to be redirected frequently. ADON B said sometimes Resident #39 would go with Resident #52. ADON B said they were currently looking for alternative placement for Resident #52. ADON B said if they had 20 staff at the facility, they could not keep up with Resident #52 , but they redirect her when they see her entering somewhere she should not be. ADON B said she had not received any complaints from the other residents related to the residents that wandered into their rooms. ADON B said she was sure it was uncomfortable for the other residents, and it invaded the other residents' privacy. ADON B said it was the responsibility of all the staff to ensure the privacy of all the residents and monitor the residents that wandered.
During an interview on 6/29/23 at 12:01 PM, the SW said she had worked at the facility for 13 years either as the SW or the Administrator. The SW said Resident #52 and Resident #39 walked throughout the facility. The SW said Resident #52 was not easily focused or redirected. The SW said she had witnessed Resident #52 and Resident #39 go into other residents' rooms. The SW said Resident #39 would not go without Resident #52. The SW said she had not had any complaints related to Resident #39 or Resident #52 going into other residents' rooms, however, she would expect them to complain. The SW said other residents could become irritated or fearful. The SW said she even started locking her office because Resident #39 and Resident #52 would come into her office and go through her things. The SW said she only worked part-time. The SW said it was ultimately the responsibility of the Administrator to ensure the privacy of all the residents. The SW said it would be the responsibility of the nurses to determine the level of supervision a resident needed based on the resident's behaviors, such as 1 on 1 monitoring or every 15-minute checks, to ensure adequate supervision of the residents that wandered.
During an interview on 6/29/23 at 12:50 PM, the Chief Nursing Officer said the DON was on vacation and she could respond to general questions. The Chief Nursing Officer said the Administrator was ultimately responsible for ensuring the resident's privacy was provided, such as with residents that wandered.
During an interview on 6/29/23 at 1:06 PM, the Administrator said all staff were responsible for providing supervision for the residents that wandered. The Administrator said she had been told by other residents that they did not like Resident #39 and Resident #52 coming into their rooms and it made them feel like they had no privacy. The Administrator said the staff was not aware Resident #52 was in Resident #46's room prior to seeing Resident #46 fall outside her doorway on 6/23/23. The Administrator said she was not aware Resident #52 and Resident #39 were going into Resident #33's room. The Administrator said it was the responsibility of all staff to ensure the privacy of the residents. The Administrator said they were seeking alternative placement for Resident #52. The Administrator said they had not tried 1 on 1 monitoring with Resident #52 to ensure the privacy of the other residents.
Review of the facility 's policy titled Resident Rights with a revised date of February 2021 indicated, . Federal and State laws guarantee certain basic rights to all residents of the facility. Those rights include the resident's right to: . exercise his or her rights as a resident of the facility . be supported by the facility in exercising his or her rights . privacy and confidentiality . voice grievances to the facility, or other agency that hears grievances . have the facility respond to his or grievances .
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Safe Environment
(Tag F0584)
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 a safe, functional, sanitary, and comfortable...
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 a safe, functional, sanitary, and comfortable environment for 4 of 7 (Resident #36, Resident #37, Resident #42, Resident #160) residents and 1 of 6 Halls (Hall 1) reviewed for environment.
1. The facility failed to ensure resident #37 could close her bedroom door.
2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #36 did not have brown and orange stains on the wall.
3. The facility failed to ensure Resident #36 did not have a torn vent cover behind the headboard.
4. The facility failed to ensure Resident #42, and Resident #160 did not have torn walls of sheetrock.
5. The facility failed to ensure Resident #160 did not have brown and yellow stain on the wall.
6. The facility failed to ensure Resident #160 door was not obstructed by a footboard causing it not to completely close.
7. The facility failed to endure 4 foam ceiling tiles on Hall 1 were not bowing and brown stained.
These failures could place residents at risk of an unsafe or uncomfortable environment and a decrease in quality of life and self-worth.
Findings included:
1. Record review of the face sheet dated 04/25/23 indicated Resident #37 was [AGE] years old and was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including Dementia (loss of memory, language, problem-solving and other thinking abilities that are severe enough to interfere with daily life), psychotic disturbance (Psychosis may occur as a result of a psychiatric illness like schizophrenia), anxiety (a feeling of fear, dread, and uneasiness), Alzheimer's disease (the most common type of dementia.)
Record review of Resident #37's annual MDS dated [DATE] revealed a BIMS with a score of 0, which indicated resident #37 had severely impaired cognition. The MDS also revealed, Resident #37, required extensive assistance with ADLs. Resident #37 was unable to walk on her own in her room, in and off the unit.
Record review of a care plan revised on 03/06/23 indicated Resident #37 had an ADL self-care performance deficit, was dependent on staff for personal care, and was bedfast.
During an observation on 06/26/23 at 10:46 a.m., Resident #37's bed was blocking her door from being closed.
During an observation on 06/27/23 at 8:47 a.m., Resident #37's bed was blocking her door from being closed.
During an observation on 06/28/23 at 9:10 a.m., Resident #37's bed was blocking her door from being closed.
During an interview on 06/28/23 at 10:35 a.m., LVN P stated that the bed for Resident # 37 is extra-long because the resident has long legs. She stated that they must pull the bed out away from the wall to close the door. She said that allows the door to clear the bed. She stated that the door will not close unless they pull the bed away because it will block the door from closing. She stated that Resident #37 could not pull her bed out away from the wall and then close the door if she wanted it closed.
During an interview on 06/29/23 at 9:20 a.m., The ADON stated that doors to resident's rooms should be able to close as residents have the right to privacy in their room. She said that if a resident's bed was too long and the door was blocked by a resident's bed, they could fix this issue by rearranging the room so the bed did not interfere with the door closing or they could move the long bed to the other side of the room towards the exterior walls so that the shorted bed was on the wall with the door.
During an interview on 06/29/23 at 10:30 a.m., The Administrator said staff should ensure that resident's rooms can be closed. She stated that doors to rooms should be able to fully close.
2. Record review of a face sheet dated 06/29/23 indicated Resident #36 was an [AGE] year-old female admitted on [DATE] with diagnosis including dementia (is a general term for loss of memory, language, problem-solving and other thinking abilities that are severe enough to interfere with daily life) with behavioral disturbance (such as depression, agitation, and wandering).
Record review of the quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] indicated Resident #36 was usually understood and usually understood others. The MDS indicated Resident #36 had a BIMS score of 08 which indicated moderately impaired cognition and required limited assistance for eating, extensive assistance for dressing and toilet use, and total dependence for bed mobility, personal hygiene, and bathing.
Record review of a care plan dated 05/28/23 indicated Resident #36 had dementia, pain, and anxiety and was at risk for altered psychosocial well-being. Intervention included allow to express feelings.
During an observation on 06/26/23 at 11:09 a.m., Resident #36 was in bed facing the wall. On Resident #36's wall were small amount of splattered brown and orange stains. Behind Resident #36's headboard was a partially detached, bent vent cover.
During an observation on 06/27/23 at 09:09 a.m., Resident #36 was in bed facing the wall. On Resident #36's wall were small amount of splattered brown and orange stains. Behind Resident #36's headboard was a partially detached, bent vent cover.
During an observation on 06/28/23 at 11:15 a.m., Resident #36 was in bed facing the wall. On Resident #36's wall were small amount of splattered brown and orange stains. Behind Resident #36's headboard was a partially detached, bent vent cover.
3. Record review of a face sheet dated 06/26/23 indicated Resident # 42 was a [AGE] year-old male admitted on [DATE] with diagnosis alcoholic hepatitis (is inflammation of the liver caused by drinking alcohol) with ascites (is a condition in which fluid collects in spaces within your abdomen).
Record review of a significant change in status MDS assessment dated [DATE] indicated Resident #42 was understood and understood others. The MDS indicated Resident #42 had a BIMS score of 10 which indicated moderately impaired cognition and required supervision for transfer, limited assistance for bed mobility, dressing, toilet use, and personal hygiene and total dependence for bathing.
Record review of care plan dated 05/13/23 indicated Resident #42 was at risk for skin tears, bruises, and abrasions from bumping arms/legs on furniture, walls, and structures.
During an observation on 06/26/23 at 10:54 a.m., Resident #42 was sitting on the side of his bed. Above Resident #42's headboard, a small area of torn sheet rock was noted. On Hall 1, 4 ceiling tiles near rooms [ROOM NUMBERS] were bowed and edges stained brown.
During an observation on 06/27/23 at 08:57 a.m., Resident #42 was asleep in his bed. Above Resident #42's headboard, a small area of torn sheet rock was noted. On Hall 1, 4 ceiling tiles near rooms [ROOM NUMBERS] were bowed and edges stained brown.
During an observation on 06/28/23 at 11:30 a.m., Resident #42 was sitting in his wheelchair in the room. Above Resident #42's headboard, a small area of torn sheet rock was noted. On Hall 1, 4 ceiling tiles near rooms [ROOM NUMBERS] were bowed and edges stained brown.
4. Record review of a face sheet dated 06/26/23 indicated Resident #160 was a [AGE] year-old male admitted on [DATE] with diagnosis including pressure ulcer of sacral region, stage 4 (The wound penetrates all three layers of skin, exposing muscles, tendons, and bones in your musculoskeletal system).
Record review of the MDS revealed Resident #160 was admitted to the facility less than 21 days ago. No MDS for Resident #160 was completed prior to exit.
Record review of a care plan dated 06/16/23 indicated Resident #160 required a baseline care plan identifying care needs, risks, strengths, and goals.
During an observation on 06/26/23 at 11:58 a.m., Resident #160 was lying in bed asleep. Gray colored scratches were noted to the wall near the windowsill.
During an observation on 06/26/23 at 2:25 p.m., Resident #160 was laying bed awake. Resident #160's room door hit the footboard of an empty bed which caused the door to not close. On Resident #160's wall near the head of the bed, a small amount of brown and yellow stains on the wall was noted and a gash in the sheetrock was noted.
During an observation on 06/27/23 at 3:25 p.m., Resident #160 was in the bed with a family member at the bedside. The surveyor attempted to close the door to conduct a private interview but was unable to due to the bed blocking the door. On Resident #160's wall near the head of the bed, small amount of brown and yellow stains on the wall was noted and a gash in the sheetrock was noted.
During an interview and observation on 06/28/23 at 11:39 a.m., Housekeeper O said she worked Monday-Friday and alternated weekends. She said she cleaned the walls daily but could only clean occupied areas if residents were not in the room or moved by nursing staff. Housekeeper O said maintenance was responsible for the sheetrock repair, broken vent cover, and ceiling tiles. She said Resident #36 had brown stains running down her wall, but she could not get to the wall unless the CNAs moved her. Housekeeper O said she thought Resident #160's wall was stained from a previous resident who urinated on the wall. She said it was important to clean the walls because a resident could get sick from whatever was on the wall.
During an interview on 06/29/23 at 9:36 a.m., CNA E said maintenance was responsible for building repairs and housekeeping for cleaning. She said she knew how to place repair orders, but the facility's maintenance man had been on leave for 2-3 weeks. CNA E said the maintenance man took a long time to fix things. She said housekeeping occasionally asked her to move residents to clean the walls. CNA E said no one wanted to live in a dirty place.
During an interview on 06/29/23 at 10:29 a.m., ADON B said housekeeping did deep cleaning every week. She said staff should place repair issues in the maintenance book, but the maintenance man had been out for 3 weeks. She said all staff were responsible for ensuring residents had a homelike environment.
During an interview on 06/29/23 at 12:15 p.m., the Administrator said the maintenance director was responsible for the upkeep of the facility and housekeeping the cleaning. She said she expected all staff to follow policy and procedure related to maintaining a nice, clean environment. The Administrator said the facility should be presentable. The Administrator said staff should place work orders in the maintenance book and the maintenance man also used a computerized system for yearly and monthly duties. She said she expected work orders to be handled as soon as possible by the maintenance supervisor. The Administrator said the empty bed in Resident #160's room needed to be removed so the door could be closed for privacy. She said the facility needed to be maintained because the facility was the resident's home and could lower their self-worth.
The last 6 months of the maintenance book was requested, the Administrator only provided June 2023.
Record review of the facility's Maintenance Request dated June 2023 indicated no request for repair of sheetrock, vent cover, or foam ceiling tiles on Hall 1.
Review of a Quality of Life - Homelike Environment facility policy dated February 2021 indicated, Residents are provided with a safe, clean, comfortable, homelike environment .staff shall provide person-centered care that emphasizes the residents' comfort, independence, and personal needs and preferences .the facility staff and management shall maximize, to the extent possible, the characteristics of the facility that reflect a personalized homelike setting. These characteristics include clean, sanitary, and orderly environment .''
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
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
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 each resident received adequate supervision to...
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 each resident received adequate supervision to prevent accidents or hazards for 2 of 7 residents that wandered reviewed for supervision. (Resident #39 and Resident #52)
1.The facility failed to provide adequate supervision to continue to prevent Resident #39 from entering Resident #15's room following a previous incident on 5/31/23 where Resident #39 had put his hands around Resident #15's neck.
2.The facility failed to provide adequate supervision to prevent Resident #52 from exiting the building twice on 6/18/23.
3.The facility failed to provide adequate supervision to prevent Resident #39 and Resident #52 from entering Resident #46's room and going through her things, resulting in Resident #46 being pushed by Resident #52.
These failures could place residents at an increased risk of injury.
Findings included:
1.Record review of Resident #39's face sheet dated 6/28/23 indicated he was [AGE] years old and admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including vascular dementia (changes in memory, thinking, and behavior due to impaired blood supply to the brain) and hypertension.
Record review of Resident #39's admission MDS dated [DATE] indicated he was understood and understood others. The MDS indicated a BIMS score of 8 which indicated Resident #39 had moderate cognitive impairment. The MDS indicated Resident #39 did not have behavioral symptoms. The MDS indicated Resident #39 wandered daily but he did not significantly intrude on the privacy or activities of others. The MDS indicated Resident #39 required supervision to limited assistance from staff for most activities of daily living and did not use an assistive device for mobility.
Record review of Resident #39's care plan initiated 4/19/23 revealed he wandered and was at risk of injury related to dementia and wandering and he was at risk for behavioral symptoms related to dementia and history of agitation. Interventions included to remove resident from other resident's rooms and unsafe situations and redirect resident as needed.
Record review of Resident #39's progress notes ranging from 4/18/23-6/27/23 revealed multiple notes of resident wandering in the facility and required frequent redirecting and on 4/25/23 revealed he required redirecting for going into other residents' room.
2.Record review of Resident #15's face sheet dated 6/28/23 indicated he was [AGE] years old and admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including cerebral palsy (disorder of movement, muscle tone, or posture due to abnormal brain development before birth), anxiety (feeling of worry, nervousness, unease), intellectual disabilities, and cognitive communication deficit.
Record review of Resident #15's annual MDS dated [DATE] indicated he had serious mental illness and intellectual disability. Resident #15 had unclear speech, was usually understood, and usually understood others. The MDS indicated Resident #15 was not able to complete the BIMS. The MDS indicated Resident #15 did not have behavioral symptoms. The MDS indicated Resident #15 was PASRR positive due to mental illness and intellectual disabilities. The MDS indicated Resident #15 required supervision to extensive assistance from staff for most activities of daily living and used a wheelchair for mobility.
Record review of Resident #15's progress notes dated 5/31/23 at 5:54 PM, indicated Resident #15 was in his wheelchair by the nurses' station, when Resident #39 came up behind Resident #15 and attempted to pick the back of the wheelchair up and then put his hands around Resident #15's neck and squeezed his neck. The nurse immediately stopped Resident #39 and Resident #39 immediately started apologizing and said he did not do it hard.
3.Record review of Resident #33's face sheet dated 6/28/23 indicated he was [AGE] years old and admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including history of hypertension (high blood pressure), depression (persistent sadness), and right sided hemiplegia (severe loss of function to right side of the body), and intracranial hemorrhage (brain bleed-stroke).
Record review of Resident #33's quarterly MDS dated [DATE] indicated he was understood and understood others. The MDS indicated a BIMS score of 10 which indicated Resident #33 had moderate cognitive impairment. The MDS indicated Resident #33 did not have behavioral symptoms. The MDS indicated Resident #33 required extensive to total assistance from staff for most activities of daily living and used a wheelchair device for mobility when out of the bed.
During an observation and interview on 6/26/23 beginning at 10:59 AM, Resident #15 was sitting on the side of his bed playing dice in a box lid. Resident #15 said he was doing okay, but he was not able to carry on a conversation. Resident #15's family member (Resident #33) shares a room with him. Resident #33 said he was told about the incident where Resident #39 put his hands around Resident #15's neck about a month ago. Resident #33 said Resident #39 often comes into their room with his girlfriend (Resident #52). Resident #33 said he usually hollers at them to get out or will push his call light and staff will come get them.
During an interview on 6/28/23 at 1:52 PM, Resident #33 said his family member (Resident #15) was special needs and would not know how to respond to an incident such as the one where Resident #39 put his hands around Resident #15's neck. Resident #33 said Resident #39 wandered into their room frequently, which concerned him since the incident when Resident #39 put his hands around Resident #15's neck. Resident #33 said Resident #39 had not done anything else since then. Resident #33 said he was bedbound, and he could not stop Resident #39 if he decided to put his hands on Resident #15 again and he worried about it. Resident #33 said staff did not have a clue Resident #39 and/or Resident #52 were in their room unless someone hollers at them to get out or if they happen to see them.
4.Record review of Resident #52's face sheet dated 6/26/23 indicated she was [AGE] years old and admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including dementia, depression, anxiety (feeling of worry, nervousness, unease), mild cognitive impairment, and a mood disorder.
Record review of Resident #52's quarterly MDS dated [DATE] indicated she was understood and understood others. The MDS indicated a BIMS score of 7 which indicated Resident #52 had severe cognitive impairment. The MDS indicated Resident #52 had fluctuating disorganized thinking, did not reject care, and did not wander. The MDS indicated Resident #52 required supervision to limited assistance from staff for most activities of daily living and ambulated without the use of an assistive device.
Record review of Resident #52's care plan revealed she had anxiety, paced, and wandered the hallways. Resident #52 was at risk of injury due to wandering. Interventions included to redirect when attempting to wander into an unsafe environment, monitor whereabouts to assure resident safety, and wander guard in place.
Record review of Resident #52's progress notes ranging from 3/18/23-6/23/23 revealed multiple notes documenting resident wandering around facility and required frequent redirecting that was sometimes successful and other times unsuccessful. The 6/18/23 12:48 PM progress note by RN L revealed Resident #52 had exit seeking behaviors with 2 successful attempts in exiting the facility with staff intercepting resident upon exit. The 6/23/23 5:54 PM progress note by LVN D revealed Resident #52 had wandered into another resident's room and when the other resident asked Resident #52 to leave her room, Resident #52 pushed her down.
During observations on 6/26/23 at 8:55 AM, 12:30 PM, and 4:30 PM noted the front door was not locked and there was a sign on the front door stating, PUSH UNTIL ALARM SOUNDS DOOR CAN BE OPENED IN 15 SECONDS. There was no alarm when door was opened.
During observations on 6/27/23 at 8:00 AM, 1:30 PM, and 5:00 PM noted the front door was not locked and no alarm sounded when it was opened.
During observations on 6/28/23 8:30 AM and 12:00 PM noted the front door was not locked and no alarm sounded when it was opened. At 1:15 PM the door was locked and required staff to enter a code to open the front door.
During an observation on 6/26/23 at 12:08 PM Resident #52 was in the dining room during mealtime. Resident #52 was ambulatory and was constantly redirected by staff to sit down at the table to eat meal. Resident #52 was not easily redirected and grabbed at the Resident #39's shirt that was sitting at the same table as Resident #52 stood and did not want to sit down. Resident #52 was redirected to sit down to eat, and she ate very little and then left the dining area.
During an observation on 6/26/23 at 3:50 PM Resident #52 was wandering in hallways and tossed trash onto the floor of another resident's room and no staff were in the area to redirected Resident #52.
During an observation on 6/27/23 at 1:30 PM Resident #52 and Resident #39 were wandering in the hallways holding hands.
During an observation on 06/28/23 at 9:16 AM Resident # 52 was observed taking a water pitcher from a medication cart sitting next to the central nurse's station and pouring water into her mouth. No staff were present, and her behavior was not redirected.
During a phone interview on 6/28/23 at 9:37 AM, RN L said Resident #52 wandered the facility all the time. RN L said Resident #52 was very agitated on 6/18/23 and was exit seeking on her shift. RN L said Resident #52 had tried to go out the front door twice and made it just outside the front door on the porch before RN L could get from the nurses' station to the front door. RN L said the alarm sounded when Resident #52 opened the front door and Resident #52 was wearing a wander guard. RN L said she redirected Resident #52 back into the facility to her room, but that did not last long, and Resident #52 was back wandering the hallways and into other residents' rooms.
5.Record review of Resident #46's face sheet dated 6/28/23 indicated she was [AGE] years old and admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including cerebral infarction (disruption of blood to the brain cells and causes parts of the brain to die), altered mental status, weakness, hypertension (high blood pressure), mood disorder with depressive features (persistent sadness), and lack of coordination.
Record review of Resident #46's quarterly MDS dated [DATE] indicated she was understood and understood others. The MDS indicated a BIMS score of 12 which indicated Resident #46 had moderate cognitive impairment. The MDS indicated Resident #46 required supervision from staff for most activities of daily living and used a walker.
During an interview on 6/28/23 at 3:00 PM, LVN D said she had worked at the facility since November 2022. LVN D said Resident #52 wandered constantly and went into every single resident's room and would go through the other residents' things. LVN D said Resident #52 could be redirected but it would only last for a second and she would be headed off somewhere else and was often accompanied by Resident #39. LVN D said on 6/23/23 Resident #46 came back to her room and found Resident #52 in her room going through her things. LVN D said she did not know Resident #52 was in Resident #46's room until she saw Resident #46 fall outside her doorway. LVN D said residents could keep their doors shut as a deterrent, but it did not stop Resident #52 and Resident #39 from entering the rooms. LVN D said residents were frustrated and did not like Resident #52 and Resident #39 coming into their rooms. LVN D said Resident #52 had progressively gotten more difficult to redirect over the last month.
During an interview of 6/28/23 at 4:08 PM, Resident #46 said Resident #39 and Resident #52 came into her room frequently and went through her things. Resident #46 said staff did not know residents were in her room until she hollers at them. Resident #46 said she had even woken up at night to see Resident #39 standing over her bed. Resident #46 said Resident #39 had never done anything to her, but it was scary to see him standing over her bed when she woke up. Resident #46 said on 6/23/23 she had returned to her room from smoking and saw Resident #52 and Resident #39 in her room going through her dresser. Resident #46 said she told them that it was not their room and to get out. Resident #46 said she took Resident #52 by the arm and tried to escort her out of her room, when Resident #52 pushed her, and Resident #46 said she lost her balance and fell at her doorway. Resident #46 said she was not hurt.
During an interview on 6/29/23 at 9:47 AM, CNA A said she had worked at the facility for two years. CNA A said Resident #52 wandered everywhere and often went into other residents' rooms and was often accompanied by Resident #39. CNA A said the other residents would yell at Resident #52 and Resident #39 to get out of their rooms. CNA A said Resident #39 usually did not enter other residents' rooms unless he was with Resident #52. CNA A said if she saw Resident #39 and/or Resident #52 in other residents' room, she would redirect them, but it didn't last long. CNA A said she did not feel there was enough staff to monitor the residents that wandered appropriately. CNA A said all staff were responsible for the supervision of the residents that wandered.
During an interview on 6/29/23 at 10:16 AM, CNA E said she had worked at the facility for sixteen years. CNA E said she had witnessed Resident #39, and Resident #52 go into other residents' rooms and throughout the facility. CNA E said Resident #39 and Resident #52 had to be redirected. CNA E said residents had voiced their concerns that the residents were tired of Resident #39 and Resident #52 coming into their rooms and the facility needed to do something about it. CNA E said she did not feel the facility had enough staff to monitor the residents that wandered. CNA E said the staff could only redirect them if you catch them in your eyesight, but if staff were assisting other residents, it would not leave many to monitor the residents that wandered. CNA E said they usually did not know Resident #39 and Resident #52 were in another resident's room until the other residents hollered out and told them. CNA E said it was the facility's responsibility to provide adequate supervision of the residents that wandered.
During an interview on 6/29/23 at 10:51 AM, LVN P said she had worked at the facility for 24 years. LVN P said Resident #52 wandered all over the facility and they could not keep up with her. LVN P said other residents had verbalized to her they did not like Resident #52 coming into their rooms and going through their stuff. LVN P said on 6/23/23 Resident #52 had been found in Resident #46's room by Resident #46. LVN P said she did not know Resident #52 was in Resident #46's room until she saw Resident #46 fall outside her doorway. LVN P said it was aggravating to the other residents. LVN P said it was the responsibility of all staff to monitor the residents that wandered.
During an interview on 6/29/23 at 11:06 AM, RN N said she had worked at the facility since April 2023 in an internship as an Administrator in Training but worked the floor sometimes to help. RN N said Resident #39 and Resident #52 wandered the facility. RN N said Resident #52 was worse and was hard to redirect. RN N said she had witnessed Resident #39, and Resident #52 go into other residents' rooms. RN N said when they saw them go into other residents' rooms, they would go redirect them out. RN N said the other residents said it was an invasion of their privacy and they did not like Resident #39 and Resident #52 going into their rooms. RN N said it was the responsibility of all the staff to ensure the privacy of the other residents and redirect the residents that wandered.
During an interview on 6/29/23 at 11:30 AM, ADON B said she had worked at the facility for over eight years. ADON B said Resident #52 wandered the facility and had gone into other residents' rooms and had to be redirected frequently. ADON B said sometimes Resident #39 would go with Resident #52. ADON B said they were currently looking for alternative placement for Resident #52. ADON B said if they had 20 people at the facility, they could not keep up with Resident #52, but they redirect her when they see her entering somewhere she should not be. ADON B said they have been trying to meet the Resident #52's needs and keep the other residents safe until alternative placement was secured for Resident #52. ADON B said they did not have any special monitoring in place, such as 1 on 1 monitoring, for Resident #52. ADON B said she had not received any complaints from the other residents related to the residents that wandered into their rooms. ADON B said she was sure it was uncomfortable for the other residents, and it invaded the other residents' privacy. ADON B said it was the responsibility of all the staff to ensure the privacy of all the residents and monitor the residents that wandered.
During an interview on 6/29/23 at 12:01, the SW said she had worked at the facility for 13 years either as the SW or the Administrator. The SW said Resident #52 and Resident #39 walked throughout the facility. The SW said Resident #52 was not easily focused or redirected. The SW said she had witnessed Resident #52, and Resident #39 go into other residents' rooms. The SW said Resident #39 would not go without Resident #52. The SW said she had not had any complaints related to Resident #39 or Resident #52 going into other residents' rooms, however, she would expect them to complain. The SW said other residents could become irritated or fearful. The SW said she even started locking her office because Resident #39 and Resident #52 would come into her office and go through her things. The SW said she only worked part-time. The SW said it was ultimately the responsibility of the Administrator to ensure the privacy of all the residents. The SW said it would be the responsibility of the nurses to determine the level of supervision a resident needed based on the resident's behaviors, such as 1 on 1 monitoring or every 15-minute checks, to ensure adequate supervision of the residents that wandered.
During an interview on 6/29/23 at 12:50 PM, the Chief Nursing Officer said the DON was on vacation and she could respond to general questions. The Chief Nursing Officer said all staff were responsible for ensuring residents were adequate supervised.
During an interview on 6/29/23 at 1:06 PM, the Administrator said all staff were responsible for providing supervision for the residents that wandered. The Administrator said she had been told by other residents that they did not like Resident #39 and Resident #52 coming into their rooms and it made them feel like they had no privacy. The Administrator said the staff was not aware Resident #52 was in Resident #46's room prior to seeing Resident #46 fall outside her doorway on 6/23/23. The Administrator said she was not aware Resident #52 and Resident #39 were going into Resident #15 and #33's room. The Administrator said they were seeking alternative placement for Resident #52. The Administrator said they had not done 1 on 1 monitoring with Resident #52 to ensure the privacy and safety of the other residents.
Record review of the facility's policy titled Wandering and Elopements, with a revised date of 5/15/23, indicated . the center would identify residents who were at risk for unsafe wandering and/or elopement . the center would strive to prevent harm while maintaining the least restrictive environment for residents .
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0725
(Tag F0725)
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 services by sufficient numbers of other nursin...
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 services by sufficient numbers of other nursing personnel, which included but not limited to nurse aides, on a 24-hour basis to provide nursing care to all residents in accordance with resident care plans for 5 of 17 residents (Residents #30, Resident #39, Resident #43, Resident #45, Resident #52) and Anonymous Resident Council members (AR 1-AR7) reviewed for care and services.
The facility failed to provide sufficient staff on the 6a-2pm, 2pm-10pm, 10pm-6am (04/01/23-06/25/23) shifts to meet the needs of the residents who required assistance with activities of daily living.
This failure could place residents at risk of infection, skin breakdown, low self-esteem, depression, embarrassment, and psychological harm.
Findings included:
Record review of the PBJ staffing Data Report dated 01/01/23-03/31/23 indicated the facility triggered for one star staff rating.
Record review of the Facility Assessment Tool updated 04/24/23, indicated the average daily census was 55 residents and the total minimum number needed was 1 licensed nurse providing direct care per 24 hours and 9 nurse aides per 24 hours.
Record review of the Staffing Schedule dated 04/01/23-06/25/23 indicated: 14 out of 19 days 9 CNAs (8 hours shifts) did not work in a 24-hour period:
*04/08/23
*04/09/23
*04/22/23
*05/06/23
*05/13/23
*05/14/23
*05/21/23
*05/28/23
*06/03/23
*06/04/23
*06/10/23
*06/17/23
*06/24/23
*06/25/23
Record review of the CMS 672 dated 06/26/23 indicated a census of 57 residents with the following:
*22 residents required assist of one or two staff for bathing.
*34 residents were dependent for bathing.
*54 residents required assist of one or two staff for dressing.
*3 residents were dependent for dressing.
*48 residents required assist of one or two staff for transfers.
*9 residents were dependent for transfers.
*46 residents required assist of one or two staff for toilet use.
*10 residents were dependent for toilet use.
*55 residents required assist of one or two staff for eating: and
*2 residents were dependent for eating.
1. During an interview on 06/27/2023 at 2:30 p.m. in Resident Council Anonymous Residents #1-7 stated that staff took a long time to answer call lights. They said that when they push a call light, they feel like it is useless because they never come in time to answer their call light. They stated that staff feel like they are too busy. They stated that some of their needs are not being met because staff do not answer their call lights. Anonymous Residents #1-6 said Resident #39 and Resident #52 bothered them. Anonymous Residents #1-6 said Resident #39 and Resident #52 wandered the facility the entire day. Anonymous Residents #1-6 said Resident #39 and Resident #52 caused trouble everywhere they went. Anonymous Residents #1-6 said Resident #39 and Resident #52 would wander into their rooms at night and just stand there and did nothing or stood next to their bed. Anonymous Residents #1-6 said they had never been harmed by either resident, but they were creeped out by them when woke up and them being in their room. Anonymous Residents #1-6 said they do not feel comfortable with Resident #39 and Resident #52 entering their rooms while they were sleeping. Anonymous Residents #1-6 said the staff knew Resident #39 and Resident #52 were wandering around and causing trouble. Anonymous Residents #1-6 said they would typically shoo Resident #39 and Resident #52 away when they came into their rooms, and they would leave.
2. During an interview on 06/29/23 at 9:50 a.m., Resident # 10 stated that the facility needs more aides and the ones they do hire don't know shit. She stated that she usually must try and teach the CNAs to be an aide because she used to be an aide and the girls, they hire don't know how to do their jobs. She stated that an example is that she must show the CNAs how to get her into her wheelchair safely. She stated that she will show the CNAs how to lock the wheels on the chair and how to help stand her up because she is a big woman. She stated that the facility doesn't have enough CNAs to do the job either. She stated that she will stay in bed too long and it makes her angry. She stated that then the CNAs ask what she is mad about she will tell them she is mad because she stayed in bed for an hour after she asked to be gotten into her chair. She stated that the CNAs will tell her that they will get to her, but it takes so long, and it is obvious it is because they do not have enough staff. She stated that it is also taking too long to get the clean clothes and bedding passed out and too long to get the sheets off the bed. She stated that she wants their CNAs to make their beds properly and there aren't enough CNAs to get this job done.
3. Record review of an electronic face sheet dated 06/27/23 revealed Resident #30 was an [AGE] year-old female admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including Cerebral infraction (occurs as a result of disrupted blood flow to the brain due to problems with the blood vessels that supply it), Age related nuclear cataract (major cause of blindness), history of falling, unsteadiness on feet, and Alzheimer's disease (common type of dementia.)
Record review of Resident #30's annual MDS dated [DATE] revealed a BIMS with a score of 6, which indicated rResident #30 has severely impaired cognition. The MDS also revealed, Resident #30, required extensive assistance with personal hygiene. Resident #30 required one-person physical assistance with personal hygiene, including nail hygiene.
During an observation and interview on 06/27/23 at 11:15 a.m., Resident #30 was observed with half inch long mustache hairs. She stated that she prefers a clean shave and would like her upper lip to be shaved.
During an observation and interview on 06/28/23 at 9:12 a.m., Resident #30 was observed with a mustache, and she said she would still like it to be shaved. She stated that she did not know how long it had been since she was shaved but it may have been at least a week.
4. Record review of Resident #39's face sheet dated 6/28/23 indicated he was [AGE] years old and admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including vascular dementia (changes in memory, thinking, and behavior due to impaired blood supply to the brain) and hypertension.
Record review of Resident #39's admission MDS dated [DATE] indicated he was understood and understood others. The MDS indicated a BIMS score of 8 which indicated Resident #39 had moderate cognitive impairment. The MDS indicated Resident #39 did not have behavioral symptoms. The MDS indicated Resident #39 wandered daily but he did not significantly intrude on the privacy or activities of others. The MDS indicated Resident #39 required supervision to limited assistance from staff for most activities of daily living and did not use an assistive device for mobility.
Record review of Resident #39's care plan initiated 4/19/23 revealed he wandered and was at risk of injury related to dementia and wandering and he was at risk for behavioral symptoms related to dementia and history of agitation. Interventions included to remove resident from other resident's rooms and unsafe situations and redirect resident as needed.
Record review of Resident #39's progress notes ranging from 4/18/23-6/27/23 revealed multiple notes of resident wandering in the facility and required frequent redirecting and on 4/25/23 revealed he required redirecting for going into other residents' room.
5. Record review of an electronic face sheet dated 06/27/23 revealed Resident #43 was an [AGE] year-old male admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including quadriplegia (paralysis of all four limbs), urinary tract infections (an infection in any part of the urinary system), Constipation (not passing stools regularly or you're unable to completely empty your bowel), Neuromuscular dysfunction of bladder (the bladder may not fill or empty correctly), Diarrhea (stools are loose and watery)
Record review of Resident #43's annual MDS dated [DATE] revealed a BIMS with a score of 11, which indicated rResident #43 had moderately impaired cognition. The MDS also revealed, Resident #43, required extensive assistance with personal hygiene. Resident #43 required two-person physical assistance with personal hygiene, including nail hygiene.
During an observation and interview on 06/26/23 at 11:08 a.m., Resident #43 was observed lying in his bed. He appeared unkempt and had long dirty fingernails. Resident #43 stated that the staff did not trim his fingernails, but that he would like them trimmed. He stated that he had not had his fingernails trimmed for over a month. He stated that he did not like that his nails were long and that there was dirt underneath the nail.
During an observation and interview on 06/26/23 at 11:08 a.m., Resident #43 was observed with long and dirty fingernails.
During an observation and interview on 06/26/23 at 3:24 p.m., Resident #43 was observed with long and dirty fingernails, unchanged from first observation.
During an observation and interview on 06/27/23 at 8:22 a.m., Resident #43 was observed with long and dirty fingernails, unchanged from first observation.
During an observation and interview on 06/28/23 at 9:12 a.m., Resident #43 was observed with long and dirty fingernails, unchanged from first observation.
6. Record review of the face sheet dated 06/26/23 indicated Resident #45 was a [AGE] year-old male and admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including generalized muscle weakness, congestive heart failure (the heart muscle doesn't pump blood as well as it should.), cerebral infarction (stroke), nicotine dependence (is an addiction to tobacco products caused by the drug nicotine), and flaccid (loose or floppy) hemiplegia (weakness or paralysis of one side of the body) affecting right dominant side.
Record review of the quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] indicated Resident #45 was understood and understood others. The MDS indicated Resident #45 had a BIMS score of 09 which indicated moderately impaired cognition and required extensive assistance for bed mobility and total dependence with two plus persons for transfer.
Record review of a care plan dated 06/21/23 indicated Resident #45 required a mechanical lift to transfer to chair/bed which puts me at risk for injury, Intervention included please have two people to safely transfer from bed to chair using mechanical lift.
Record review of a care plan dated 03/01/22 and revised on 06/12/23 indicated Resident #45 was at risk for psychosocial well-being disturbed related to mood disorder and schizophrenia (is a serious mental illness that affects how a person thinks, feels, and behaves). Intervention included all to participant in daily care and decision/goals making. The care plan indicated Resident #45 had ADL function/rehab potential risk related to being bedfast. Intervention included ambulation/transfers amount of assist x2.
During an observation on 06/26/23 at 10:54 a.m., CNA A walked out of Resident #45's room and said I don't know if I will have time today to get you. We will have to see.
During an observation and interview on 06/26/23 at 11:23 a.m., Resident #45 was in bed. Resident #45 said he asked to get out of the bed since morning. He said staff did not always get him out of bed when he asked, he depended on if the facility had enough staff working the floor. Resident #45 said he was a smoker and had not been able to smoke yet.
During an observation on 06/26/23 at 11:45 p.m., CNA A dropped Resident #45 lunch tray on his bedside table. Resident #45 asked her if he would be able to get out of bed after lunch and CNA A said, I said I would try.
During an observation and interview on 06/26/23 at 2:06 p.m., Resident #45 was in the bed watching television. He said he had not gotten out of bed today.
During an observation on 06/26/23 at 5:00 p.m., Resident #45 was in the bed watching television.
During an interview on 06/28/23 at 1:53 p.m., CNA A said she worked for the facility for 2 years. She said she worked Hall 1 and 2 on Monday (06/26/23) and Hall 1 was where Resident #45 resided. CNA A said on Monday (06/26/23) she did not have time to get Resident #45 out of bed due to only 3 CNAs working the halls. She said Resident #45 required a mechanical lift with 2 people assist and no one had time to help her. CNA A said Resident #45 did ask to get out of bed daily. She said she explained to Resident #45 why she could not get him out of bed because lack of staff. CNA A said he knew the facility had low staffing some days so Resident #45 should not be upset. She said Resident #45 wanted to get up to smoke too but currently did not have cigarettes. CNA A said it probably upset Resident #45 to not get out of bed after he asked several times. She said she had recent training on resident rights. CNA A said denying Resident #45 could cause him to try getting up by himself and fall.
During an interview on 06/28/23 at 4:05 p.m., LVN D said Resident #45 had the right to get out of when he asked. She said Resident #45 should not have been told he could not get out due to lack of staffing. LVN D said not honoring Resident #45 wish to get up could cause him to stop asking and isolate himself in his room or feel like he was not important. She said it was nursing staff responsibility to honor a resident right to get out bed when asked to.,
During an interview on 06/29/23 at 10:29 a.m., the ADON B said Resident #45 had the right to get out of bed unless there was an important reason not to. She said not getting Resident #45 out of the bed when he asked violated his rights. ADON B said Resident #45 should not have been told he could not get out due to lack of staffing. She said CNAs and LVNs were responsible for helping resident with their ADLs which included transfers. ADON B said it probably did not make Resident #45 feel good being denied get out bed which risked skin issues, emotional distress, and decrease in quality of life.
6. Record review of Resident #52's face sheet dated 6/26/23 indicated she was [AGE] years old and admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including dementia, depression, anxiety (feeling of worry, nervousness, unease), mild cognitive impairment, and a mood disorder.
Record review of Resident #52's quarterly MDS dated [DATE] indicated she was understood and understood others. The MDS indicated a BIMS score of 7 which indicated Resident #52 had severe cognitive impairment. The MDS indicated Resident #52 had fluctuating disorganized thinking, did not reject care, and did not wander. The MDS indicated Resident #52 required supervision to limited assistance from staff for most activities of daily living and ambulated without the use of an assistive device.
Record review of Resident #52's care plan revealed she had anxiety, paced, and wandered the hallways. Resident #52 was at risk of injury due to wandering. Interventions included to redirect when attempting to wander into an unsafe environment, monitor whereabouts to assure resident safety, and wander guard in place.
Record review of Resident #52's progress notes ranging from 3/18/23-6/23/23 revealed multiple notes documenting resident wandering around facility and required frequent redirecting that was sometimes successful and other times unsuccessful. The 6/18/23 12:48 PM progress note by RN L revealed Resident #52 had exit seeking behaviors with 2 successful attempts in exiting the facility with staff intercepting resident upon exit. The 6/23/23 5:54 PM progress note by LVN D revealed Resident #52 had wandered into another resident's room and when the other resident asked Resident #52 to leave her room, Resident #52 pushed her down.
During observations on 6/26/23 at 8:55 AM, 12:30 PM, and 4:30 PM noted the front door was not locked and there was a sign on the front door stating, PUSH UNTIL ALARM SOUNDS DOOR CAN BE OPENED IN 15 SECONDS. There was no alarm when door was opened.
During an interview on 06/26/23 at 2:48 PM, a family member of Resident #52 said her main concerns with the facility was they needed more staff to make sure resident were bathed and changed. She said the facility was understaffed
During observations on 6/27/23 at 8:00 AM, 1:30 PM, and 5:00 PM noted the front door was not locked and no alarm sounded when it was opened.
During observations on 6/28/23 8:30 AM and 12:00 PM, noted the front door was not locked and no alarm sounded when it was opened. At 1:15 PM the door was locked and required staff to enter a code to open the front door.
During multiple observations made during survey on 6/26/23- 6/28/23, Resident #52 was observed frequently wandering down hallways and entering other residents' rooms and was often accompanied by Resident #39. Resident #52 and Resident #39 were sometimes redirected by staff but sometimes there were no staff in the area monitoring the residents.
During an interview on 06/28/23 11:52 AM, MA G said medications pop up on the computer an hour before they are scheduled. She said this is how she knew which medications were due. She said medications that are scheduled at 7:00 a.m. should have gotten their medications no later than 8:00 a.m. She said daily she had to pass medications late to residents because she is the only medication aide in the building and because they would not change the scheduled times. She said she always came in to work at 5:00 a.m. to try to pass medications on time.
During an interview on 06/29/23 at 08:27 AM, LVN D stated that she has worked at the facility since November of last year. She stated that she is an LVN. She stated that she used to work the 6:00 a.m. shift to 2:00 p.m. shift when she started. She stated that she now works the 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. shift. She stated that she now works the 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. 12-hour shift because they have issues with staffing. She stated that she works a lot of hours. She stated that it is kind of hard-to-get paid time off approved. She stated that she can still do her tasks because of low staffing. She stated that some of the nurse aides have trouble keeping up and she and other nurses must double as a nurse aide. She stated that if there are at least three or four nurse aides on duty they can keep up with the workload.
During an interview on 06/29/23 at 08:54 AM, Med aide E stated that she has worked at the facility since 2019. She stated that she works the 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. shift. She stated that she works 7 days a week 12 hours a day. She said that she works one week on and one week off. She stated that she works 84 hours a week. She stated that she does get tired working long hours continuously for an entire week. She stated that there are only two medication aides on the 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. shift. She stated that she does feel overworked at times due to the long hours. She stated that she does help the CNAs do their job when they are overwhelmed and understaffed. She stated that it does take her away from passing meds when the CNAs are low staffed because she must help them with their duties. She stated that there are residents not getting out of bed because of low CNA staffing. She stated that there are typically 3-4 CNAs on shift but sometimes there is just 1 or 2 CNAs on duty. She stated that when there is only 1 or 2 CNAs it really affects her workflow, and she will have to work on the floor and do med pass at the same time which is very difficult to take on double responsibility.
During an interview on 06/29/23 at 9:47 a.m., CNA A said she had worked at the facility for 2 years. CNA A said other staff members were not team players and did not help each other. She said the facility had issues getting residents up because they did not have enough help to perform 2 person assist transfers. CNA A said she had reported the short staffing issue to the DON and both ADONs, but nothing had really changed. She said sometimes she got overwhelmed when there was not enough staff to complete tasks.
During an interview on 06/29/23 at 10:16 a.m., CNA E said she had worked at the facility for 16 years. She said day shift (6a-2p) was usually staffed but the evening shifts were short. CNA E said the 2p-10p shift had a lot of call ins and was always shorthanded. CNA E said she was scheduled to work 6a-2p but 90% of the time she worked 6a-6p to help the evening shift. She said she did not feel like there was enough staff to monitor the residents who wandered when you had 17-18 residents to care for. CNA E said with wandering residents you are only able to redirect them if you catch them in your eyesight. She said due to lack of staffing, you only know when a resident is in another resident room uninvited, when they holler out or notify staff they are in their room.
During an interview on 6/29/23 at 10:51 AM, LVN P said she had worked at the facility for 24 years. LVN P said Resident #52 wandered all over the facility and they could not keep up with her. LVN P said other residents had verbalized to her they did not like Resident #52 coming into their rooms and going through their stuff. LVN P said on 6/23/23 Resident #52 had been found in Resident #46's room by Resident #46. LVN P said she did not know Resident #52 was in Resident #46's room until she saw Resident #46 fall outside her doorway. LVN P said it was aggravating to the other residents and affected their privacy. LVN P said it was the responsibility of all staff to monitor the residents that wandered.
During an interview on 06/29/23 at 10:52 a.m., ADON C said due to nursing being short staffed, she had to work the floor often and still try to keep up with the ADON duties. She said the 2p-10p shift had the most call ins by CNAs. ADON C said the facility had interview several CNAs, but they never show up to work. She said the population in nursing home was becoming more mental health resident than elderly. ADON C said working with the mental health resident was a factor why some staff quit.
During an interview on 06/29/23 at 12:15 p.m., the Administrator said the facility attempted to schedule no less than 3 aides per shift. She said the on-call nurse dealt with staffing issues. The Administrator said the facility would benefit from hiring more staff. She said the current staffing situation was not ideal, but the support staff helped cover some weak areas. The Administrator said 3 or more CNAs a shift ensured resident were getting the care they deserved. She said the facility did a wage survey and was trying to recruit staff.
Record review of Appropriate Nurse Staffing Levels for U.S. Nursing Homes (06/29/2020), www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/srticles/PMC7328494 was assessed on 07/06/2023 indicated US nursing homes are required to have sufficient nursing staff with the appropriate competencies to assure resident safety and attain or maintain the highest practicable level of physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident .nursing homes must take into account the resident acuity to assure they have adequate staff levels to meet the needs of residents .
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0727
(Tag F0727)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to use the services of a registered nurse for at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week for 1 of 1 facility reviewed for RN coverage....
Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to use the services of a registered nurse for at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week for 1 of 1 facility reviewed for RN coverage.
The facility failed to provide RN coverage for 8 consecutive hours daily on 04/10/23, 06/04/23, 06/10/23, 06/24/23, 06/25/23.
The deficient practice had the potential to affect residents in the facility by leaving staff without supervisory coverage for RN specific nursing activities and for coordination of events such as an emergency care and disasters.
Findings include:
Record review of a nursing staff information sheet dated 04/10/23, 06/04/23, 06/10/23, 06/24/23, 06/25/23 indicated that the facility did not have an RN in the facility or did not work 8 consecutive hours.
During an interview on 06/29/23 at 10:50 a.m., the ADON C said she was currently the only RN scheduled due to the DON being on vacation. She said until the DON returned, she was solely responsible for RN coverage. She said the facility had two other RNs, but they no longer worked for the facility. The ADON C said she did not know for sure about certain days being without RN coverage, but it may have happened. She said the facility needed to find a way to get more nurses especially some RNs. ADON C said she performed central line dressing changes which currently was the only task that required a RN.
On 06/29/23 at 12:00 p.m., DON unavailable for interview due to being on leave.
During an interview on 06/29/23 at 12:15 p.m., the Administrator said she was aware the facility was required to have a RN on duty every day for 8 hours. She said the last RN left last week and currently only the DON and ADON C were full time RNs. She said the DON was responsible for ensuring RN coverage 7 days a week for 8 hours. The Administrator said the facility was looking to hire more RNs. She said she did not know why a RN was required to work 8 hours a day.
Record review of Appropriate Nurse Staffing Levels for U.S. Nursing Homes (06/29/2020), www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/srticles/PMC7328494 was assessed on 07/06/2023 indicated US nursing homes are required to have sufficient nursing staff with the appropriate competencies to assure resident safety and attain or maintain the highest practicable level of physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident .nursing homes must take into account the resident acuity to assure they have adequate staff levels to meet the needs of residents .the impact of registered nurses (RN) is particularly positive .higher RN staff levels are associated with better resident quality in terms of fewer pressure ulcers; lower restraint use; decreased infection; lower pain; improved activities of daily living independence; less weight loss; dehydration .higher nurse staffing levels in nursing homes and reduced emergency room use and rehospitalization .
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0804
(Tag F0804)
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 food that was palatable and served at an appe...
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 food that was palatable and served at an appetizing temperature for 6 of 18 residents and 7 anonymous residents reviewed for palatable food. (Anonymous Resident #1 - #7, Resident #22, Resident #25, Resident #35, Resident #38, Resident #50, and Resident #110)
The facility failed to provide palatable food served to Resident #22, Resident #25, Resident #35, Resident #38, Resident #50, and Resident #110 who complained the food did not taste good.
This failure could place residents who ate food from the kitchen at risk of weight loss, altered nutritional status, and diminished quality of life.
Findings included:
Record review of Resident Council Minutes dated 01/30/23 indicated .Res. (residents) would like more toss salad. Still too many of the same vegetables .Res. would like to have a meeting with the dietician . The response from the Dietary Manager indicated, We go by the menu. We a will tired get different veg. Next time dietician come I will tell her to see the res.
Record review of Resident Council Minutes dated 02/28/23 indicated, .Dietary: Res would like to have more tomato soup. Would like to know the coffee times during the day. Food a little bit too salted. The response from the Dietary Manager indicated, We tried to have more tomato soup. Coffee time 9:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m.
Record review of Resident Council Minutes dated 03/27/23 indicated, .Some resident would like to have 2 cups of coffee for breakfast. Food cont. to be too salted. Some Res. was told that coffee would only be available during breakfast. Too many carrots, have them at least 3 X a wk. Would like fried foods occ . The response from the Dietary Manager indicated, The nursing aid put the coffee on the tray for breakfast. Dietary don't do it. The nursing does it. We will try to find a no salt gravy. Coffee is served at 9:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m. every day. We have what on the menu. We don't have a fryer. We fried in a pan.
Record review of Resident Council Minutes dated 04/26/23 indicated, .Too many carrots, green peas, green beans, & corn on the menu. Want more sliced turkey sandwiches/cheeseburgers/meat loaf/mashed potatoes/gravy. Switch between tea and lemonade. The response from the Dietary Manager indicated, We go by the menu. We don't have lemonade.
Record review of Resident Council Minutes dated 05/30/23 indicated, .still too many of the same vegetables. Res. would like to have more desserts from the kitchen with their meals in place of the ones already wrapped/prepared would like (dietary manager) to attend the next resident council mtg to discuss the food. The response from the Dietary Manager indicated, We go by the menu. There are very much on the order guide to choice from .
Record review of Spring Summer 2023 Week 1 menu indicated the lunch menu for 06/27/23 was baked pork steak with gravy, lyonnaise potatoes, sliced carrots, cornbread, and a brownie.
During a group meeting conducted on 6/27/2023 at 2:30 p.m. Anonymous Resident #1 - #7 said that food prepared by kitchen staff was of terrible quality. They stated that they eat the same few canned vegetables over and over. They stated that previously they had eaten the same meal for dinner four nights in a row. They stated that the desserts were premade and prepackaged desserts that are low quality junk food. They stated they want homemade desserts. They stated that the Dietary Manager does not listen to food complaints, and she does not care either because all complaints go unheard.
1. Record review of the face sheet dated 06/27/23 revealed Resident #22 was [AGE] years old and admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including vitamin deficiency, nausea, and other signs and symptoms concerning food and fluid intake.
Record review of an MDS dated [DATE] revealed Resident #22 had a BIMS of 12, which indicated moderate cognitive impairment. Resident #22 required supervision with ADLs.
Record review of a care plan dated 06/06/23 indicated Resident #22 required the use of an ostomy as evidenced by a colostomy. There was an intervention to encourage dietary/fluid intake within dietary limits. The care plan indicated Resident #22 had a history of loss of appetite and weight loss. Resident #22 was at risk for nutritional deficits.
During an interview on 06/26/23 at 10:42 a.m., Resident #22 said the food was terrible. She said the food did not taste good and did not look good. Said the vegetable were like they were just dumped out of the can and heated up. She said once she had a side salad with only lettuce and dressing.
During an observation and interview on 06/26/23 at 12:06 p.m., Resident #22 said the pasta on her lunch tray was gummy. She said she tried to add butter to it to make it creamy, but it didn't work. She said she did not eat her pasta. Her lunch tray was observed on her bedside table. The pasta was left uneaten on the plate. The pasta did appear thick and sticky.
2. Record review of the face sheet dated 06/27/23 revealed Resident #25 was [AGE] years old and admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including adult failure to thrive (a syndrome of decrease appetite and poor nutrition, and inactivity), depression and anxiety disorder.
Record review of an MDS dated [DATE] revealed Resident #25 had a BIMS of 11, which indicated moderate cognitive impairment. Resident #25 required supervision with all ADLs.
Record review of a care plan dated 06/12/23 indicated Resident #25 was at risk for associated complications with nutritional status /diet related to pain, anxiety, and depression.
During an interview on 06/26/23 at 10:42 a.m., Resident #25 said the food was not fit to eat. Resident #25 said the food sometimes looks like dogfood. She said residents could request sandwiches, but she had stopped because she was told someone was getting in trouble for making them for her.
During an observation and interview on 06/26/23 at 12:05 p.m., Resident #25 was sitting on her bed. Her food tray was in front of her. She said she did not eat dark meat chicken. She did not like the butterscotch pudding and the pasta was thick and gummy. She said the only thing she ate was her zucchini. Her food appeared untouched except for one small empty bowl with remnants of a green vegetable. The pasta was left uneaten on the plate. The pasta did appear thick and sticky.
3. Record review of the face sheet dated 06/27/23 revealed Resident #35 was [AGE] years old and admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including acute myocardial infarction (heart attack), major depressive disorder (a persistent low or depressed mood), and Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus with hypoglycemia (diabetes with low blood sugar).
Record review of an MDS dated [DATE] revealed Resident #35 had a BIMS of 14, which indicated no cognitive impairment. Resident #12 required supervision with ADLs.
Record review of a care plan dated 05/11/23 indicated Resident #35 was at risk for nausea and emesis with an intervention to eat scheduled meals and snack as needed.
During an interview on 06/26/23 at 10:52 a.m., Resident #35 said the food sucks. He said the food isn't seasoned at all. He said they serve the same vegetables over and over. He said the beets are terrible.
4. Record review of the face sheet dated 06/27/23 revealed Resident #38 was [AGE] years old and admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including unspecified severe protein-calorie malnutrition, depression, and vitamin deficiency.
Record review of an MDS dated [DATE] revealed Resident #38 had a BIMS of 12, which indicated moderate cognitive impairment. Resident #38 required supervision with eating.
Record review of a care plan dated 05/13/23 indicated Resident #38 recently lost a family member and was at risk for depression and anxiety. Resident #38 required the use of an ostomy as evidenced by a colostomy. There was an intervention to encourage dietary/fluid intake within dietary limits. The care plan indicated Resident #38 was at risk for nutritional deficits.
During an interview on 06/26/23 at 10:35 a.m., Resident #38 said the food was not good. He said he liked soul food. He said staff do not offer or bring him a substitute.
5. Record review of the face sheet dated 06/27/23 revealed Resident #50 was [AGE] years old and admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including depression, vitamin deficiency, and heartburn.
Record review of an MDS dated [DATE] revealed Resident #50 had a BIMS of 11, which indicated moderate cognitive impairment. Resident #50 required supervision to limited assistance with all ADLs.
Record review of a care plan dated 05/31/23 indicated Resident #50 was at risk for complications with psychosocial well-being. The care plan indicated Resident #50 was at risk for nutritional deficits.
During an interview on 06/26/23 at 10:52 a.m., Resident #50 said the food was not good. He said the food did not taste good. He said they are served too much salad and the same vegetable. He said the beets were terrible.
6. Record review of the face sheet dated 06/27/23 revealed Resident #110 was [AGE] years old and admitted most recently on 06/09/23 with diagnoses including muscle weakness, deficiency of other vitamins, and muscle weakness. The face sheet indicated Resident #110 was discharged home on [DATE].
Record review of an MDS dated [DATE] revealed Resident #110 had a BIMS of 14, which indicated no cognitive impairment. Resident #12 required supervision to extensive assistance with ADLs.
Record review of a care plan dated 06/15/23 indicated Resident #110 was at risk for complications related to diabetes. There was an intervention for diet as ordered.
Record review of a Grievance Form completed by the Administrator dated 05/23/23 indicated Resident #110 .was upset that she didn't have lunch. I asked why she didn't have lunch and she stated the pork wasn't browned so she didn't eat it. I asked if she tasted it and she said no - it didn't look good so I didn't want it .
During an observation and interview on 06/27/23 at 12:01 p.m., a lunch tray was sampled by the Dietary Manager and 4 surveyors. The pork steak had a gummy processed texture and tasted like turkey. The carrots tasted like they were poured out of a can and unseasoned. The bread was a piece of wheat bread, not cornbread. The dessert was a packaged brownie that was thick and dry. The Dietary Manager said they do not use brownie mixes because they come out hard. She said she was working with the food service representative to get a better deal.
During an interview on 06/28/23 at 10:35 a.m., CNA H said she had heard food complaints from the residents as she passed trays. She said the residents usually said, the same thing again. She said she had reported food complaints to the kitchen staff, DON, and the Administrator. She said she had also had residents write notes and put them on their trays to be returned to the kitchen. She said did offer alternatives such as sandwiches or soup and crackers.
During an interview on 06/28/23 at 10:43 a.m., ADON B said the residents do not like the food. She said they had talked about the issue numerous times in morning meetings. She said the residents just say they do not like the food on the menu.
During an interview on 06/28/23 at 1:29 p.m., the Dietary Manager said the residents never complain about anything until they go to resident council. She said no staff ever report to her any food complaints. When asked about the pre-packaged desserts she said, I don't even know why the residents are complaining about this. She said she did not know about the gummy thick pasta on 6/26/23. She said she did make rounds to visit with the residents when she could, but she was staff out at this time. She said all she could do was work with her food representative and the dietician. She said she could not make changes to the menu only the dietician could. She said the dietician had not come to the facility to meet with the residents as they had requested. She said substitutes were always available if the resident did not like what they were served. She said the cornbread was not on the sample tray because the delivery truck was running late. She said residents that do not like their food could lose weight.
During an interview on 06/29/23 at 9:38 a.m., the Dietician said she was covering for another dietician. She said she had been to the facility approximately 3 times over the last year. She said sometimes the dieticians were involved in Resident Council, but only if they were invited. She said she was not sure if another dietician had met with the residents. She said one of the dietician's duties were to complete a quarterly meal satisfaction survey. She said the dietician meets with 10 different residents to complete this survey. She said part of the meal satisfaction survey was to make sure the residents actually enjoy the meals. She said the information was used to make adjustments to the menu. She said if residents did not enjoy the meals, they would not eat the part they did not like. She said she did not know when the last quarterly was done. She said consultant dieticians only come one time a month. She said it was difficult for the dietician to come to a resident council meeting unless it was a coordinated meeting. She said the menus come from a food service company. She said the dietary manager did have the authority to change the menu as long as the item exchanged had the same nutritional value and a registered dietician signed off on the change.
During an interview on 06/29/23 at 11:06 a.m., the Administrator said they learn of food complaints mainly through resident council meetings. She said the Dietary Manager was responsible for addressing the food complaints. She said the dietary manager sampled a food tray every day and got the resident council follow up form each month. She said she was not sure if the dietary manager made rounds to visit with the residents. She said the dietician did complete quarterly surveys. She said the last one was completed on 03/06/23.
Review of a Food and Nutrition Services facility policy dated September 2021 indicated, .Each resident is provided with a nourishing, palatable, well-balanced diet that meets his or her daily nutritional and special dietary needs, taking into consideration the preferences of each resident .reasonable efforts will be made to accommodate resident choices and preferences .
Review of a Food Production Policy facility policy dated 05/01/14 indicated, .All food will be prepared by methods that preserve nutritional value, flavor, and appearance with variety of color, and will be attractively served .in a form to meet the individual needs of the resident .