BROOKDALE GALLERIA

2929 POST OAK BLVD, HOUSTON, TX 77056 (713) 993-9999
For profit - Corporation 56 Beds HEALTHPEAK PROPERTIES, INC. Data: November 2025 2 Immediate Jeopardy citations
Trust Grade
6/100
#653 of 1168 in TX
Last Inspection: June 2025

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

Overview

Brookdale Galleria has received a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns about the quality of care provided. Ranking #653 out of 1168 facilities in Texas places them in the bottom half of all nursing homes in the state, and #52 out of 95 in Harris County means only one local facility is performing worse. The facility has shown an improving trend, reducing reported issues from 10 in 2024 to just 1 in 2025, but there are still serious concerns, including $72,239 in fines, which is higher than 87% of Texas facilities, suggesting ongoing compliance problems. Staffing is a mixed bag; while the facility has average turnover at 63%, the RN coverage is good, exceeding 83% of other facilities, which is important for catching potential health issues. Specific incidents include delays in wound care that could lead to life-threatening infections and a failure to perform timely assessments for residents at risk for pressure ulcers, highlighting both significant weaknesses alongside some positive aspects of nursing staff coverage.

Trust Score
F
6/100
In Texas
#653/1168
Bottom 45%
Safety Record
High Risk
Review needed
Inspections
Getting Better
10 → 1 violations
Staff Stability
⚠ Watch
63% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
Penalties
○ Average
$72,239 in fines. Higher than 52% of Texas facilities. Some compliance issues.
Skilled Nurses
✓ Good
Each resident gets 48 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than average for Texas. RNs are trained to catch health problems early.
Violations
⚠ Watch
19 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
★★☆☆☆
2.0
Overall Rating
★★★☆☆
3.0
Staff Levels
★★★☆☆
3.0
Care Quality
★★☆☆☆
2.0
Inspection Score
Stable
2024: 10 issues
2025: 1 issues

The Good

  • Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
  • No fines on record

Facility shows strength in fire safety.

The Bad

2-Star Overall Rating

Below Texas average (2.8)

Below average - review inspection findings carefully

Staff Turnover: 63%

17pts above Texas avg (46%)

Frequent staff changes - ask about care continuity

Federal Fines: $72,239

Well above median ($33,413)

Moderate penalties - review what triggered them

Chain: HEALTHPEAK PROPERTIES, INC.

Part of a multi-facility chain

Ask about local staffing decisions and management

Staff turnover is elevated (63%)

15 points above Texas average of 48%

The Ugly 19 deficiencies on record

2 life-threatening 2 actual harm
Jun 2025 1 deficiency
CONCERN (E)

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

Food Safety (Tag F0812)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on observation, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for one of one...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for one of one kitchen reviewed for expired foods. The facility failed dispose of perishable foods after use in the walk-in fridge. This failure could place residents at risk for consuming hazardous expired food and developing foodborne illnesses who received food from the kitchen. Findings Included: Observation on 06/17/2025 at 10:48 AM revealed the following: *a bottle of Bay Leaves with use by date of 05/31/2025. * a package of Pork with use by date of 06/14/2025; *a package of Beef with use by date of 06/15/2025; *a package of Beef Tips with use by date of 06/10/2025; *a package of Brisket with use by date of 06/03/2025; and *a container of Chocolate Fudge Icing with use by date of 04/27/2025. An interview on 06/19/2025 at 11:22 AM with [NAME] A who revealed they have been trained on kitchen processes including discarding expired foods. [NAME] A stated that if there are expired foods in the facility it should be thrown away. [NAME] A stated there should not be any expired foods in the facility. [NAME] A stated a negative impact this could have on residents was the potential for illness. An interview on 06/19/2025 at 11:45AM with DM who revealed he has received training on topics including kitchen storage. DM stated the process for checking expired foods was done two times a day, once in the morning and once in the evening. DM stated this was monitored by the DM and shift manager on duty. DM stated if there are expired foods it should be thrown away. DM stated a negative impact this could have on residents was the potential for illness. An interview was conducted on 06/19/2025 at 12:00PM with DSD who revealed he has received training in topics including kitchen storage as well as labeling and dating system. DSD stated the process for checking for expired food was completed in the AM and PM. DSD stated if foods are expired, they should be thrown away. DSD stated a negative impact this could have on residents could be detrimental illness. An interview was conducted on 06/19/2025 at 12:05PM with EC who revealed he has received training on topics including kitchen storage and labeling. EC stated the expectation for expired foods is to throw it out immediately. EC stated himself and the sous chef monitor the expiration of food items. EC stated a negative impact this could have on residents was it could make them sick. An interview was conducted on 06/19/2025 at 1:15PM with ADM who revealed the dietary services manager provides the training to kitchen staff. ADM stated the policy for dated foods was to throw them away when they are expired. ADM stated the DSD was in charge of the functionality in the kitchen. ADM stated that the kitchen should be checking for expired foods two times a day, once in the AM and in the PM. ADM stated this could cause a negative impact on residents if they consumed the expired foods. Record Review of facility policy titled Labeling Safety and Sanitization dated November 2024 stated, 1.Upon receipt from vendors, all non-perishable food items must be labeled with the received date (month and year) before putting in dry storage. This should be done even if the food item has a use by or sell by date marked by the manufacturer. 2.All prepared items must have a label with the name of item, date and time prepared, by whom, and discard/use by date. Discard/use by dates should be no more than 3 days for leftovers/hazardous foods and 7 days for all other prepared food. Supervisors are responsible for ensuring food items in pantry, refrigerators, and freezers are not past use by or expiration dates.
Dec 2024 2 deficiencies 1 Harm
SERIOUS (G) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures

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 interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure 1 of 6 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for wound care rece...

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 1 of 6 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for wound care received necessary treatment and services, consistent with professional standards of practice, to promote healing and prevent new ulcers from developing, in that: - The facility failed to identify a healed area to Resident #1's sacrum which included a scab and pink skin when Resident #1 admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Appropriate interventions were not implemented for Resident #1 and the area developed into a pressure ulcer within approximately 12 days of admission and eventually developed into a Stage IV pressure ulcer. - CNA B stated she did not reposition the resident frequently enough while working with Resident #1 upon her first few days admission. This failure placed residents with low skin integrity at risk for skin breakdown or failure of wounds to heal. Findings included: Resident #1 Record review of Resident #1's face sheet reflected an [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #1 had diagnoses of fracture of head and neck of left femur, and Alzheimer's disease. Record review of Resident #1's admission MDS , dated 08/15/2024 reflected no BIMS score as resident was assessed to be never/rarely understood. Resident #1's MDS also reflected her need for touching assistance/supervision for eating and substantial/maximal assistance for bed mobility. The resident was also assessed to be at risk of pressure injuries and was noted to have a surgical wound. Record review of Resident #1's care plan, dated 11/18/2024, reflected resident, .has a Stage IV pressure ulcer to sacrum w/ potential for pressure ulcer development [related to] impaired mobility ., with interventions including dietary supplementation, low air loss mattress, assisting with turning and repositioning as needed (starting 08/08/2024), and monitoring effectiveness of wound treatment. Record review of Resident #1's hospital Discharge summary, dated [DATE], reflected the resident had a pressure injury to right buttocks starting 08/04/2024 and an incision wound to left hip starting on 08/05/2024. Record review of Resident #1's progress notes, dated 08/08/2024 at 6:39PM revealed LVN C wrote an admission note documenting , .Resident non-verbal and unable to participate in medical history . Needs assistance with eating and drinking . Resident observed with surgical site to left hip . There were no other skin concerns disclosed in her notes. Record review of Resident #1's TAR, dated August 2024, reflected the resident was ordered remedy clinical silicone barrier cream twice a day for preventative treatment with each incontinence episode starting 08/13/2024. The TAR also reflected resident was later ordered clinical zinc paste every shift for skin care preventative with each incontinence episode starting 08/15/2024. Record review of Resident #1's TAR, dated August 2024, reflected the resident was ordered : - wound care to left inner buttock starting on 08/18/2024 and ending on 08/19/2024. - wound care to sacrum starting on 08/20/2024 and ending 09/14/2024. Record review of Resident #1's wound doctor's assessment, dated 08/16/2024, revealed the resident had: - a non-pressure wound on sacrum full thickness, measuring 1.3 X 4.1 X 0.1cm = 5.33cm squared surface area with a duration of greater than three days, and etiology being trauma/injury from a transfer. The resident was recommended zinc ointment once daily, cleansing wound at time of dressing change, and off-loading wound. Record review of Resident #1's wound doctor's assessment, dated 08/22/2024, revealed the resident had: - a non-pressure wound on sacrum full thickness, measuring 2.2 X 4.1 X 0.1cm = 9.02cm squared surface area. Resident was ordered a dressing treatment plan and was recommended to have wound cleansed at time of dressing change, off-load wound, turn side to side in bed ever 1-2 hours, a low air loss mattress and vitamin C supplementation. Observations of Resident #1 on 11/21/2024 at 8:25AM, revealed the resident was in bed being fed by a CNA. Resident #1 was lying on a low air loss mattress. In a phone interview with LVN C on 11/22/2024 at 2:44PM, she stated all nurses do their own wound care because there is no dedicated wound case nurse. She stated Resident #1's skin was not open on admission, but appeared to only have what looked like a healed, pink-colored scab on her buttocks that was not open. She stated she could not recall documenting the pink skin but after some time of being there she was told it had reopened. She stated in the beginning of Resident #1's stay, the resident had a regular mattress and she was not asked for help by her aides to reposition the resident but the aides repositioned the resident themselves. She stated immobility and poor nutrition can both contribute to skin breakdown and turning every two hours could help prevent further skin breakdown. She stated that she believed there was not a risk in not reporting scabs found on the resident because the skin was technically open. She stated she was not told by any nursing aides that Resident #1's skin was opening. In a phone interview with CNA D on 11/25/2024 at 9:08AM, she stated when Resident #1 first came to the facility, her bottom was clear. She said she eventually noticed skin breakdown on the resident's bottom and notified her nurse. She stated initially the resident, who unable to turn herself, did not have an air mattress and she did not help reposition her outside of the times she provided the resident with incontinent care because the resident was getting in her wheelchair and going to therapy. She stated she started repositioning her more often using pillows and wedges only after the skin breakdown started. She stated the resident likely developed the skin breakdown because she was not being turned as much. She also stated she knew that residents with bed immobility were supposed to be repositioned every two hours once they came in, but she did not know where to reference what care, such as repositioning, should be provided to certain residents. She stated she felt that she could only discover the level of care residents needed only after interacting with the residents because she is not told that information upfront by the nurses. In an interview with the DON on 12/03/2024 at 9:42AM, she stated LVN C should have noted the pink scab she found on Resident #1 upon admission considering that finding could indicate vulnerability of the patient's skin. This could have possibly led to more preventative measures being put in place at an earlier time for Resident #1 to help prevent further skin breakdown. In a phone interview with the DON on 11/25/2024 at 7:40PM, she stated for Resident #1, they had interventions in place from the start to prevent skin breakdown, including application of barrier cream by nurse aides and zinc ointment by nurses after incontinent care. She stated the goal was to use frequent incontinent care, barrier ointment and repositioning as interventions to maintain skin integrity and the air mattress was introduced later as an additional intervention due to the ineffectiveness of the initial interventions. She stated nurse aides have been inserviced and audited on their knowledge to refer to the [NAME] for resident ADLs such as frequent repositioning which is also listed in the care plan. She stated she believed aides are providing changing in a timely manner to their residents but did not believe repositioning was being done every two hours exactly. She believed Resident #1's issues with hydration, nutrition and immobility following fracture likely contributed towards her skin breakdown. In an interview phone interview with the Wound Physician on 11/26/2024 at 1:36PM, she stated the history came out that Resident #1 did have a pre-existing wound before and it was communicated in hospital's documentation. She stated they saw documentation on hospital documents saying that she had a wound before. She stated she is not sure if the nurse who initially did the skin assessment captured it. She stated she did not what to say whether Resident #1's sacral wound was avoidable or unavoidable because of the resident's issues with nutrition and overall she has had good progress so far. She stated since the wound was identified and treated, the resident has done well. She said a couple of weeks there was a stall related to the nutrition intervention, while talking with the family about placing a G-tube, but the resident had improved her nutrition status overtime. In terms of all the components being optimized she would say they optimized everything. She stated if there was a wound present before in the same location, there would always be a risk of the wound reopening, but the resident was already on an air mattress during her first evaluation of her. She stated she typically recommended air mattresses for residents with a Stage III or higher, and they look at immobility as a factor. She said if the staff were changing the position every 2 hours, there would be no reason for an air mattress. If the resident is declining and cannot reposition themselves, that is when they need the air mattress. Record review of the facility's policy and procedure on, dated March 2009, reflected, Charge nurse should: 1> Complete physical observation, documenting findings within the admission data collection form. If a wound is present on admission the Charge Nurse should initiate and describe the wound on the Weekly Wound Data Collection Sheet . 4. Initiate treatment intervention. 5. Initiate plan of care . Update plan of care with each intervention. The Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) should: a. Complete documentation of new skin concerns as identified in Point of Care and notify the nurse as indicated . c. Provide skin care during routine care. D. Apply moisturizing creams, barrier products per the plan of care and scope of practice .
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

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 establish and maintain an infection prevention and con...

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 establish and 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 infection for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #1) reviewed for infection. -The facility failed to ensure RN B performed hand hygiene during wound care for Resident #1. This failure could lead to the spread of infection to residents. Finding included: Record review of the admission sheet (undated) for Resident #1 revealed an [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included Fracture of left femur, history of falling, presence of left artificial hip joint, hypertension (a condition in which the force of the blood against the artery walls is too high). Record review of Resident #1's Entry MDS, dated [DATE], revealed there was no section for BIMS score, functional status, urinary incontinence, and bowel incontinence . Record review of Resident #1's care plan, initiated 08/08/2024 revealed the following: Care Plan Description: Potential for and actual impairment to skin integrity related to impaired mobility, blister to upper right buttock and pressure injury to left buttock. Date Initiated: 11/18/24. Care Plan Goal: The resident will have no worsening of skin alteration through review date. Intervention; Monitor/document location, size and treatment of skin injury. Report abnormalities, failure to heal, signs and symptoms of infection, maceration etc. to MD. Record review of Resident #1's physician order dated 11/22/24 revealed an order to cleanse sacrum with normal saline, pat dry with gauze, use alginate rope to pack wound, collagen powder and cover with Opti-foam dressing. Observation on 11/22/24 at 08:38 am, revealed RN B provided Resident #1 with wound care. RN B was assisted by Unit Manager LVN P. RN B gathered the supplies at the treatment cart in the hallway before bringing them into Resident #1's room. Supplies included 1 bottle normal saline, 4 packages of 4x4 gauze, 1 package Maxorb II alginate, 1 package Opti-foam, 1 tongue depressor and three cups. Closed curtain for privacy and assisted resident on to her left side. LVN P held the resident on her left side, unfastened the resident's brief. RN B removed the resident's brief and dated sacral area wound dressing and placed in the garbage can at bedside. Continued observation revealed an open area of approximately 2-3 centimeters in diameter. RN B applied/cleaned with damp 4x4's the skin around wound, applied other 4x4's and applied/cleaned inside the wound, the applied/dried inner and outer wound area. Without washing/sanitizing hands or changing gloves, she placed collagen powder around and into the wound, then handled and applied alginate rope into wound with tongue depressor, placed Opti-foam over wound without washing/sanitizing hands or changing gloves. RN B completed wound care with the same soiled gloves on. In an interview on 11/22/2024 at 11:07 am, RN B stated washing/sanitizing hands was important to protect resident from infection. RN B reported she should have washed/sanitized her hands, placed clean gloves on after removing dirty dressing and prior to providing wound care with new wound dressing. RN B stated she doesn't know why she didn't remember to wash/sanitize her hands after removing dirty dressing/brief and before providing wound care treatment. Reports wound care training and infection training were performed with in the last month. In an interview on 11/22/2024 at 11:36 am, LVN P, she stated washing/sanitizing hands was important to protect resident from infection. LVN P reported RN B should have washed/sanitized her hands after removing dirty brief and sacral dressing prior to providing wound care with new dressing. Reports wound care training and infection training was performed with in the last month. In an interview on 11/22/2024 at 11:50 am, the DON stated it is important to wash/sanitize hands, place gloves on, obtain supplies, clean tabletop, provide protective barrier. Wash/sanitize hands, place on gloves, remove old dressing, wash/sanitize hands place gloves on, clean wound, wash/sanitize hands, place gloves on, provide treatment to wound, cover with dressing. The DON reported washing/sanitizing hands is important to protect resident from infection, she reported RN B should have washed/sanitized her hands prior to providing wound care with new wound dressing and thinks RN B may have been nervous while being observed. The DON reports wound care training and infection training was performed with in the last month. The DON said the expectation was to maintain infection control throughout the process. She said staff received in-service on infection control once or twice a month. She said nurses was provided training and competency check offs annually and as needed if noted concerns. The DON said she did do another competency check off and in-service with RN B. Record review of facility's Infection Prevention and Control Program dated (Revised July 2018) read in part: .Policy Statement: An infection prevention and control program (IPCP) is established and maintained to provide a safe, sanitary and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections. Record review of facility's Wound Care Competency revised 02/2020 for RN B performed on 11/22/2024 read in part: . 5. Pull glove over dressing and discard into appropriate receptacle. Perform hand hygiene. 6. Put on gloves. 11. Wash tissue around the wound that is usually covered by the dressing, tape or gauze with wound cleanser or normal saline. 12. Perform hand hygiene. 13. Apply treatments as indicated. Record review of facility's Procedure: Wound Care . 5. Pull glove over dressing and discard into appropriate receptacle. Perform hand hygiene. 6. Put on gloves. 11. Wash tissue around the wound that is usually covered by the dressing, tape or gauze with wound cleanser or normal saline. 12. Perform hand hygiene. 13. Apply treatments as indicated. Record review of facility's Handwashing/Hand Hygiene policy dated (October 2015 Last revised 01/2021) read in part: .Policy Overview: This community considers hand hygiene the primary means to prevent the spread of infections. Policy Detail: B. All associates shall follow the handwashing/hand hygiene procedures to help prevent the spread of infections to other associates, residents, and visitors. C. Hand hygiene products and supplies (sinks, soap, towels, alcohol-based hand rub, etc.) shall be readily accessible and convenient for associates use to encourage compliance with hand hygiene policies. G. CDC recommends using Alcohol Based Hand Sanitizer with 60-95% alcohol in healthcare settings. Unless hands are visibly soiled, an alcohol-based hand rub is preferred over soap and water in most clinical situations due to evidence of better compliance compared to soap and water during routine resident care. 7. Before handling clean or soiled dressings, gauze pads, etc.; 8. Before moving from a contaminated body site to a clean body site during resident care;10. After contact with blood or bodily fluids;11. After handling used dressings, contaminated equipment, etc.
Apr 2024 3 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0638 (Tag F0638)

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 for 1 of 12 residents (Resident #4) reviewed for resident as...

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 for 1 of 12 residents (Resident #4) reviewed for resident assessments was assessed using the quarterly review instrument not less frequently than once every 3 months, in that: - Resident #4's EHR showed her quarterly MDS assessment was due for completion by 4/10/2024 but was not done by time of record review on 04/24/2024. This failure placed residents at risk of not receiving adequate care. Findings included: Record review of Resident #4's face sheet, dated, revealed a [AGE] year-old female who was admitted into the facility on [DATE] and was diagnosed with vascular dementia, Parkinson's disease and protein calorie malnutrition. Record review of Resident #4's last comprehensive MDS, revealed it was dated 01/09/2024. Record review of Resident #4's EHR revealed the resident's quarterly ARD was due by 4/10/2024. In an interview with the MDS Nurse on 04/24/24 at 1:41PM, she stated assessment for admission assessments, quarterly assessments and discharge assessments are all completed within 14 days and the DON then has 7 days to sign off on the assessment and transmit the MDS to CMS . She stated follows the guidance as stated in the RAI manual. She stated she was not aware that she had missed Resident #4's quarterly MDS. She stated she forgot to complete Resident #4's MDS and, as of 04/24/2024, her MDS should have been completed since it was already beyond the 3-month period since her last MDS was completed. In an interview with the DON, on 04/24/24 at 2:52PM, she stated she signed MDS assessments when they were due, but she was not involved in auditing the MDS Nurse's work. She stated she expected the MDS to be completed on time and knew that it could affect billing and updates in resident care plans. Record review of the RAI Manual, dated 2019, revealed a quarterly MDS must be completed within 14 calendar days after ARD and a discharge MDS must be completed within 14 days after discharge date .
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Pharmacy Services (Tag F0755)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

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

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services (including procedures that assure the accurate acquiring, receiving, dispensing, and administering of all drugs and biologicals) to meet the needs of 1 of 6 residents (Resident #42) reviewed for pharmaceutical services. -The facility failed to administer the medication Esomeprazole (used to treat stomach acid related conditions) to Resident #8 on 04/21/2024, 04/22/2024 and 04/23/2024 as physician ordered. This failure could place residents receiving medication at risk of inadequate therapeutic outcomes and discomfort. Findings included: Record review of Resident #8's Diagnosis sheet dated 04/23/2024 revealed, an [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included: GERD (gastro-esophageal reflux) and personal history of digestive system disease. Record review of Resident #8's annual MDS dated [DATE] revealed she had a BIMS score of 9 out of 10. She required substantial assistance to partial assistance with all ADLs. Record review of Resident #8's undated Care Plan revealed, focus- Resident #8 has an alteration in gastro-intestinal status r/t cholangitis (inflammation of the bile duct). Interventions included: give medications as ordered. Focus - Resident had GERD. Interventions included: give medications as ordered. Record review of Resident #8's undated order details for Esomeprazole Magnesium delayed release 40 mg, one capsule every morning and at bedtime every day, revealed the order date 3/13/2024. Record review of Resident #8's April 2024 MAR (medication administration records) revealed, on 04/23/2024 the 9:00 AM dose of Esomeprazole Magnesium delayed release 40mg was not given and was put on hold. Resident received Esomeprazole as ordered from 04/01/2024 to 9:00 AM on 4/21/2024. Record review of Resident #8's MD progress note dated 4/14/2024 revealed the date of service was 4/12/2024 and the resident denied acid reflux and heartburn. Record review of Resident #8's nursing progress note dated 04/21/2024 at 9:46 PM, LVN C wrote the Esomeprazole Magnesium 40 mg was pending. Record review of Resident #8's nursing progress note dated 04/22/2024 at 8:37 AM, LVN A wrote the Esomeprazole Magnesium 40 mg was pending. Record review of Resident #8's April 2024 MAR (medication administration records) revealed, on 04/23/2024 the 9:00 AM dose of Esomeprazole Magnesium delayed release 40mg was not given but was put on hold. Record review of Resident #8's nursing progress note dated 4/23/2024 at 9:06 AM, written by LVN A revealed that the Omnicell was checked for Esomeprazole 40mg, and the medication was not present. LVN A contacted the pharmacy to check on status of the order and that it was refilled. The NP was notified, no new orders and holding medication until medication arrives. Record review of Resident #8's nursing progress note dated 04/23/24 at 2:32 PM, written by LVN A, revealed the Esomeprazole was refilled in Fort Worth and would be coming from there. LVN A cancelled the request to fill the medication at a Houston location and should be received on the evening delivery run. An observation and interview on 04/23/24 at 08:12 AM revealed, LVN A preparing medication for administration to Resident #8. LVN A administered all ordered 9:00 AM medications by 8:33 AM except for Esomeprazole. LVN A stated she would check the Omnicell for the Esomeprazole 40 mg and that it just may be out of stock. LVN A stated she did not know why it was not available. In an interview on 04/24/2024 at 9:12 AM, Resident #8 stated she had stomach issues for a very long time and had taken medication for it, that always helped her stomach feel better. She stated in the last few days she had been having indigestion. In an interview on 04/24/2024 at 9:19 AM, LVN A stated Resident #8 had a personal history of acid reflux and if she did not receive Esomeprazole, as physician ordered, then heart burn could begin. LVN A stated typically once a medication was down 3-4 doses, she would reorder. LVN A stated she would place a reorder online, or call pharmacy directly, or fax the label. LVN A stated all nurses were responsible to reorder. LVN A stated she would also reorder a medication if it popped up on the PCC during her shift. LVN A stated once a medication was not available, she would notify the physician. LVN A stated when she notified the NP on 04/23/24, the NP did not reorder an alternative medication for the Esomeprazole, the order was to hold. In an interview on 04/24/2024 at 9:40 AM, RN D stated if she would reorder medications when only 3 to 4 days left because she would not want a resident to suffer from not receiving their medications. RN D stated the nurses were responsible to reorder every shift and if a follow up was needed at the end of her shift she would report to the oncoming nurse. In an interview on 04/24/2024 at 10:50 AM, the DON stated the nurses were responsible to reorder medications at least 3 to 4 days before running out. The DON stated she expected the nurses to call the physician right away and ask if the medications can be held and restarted once received from pharmacy then check in with the pharmacy right away. She stated if the medication was OTC, then it can be picked up at local pharmacy. The DON stated the night shift nurses were responsible for auditing the medication rooms and medication carts but not individual medications. The DON stated she would have to trust the nurses to be aware of when medications run low. She stated she reminds the nurses they must reorder when only 3 days left on medications. The DON stated Resident #8's Esomeprazole should have been reordered on 4/19/2024 or 4/20/2024. In an interview on 04/24/2024 at 2:07 PM, the DON stated she checked Resident #8's records and confirmed that the resident received a dose of Esomeprazole on 04/21/2024 at 11:45 AM, the evening dose was missed and the next dose she received was on 04/24/204 in the morning. The DON states she did not know why the medication was not available the evening of 04/21/2024. She stated the medication could have been picked up at the local pharmacy but d/t the higher dose of 40 mg, it needed to be ordered. Record review of the facility policy titled: Reordering, Changing and Discontinuing Orders, revised on 01/01/2013, read in part: .This policy 4.5 sets forth procedures with respect to Facility's communication of any medication reorders, changes or discontinuations to Pharmacy .2.1 Reorders can be written and submitted on the refill order form .2.2 Verbal refill order can be submitted verbally .2.3 Reorders can be faxed to Pharmacy .2.4 Electronic orders: Authorized Facility staff may use . Further review revealed the policy did not include when to place reorders when medications run low.
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 that the medication error rate was not five per...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure that the medication error rate was not five percent or greater. The facility had a medication error rate of 7 % based on 2 errors out of 28 opportunities, which involved 2 of 6 residents (Resident #8, Resident #42) reviewed for medication errors. 1-LVN A failed to administer medications as physician ordered to Resident #8 as by not administering Esomeprazole Magnesium delayed release 40mg on 04/23/2024. The original order for Esomeprazole 40mg twice a day was dated 3/13/2024.The order status was on hold because the medication was out of stock on 04/23/2024. 2-LVN B failed to administer medications as ordered to Resident #42 as by administering Vitamin B12 with Folate instead of the physician order for Vitamin B12 without folate on 4/23/2024. These failures could place residents at risk of not receiving the desired therapeutic effect of their medications. Findings included: 1.Record review of Resident #8's Diagnoses sheet dated 04/23/2024 revealed, an [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included: GERD (gastro-esophageal reflux) and personal history of digestive system disease. Record review of Resident #8's undated Care Plan revealed, focus- Resident #8 has an alteration in gastro-intestinal status r/t cholangitis (inflammation of the bile duct). Interventions included: give medications as ordered. Focus - Resident had GERD. Interventions included: give medications as ordered. Record review of Resident #8's April 2024 MAR (medication administration records) revealed, on 04/23/2024 the 9:00 AM dose of Esomeprazole Magnesium delayed release 40mg was not given but was put on hold. Record review of Resident #8's nursing progress note dated 4/23/2024 at 9:06 AM, LVN A wrote that the Omnicell was checked for Esomeprazole 40mg, and the medication was not present. Contacted the pharmacy to check on status of order and that it was refilled. The NP was notified, no new orders and holding medication until medication arrives. Record review of Resident #8's Order Summary Report received from the DON dated 04/24/2024 at 11:37 AM revealed, Esomeprazole Magnesium oral capsule delayed release 40mg, give every morning and at bedtime, start date 03/13/2024. The order status was on hold. An observation and interview on 04/23/24 at 08:12 AM revealed, LVN A preparing medication for administration to Resident #8. LVN A administered all ordered 9:00 AM medications by 8:33 AM except for Esomeprazole. LVN A stated she would check the Omnicell for the Esomeprazole 40 mg and that it just may be out of stock. LVN A stated she did not know why it was not available. In an interview on 04/24/2024 at 9:19 AM, LVN A stated Resident #8 has a personal history of acid reflux and if she did not receive Esomeprazole as physician ordered then heart burn could begin. 2.Record review of Resident #42's Diagnoses sheet dated 04/04/2024 revealed an [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE]. His diagnoses included a fracture to the right thigh bone, heart disease, and unstageable pressure ulcer to the sacrum. Record review of Resident #42's undated Care Plan revealed, focus- Resident had altered cardiovascular status. Interventions included administer medications as ordered. Focus - Resident had Unstageable pressure ulcer to sacrum. Interventions included: Vitamin C and multivitamins with minerals for wound healing. Further review did not include Vitamin B12 and Folic Acid. Record review of Resident #42's Order Summary Report dated 04/24/2024 revealed an order for Vitamin B12 1000 mcg, give 1 tablet daily for Vitamin insufficiency, order start date was 04/05/2024. Further review revealed an order for Folic acid 1mg, give daily for vitamin insufficiency, order start date 04/05/2024. Record review of Resident #42's April 2024 MAR dated 04/23/2024 at 10:59 AM, revealed LVN B documented she administered Vitamin B12 1000mcg on 04/23/2024 on arising (between 7:00 AM and 10:00 AM). An observation on 04/23/24 at 09:09 AM revealed, LVN B preparing medication for administration to Resident #42. LVN B administered 2 tablets of Vitamin B12 with folate 500 mcg and Folic acid 1 mg tablet. In an interview on 04/23/2024 at 11:30 AM, LVN B stated she gave Resident #42 Vitamin B12 from the bottle with the label Vitamin B12 with folate 500mcg because she did not have Vitamin B12 without folate in her cart. LVN B stated she was not aware that it contained folate (folic acid) and that the resident also received folic acid 1 mg tablet. When asked if she gave the correct medication as physician ordered she stated she would check to see if there was stock Vitamin B12 bottles and would call the NP to ask for the order to be changed. In an interview on 04/24/2024 at 10:50 AM, the DON stated the nurses were responsible for reordering the Esomeprazole through the online electronic health record system, before they run out for sure at least 3 days prior. The DON stated the night shift nurses were responsible for auditing the medication rooms and medication carts but not individual medications. The DON stated she would have to trust the nurses to be aware of when medications run low. Record review of the facility policy titled General dose Preparation and Medication Administration, dated 12/01/2007 read in part: .4.1 Facility staff should: .Verify each time a medication is administered that it is the correct medication, at the correct dose, at the correct route .
Apr 2024 2 deficiencies 2 IJ (2 affecting multiple)
CRITICAL (K) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation

Notification of Changes (Tag F0580)

Someone could have died · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review the facility failed immediately consult with the resident's physician when there is a signi...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review the facility failed immediately consult with the resident's physician when there is a significant change in the resident's physical status for 1 (Resident #1) of 5 residents reviewed physician notification. Facility staff identified sacral wound on Resident #1 on 2/16/2024 and facility staff failed to perform and document a wound assessment, notify the physician, and obtain wound care orders until 4 days later 2/20/2024. An IJ was identified on 4/1/2024. The IJ template was provided to the facility on 4/2/2024 at 4:14pm. The Immediate jeopardy was removed on 4/4/2024 due to the facilities implemented actions that corrected the non-compliance. This failure could affect residents with impaired skin integrity and residents at risk for impaired skin integrity of developing life threatening infections, hospitalization, and worsening pressure ulcers. Findings included: Record Review of Resident #1's Face Sheet undated revealed an [AGE] year old female who was admitted to facility on 2/8/2024 with diagnoses of Other fracture of left femur (Bone that runs from hip to knee), subsequent encounter for closed fracture with routine healing (Unopen fracture), Encounter for other orthopedic after care (At facility for rehabilitation), Extended Spectrum Beta Lactamase (ESBL) resistance (Antibiotic resistant urinary infection), Urinary Tract Infection where urine is excreted), Morbid Severe Obesity due to excess calories, Type 2 Diabetes Mellites with Hyperglycemia (High blood sugar). Record Review of Resident #1's MDS dated [DATE] revealed Resident #1 had a BIMS score of 9 indicating the resident was moderately cognately impaired, Resident #1 required extensive assistance with ADLs. Section I revealed fractures and other multiple traumas, urinary tract infection last 30 days, Swallowing Disorder . Risk of pressure injuries .yes, Unhealed pressure ulcers/Injuries yes .Unhealed pressure ulcers/injuries Yes .stage 1 .0 .Stage 2 .0, Stage 3 .0. Stage 4 .0 (No pressure injuries at admission) Unstageable deep tissue injury .1 .MASD (Moisture Associated Skin Damage). Record review of Resident #1's Care Plan dated 2/9/2024 read in part .Resident #1 has potential/actual impairment to skin integrity . Interventions: Assist with turning and reposition as needed. Reduce friction and shearing with use of lift or transfer sheets 2/8/2024 .Monitor/document location, size and treatment of skin injury. Report abnormalities, failure to heal, s/sx of infection, maceration etc to MD. 2/8/2024 . Record Review of Resident #1's Comprehensive Nursing notes dated 2/16/2024, 2/18/2024 and 2/19/2024 read no new or worsening skin conditions. Record review of Resident #1's orders dated 2/20/2024 read . Cleanse sacrococcygeal ulcer (Area above and center of buttocks) with NSS (normal saline), Pad Dry, apply calcium alginate (Fabric) and med honey (medication for healing) and cover with sacral dressing (area at top and center of buttocks) qd (daily). Record Review of Resident #1's BD Weekly Wound Data Collection Flow Sheet dated 2/20/2024 revealed wound 6.5x14.0 depth, unstageable. Record Review of Resident #1's Change of Condition dated 2/20/2024 read in part . Skin status evaluation .pressure ulcer injury .Sacrum .unstageable pressure wound. 3/2/2024 Family Member #1 removed Resident #1 from the skilled nursing facility and took her to the hospital due to the pressure wound on her sacrum. Record Review of Resident #1's hospital records dated 3/2/2024 to 3/11/2024 revealed Resident #1 was admitted to the hospital with diagnoses of Infected decubitus ulcer (Infection at buttocks), unspecified ulcer stage. 8.0 x 10.0 x Unstageable due to 80% adherent necrotic tissue. Resident underwent Incision and drainage of sacral wound on 3/5/2024, intraoperative cultures grew Protease mirabilis (Bacteria in Urine infections), ESBL E. coli MDR (Harder to treat with antibiotics) and Enterococcus faecalis Pan sensitive (Bacteria found in the intestine). Resident #1 was discharged with orders for IV Meropenem (Intravenous antibiotic) every 8 hours for 21 days. Interview 3/13/2023 at 10:30am the Assistant Director Clinical Services said if a nurse found a wound and the skin was broken the expectations were to clean it, put a dry dressing on it and contact the Nurse Practitioner or Doctor for the findings and get and order for wound care. If that was not done the wound could have possibly deteriorated even more. She said they wanted staff to put in nursing interventions and needed them to offload from the wound. She said looking back they saw there was no notification to the physician and no orders for wound care for 2 days. She said they did rounds with the wound care physician so when the wound was found, they put interventions in place, making sure the wound care physician was notified, made sure the proper treatments were in place and notified the family. Interview 3/13/2024 at 10:44am with Family Member #1 he said he had to take his Resident #1 out of the nursing facility himself as the facility transportation would not take him to the hospital of his choice and he wanted Resident #1 to go to a particular hospital for her wound. He said he had to initiate the transfer as the facility said Resident # 1 did not need to go to the hospital. He said Resident #1 was in the hospital for nine days for her infected bedsore and she had been discharged the previous day to another nursing facility. Interview on 3/13/2024 at 1:20pm with LVN A she said she worked on 2/18/2023 in the evening. She said the weekend supervisor told her Resident #1 had a wound on her sacrum. She said she thought the weekend supervisor was going to manage everything. She said she did not necessarily say she was going to manage everything, she said she thought they were going to handle the wound together. She said she guessed it was her fault the physician was not called about the wound even the CNAs were telling her they were reporting it to previous nurses the day before on 2/17/2024. They said there were bandages on the wound already and there were bandages in the room. She said the CNAs that told her they were from the weekend shifts. They said the bandage fit on the specific part for the sacrum. She said the CNAs had been putting the bandage on the wound and said they had been reporting it to previous nurses. She said the weekend supervisor looked at the wound. She said she thought the supervisor was going to call the doctor. She said she had not worked at the facility in 2 or 3 weeks. She said she talked to the DON and ADON about the wound and they asked how it looked at the time, they wanted to know if it looked black at that time. She said the wound was large. She said no one had previously reported a wound to the sacrum. No one had reported a wound on Saturday. She said she had been a nurse for one year, worked at the facility for one month, and was in-serviced on wound care in February 2024. Interview on 3/13/2024 at 2:00pm, CNA K said she remembered Resident #1. She said she came back from 5 days off and had her as a patient and when she was changing her, she saw she had redness and told her nurse. She said from then on, they started turning Resident #1 every 2 hours to get her off her bottom. She said this was on Wednesday February 21, 2024. She said when she saw the wound it was very large, very tender, obvious it had been there for a few days. She said the skin was broken. She said it was very vibrant colored, so she reported it to LVN B. She said she had been a CNAs for 10 months and worked at the facility for 5 months. She said prior to this happening she was in-serviced on wounds at a retirement home and was reminded at this facility. She said the facility had done an in-service . She said they had shown them how to add notes so they could have said they told the nurse about wounds and so the residents could have gotten treatment. Interview on 3/13/2024 at 2:50pm CNA L said she worked on Sunday 2/18/2024. She said she had only worked with Resident #1 a handful of times, and she was dead weight. She said when she got to Resident #1, she noticed a wound with no covering on her back side (2/16/2024). She said another CNA said she noticed it the day before on 2/17/2024, but she did not remember who it was. She said this had to have happened about a month ago if not more. She said the skin was broken off at the back and butt crack and she told the nurse but could not remember who on the morning shift. She said the wound looked pretty bad and looked like it would have stung. She said it was medium to large. She said they should have known about the wound if the CNA noticed it before her. She said it was a Sunday. She said she did not really know some of the nurses. She said she had worked at facility 7 months and been a CNA for 3 years. She said she was last in-serviced on skincare the prior weekend, and before that 3 months ago. Interview on 3/13/2024 at 3:55pm CNA M she said she was not at the facility at first but when she came back on 2/16/2024, she saw Resident #1 had a wound to her buttocks. She said she told the nurse it needed to be cleaned and it had an odor. She said the wound was open, large and had an odor. She said the skin was off the wound. She said she told the nurse LVN C about the wound, but she did not do anything about it because after that she got a call from the DON asking about the wound and when it started. An interview with LVN C could not be conducted as she was in the hospital. Record review of Resident #1's Braden Scale for predicting pressure ulcer risk dated 2/15/2024 read Resident #1 had slightly limited sensory perception, was bedfast, occasionally moist, made frequent though slight changes in body or extremity position independently, friction or shear was a potential problem, and the total score was above 16. (Mild risk for pressure ulcers). Interview on 3/14/2024 at 2:55pm with the Assistant Director Clinical Services she said they did investigations with the staff to figure the gaps on Resident #1's wound. She said she looked herself and the skin initially was intact. She said even the week prior the evening nurse showed on the 14th it was intact. She said it was Resident #1's positioning, nutrition, and incontinence, and it was a combination that caused the wound. She said she knew they were putting zinc on the wound. She said on Sunday 2/20/2024, the CNA had identified and informed the off going nurse on the 3 to 11shift of the wound and she looked at it and told RN S. She said LVN A told RN S Resident #1 had skin breakdown and could she look at it look at it let her know. She said RN S said she would help LVN A if she needed it. The Assistant Director Clinical Services stated according to the RN S she told the nurse to get the information and call the doctor. LVN A said she would call the doctor and get the order. The Assistant Director Clinical Services stated It was he said she said situation. She said she had not heard anything about February 16th and when she did her weekly assessment on the 14th it was ok and there was no breakdown on the sacral area. She said the reason the resident had a sacral wound was because she had not been repositioned. She said when residents get sacral wounds, they can become infected. Interview on 3/14/2024 at 2:55pm with the ADON she said she did not know a CNA had reported skin breakdown to LVN C on 2/16/2024. She said on 2/18/2024 LVN A and RN S told her it was the others responsibility to call the physician. She said LVN C told her RN S would call the physician for orders and RN S said LVN A would call the physician for orders. She said RN S should have called the physician for orders for wound care as she was the person who reported to the oncoming staff. On 3/13/2024 at 11:05am outreached RN S who had been terminated by the facility for not contacting the physician for wound care orders, and she refused the interview. Interview on 3/15/2024 at 8:30am with the ADON she said the failure with Resident #1's wound was a combination of timely identification of the wound and not getting timely treatment in place. She said Resident #1 was being treated for ESBL (Antibiotic Resistant bacteria) and E. coli (Intestinal bacteria) in urine. She said Resident #1 had a slight decrease in mobility and it was their job to have repositioned her, to have been timely in reporting the wound, and she said the reason Resident #1 developed the wound was because she was not repositioned enough. She said she had been a part of the QAPI (Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement) subcommittee, with KPI (report to look at metrics and pressure ulcers) were worked on this year, she said this issue was disheartening, she said they had identified wounds and they had multiple sessions with the nurses. She said she thought the failure was communication regarding Resident #1. She said they educated the staff so when they saw something to report it. She said staff were to report skin breakdown instead of someone assuming it had already been reported. She said Resident #1 did not really want to be turned and Resident #1 could have gotten the wound by not being turned, she said Resident #1 needed assistance with turning. She said what should have happened was as soon as anything was different with Resident #1's skin, they should have reported to the charge nurse starting at the stage 1. She said staff should have notified charge nurse, notified wound care physician, and gotten orders for wound care. Interview on 3/15/2024 at 6:46am CNA N said she worked the night shift last night. She said she had worked at the facility for 10 years and been a CNA for 20 plus years. She said she worked on the first floor. She said she saw Resident #1's wound. She said she saw her wound, but she was not assigned to her, but she did see it, she said she assisted with turning. She said when Resident #1 needed changing she would assist with changing her. She said Resident #1 would call and let us know when she was ready to be changed. She said Resident #1 was with it and she was coherent. She said she saw the bedsore and saw the wound as medium sized, she said they would have patches on it, they would clean it and put patches on it. She said she told the nurse about the wound, and they had so many since then she did not know the name of the nurse, she reported it to. She said she did not know if the ADON knew about the wound. She said she was sure she did, she said you can tell nurses about a wound but after that you do not know what happens. She said if a resident was not turned, they could have gotten a bedsore and it could have gotten larger. She said it could have gotten infected. She said she did not know how Resident #1 got the bedsore but had been shocked to hear about it and said she saw it when it was smaller. Interview on 3/15/2024 7:31am with LVN D she said she had worked at the facility for about 5 weeks. She said she had been a nurse for 2 years. She said she saw the wound on Resident #1's sacrum. She said the wound was unstageable when she saw it. She said it was red around the perimeter and black on the inside. She said she did not believe the CNA reported the wound. She said she believed there was a dressing on the wound on Friday 2/16/2024. She said she did not know it had not been reported to the physician as they each had a list of comprehensive nursing notes to write, and she had not documented on her. She said the CNA told her there was a wound and it was not dirty. She said she did not call the physician. She said they do skin checks on the 7 to 3 and 3 to 11 shifts so they would have called and received an order as she worked nights. She said she found a wound on Resident #1's inner thigh the following week and called the wound care physician and received an order for that. She said if a resident had a bedsore, they could get an infection and have pain. She said she did not know how long Resident #1's sacral wound had been there. Interview on 3/15/2024 at 7:33am with CNA O she said she had worked at the facility since October 2023, she said she would have been a CNA for a year in May 2024. She said she had seen the wound on Resident #1's sacrum and reported it to the nurse. She said she reported it to LVN D because the bandage was soiled, and she took it off so that LVN D could replace it. She said LVN D came in and replaced the bandage. She said she saw the wound after Valentines Day . She said she did not work on weekends, so it was on Thursday 2/15/2024, or Friday 2/16/2024. She said it was not the week of 2/23/24. She said if a resident was not turned, they could have gotten a bedsore, the bedsore could have gotten worse, and the resident could have gotten an infection. Record Review of facilities policy titled, Skin Observation and Wound Prevention Protocol dated 10/2022 read in part . Charge nurses should observe the condition of the resident's skin on admission and on a routine basis. Record Review of facilities policy titled, Change of Condition for Skilled Nursing Communities dated 8/2023 read in part .An associate should communicate information about a residents status change to appropriate licensed personnel upon observation .or observing a difference in the residents usual physical .the licensed nurse should .notify the HCP (Healthcare provider) of observations and relevant change of condition information .Implement treatment interventions, received orders and document HCP recommendations as indicated . Record Review of Facility In-Service dated 2/2/2024, 2/3/2024 and 2/7/2024 .Topic .Annual Charge Nurse Check-off Training read in part . Importance of pressure wound prevention .Doctors, On-call, Telehealth. Record Review of Facility In-Service dated 2/20/2024 .Topic . Offloading/Repositioning read in part .Repositioning patients throughout shift to offload bony prominences .offload areas at risk for breakdown . Record Review of Facility In-Service dated 2/21/2024 .Topic .Infection Control read in part . Signs and Symptoms of wound infection: Swelling, Redness, Slight odor, increased pain at wound site . Record Review of Facility In-Service dated 3/13/2024 .Topic .Reporting New or Progression of Wound read in part .CNA to report New or Worsening wounds too Charge nurse immediately .Document Change in Skin Condition in PCC using Stop-N-Watch Tool .Charge Nurse to report New or Worsening wounds to Physician/NP to receive wound care orders immediately .Charge Nurse should place call to DCS (Director Clinical Services) or ADCS (Associate Director Clinical Services) to inform of New or Worsening wound identified. An IJ was identified on 4/1/2024 and the facility administrator was notified at 7:00pm. The IJ template was provided to the facility on 4/2/2024 at 4:14pm. On 4/3/2024 at 4:40pm the following Plan of Removal was accepted. Plan of Removal Brookdale Galleria - April 2, 2024 F580 Notifications of Changes Immediate Action: On 2/19/2024, an impromptu Quality Assurance Performance Improvement (QAPI) Meeting was completed with the Healthcare Administrator (HCA), Director of Clinical Services, Assistant Director of Clinical Services (ADCS), and Medical Director via the phone related to the Skin Management Process related to Resident # 1 skin documentation. The additional actions included re-education to Certified Nursing Assistance (C.N.As) and Licensed Nurses on repositioning and abuse neglect reporting. Re-education for Licensed Nurses on skin assessments, Skin observation protocol (which includes notification of healthcare provider), repositioning, and wound prevention. These Inservices were completed on 2/20 by the ADCS. On 2/20/2024, the ADCS and Attending Physician assessed the wound to Resident #1's sacrum and new orders received by the attending physician for medical honey and calcium alginate, supplements, and a low air loss mattress. On 2/22/2024 the Third Party Wound Doctor assessed the wound, orders were updated to include Santyl. The Third Party Wound Doctor discussed the skin management plan of care with the resident # 1 representative at bedside. On 2/22/24, the ADCS performed wound rounds on current residents with wounds. No new pressure concerns were noted. On 3/2/24, Resident # 1 discharged from the community. On 3/13/24, an Impromptu QAPI Meeting held with the HCA, ADCS, Regional Director of Clinical Services (RDCS), and the Medical Director via the phone related to the Skin Management Process. The additional actions included the ADCS or designee to extend the audits of 5 residents dressing to be completed weekly for 90 days, review residents that would benefit from a Low Air Loss Mattress, complete skin checks on current residents, and re-education to C.N.A's and Licensed Nurses to notify the DCS or ADCS on new pressure ulcers. The regional support nurse conducted an audit on 3/14 no additional findings relating to physician notification were noted. On 3/13-3/14/24, the ADCS and designee completed skin checks on current residents. No new pressure concerns were noted. On 3/14/24, a Registered Nurse (RN) performed a remote Skin Documentation Audit. The audit included the following items. The audit was documented on an audit form. o Weekly Skin Integrity Review form to verify every resident had either the weekly skin form or the section completed in the Nursing admission Data Collection form, if newly admitted . o That every resident had a weekly skin integrity review activated schedule to be completed weekly in PCC. Form scheduled as needed in PCC. o Weekly Wound Data Collection form if completed, the date, and information in the form. o Third Party Wound Care MD notes in PCC Miscellaneous tab with notes on wounds (location, etc.) o Third Party Wound Care MD orders from their notes on wounds from bullet above. o Physician orders written in PCC for wounds or anything related to skin. o Care Plans related to wounds. Plan for Compliance: From 3/13/- 3/16/2024, the DCS or designee re-educated all Licensed Nurses on change of condition documentation which includes notifying physician and representative, skin documentation, obtaining orders for any wounds, reviewing and addressing clinical alerts on skin concerns from C.N.A's, notifying provider as indicated, professional standards of wound care, that the C.N.A can't apply a treatment, Braden Scale which includes preventative measures. Licensed nurses not available between 3/13/2024 to 3/16/2024 received re-education by the DCS or designee before their next scheduled shift and this will include new hires hired after 3/16/2024. Competency validated with a post test. From 4/1 -4/3 the DCS or designee re-educated nurse on physician notification of new skin issues, change of condition documentation, aides performing dressing changes, skin observation and wound prevention protocol. Licensed nurses not available between 4/1 to 4/3 will receive re-education by the DCS or designee before their next shift, this will include new hires hired after 4/3. Competency validated with a post test. Starting 3/14/24, the Licensed Nurses will initiate the wound data collection sheets on any new pressure ulcers. The RAI or designee will update resident care plans as needed as new pressure concerns arise. The Licensed Nurse will review the clinical alerts in the dashboard periodically through the shift to verify that any new skin concerns communicated by the C.N.A are addressed. The ADCS or designee overseeing will complete the weekly wound data collections for residents with new pressure ulcers until pressure ulcer is resolved or the resident is discharged . Order listing report, progress notes, weekly skin and wound documentation is reviewed during daily standup for any new or worsening pressure ulcers. From 3/13- 3/16/24, the ADCS or designee re-educated all C.N.A.s on communication of changes in skin integrity with the licensed nurse and DCS or ADCS, documentation of any new skin concerns in the electronic medical record every shift including the stop and watch, what to do if dressing falls off the resident's wound, moisture barriers, and turning and repositioning. The C.N.A may complete a Stop and Watch Alert that there is a Change in skin color or condition as indicated. These alerts display on the licensed nurse clinical alert dashboard in the electronic medical record. The C.N.A will also communicate verbally to the licensed nurse what they documented in the electronic medical record related to new skin concerns. The C.N.A. will contact the DCS, ADCS, or the Healthcare Administrator to report new skin issue for additional follow up. C.N.As not available between 3/13- 3/16/23 received re-education by the DCS or designee before their next scheduled shift and this will include new hires hired after 3/16/24. Competency validated with a post test. From 4/1 to 4/3 C.N.A. were re-educated on C.N.A. not performing dressing changes and are allowed to apply barrier cream, reporting changes in skins and wound prevention. Aides not available between 4/1 to 4/3 will receive re-education by the DCS or designee before their next shift, this will include new hires hired after 4/3. Competency validated with a post test. For 90 days, the DCS or designee will review clinical alerts in stand-up meeting five days a week, to determine if there is documentation of new skin concerns noted by a C.N.A. and verify that appropriate follow up and documentation was completed by a licensed nurse as indicated. The licensed nurses will review clinical alerts including the stop and watch periodically through their shifts daily, to assist with identification of new skin concerns documented by the C.N.A's. For 90 days, the ADCS or designee will audit the weekly skin integrity review for 5 residents a week to verify completion, validate accuracy with a head-to-toe skin check, confirm that appropriate skin care orders are in place as applicable, and notification of the Healthcare was completed as applicable if skin concerns identified. These audits will be documented on an audit form. For 90 days, the ADCS or designee will audit 5 residents' wound care orders a week to verify treatments were completed per physician orders. These audits will be documented on an audit form and reported in the next morning stand up meeting. For 90 days, the DCS or designee will review the audits monthly at the QAPI meeting. Compliance date: 4/3/2024 An IJ was identified on 4/1/2024 and the facility was notified at 7:00pm. The IJ template was provided to the facility on 4/2/2024 at 4:14pm. The Immediate jeopardy was removed on 4/4/2024 due to the facilities implemented actions that corrected the non-compliance. The surveyor monitoring was from 4/1/2024 to 4/4/2024. Immediate Jeapordy monitoring included: Record review on 3/13/2024 revealed a QAPI sign in sheets for 2/19/2024, 3/13/2024, 3/15/24, 3/20/2024, 3/27/2024 with sign in sheets in IJ book by Administrator, Infection preventionist/ADON, Medical Director (3/15/2024). Record review on 3/13/2024 of nurse's notes dated 2/20/2024 revealed the physician was notified immediately on 2/20/2024 at 1:51pm and orders implemented for wound care and wound care physician consulted. Record review on 3/13/2024 revealed staff in-services 2/20/2024 for Abuse and Neglect, the facility provided a copy of policy, Offloading and Repositioning, Skin observation and repositioning, 2/21/24 In-service included Hand Hygiene, Incontinent Care Cleansing, Signs and Symptoms of wound infection, Cleansing of Shared equipment, Handouts: Charge nurse responsibilities, Nursing Forms, Shift Report, Patient appointments and facility provided policy on infection control. Inservice 3/1/2024 Charge nurse responsibilities, 3/13/2024 Reporting new or progression of wound, 3/21/2024 Wound care paperwork, 3/25/2024 Infection Control. Facility provided policy. 3/25/24 Order Confirmation from Physician/NP. Record review on 3/13/2024 revealed wound care physician visit on 2/22/2024 Record review on 3/13/2024 of physician orders dated 2/23/2024 15:00 were updated to include Santyl Ointment as part of the residents wound care regimen. Record review on 3/13/2024 revealed staff were in-service 3/13/2024 Reporting New or Progression of Wound: CNAs t report new or worsening wounds to charge nurse immediately, Charge nurse to report new or worsening wounds to Physician/NP to receive wound care orders immediately, Charge nurse should place call to Director of Clinical Services or Assistant Director of Clinical Services to inform of New or worsening wound identified. Record review on 3/13/2024 revealed skin assessments performed on 2/21/2024 to 2/23/2024 and 3/13/2024. Record review 4/3/2024 revealed Woundcare Orders and Treatment audit for March 2024 Record review on 4/3/2024 revealed staff were in-serviced 4/2/2024 and 4/3/2024 for Physician notification for new skin issue, change of condition documentation, and CNAs and dressing changes. In-service included CNAs should never apply Zinc oxide to patients' body, change a wound dressing and if the dressing comes off during a shower or bath the CAN needed to notify the nurse to put a new dressing on the wound. The in-service was followed by a post test for CNA's. Record review on 4/3/2024 revealed staff were in-serviced 4/2/2024 for Skin observation/Wound prevention; facility provided policy. Record review on 4/3/2024 revealed audits on 4/2/2024 for residents admitted within the last 30 days for new pressure ulcers and notification to healthcare provider. Audit consisted of reviewing the weekly skin integrity forms, admission assessment and weekly wound data forms. Wound physician progress notes as indicated. No additional findings. Record review on 4/3/2024 revealed weekly skin integrity reviews for February 2024 and March 2024 revealed no new or worsening wounds. Observation of wound care on 4/3/2024 11:45am on Resident #6. Resident #6 noted to be on a low air loss mattress. Nurse washed hands, donned gloves, removed dressing, removed gloves, applied hand sanitizer .donned gloves, wiped wound from inside to outside with gauze impregnated with wound cleanser, removed gloves, hand sanitizer, donned gloves, patted are around wound for adhesion, removed gloves, hand sanitizer, applied calcium alginate and bordered dressing. Dated. Noted wound was healthy and healing, It appeared sacral wound had been larger at one time but now wound small, healthy red with granulation tissue. In an interview on 4/2/2024 at 12:47pm LVN E said she had been in-serviced a few times on wounds and wound care, she said she had been in-service the previous night on reporting new wounds to the physician, letting the unit manager and ADON know, calling the physician for orders and letting them know about changes in condition and weekly skin data. Interview on 4/2/2024 at 12:53pm CNA P said she was not supposed to change dressings on a resident, she said she was supposed to report missing or damaged dressings to the charge nurse or DON and document in the system who she told. Se said she would have reported skin breakdown to the charge nurse or DON, she said she had been in-service today, last week on wounds, change of condition, not to use zinc oxide and moisture barrier. Interview on 4/2/2024 1:00pm CNA Q said he had been in-service on wounds and wound care that morning. He said reporting wounds, new skin issues, not to change dressings, role as a CNAs, and when he saw redness or wounds to report and document in the system. He said he would have reported to the nurse and ADON. Interview on
CRITICAL (K) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation

Pressure Ulcer Prevention (Tag F0686)

Someone could have died · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure that a resident reviewed for pressure ulcers received necessa...

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 that a resident reviewed for pressure ulcers received necessary treatment and services, consistent with professional standards of practice, to promote healing and prevent infection for 1 (Resident #1) of 5 residents. 1. Facility staff identified sacral wound on Resident #1 on 2/16/2024 and facility staff failed to perform and document a wound assessment, notify the physician, and obtain wound care orders until 4 days later on 2/20/2024. Wound Care Physician assessed Resident #1 on 2/22/2024 and diagnosed Resident #1 with an unstageable (Due to Necroses) Sacrum Full Thickness pressure wound with a surface area of 129.72 cm. 2. Facility staff were performing dressing changes without a physician's order. An IJ was identified on 4/1/2024. The IJ template was provided to the facility on 4/2/2024 at 4:14pm. The Immediate jeopardy was determined to have been removed 4/4/2024 due to the facilities implemented actions that corrected the non-compliance. This failure could affect residents with impaired skin integrity and residents at risk for impaired skin integrity of developing life threatening infections, hospitalization, and worsening pressure ulcers. Findings included: Record Review of Resident #1's Face Sheet undated revealed an [AGE] year old female who was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses of Other fracture of left femur (Bone that runs from hip to knee), subsequent encounter for closed fracture with routine healing (Unopen fracture), Encounter for other orthopedic after care (At facility for rehabilitation), Extended Spectrum Beta Lactamase (ESBL) resistance (Antibiotic resistant urinary infection), Urinary Tract Infection where urine is excreted), Morbid Severe Obesity due to excess calories, Type 2 Diabetes Mellites with Hyperglycemia (High blood sugar). Record Review of Resident #1's MDS dated [DATE] revealed Resident #1 had a BIMS score of 9 indicating the resident was moderately cognately impaired, Resident #1 required extensive assistance with ADLs. Section I revealed fractures and other multiple trauma, urinary tract infection last 30 days, Swallowing Disorder, Risk of pressure injuries .yes, Unhealed pressure ulcers/Injuries yes .Unhealed pressure ulcers/injuries Yes .stage 1 .0 .Stage 2 .0, Stage 3 .0. Stage 4 .0 Unstageable deep tissue injury .1 .MASD (Moisture Associated Skin Damage). Record review of Resident #1's Care Plan dated 2/9/2024 read in part . Goal The resident will have no worsening of skin alteration . INTERVENTIONS: Monitor/document/report to MD changes in skin status: appearance, color, wound healing, signs/symptoms of infection, wound size and stage. Record Review of Resident #1's Comprehensive Nursing notes dated 2/16/2024, 2/18/2024 and 2/19/2024 read no new or worsening skin conditions. Record review of Resident #1's orders dated 2/20/2024 read . Cleanse sacrococcygeal ulcer (Area above and center of buttocks) with NSS (normal saline), Pad Dry, apply calcium alginate (Fabric) and med honey (medication for healing) and cover with sacral dressing (area at top and center of buttocks) qd (daily). Record review of Resident #1's orders for Februrary 2023 and March 2023 revealed Resident #1 was not placed on antibiotics before she went to the hospital. Record Review of Resident #1's Change of Condition dated 2/20/2024 read in part . Skin status evaluation .pressure ulcer injury .Sacrum .unstageable pressure wound. Record review of Resident #1's orders dated 2/21/2024 read .Pressure Redistribution Mattress-Low air loss. Record review of Resident #1's wound care notes dated 2/22/2024 read in part . Unstageable (due to necroses) sacrum full thickness .Etiology .pressure .Duration >6 days wound size 14.1x9.2x0.1cm . Surface area 129.72 .Thick adherent devitalized necrotic tissue 90%. 3/2/2024 Family Member #1 removed Resident #1 from the skilled nursing facility and took her to the hospital due to the pressure wound on her sacrum. Record Review of Resident #1's hospital records dated 3/2/2024 to 3/11/2024 revealed Resident #1 was admitted to the hospital with diagnoses of Infected decubitus ulcer (Infection at buttocks), unspecified ulcer stage. 8.0 x 10.0 x Unstageable due to 80% adherent necrotic tissue. Resident underwent Incision and drainage of sacral wound on 3/5/2024, intraoperative cultures grew Protease mirabilis (Bacteria in Urine infections), ESBL E. coli MDR (Harder to treat with antibiotics) and Enterococcus faecalis Pan sensitive (Bacteria found in the intestine). Resident #1 was discharged with orders for IV Meropenem (Intravenous antibiotic) every 8 hours for 21 days. Interview 3/13/2023 10:30am with the Assistant Director Clinical Services said if a nurse found a wound and the skin was broken the expectations were to clean it, put a dry dressing on it and contact the Nurse Practitioner or Doctor for the findings and get and order for wound care. If that was not done the wound could have possibly deteriorated even more. She said they wanted staff to put in nursing interventions and needed them to offload from the wound. She said looking back they saw there was no notification to the physician and no orders for wound care for 2 days. She said they did rounds with the wound care physician so when the wound was found, they put interventions in place, making sure the wound care physician was notified, made sure the proper treatments were in place and notified the family. Interview on 3/13/2024 at 1:20pm with LVN A she said she worked on 2/18/2023 in the evening. She said the weekend supervisor told her Resident #1 had a wound on her sacrum. She said she thought the weekend supervisor was going to manage everything. She said she did not necessarily say she was going to manage everything, she said she thought they were going to handle the wound together. She said she guessed it was her fault the physician was not called about the wound even the CNAs were telling her they were reporting it to previous nurses the day before on 2/17/2024. They said there were bandages on the wound already and there were bandages in the room. She said the CNAs that told her they were from the weekend shifts. They said the bandage fit on the specific part for the sacrum. She said the CNAs had been putting the bandage on the wound and said they had been reporting it to previous nurses. She said the weekend supervisor looked at the wound. She said she thought the supervisor was going to call the doctor. She said she had not worked at the facility in 2 or 3 weeks. She said she talked to the DON and ADON about the wound and they asked how it looked at the time, they wanted to know if it looked black at that time. She said the wound was large. She said no one had previously reported a wound to the sacrum. No one had reported a wound on Saturday. She said she had been a nurse for one year, worked at the facility for one month, and was in-serviced on wound care in February. Interview on 3/13/2024 at 2:00pm, CNA K said she remembered Resident #1. She said she came back from 5 days off and had her as a patient and when she was changing her, she saw she had redness and told her nurse. She said she could not remember the day when she first saw the redness on Resident #1. She said from then on, they started turning Resident #1 every 2 hours to get her off her bottom. She said this was on Wednesday February 21, 2024. She said when she saw the wound it was very large, very tender, obvious it had been there for a few days. She said the skin was broken. She said it was very vibrant colored, so she reported it to LVN B. She said she had been a CNAs for 10 months and worked at the facility for 5 months. She said prior to this happening she was in-serviced on wounds at a retirement home and was reminded at this facility. She said the facility had done an in-service. She said they had shown them how to add notes so they could have said they told the nurse about wounds and so the residents could have gotten treatment. Interview on 3/13/2024 at 2:50pm CNA L said she worked on Sunday 2/18/2024. She said she had only worked with Resident #1 a handful of times, and she was dead weight. She said when she got to Resident #1, she noticed a wound with no covering on her back side. She said another CNAs said she noticed it the day before on 2/17/2024, but she did not remember who it was. She said this had to have happened about a month ago if not more. She said the skin was broken off at the back and butt crack and she told the nurse but could not remember who on the morning shift. She said the wound looked pretty bad and looked like it would have stung. She said it was medium to large. She said they should have known about the wound if the CNA noticed it before her. She said it was a Sunday. She said she did not really know some of the nurses. She said she had worked at facility 7 months and been a CNA for 3 years. She said she was last in-serviced on skincare the prior weekend, and before that 3 months ago. Interview on 3/13/2024 at 3:55pm CNA M she said she wasn't at the facility at first but when she came back on February 16, 2024, she saw Resident #1 had a wound to her buttocks. She said she told the nurse it needed to be cleaned and it had an odor. She said the wound was open, large and had an odor. She said the skin was off the wound. She said she told the nurse LVN C about the wound, but she did not do anything about it because after that she got a call from the DON asking about the wound and when it started. Record review of Resident #1's Braden Scale for predicting pressure ulcer risk on 3/14/2023 read Resident #1 had slightly limited sensory perception, was bedfast, occasionally moist, made frequent though slight changes in body or extremity position independently, friction or shear was a potential problem, and the total score was above 16. (Mild risk for pressure ulcers). Interview on 3/14/2024 at 2:55pm with the Assistant Director Clinical Services she said they did investigations with the staff to figure the gaps on Resident #1's wound. She said she looked herself and the skin initially was intact. She said even the week prior the evening nurse showed on the 14th it was intact. She said it was Resident #1's positioning, nutrition, and incontinence, and it was a combination that caused the wound. She said she knew they were putting zinc on the wound. She said on Sunday February 20, 2024, the CNA had identified and informed the off going nurse 3 to 11 and she looked at it and told RN S. She said LVN A told RN S Resident #1 had skin breakdown and could she look at it look at it let her know. She said RN S said she would help LVN A if she needed it. According to the RN S she told the nurse to get the information and call the doctor. LVN A said she would call the doctor and get the order. It was he said she said. She said she had not heard anything about February 16th and when she did her weekly assessment on the 14th it was ok and there was no breakdown on the sacral area. She said the reason the resident had a sacral wound was because she had not been repositioned. She said when residents get sacral wounds, they can become infected. Unable to get an interview with RN S as she was terminated for not contacting the physician regarding the wound and obtaining orders for wound care. Interview on 3/14/2024 at 2:55pm with the ADON she said she did not know a CNA had reported skin breakdown to LVN C on 2/16/2024. She said on 2/18/2024 LVN A and RN S told her it was the others responsibility to call the physician. She said LVN C told her RN S would call the physician for orders and RN S said LVN A would call the physician for orders. She said RN S should have called the physician for orders for wound care as she was the person who reported to the oncoming staff. Interview on 3/15/2024 at 8:30am with the ADON she said the failure with Resident #1's wound was a combination of timely identification of the wound and not getting timely treatment in place. She said Resident #1 was being treated for ESBL (Antibiotic Resistant bacteria) and E. coli (Intestinal bacteria) in urine. She said Resident #1 had a slight decrease in mobility and it was their job to have repositioned her, to have been timely in reporting the wound, and she said the reason Resident #1 developed the wound was because she was not repositioned enough. She said she had been a part of the QAPI (Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement) subcommittee, with KPI (report to look at metrics and pressure ulcers) were worked on this year, she said this issue was disheartening, she said they had identified wounds and they had multiple sessions with the nurses. She said she thought the failure was communication regarding Resident #1. She said they educated the staff so when they saw something to report it. She said staff were to report skin breakdown instead of someone assuming it had already been reported. She said Resident #1 did not really want to be turned and Resident #1 could have gotten the wound by not being turned, she said Resident #1 needed assistance with turning. She said what should have happened was as soon as anything was different with Resident #1's skin, they should have reported to the charge nurse starting at the stage 1. She said staff should have notified charge nurse, notified wound care physician, and gotten orders for wound care. Interview on 3/15/2024 at 6:46am CNA N said she worked the night shift last night. She said she had worked at the facility for 10 years and been a CNA for 20 plus years. She said she worked on the first floor. She said she saw Resident #1's wound. She said she saw her wound, but she was not assigned to her, but she did see it, she said she assisted with turning. She said when Resident #1 needed changing she would assist with changing her. She said Resident #1 would call and let us know when she was ready to be changed. She said Resident #1 was with it and she was coherent. She said she saw the bedsore and saw the wound as medium sized, she said they would have patches on it, they would clean it and put patches on it. She said she told the nurse about the wound, and they had so many since then she did not know the name of the nurse, she reported it to. She said she did not know if the ADON knew about the wound. She said she was sure she did, she said you can tell nurses about a wound but after that you do not know what happens. She said if a resident was not turned, they could have gotten a bedsore and it could have gotten larger. She said it could have gotten infected. She said she did not know how Resident #1 got the bedsore but had been shocked to hear about it and said she saw it when it was smaller. Interview on 3/15/2024 7:31am with LVN D she said she had worked at the facility for about 5 weeks. She said she had been a nurse for 2 years. She said she saw the wound on Resident #1's sacrum. She said the wound was unstageable when she saw it. She said it was red around the perimeter and black on the inside. She said she did not believe the CNA reported the wound. She said it was Friday February 16, 2024. She said she believed there was a dressing on the wound on Friday February 16, 2024. She said she did not know it had not been reported to the physician as they each had a list of comprehensive nursing notes to write, and she had not documented on her. She said the CNA told her there was a wound and it was not dirty. She said she did not call the physician. She said they do skin checks on the 7 to 3 and 3 to 11 shifts so they would have called and received an order as she worked nights. She said she found a wound on Resident #1's inner thigh the following week and called the wound care physician and received an order for that. She said if a resident had a bedsore, they could get an infection and have pain. She said she did not know how long Resident #1's sacral wound had been there. Interview on 3/15/2024 at 7:33am with CNA O she said she had worked at the facility since October 2023, she said she would have been a CNA for a year in May 2024. She said she had seen the wound on Resident #1's sacrum and reported it to the nurse. She said she reported it to LVN D because the bandage was soiled, and she took it off so that LVN D could replace it. She said LVN D came in and replaced the bandage. She said she saw the wound after Valentines Day February 14, 2024, on Thursday or Friday. She said she did not work on weekends, so it was on Thursday February 15, 2024, or Friday February 16, 2024. She said it was not the week of February 23, 2024. She said if a resident was not turned, they could have gotten a bedsore, the bedsore could have gotten worse, and the resident could have gotten an infection. Record Review of facilities policy titled, Skin Observation and Wound Prevention Protocol dated 10/2022 read in part . Charge nurses should observe the condition of the resident's skin on admission and on a routine basis. Record Review of facilities policy titled, Change of Condition for Skilled Nursing Communities dated 8/2023 read in part .An associate should communicate information about a residents status change to appropriate licensed personnel upon observation .or observing a difference in the residents usual physical .the licensed nurse should .notify the HCP (Healthcare provider) of observations and relevant change of condition information .Implement treatment interventions, received orders and document HCP recommendations as indicated . Record Review of Facility In-Service dated 2/2/2024, 2/3/2024 and 2/7/2024 .Topic .Annual Charge Nurse Check-off Training read in part . Importance of pressure wound prevention .Doctors, On-call, Telehealth. Record Review of Facility In-Service dated 2/20/2024 .Topic . Offloading/Repositioning read in part .Repositioning patients throughout shift to offload bony prominences .offload areas at risk for breakdown . Record Review of Facility In-Service dated 2/21/2024 .Topic .Infection Control read in part . Signs and Symptoms of wound infection: Swelling, Redness, Slight odor, increased pain at wound site . Record Review of Facility In-Service dated 3/13/2024 .Topic .Reporting New or Progression of Wound read in part .CNA to report New or Worsening wounds too Charge nurse immediately .Document Change in Skin Condition in PCC using Stop-N-Watch Tool .Charge Nurse to report New or Worsening wounds to Physician/NP to receive wound care orders immediately .Charge Nurse should place call to DCS (Director Clinical Services) or ADCS (Associate Director Clinical Services) to inform of New or Worsening wound identified. An IJ was identified on 4/1/2024 and the facility administrator was notified at 7:00pm. The IJ template was provided to the facility on 4/2/2024 at 4:14pm. On 4/3/2024 at 4:40pm the following Plan of Removal was accepted. On 2/19/2024, an impromptu Quality Assurance Performance Improvement (QAPI) Meeting was completed with the Healthcare Administrator (HCA), Director of Clinical Services, Assistant Director of Clinical Services (ADCS), and Medical Director via the phone related to the Skin Management Process related to Resident # 1 skin documentation. The additional actions included re-education to Certified Nursing Assistance (C.N.As) and Licensed Nurses on repositioning and abuse neglect reporting. Re-education for Licensed Nurses on skin assessments, Skin observation protocol (which includes notification of healthcare provider), repositioning, and wound prevention. These Inservice's were completed on 2/20 by the ADCS. On 2/20/2024, the ADCS and Attending Physician assessed the wound to Resident #1's sacrum and new orders received by the attending physician for medical honey and calcium alginate, supplements, and a low air loss mattress. On 2/22/2024 the Third Party Wound Doctor assessed the sacral wound; orders were updated to include Santyl. On 2/22/24, the ADCS performed wound rounds on current residents with wounds. No new pressure concerns were noted. On 3/2/24, Resident # 1 discharged from the community. On 3/13/24, an Impromptu QAPI Meeting held with the HCA, ADCS, Regional Director of Clinical Services (RDCS), and the Medical Director via the phone related to the Skin Management Process. The additional actions included the ADCS or designee to extend the audits of 5 residents dressing to be completed weekly for 90 days, review residents that would benefit from a Low Air Loss Mattress, complete skin checks on current residents, and re-education to C.N.A's and Licensed Nurses to notify the DCS or ADCS on new pressure ulcers. On 3/13-3/14/24, the ADCS and/or designee completed skin checks on current residents. No new pressure concerns were noted. On 3/14/24, a Registered Nurse (RN) performed a remote Skin Documentation Audit. The audit included the following items. The audit was documented on an audit form. o Weekly Skin Integrity Review form to ensure every resident had either the weekly skin form or the section completed in the Nursing admission Data Collection form, if newly admitted . o That every resident had a weekly skin integrity review activated schedule to be completed weekly in PCC. Form scheduled as needed in PCC. o Weekly Wound Data Collection form if completed, the date, and information in the form. o Third Party Wound Care MD notes in PCC Miscellaneous tab with notes on wounds (location, etc.) o Third Party Wound Care MD orders from their notes on wounds from bullet above. o Physician orders written in PCC for wounds, or anything related to skin. o Care Plans related to wounds. Plan for Compliance From 3/13/- 3/16/2024, the DCS or designee re-educated all Licensed Nurses on change of condition documentation which includes notifying physician and representative, skin documentation, obtaining orders for any wounds, reviewing and addressing clinical alerts on skin concerns from C.N.A's, notifying provider as indicated, professional standards of wound care, that the C.N.A can't apply a treatment, Braden Scale which includes preventative measures. Licensed nurses not available between 3/13/2024 to 3/16/2024 received re-education by the DCS or designee before their next scheduled shift and this will include new hires hired after 3/16/2024. Competency validated with a post test. From 4/1 -4/3 the DCS or designee re-educated nurse on physician notification of new skin issues, change of condition documentation, aides performing dressing changes, skin observation and wound prevention protocol. Licensed nurses not available between 4/1 to 4/3 will receive re-education by the DCS or designee before their next shift, this will include new hires hired after 4/3. Competency validated with a post test. Starting 3/14/24, the Licensed Nurses will initiate the wound data collection sheets on any new pressure ulcers. The RAI or designee will update resident care plans as needed as new pressure concerns arise. The Licensed Nurse will review the clinical alerts in the dashboard periodically through the shift to verify that any new skin concerns communicated by the C.N.A are addressed. The ADCS or designee overseeing will complete the weekly wound data collections for residents with new pressure ulcers until pressure ulcer is resolved or the resident is discharged . Order listing report, progress notes, weekly skin and wound documentation is reviewed during daily standup for any new or worsening pressure ulcers. From 3/13- 3/16/24, the ADCS or designee re-educated all C.N.A.s on communication of changes in skin integrity with the licensed nurse and DCS or ADCS, documentation of any new skin concerns in the electronic medical record every shift including the stop and watch, what to do if dressing falls off the resident's wound, moisture barriers, and turning and repositioning. The C.N.A may complete a Stop and Watch Alert that there is a Change in skin color or condition as indicated. These alerts display on the licensed nurse clinical alert dashboard in the electronic medical record. The C.N.A will also communicate verbally to the licensed nurse what they documented in the electronic medical record related to new skin concerns. The C.N.A. will contact the DCS, ADCS, or the Healthcare Administrator to report new skin issue for additional follow up. C.N.A s not available between 3/13- 3/16/23 received re-education by the DCS or designee before their next scheduled shift and this will include new hires hired after 3/16/24. Competency validated with a post test. From 4/1 to 4/3 C.N.A. were re-educated on C.N.A. not performing dressing changes and are allowed to apply barrier cream, reporting changes in skins and wound prevention. Aides not available between 4/1 to 4/3 will receive re-education by the DCS or designee before their next shift, this will include new hires hired after 4/3. Competency validated with a post test. For 90 days, the DCS or designee will review clinical alerts in stand-up meeting five days a week, to determine if there is documentation of new skin concerns noted by a C.N.A. and verify that appropriate follow up and documentation was completed by a licensed nurse as indicated. The licensed nurses will review clinical alerts including the stop and watch periodically through their shifts daily, to assist with identification of new skin concerns documented by the C.N.A's. For 90 days, the ADCS or designee will audit the weekly skin integrity review for 5 residents a week to verify completion, validate accuracy with a head-to-toe skin check, confirm that appropriate skin care orders are in place as applicable, and notification of the Healthcare was completed as applicable if skin concerns identified. These audits will be documented on an audit form. For 90 days, the ADCS or designee will audit 5 residents' wound care orders a week to verify treatments were completed per physician orders. These audits will be documented on an audit form and reported in the next morning stand up meeting. For 90 days, the DCS or designee will review the audits monthly at the QAPI meeting. Compliance date: 4/3/2024 The surveyor monitoring was from 4/1/2024 to 4/4/2024. Record review on 3/13/2024 revealed a QAPI sign in sheets for 2/19/2024, 3/13/2024, 3/15/24, 3/20/2024, 3/27/2024 with sign in sheets in IJ book by Administrator, Infection preventionist/ADON, Medical Director (3/15/2024). Record review on 3/13/2024 of nurse's notes dated 2/20/2024 revealed the physician was notified immediately on 2/20/2024 at 1:51pm and orders implemented for wound care and wound care physician consulted. Record review on 3/13/2024 revealed staff in-services 2/20/2024 for Abuse and Neglect, the facility provided a copy of policy, Offloading and Repositioning, Skin observation and repositioning, 2/21/24 In-service included Hand Hygiene, Incontinent Care Cleansing, Signs and Symptoms of wound infection, Cleansing of Shared equipment, Handouts: Charge nurse responsibilities, Nursing Forms, Shift Report, Patient appointments and facility provided policy on infection control. Inservice 3/1/2024 Charge nurse responsibilities, 3/13/2024 Reporting new or progression of wound, 3/21/2024 Wound care paperwork, 3/25/2024 Infection Control. Facility provided policy. 3/25/24 Order Confirmation from Physician/NP. Record review on 3/13/2024 revealed wound care physician visit on 2/22/2024 Record review on 3/13/2024 of physician orders dated 2/23/2024 15:00 were updated to include Santyl Ointment as part of the residents wound care regimen. Record review on 3/13/2024 revealed staff were in-service 3/13/2024 Reporting New or Progression of Wound: CNAs t report new or worsening wounds to charge nurse immediately, Charge nurse to report new or worsening wounds to Physician/NP to receive wound care orders immediately, Charge nurse should place call to Director of Clinical Services or Assistant Director of Clinical Services to inform of New or worsening wound identified. Record review on 3/13/2024 revealed skin assessments performed on 2/21/2024 to 2/23/2024 and 3/13/2024. Record review 4/3/2024 revealed Woundcare Orders and Treatment audit to for March 2024 Record review on 4/3/2024 revealed staff were in-serviced 4/2/2024 and 4/3/2024 for Physician notification for new skin issue, change of condition documentation, and CNAs and dressing changes. In-service included CNAs should never apply Zinc oxide to patients' body, change a wound dressing and if the dressing comes off during a shower or bath the CAN needed to notify the nurse to put a new dressing on the wound. The in-service was followed by a post test for CNA's. Record review on 4/3/2024 revealed staff were in-serviced 4/2/2024 for Skin observation/Wound prevention; facility provided policy. Record review on 4/3/2024 revealed audits on 4/2/2024 for residents admitted within the last 30 days for new pressure ulcers and notification to healthcare provider. Audit consisted of reviewing the weekly skin integrity forms, admission assessment and weekly wound data forms. Wound physician progress notes as indicated. No additional findings. Record review on 4/3/2024 revealed weekly skin integrity reviews for February 2024 and March 2024 revealed no new or worsening wounds. Observation of wound care on 4/3/2024 11:45am on Resident #6. Resident #6 noted to be on a low air loss mattress. Nurse washed hands, donned gloves, removed dressing, removed gloves, applied hand sanitizer .donned gloves, wiped wound from inside to outside with gauze impregnated with wound cleanser, removed gloves, hand sanitizer, donned gloves, patted are around wound for adhesion, removed gloves, hand sanitizer, applied calcium alginate and bordered dressing. Dated. Noted wound was healthy and healing, It appeared sacral wound had been larger at one time but now wound small, healthy red with granulation tissue. In an interview on 4/2/2024 at 12:47pm LVN E said she had been in-serviced a few times on wounds and wound care, she said she had been in-service the previous night on reporting new wounds to the physician, letting the unit manager and ADON know, calling the physician for orders and letting them know about changes in condition and weekly skin data. Interview on 4/2/2024 at 12:53pm CNA P said she was not supposed to change dressings on a resident, she said she was supposed to report missing or damaged dressings to the charge nurse or DON and document in the system who she told. Se said she would have reported skin breakdown to the charge nurse or DON, she said she had been in-service today, last week on wounds, change of condition, not to use zinc oxide and moisture barrier. Interview on 4/2/2024 1:00pm CNA Q said he had been in-service on wounds and wound care that morning. He said reporting wounds, new skin issues, not to change dressings, role as a CNAs, and when he saw redness or wounds to report and document in the system. He said he would have reported to the nurse and ADON. Interview on 4/2/2024 at 1:05pm CNA R said she had been in-service that day on what to do and what not to do with wounds and who to report them to. She said not to have changed dressings and not to apply Zinc Oxide. She said they were in serviced on reporting wounds to the nurse or DON and documenting in PCC system. Interview on 4/2/2024 at 1:30pm LVN F said he had been in-service on 4/1/2024 on wound care, who to notify, progress notes, handwashing, and infection control. He said he would have initially let the primary physician and the wound physi[TRUNCATED]
Jan 2024 3 deficiencies
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Quality of Care (Tag F0684)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

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

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, based on the comprehensive assessment of a resident, residents received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice the comprehensive person-centered care plan and the resident's choices 1 of 5 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for quality of care. -The facility failed to enter orders for blood sugar monitoring for Resident #1, who had type 2 diabetes, upon admission and as a result the resident's blood sugar was not assessed for over 22 hrs. (01/17/24 at 02:50 PM to 01/18/24 at 01:11 PM) after admission. This failure could place residents at risk of delayed identification/treatment of acute health conditions and hospitalization. Findings Include: Record review of Resident #1's Face Sheet dated 01/23/24 revealed, a [AGE] year-old female who admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of: left hip fracture, overactive bladder, high cholesterol, difficulty swallowing and type 2 diabetes. Resident #1 transferred to facility after a hospital stay from 01/04/24 to 01/17/24. Record review of Resident #1's undated Care Plan revealed, focus- diabetes; goal- the resident will have no complications related to diabetes; intervention- medication as ordered, monitor/document/report to MD s/sx of hypo and hyperglycemia. Record review of Resident #1's Entry MDS dated [DATE] revealed, Resident #1 admitted to the facility from a short-term general hospital. Record review of Resident #1's Pre-admission Nursing Report dated 01/17/24 at 01:00 PM revealed, Resident #1 had diabetes and her expected arrival time to the facility was 02:00 PM. There was no documented blood sugar levels. Record review of Resident #1's Census List revealed, Resident #1 admitted to the facility on [DATE] at 2:50 PM. Record review of Resident #1's admission assessment dated [DATE] at 06:07 PM and signed by LVN A revealed, a diagnosis of type 2 diabetes and there was no documented blood sugar level on admission. Record review of Resident #1's Order Summary Report dated 01/17/24 printed by LVN A and signed by the MD revealed, no orders for blood sugar monitoring. Record review of Resident #1's Order Summary Report dated 01/23/24 revealed, check blood sugars before meals and at bedtime entered on 01/18/24 and started on 01/18/24 at 09:00 AM, over 12 hours after admission to the facility. Record review of Resident #1's Blood Sugar Summary dated 01/23/24 revealed, the first documented blood sugar reading was on 01/18/24 at 01:11 PM. - 311 mg/dL on 01/18/24 01:11 PM documented by LVN B. - 207 mg/dL on 01/18/24 05:52 PM documented by LVN D. - 115 mg/dL on 01/19/24 at 10:49 PM documented by LVN D. An observation and interview on 01/24/24 at 11:00 AM revealed, Resident #1 lying in bed in no immediate distress. She said the day she was admitted she did not have her blood sugar checked even though she ate meals. Resident #1 said the day after she admitted was the first day she had her blood sugar check but she denied any symptoms or side effects of high blood sure. In an interview on 01/23/24 at 02:35 PM, the DON said when a resident arrives at the facility, they were immediately placed in a room with the staff assisting the paramedics. She said the admitting nurse then completed a head-to-toe assessment, collected vitals (including BS for diabetics) reconciled medications and then contacted the physician to approve all medications and care records. The DON said per the EMR Resident #1 admitted to the facility at 02:50 PM and LVN A completed Resident #1's admission assessment after she arrived at her shift which usually starts between 4 and 5. In an interview on 01/23/24 at 05:11 PM, LVN A said she had been in her role as the admission nurse for the past 3 years. She said when a resident admitted to the facility the nurse who received them was responsible for verifying the residents' medications/orders with the admitting physician and checking vitals which included blood sugar checks. LVN A said she saw Resident #1 when she arrived at her evening shift, the resident was primarily Spanish speaking and arrived at the facility with family. She said she was not the nurse who received the resident, and it was not her responsibility to enter the resident into the system, complete the admitting assessment or check the resident's vitals. LVN A said it was the responsibility of the actual nurse who admitted the resident and the unit manager to ensure all orders were entered and vitals like BS were checked. LVN A said even though she did not actually assess the resident or reconcile the medications/order with the physician, she helped enter the resident's admission assessment and orders a little after six. She said she did not know why she did not enter Resident #1's BS monitoring orders and failure to check blood sugars in a diabetic could place the resident at risk for unidentified hypo or hyperglycemia (low and high blood sugars). In an interview on 01/24/24 at 09:35 AM, the DON said the nurse who received Resident #1 was responsible for checking vitals, which included blood sugars in diabetics, going over the medications and orders with the physician and then entering the orders in the system. The DON said after reviewing the chart, LVN B was the nurse who received Resident #1 but since the resident arrived during a shift change his unit manager should have been responsible for entering the resident's orders into the system. She said she could not determine which nurse reconciled the medications and orders with the physician from the records provided. In an interview on 01/24/24 at 10:01 AM, LVN B said when resident arrived at the facility the admitting nurse was whoever received the resident. He said the admitting nurse was responsible for ensuring that the resident was comfortable, educated about the facility and collecting vitals, reconciling medications with the physician and then entering orders. LVN B said upon admission, the admitting staff must check a diabetic resident's blood sugars immediately to establish their baseline if they did not receive BS records from the discharging facility. He said facility's policy required all new admissions that arrived after 02:00 PM would be given to the unit manager and Unit Manager A was responsible for admitting Resident #1. LVN B said LVN A was the facility admission nurse, and her shift usually began between 04:00-05:00 PM and she would complete admissions of residents who arrived during her shift. In an interview on 01/24/24 at 11:42 AM, Unit Manager A said she was the 2nd floor unit manager, and her shift was from 08:30- 05:00 PM. She said when a resident admitted into the facility, the admitting nurse was responsible for greeting the resident, reconciling medications, verifying orders with the physician and then entering the orders. Unit Manager A said all diabetic residents should have admitting orders to check their blood glucose and lab orders for A1c. She said failure to enter BS orders and check blood sugar upon admission could place the resident at risk for unknown low/high BS and a result in the failure to treat these uncontrolled blood sugars. Unit Manager A said after reviewing the EMR, Resident #1's order entry was her responsibility but LVN B, the admitting nurse, was responsible for checking the resident's BS since it was part of the vitals collected. Unit Manager A said she did not remember processing Resident #1's admission but due to the time the resident arrived it was her responsibility but she was not informed or provided any communication that she had to complete the resident's admission so that was why LVN A completed the admissions assessment and entered the medication orders. Unit Manager A said she could not remember any details regarding Resident #1's admissions. In an interview on 01/24/24 at 12:40 PM, the DON said when Resident #1 admitted to the facility LVN B (the admitting nurse) was responsible for entering orders for BS monitoring and he should have checked the resident's BS upon admission. She said the DON was ultimately responsible for ensuring admissions orders are entered correctly but the responsibility is delegated to the unit managers. The DON said failure enter orders and monitor blood sugars in diabetics could result in a worsening of prognosis as well as hypo and hyperglycemia. In an interview on 01/24/24 at 12:54 PM, LVN B said he did not check Resident #1's blood sugars upon admission or enter her blood sugar monitoring orders and he did not know whose responsibility it was since the resident arrived during a change of shift. An attempt was made on 01/23/24 at 03:12 PM to contact Resident #1's Physician. The prescriber was unavailable, and a message was left. An attempt was made on 01/24/24 at 09:19 AM to contact Resident #1's Physician. The prescriber was unavailable, and a message was left. Record review of the facility policy titled Blood Glucose Management revised 10/2016 revealed, program overview- charge nurses will provide blood glucose management per Health Care Provider's order.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Pharmacy Services (Tag F0755)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

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

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for pharmacy services. - The facility failed to acquire and administer antibiotics antidiabetic medications timely to Resident #1 upon admission resulting in the resident's blood sugar level at 311 mg/dL. This failure could place residents at risk of not having their diseases treated, adverse events and hospitalization. Findings Included: Record review of Resident #1's Face Sheet dated 01/23/24 revealed, a [AGE] year-old female who admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of: left hip fracture, overactive bladder, high cholesterol, difficulty swallowing and type 2 diabetes. Resident #1 transferred to facility after a hospital stay from 01/04/24 to 01/17/24. Record review of Resident #1's undated Care Plan revealed, focus- diabetes; goal- the resident will have no complications related to diabetes; intervention- medication as ordered, monitor/document/report to MD s/sx of hypo and hyperglycemia. Record review of Resident #1's Entry MDS dated [DATE] revealed, Resident #1 admitted to the facility from a short-term general hospital. Record review of Resident #1's Pre-admission Nursing Report dated 01/17/24 at 01:00 PM revealed, Resident #1 had diabetes and her expected arrival time to the facility was 02:00 PM. There was no documented blood sugar levels. Record review of Resident #1's Census List revealed, Resident #1 admitted to the facility on [DATE] at 2:50 PM. Record review of Resident #1's Order summary dated 01/17/24 at 06:48 PM generated by LVN A revealed, - Cefdinir (an antibiotic) 300 mg- 1 capsule by mouth every 12 hours for 5 days, with a start date of 01/18/24. - Metformin (an oral antidiabetic) 1000 mg- 1 tablet by mouth two times a day for diabetes with a start date of 01/18/24. - Insulin Lispro- Inject 10 units under the skin three times a day for diabetes with a start date of 01/18/24. - Tresiba Insulin- Inject 30 units under the skin every 12 hours for type 2 diabetes with a start date of 01/17/24. - Gabapentin 300 mg- 1 Capsule by mouth two times a day for nerve pain with a start date of 01/18/24 at 09:00 AM. Record review of Resident #1's Blood Sugar Summary dated 01/23/24 revealed, the first documented blood sugar reading was on 01/18/24 at 01:11 PM. - 311 mg/dL on 01/18/24 01:11 PM documented by LVN B. - 207 mg/dL on 01/18/24 05:52 PM documented by LVN D. - 115 mg/dL on 01/19/24 at 10:49 PM documented by LVN D. Record review of Resident #1's 01/17/24 MAR revealed, - Cefdinir 300 mg was not administered on 01/17/24 because it had a scheduled start of 01/18/24 at 09:00 AM. - Gabapentin 300mg was not administered on 01/17/24 because it had a scheduled start of 01/18/24 at 09:00 AM. - Metformin 1000mg was not administered on 01/17/24 because it had a scheduled start of 01/18/24 at 09:00 AM. - Tresiba Insulin was not administered on 01/17/24 even though it was scheduled for 09:00 PM for reasons not documented. - Insulin Lispro was not administered on 01/17/24 because it had a scheduled start of 01/18/24 at 09:00 AM. Record review of Resident #1's Medication Administration Audit Report from 01/17/24 to 01/18/24 revealed, - Metformin 1000 mg was first administered on 01/18/24 at 11:26 AM. - Cefdinir 300 mg was first administered on 01/18/24 at 11:26 AM. - Insulin Lispro was first administered on 01/18/24 at 01:11 PM. - Tresiba Insulin was first administered on 01/18/24 at 01:11 PM. - Gabapentin was first administered on 01/18/24 at 11:26 AM. Record review of the facility automated dispensing machine inventory list presented on 01/23/24 revealed, - the facility had 10 capsules of Cefdinir 300 mg capsules on hand for emergency dispensing or newly admitted residents. - the facility had 6 capsules of Gabapentin 300 mg capsules on hand for emergency dispensing or newly admitted residents. - the facility did not have Tresiba or Insulin Lispro on hand for emergency dispensing or newly admitted residents. Record review of Resident #1's Pharmacy Records dated 01/24/24 revealed, - Tresiba Insulin was first delivered to the facility on [DATE] at 11:59 PM. - Metformin 1000mg was first delivered to the facility on [DATE] at 11:59 PM. - Gabapentin 300 mg capsules was first delivered to the facility on [DATE] at 11:59 PM. - Insulin Lispro was first delivered to the facility on [DATE] at 07:29 PM. Insulin Lispro was delayed and did not arrive at the facility until the evening of 01/18/24 because it was held up in billing and read the drug exceeded the facility high dollar limit and required approval due to cost. Need authorization to send. In an interview on 01/23/24 at 01:23 PM, the ADON said the facility received 3 different pharmacy deliveries. She said the pharmacy delivered medications to the facility in the early morning, mid-day and at night but there was always an option for a STAT delivery to be made within 2 hours for any urgent medications that the facility did not have in their automated dispensing system. The ADON said the facility did not have any insulin on hand for newly admitted or emergency medication orders. An observation and interview on 01/24/24 at 11:00 AM revealed, Resident #1 lying in bed in no immediate distress. She said the day she was admitted (01/17/24) she did not her medications. Resident #1 said she did not receive her antibiotic, Gabapentin and antidiabetic medications (Metformin and Insulins) on 01/17/24 but she did not suffer from any pain or signs/symptoms of uncontrolled blood sugars. In an interview on 01/23/24 at 02:35 PM, the DON said per the EMR, Resident #1 admitted to the facility at 02:50 PM but her medication orders were not entered until after 06:00 PM. She said when a resident arrived at the facility their medication orders should be started immediately to avoid any missing doses based on the hospital discharge medication list. The DON said the facility had an automated dispensing system that could provide initial doses of medications for new admissions and any unavailable medications like insulin could be acquired within 2 hours from the pharmacy through a STAT order. She said if the pharmacy was unable to deliver the medication immediately, the resident's provider should be contacted for an alternative regimen and all medication issues should be documented in the resident's chart. The DON said failure to administer medications immediately upon admission could result in increased blood sugar, increased pain, as well as worsening of infection and hospitalization. In an interview on 01/23/24 at 05:11 PM, LVN A said she has been in her role as the admission nurse for the past 3 years. She said when a resident arrived at the facility the nurse should reconcile the medications against the discharging facility medication lists and medications should be administered based on the last administered dose. LVN A said since Resident #1 arrived at 02:50 PM she should have received her first dose of medications starting that evening and did not know why she entered Resident #1's medications to start the next morning. She said the facility had an automated dispensing system that had the necessary oral medications on hand and the insulin could have been received within 2 hours through a STAT order from the pharmacy. LVN A said she did not know why she did not get the medication from the automated dispensing system, or from the pharmacy and she did not know why she did not document the issue in the resident's progress notes. LVN A said the doctor did not give her approval to delay the start of Resident #1's medications and failure to administer medications immediately upon admission could place residents at risk for uncontrolled health conditions, uncontrolled blood sugars, uncontrolled pain and hospitalization. She said Resident #1 should have received her first dose of medication the night she arrived at the facility. In an interview on 01/24/24 at 12:40 PM, the DON said she was ultimately responsible for ensuring medications were started immediately upon admissions and administered as ordered but that responsibility was delegated to the managers who complete next day audits. She said to her knowledge no one had noticed that Resident #1 was not administered medications upon admissions and her first doses were administered late in the afternoon the next day. The DON said Resident #1, the resident's family as well as her doctor was notified of the missed medications and the resident reported no side effects and the physician did not give any new orders. An attempt was made on 01/23/24 at 03:12 PM to contact Resident #1's Physician. The prescriber was unavailable, and a message was left. An attempt was made on 01/24/24 at 09:19 AM to contact Resident #1's Physician. The prescriber was unavailable, and a message was left. Record review of LVN A's Charge Nurse Orientation Checklist-Skilled Nursing signed on 09/01/20 revealed, training on entering orders into the EMR, documentation administration of medications and treatment in the EMR, medication reconciliation, order and receiving medications electronically and emergency kits was completed. Record review of the facility policy titled Reconciliation of Medications od Admission/re-admission and Monthly Orders revised 03/2019 revealed, policy overview- the charge nurse will perform medication reconciliation upon admission, readmission or transition of care from prior levels of care, for the purpose of providing an accurate and current medication regimen. I(B)- Medication reconciliation reduces medication errors and enhances resident safety during the admission/transfer process by: identifying the medications the resident needs and administering without interruption, the correct dosages and routes. Record review of the facility policy titled Receipt of Interim/Stat/Emergency Deliveries revised 01/01/22 revealed, 1- facility should immediately notify pharmacy when facility receives from a physician/prescriber a medication order that may require an interim/stat/emergency delivery. 2. If a necessary medication is not contained within Facility's interim/stat/emergency supply, and Facility determines that an interim/stat/emergency delivery is necessary, Facility should arrange with Pharmacy for one of the following actions: 2.1 For Pharmacy to include the interim/stat/emergency medication(s) in an earlier scheduled delivery or a special delivery, as required, or 2.2 For Pharmacy delivery by contract courier, or 2.3 For Pharmacy to arrange for the medication to be dispensed and delivered by a Third Party Pharmacy to ensure timely receipt.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Medical Records (Tag F0842)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain medical records on each resident, in accordan...

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 medical records on each resident, in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices, that were complete and accurately documented for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #1) whose records were reviewed for resident identifiable records. - The facility failed to completely and accurately document administration of medication to Resident #1 by documenting administration of Insulin Lispro that was not in the facility and did not occur, This failure could place residents at risk of having incomplete or inaccurate records and inadequate care. Findings Included: Record review of Resident #1's Face Sheet dated 01/23/24 revealed, a [AGE] year-old female who admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of: left hip fracture, overactive bladder, high cholesterol, difficulty swallowing and type 2 diabetes. Resident #1 transferred to facility after a hospital stay from 01/04/24 to 01/17/24. Record review of Resident #1's undated Care Plan revealed, focus- diabetes; goal- the resident will have no complications related to diabetes; intervention- medication as ordered, monitor/document/report to MD s/sx of hypo and hyperglycemia. Record review of Resident #1's Entry MDS dated [DATE] revealed, Resident #1 admitted to the facility from a short-term general hospital. Record review of Resident #1's Order summary dated 01/17/24 at 06:48 PM generated by LVN A revealed, - Insulin Lispro- Inject 10 units under the skin three times a day for diabetes with a start date of 01/18/24. Record review of Resident #1's 01/17/24 MAR revealed, - Insulin Lispro was administered on of 01/18/24 for scheduled doses at 09:00 AM and 01:00 by LVN B. Record review of Resident #1's Medication Administration Audit Report from 01/17/24 to 01/18/24 revealed, - Insulin Lispro was first administered on 01/18/24 at 01:11 PM for the doses scheduled at both 09:00 AM and 01:00 PM. Record review of Resident #1's Pharmacy Records dated 01/24/24 revealed, - Insulin Lispro was first delivered to the facility on [DATE] at 07:29 PM. Insulin Lispro was delayed and did not arrive at the facility until the evening of 01/18/24 because it was held up in billing and read the drug exceeded the facility high dollar limit and required approval due to cost. Need authorization to send. In observation on 01/24/24 at 12:14 PM, inventory of the nursing cart with LVN B revealed, an Insulin Lispro pen labeled for Resident #1 with the facility open date of 01/19/24 on both the pen and on the pharmacy label. Inspection of the 2nd floor medication room with LVN B revealed, no other insulin pens for Resident #1 in the fridge. In an interview on 01/24/24 at 12:40 PM, the DON said staff were expected to document accurately and timely and any discrepancies should be documented in the progress notes. She said Resident #1's insulin arrived on 01/18/24 at 11:59 PM and based on the residents EMR it was not possible for LVN B to administer the 09:00 AM and 01:00 PM scheduled doses of Insulin Lispro to Resident #1 on 01/18/24 at 01:11 PM because the medication was not available in the pharmacy at that time and the facility did not have any insulin on-hand for emergency dispensing. The DON said failure to document accurately placed residents at risk for inaccurate medical records and unidentified missed doses. In an interview on 01/24/24 at 12:54 PM, LVN B said to his knowledge Resident #1 did not have any insulin missing and he did not remember administering Resident #1's insulin late at 01:11 PM on 01/18/24 even though it was the documented time on the MAR. LVN B said the only insulin pen Resident #1 had was the pen observed in the nursing cart with an open dated of 01/19/24 and he could not explain where the insulin he documented as administered came from since the pen had not arrived at the facility at the documented time of administration. When asked about the requirement of accurate and timely documentation, LVN B could not provide an answer. He said he did not remember any specifics about Resident #1's Insulin Lispro pen and medication administration time and when asked how he documented the administration of medication that was not available he said I also want to know what happened with the medication and the documentation. He could not provide any details regarding the discrepancy between the documentation and the unavailability of the medication. Record review of LVN B's Charge Nurse Orientation Checklist-Skilled Nursing signed on 04/24/22 by the ADON revealed, training on entering orders into the EMR, documentation administration of medications and treatment in the EMR, medication reconciliation, order and receiving medications electronically and emergency kits was completed. Record review of the facility policy titled Medication Administration revised 12/2020 revealed, after administering/observation of the client taking the medication the staff must sign for the scheduled assistance time and date for medications and if applicable, the associate should document the refusal or reason for not administering medication as ordered. Record review of the facility policy titled Documentation for Skilled Services revised 05/2023 revealed, no specific instructions on the accuracy and timeliness of documentation and medication administration times. Record review of the facility provided Skilled Documentation Guide with no revision date revealed, no specific instructions on the accuracy and timeliness of documentation and medication administration times.
Dec 2023 4 deficiencies 1 Harm
SERIOUS (H) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures

Pressure Ulcer Prevention (Tag F0686)

A resident was harmed · This affected multiple residents

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

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure residents received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice to promote healing, prevent infection and prevent ulcers from developing for 1 (Resident #2) of 11 residents reviewed for treatment of pressure ulcer. -The facility failed to provide treatment in a timely manner for Resident #2 who experienced a decrease in skin integrity to the sacral region that resulted in an unstageable wound to the sacral region diagnosed by the wound care doctor on 12/1/23. -The facility failed to do consistent weekly skin assessments on Resident #2. -Facility failed to change Resident #2's dressing to sacrum on 12/06/2023 as ordered by the wound care doctor. These failures could place resident (s) who have wounds and at risk for skin impairment at risk for further decrease in skin impairment issues, infections, possible hospitalization, and decrease in quality of life. Findings: Record review of Resident #2 face sheet revealed an 81year old male admitted to the NF on 11/06/23. Resident #2 diagnoses included the following: Urinary Tract Infection, Klebsiella Pneumonia (bacteria), gastroenteritis (intestine infection) and colitis (inflamed colon), type 2 diabetes mellitus, moderate protein-calorie malnutrition, chronic kidney disease stage 4, hypertension (high blood pressure), anemia (low blood), muscular weakness, benign prostate hyperplasia (age associated prostate gland enlargement) and acquired absence of right leg below knee. Record review of Resident #2 MDS dated [DATE] revealed that resident BIMS score was 11 indicating resident cognition was moderately intact. Further review reveled that resident was dependent of toilet hygiene, had an indwelling catheter, and was always incontinent of bowel. Further review revealed that resident had a diabetic pressure ulcer and was at risk for developing pressure ulcers/injuries. Record review of Resident #2's Care Plan dated 11/06/23 and revised on 12/07/23 revealed that resident was being care planned for impairment of skin integrity diabetic ulcer to left lateral ft stage 3 left heel and unstageable to sacrum. Resident interventions included the following: assist with turning and reposition as needed, Braden scale as required, evaluate skin condition on a daily and weekly basis, low air mattress, and monitor/document location, size, and treatment of skin injury. Report abnormalities, failure to heal, s/sx of infection, maceration etc. to MD. Record review of Resident #2's Braden scale (Predicting Pressure Ulcer Risk) dated 11/13/23 revealed that resident score was 15 indicating that resident was at mild risk for skin breakdown documented by the ADON on 11/14/23. Record review of Resident #2's Physician Order Summary Report included the following orders: -Dated 11/13/23, Apply skin prep to L (left) lateral foot every evening shift for 30 days -Dated 11/20/23, Santyl Ointment 250 unit/gm (collagenase) apply to left heel topically every evening shift for wound care cleanse with wound cleanser, pat dry, apply santyl to necrotic area, apply calcium alginate, apply dry gauze island w/bdr dressing (with border dressing). -Dated 12/01/23, Santyl Ointment 250 unit/gm (Collagenase) apply to unstageable sacrum topically every evening shift for wound care cleanse sacral wound with wound cleanser, pat dry, apply santyl to necrotic area, apply calcium alginate, apply gauze island bdr dressing. -Further record review of Resident #2's Physician orders did not reveal orders for pain Record review of Resident #2's Weekly Skin Assessment revealed the following: -Dated 11/09/23 Assessment revealed wound to left heel (pressure wound) -No assessment done 11/16/23 -Dated 11/20/23 Assessment revealed wound to left heel (pressure wound) -Dated 11/27/23 Assessment revealed wound to left heel -Dated 12/07/23 Assessment revealed wound to left heel (stage 3 pressure wound of the left heel full thickness diabetic wound of the left heel, Sacrum (unstageable due to necrosis sacrum full thickness) Record review of Resident #2's CNA Shower Skin Check Sheet revealed that CNA B documented the following: -Dated 11/21/23 Resident with skin redden to scrotum and skin breakdown to sacrum and left heel signed by LVN I -Dated 11/23/23 Resident #2 with redden scrotum and skin breakdown to sacrum and bandage on sacrum signed by LVN I -Dated 11/28/23 Resident #2 with redden scrotum, left heel and sacrum wound, signed by LVN I Record review of Resident #2's Wound Evaluation & Management Summary documented by the Wound Care Doctor revealed the following: -Dated 11/10/23 Stage 3 pressure wound of the left heel full thickness, wound size (L x W x D) 4.7 x 3.5 x 0.2 cm. Surface area 16.45cm, exudate (drainage) moderate serous (pale yellow watery fluid). -Dated 12/01/23 Stage 3 pressure wound left heel full thickness, wound size (L x W x D)3.6 x 5.2 x 0.1cm, surface area 18.72cm with moderate exudate. -Dated 12/01/23 Unstageable (due to necrosis- dead tissue) wound size (l x W x D) 12.1 x 8.2 x 0.1cm, surface area 99.22cm, exudate moderate serous, thick adherent devitalized necrotic tissue 70 %. Surgical excisional debridement (removal of damage tissue) procedure indication: remove thick adherent (sticking fast to an object or surface) eschar (collection of dry, dead tissue within a wound) and devitalized tissue (dead tissue cells). Record review of Resident #2' TAR for the month of December 2023 on the 6th revealed that resident dressing to the left heel and sacral wound was not documented as done. Further record review for the months of November and December 2023 revealed that the facility was doing pain assessment on resident with no pain documented. Interview on 12/07/23 at 11:10AM the DON said the facility wound census she would have to confirm with the ADON on the phone with at present time. The DON said the facility wound census was 9 and that the facility had one resident with an acquired wound and that was Resident #2. The DON said Resident #2 had acquired a wound to his sacrum that was unstageable. Observation on 12/07/2023 at 12:30PM Resident #2 was in bed on an air mattress that was fully inflated. Resident had an indwelling Foley catheter draining clear yellow urine. Further observation was made of residents right leg which was amputated below the knee. Further observation was made of resident dressing to the sacrum which was dated 12/05/23. The surveyor did not observed resident Left lower extremity at this time due to not being aware that resident had a wound to the heel. Interview on 12/07/23 at 12:30PM with Resident #2 said he was not in any pain. Observation on 12/07/2023 beginning at 12:35PM of dressing change for Resident #2 sacrum wound by LVN I. LVN I sanitized a bedside table to place resident dressing supplies on. LVN I washed her hands with soap and water and proceeded to remove resident old dressing. LVN I confirmed that the date on resident sacrum read 12/05/23. LVN I said resident dressing to the sacrum was supposed to be changed on the evening shift. Observation was made of resident being incontinent of loose stool. Further observation was made of resident sacrum area with skin breakdown large in circumference with variations of redness and sloughing (yellow tissue) of the skin. After LVN I and the (CNA Staffing Coordinator, name unknown) provided incontinent care for resident, LVN I washed her hands again with soap and water and proceeded to change resident dressing to his sacrum. LVN I cleansed the wound site with wound cleanser using a 4 x4's. When LVN I was done cleansing the wound site, she wiped around the wound edges with skin prep. LVN I then applied santyl ointment to yellow tissue of the wound site. LVN I then applied to wound calcium alginate secured with border dressing. Interview on 12/07/23 at 2:12PM RN E said he worked the 3PM-11PM shift. RN E said he was Resident #2's nurse on 12/06/23. RN E said he must have forgotten to change Resident #2's dressings to the sacrum and left heel. RN E said when a resident wound dressing is not changed as ordered by the physician, it placed the resident at risk of the wound getting infected. RN E said he could not remember if he had done weekly skin assessments on Resident #2. Interview on 12/07/23 at 3:00PM the DON said the facility Nursing staff failed Resident #2 because they failed to communicate with one another as well as the Wound Care Doctor when the resident began to experience skin breakdown to his sacrum. The DON said when the wound care doctor started treating the residents wound to the sacrum, it was unstageable. The DON said the resident wound to the sacrum was large. The DON said this failure placed the resident at risk for further infections. The DON said she believed that when the resident was admitted to the facility, he was being treating for a urinary tract infection. The DON said she did not know how well the resident wound to sacrum was going to heal, she just knew that the situation was bad. The DON said all she could do moving forward, was in-service the nursing staff on communicating that whenever a resident experienced a change in condition the nurses must intervene in a timely manner. The DON said the nurses must assess the residents as well as inform the doctor so that a treatment plan can be put in place. The DON said she did not know if the ADON had initiated any in-service when she was informed on last week about Resident #2 skin breakdown to the sacrum. Interview on 12/07/23 at 3:08PM LVN I said she assessed the resident's skin when it was scheduled for her to do so. LVN I said one day a CNA whom she believed was CNA B came to her on the morning shift informing her that Resident #2 had skin breakdown to his sacrum. LVN I said she could not remember if it was last week or 2 weeks ago. LVN I said it was the nurses on the morning and evening shift that were assigned to do weekly skin assessments. LVN I said weekly skin assessments were done on resident in rooms 230-234 by the day nurse. LVN I said residents weekly skin assessments for residents in room [ROOM NUMBER]-240 were done by the nurse on the evening shift. LVN I said on Saturday's resident in room [ROOM NUMBER]-A bed skin assessments were done on the day shift and 242-Bed skin assessment was done on a Sunday on the evening shift. LVN I said Resident #2 resided in room [ROOM NUMBER]. LVN I said a resident that had a wound with a dressing, the dressing should be checked regardless of what shift the nurse was working. LVN I said she had to be honest, she was not checking the wound dressings or resident skin if another nurse was assigned the task. LVN I said the nurse is accountable for their own work. LVN I said moving forward she would ask the DON to see how she wanted to proceed in the matter. LVN I said the more she thought about it, spot checking a resident wound dressing would be a good idea. LVN I said the wound care doctor saw the residents wound today (12/07/23) and did more debridement on Resident #2's wound to the sacrum. LVN I said if a resident dressing to a wound is not changed as ordered, the wound could become infected placing the resident at risk for osteomyelitis an infection that goes to the bone. LVN I said Resident #2 was admitted to the facility with a urinary tract infection and had received antibiotics for it. Interview on 12/07/23 at 3:27PM the Wound Care Doctor said the ADON informed her that Resident #2 had developed a new wound to the sacrum on 11/30/23. The Wound Care Doctor said she assessed Resident #2's sacrum on 12/07/23. The Wound Care Doctor said when she observed resident sacrum, she became frustrated asking the ADON why the facility did not inform her regarding resident skin to his sacrum had broken down? The Wound Care Doctor said she was coming to the facility every week to treat Resident #2's wound to his left heel. The Wound Care Doctor said when she observed resident skin to the sacrum, there was deep tissue injury with necrosis that was unstageable. The Wound Care Doctor said the residents wound to the sacrum looked very bad. The Wound Care Doctor said this was frustrating because the staff had to have observed the skin to resident sacrum deteriorating because they were providing care for Resident #2. The Wound Doctor said this failure had placed the resident at risk for pain, infections, further decrease in mobility, and further clinical deterioration like a [NAME] effect. Interview on 12/07/23 at 3:47PM ADON said Resident #2 skin breakdown to the sacrum was bought to her attention by nurse LVN I and RN E toward the end of the day shift on 11/30/23. The ADON said LVN I reported to her that the resident had something on his bottom. The ADON said when she observed the residents sacrum, she saw a deep tissue injury that covered a large area of resident sacrum, and the color was pink and purple with variations of skin sloughing. The ADON said she cleaned the sacrum site with a wound cleanser and applied calcium alginate to the site because the wound was oozing. When the ADON was asked if she had an order to apply calcium alginate to the site, the ADON retracted her statement and said she had just woken up and that the wound care doctor gave the order on 12/01/23. Interview on 12/08/23 at 9:43AM CNA B said she started noticing skin breakdown to Resident #2's sacrum 2 weeks prior and had informed nurse LVN I and another nurse that worked at the facility PRN. CNA B said LVN I and Clinical Manager C told her to put zinc oxide on the resident skin (skin barrier) and that they would assess the resident skin to his sacrum. CNA B said when she started taking care of Resident #2, he already had a dressing to the sacrum and the left heel. CNA B said she always reported to the nurses whenever a resident experienced any change in condition so she would not get blamed for anything. Interview on 12/08/23 at 9:45AM LVN I said CNA B, she believed, reported to her that Resident #2 had skin breakdown to the sacrum. LVN I said she could not remember when this occurred and did not know if this happened last week or 2 weeks ago. LVN I said CNA B told her that Resident #2's dressing to the sacrum was coming off. LVN I said when she saw resident sacrum, she observed a large area of redness that included skin discoloration with some drainage and variations of skin sloughing but no odor. LVN I said she cleansed the resident sacrum with wound cleanser, covered the wound, and informed the ADON of her findings. LVN I said she never assessed Resident #2's skin because he was not on her assignment for weekly skin assessments. LVN I said RN E was supposed to do Resident #2's weekly skin assessments. Interview on 12/08/23 at 10:05AM the DON said the CNAs were supposed to use the POC (Plan of care) to document any changes in a resident skin. The DON said some of the CNA's still documented on the resident skin shower sheets. The DON said the resident skin shower sheets were not considered a part of the resident records and that the POC was. The DON said the facility used the shower sheets for a in house audit. Interview on 12/08/23 at 2:52PM CNA G said she remembered Resident #2. CNA G said she told RN E about the resident having skin breakdown to the sacrum. CNA G said RN E told her that he would take care of it later. CNA G said she could not remember the day when this happened. Record review of the facility policy on Skin Observation and Wound Prevention Protocol revised 10/22 revealed in part: .Charge nurses should observe the condition of the resident's skin on admission and on routine basis. This system also provides a communication process for the nursing assistant to report residents with skin changes to the Charge Nurse .Weekly: The Charge Nurse should complete the skin Integrity Review form for residents. Document any integumentary findings including the dressing being removed (if indicated), the appearance of the wound, and treatment applied/initiated per health care provider order in the progress notes .The CNA should: complete documentation of new skin concerns as identified in Point of Care and notify the nurses as indicated. Provide showers/baths per preferred routine schedule and as needed. Provide skin care during routine care. Apply moisturizing creams, barrier products per plan of care and scope of practice .
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Deficiency F0583 (Tag F0583)

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 the resident had the right to personal privacy ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure the resident had the right to personal privacy including medical treatment for 2 (Resident #1 and Resident #4) of 11 reviewed for respect and dignity. -The facility failed to place Resident #1's Foley Cather bag inside of a privacy bag on 12/07/23. -The facility failed to place Resident #4's Foley Cather bag inside of a privacy bag on 12/09/23. This failure placed residents at risk of embarrassment and lower self-esteem. Findings: Record review of Resident #1's face sheet reveled an 88year old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the diagnoses that included the following: osteomyelitis (inflammation of the brain cause by infection) of vertebra (back bone), sacral (portion of the spine between your lower back and tailbone) and sacrococcygeal region (joint between the sacrum and the tailbone), pressure ulcer of the sacrum, long term current use of antibiotics, elevated white blood cell count, moderate protein deficiency, muscle weakness, hyperlipidemia (elevated cholesterol), dementia (memory loss and judgement), hypertension (elevated blood pressure), retention of urine, and pneumonia (infection in the lungs). Record review of Resident #1's MDS dated [DATE] revealed a BIMS score of 12 indicating resident cognition was intact. Record review of Resident #1's Physician orders included the following order: -Dated 11/08/23 Catheter care for indwelling catheter Record review of Resident #1's care plan dated 11/08/23 revealed that resident was being care planned for an indwelling Foley Catheter with an intervention privacy bags at all times. Observation on 12/07/23 at 9:20AM Resident #1 was resting in bed on an air mattress. Further observation of was made of resident having an indwelling foley catheter with the bag not inside of a privacy bag. Resident #1's door was open with Foley bag in view. Resident was alert to name but not place and time. Interview on 12/07/23 at 9:25AM LVN A regarding Resident #1 said resident Foley bag should be inside of a privacy bag for dignity and privacy. LVN A said he was Resident #1's nurse and would ensure that resident foley bag was placed inside of a privacy bag. Interview on 12/07/23 at 10:25AM CNA B said she was Resident#1's CNA. CNA B said Resident #1's Foley catheter bag should be inside of a privacy bag for privacy reasons. CNA B said she was not aware that Resident #1's Foley catheter bag was not inside of a privacy bag. CNA B said when she arrived to work, she immediately started taking the residents vital signs and after that start passing out the resident breakfast trays. CNA B said the nurses were supposed to be making their rounds on the residents as well making sure the residents were okay. Interview on 12/07/23 at 11:45AM the DON said residents who had an indwelling Foley catheter, the Foley bag needed to be inside of a privacy bag to promote dignity for the resident (s) as well as privacy. Resident #4 Record review of Resident #4's face sheet revealed an 93year old female admitted to the facility originally 07/15/23 and again on 11/08/23 with the following diagnoses that included: acute respiratory failure, heart failure, atelectasis (collapse of the whole lung or an area of the lung), vascular dementia (memory loss in older adults), urinary tract infection, hypertension (elevated blood pressure), muscle weakness, insomnia (difficulty sleeping), cardia pacemaker (small battery powered device that prevents the hear from beating too slow), and cerebral infarction (disruption of blood flow to the brain). Record review of Resident #4's MDS dated [DATE] revealed that resident BIMS score was 12 indicating that resident cognition was intact. Record review of Resident #4's Physician Orders revealed the following: -Dated 11/08/23 Apply dignity bag for placement each shift Record review of Resident #4's care plan dated 11/08/23 revealed that resident was not being care planned for Foley Catheter. Observation on 12/09/23 at 2:20PM Resident #4 was in bed resting quietly on an air mattress. Resident #4 had an indwelling Foley Catheter that was draining clear yellow urine. Resident Foley catheter bag was not inside of privacy bag. Resident privacy bag was hanging on the bed beside the Foley bag. Resident door was open with the Foley bag in view. Interview on 12/09/23 at 2:23PM LVN P said she was Resident #4's nurse. LVN P said resident Foley bag were supposed to be inside of a privacy bag to promote privacy. LVN P said the CNA had been busy. Observation on 12/09/23 at 2:23PM with staff members sitting at the nurse station as well as CNA U standing at the nurse station. Interview on 12/09/23 at 2:30pm CNA U said she was Resident #4's CNA. CNA U said she had forgotten to place Resident #4's Foley bag inside of the privacy bag. CNA U said Foley catheter bags were supposed to placed inside of a privacy bag to promote privacy for the resident. Record review of the facility Policy on Urinary Catheter Care revised January 2016 revealed in part: .The drainage collection bag should be placed in a privacy bag for dignity purposes . Record review of the facility policy on Quality of Life---Dignity revised 10/22 revealed in part: .Residents should be cared for in a manner that promotes and enhance their sense of well-being, level of satisfaction with life, and feelings of self-worth and self-esteem .Demeaning practices and standards of care that compromise dignity are prohibited. Associates should promote dignity and assist residents; for example: helping the resident to keep urinary catheter bags covered .
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

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 and prevention control program t...

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 and prevention control program to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable disease and infections for 1 (Resident #1) of 11 residents reviewed for infection control. -Resident #1 indwelling Foley catheter bag was observed on the floor underneath Resident #1's bed on 12/07/23. This failure placed resident at risk for infections and decrease quality of life. Finding: Record review of Resident #1's face sheet reveled an 88year old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the diagnoses that included the following: osteomyelitis (inflammation of the brain cause by infection) of vertebra (back bone), sacral (portion of the spine between your lower back and tailbone) and sacrococcygeal region (joint between the sacrum and the tailbone), pressure ulcer of the sacrum, long term current use of antibiotics, elevated white blood cell count, moderate protein deficiency, muscle weakness, hyperlipidemia (elevated cholesterol), dementia (memory loss and judgement), hypertension (elevated blood pressure), retention of urine, and pneumonia (infection in the lungs). Record review of Resident #1's MDS dated [DATE] revealed a BIMS score of 12 indicating resident cognition was intact. Record review of Resident #1's Physician orders included the following order: -Dated 11/08/23 Catheter care for indwelling catheter -Dated 11/08/23 Catheter bag to gravity drainage below the bladder -Dated 11/09/23 Piperacillin 4.5gram intravenously every 8 hours for infection until 12/18/23 Record review of Resident #1's MAR for the month of December 2023 revealed that the facility was administering the antibiotic medication Piperacillin 4.5mg intravenously as ordered. Record review of Resident #1's care plan dated 11/08/23 revealed resident was being care planned for an indwelling catheter with intervention that included catheter care per policy, monitor/record/report to MD for s/sx UTI. Observation 12/07/23 at 9:20AM Resident #1 was resting in bed on an air. Further observation was made of resident having an indwelling Foley catheter with the Foley bag on the floor underneath the bed. Resident was alert and oriented to name but not place or time. Interview on 12/07/23 at 9:25AM LVN A regarding Resident #1 said resident Foley bag should not be laying on the floor due to risk of infection. Interview on 12/07/23 at 10:25AM CNA B said she was Resident #1's CNA. CNA B said Resident #1's Foley catheter bag should not be on the floor to promote infection control. Interview on 12/07/23 at 11:45AM DON said residents who had an indwelling Foley catheter, the Foley bag should not be on the floor due to infection control. Record review of the facility policy on Urinary Catheter Care revised January 2016 revealed in part: .The purpose of this procedure is to prevent infection of the resident's urinary tract .Verify the catheter tubing and drainage bag are kept off of direct contact with the floor . Record review of the facility policy on Standard Precautions revised 09/2022 revealed in part: .Standard Precautions should be used in the care of residents regardless of their diagnoses or suspected or confirmed infection status. Standard Precautions presume that all blood, body fluids, secretions, and excretions (except seat), non-intact skin mucous membranes may contain transmissible infectious agents .
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

Comprehensive Care Plan (Tag F0656)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**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 tha...

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 that included measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a residents medical, nursing, mental and psychosocial needs for 2 (Resident #2, #4) of 11 residents reviewed for care plans. -The facility failed to have a comprehensive person-centered care plan for Residents #2 and Resident #4 to address indwelling Foley Catheters. This failure placed residents at risk for infections, injury, privacy, dignity, and decrease in quality of life. Findings: Resident #2 Record review of Resident #2 face sheet revealed an 81year old male admitted to the NF on 11/06/23. Resident #2 diagnoses included the following: Urinary Tract Infection, Klebsiella Pneumonia (bacteria), gastroenteritis (intestine infection) and colitis (inflamed colon), type 2 diabetes mellitus, moderate protein-calorie malnutrition, chronic kidney disease stage 4, hypertension (high blood pressure), anemia (low blood), muscular weakness, benign prostate hyperplasia (age associated prostate gland enlargement) and acquired absence of right leg below knee. Record review of Resident #2 MDS dated [DATE] revealed that resident BIMS score was 11 indicating resident cognition was moderately intact. Further review reveled that resident was dependent of toilet hygiene, had an indwelling catheter. Record review of Resident #2's Physician Orders revealed the following: -Dated 11/06/23 Catheter for indwelling catheter every shift for catheter care cleanse area every shift monitor for redness, irritation, swelling, s/s UTI. Record review of Resident #2's Care Plan dated 11/06/23 revealed that resident was not being care planned for Foley catheter. Observation on 12/07/2023 at 12:30PM Resident #2 was resting in bed on an air mattress. Resident #2 had an indwelling Foley catheter tubing draining clear yellow urine. Resident Foley bag was inside of a privacy bag. Resident #4 Record review of Resident #4's face sheet revealed an 93year old female admitted to the facility originally 07/15/23 and again on 11/08/23 with the following diagnoses that included: acute respiratory failure, heart failure, atelectasis (collapse of the whole lung or an area of the lung), vascular dementia (memory loss in older adults), urinary tract infection, hypertension (elevated blood pressure), muscle weakness, insomnia (difficulty sleeping), cardia pacemaker (small battery powered device that prevents the hear from beating too slow), and cerebral infarction (disruption of blood flow to the brain). Record review of Resident #4's MDS dated [DATE] revealed that resident BIMS score was 12 indicating that resident cognition was intact. Record review of Resident #4's Physician Orders revealed the following: -Dated 11/08/23 Catheter care for indwelling catheter every shift for catheter care cleanse area every shift, monitor for redness, irritation, swelling, s/s of UTI. Record review of Resident #4's care plan dated 11/08/23 did not reflect resident being care planned for an indwelling Foley catheter. Observation on 12/09/23 at 2:20PM Resident #4 in bed resting quietly on an air mattress. Resident #4 had an indwelling Foley Catheter that was draining clear yellow urine. Resident Foley catheter bag was not inside of privacy bag. Resident privacy bag was hanging on the bed beside the Foley bag. Resident door was open with the Foley bag in view. Interview on 12/11/23 at 11:30AM MDS Coordinator said she was responsible for completing the resident care plans. The MDS Coordinator said it must have been an oversite on her part. The MDS Coordinator said it was very important to do a comprehensive care plan on each resident so that the staff knew how to care for a particular resident. The MDS Coordinator said she checked the orders daily to see if a resident care plan needed to be updated. Interview on 12/11/23 at 12:03PM DON said the RAI and MDS Coordinator was responsible for doing accurate and complete care plans on the residents. The DON said she was responsible for making sure the care plans were being done and updated when needed. The DON said she had to be honest in the fact that she was not checking to see if the assign staff members were updating the resident care plans because she was busy completing various task. The DON said it was important to do accurate care plans because it was a tool used to properly care for the residents. The DON said moving forward, she would be delegating her clinical managers to ensuring the resident care plans were being done and updated as needed. Record review of the facility policy on Comprehensive Care Plan dated 11/2017 reflected in part: .A comprehensive, person-centered Care Plan will be developed for each resident that includes measurable objectives and timeframes to meet the resident's [NAME], nursing, mental and psychosocial needs that have been identified through a comprehensive assessment .The Interdisciplinary Team is responsible for the review and updating of care plans .
Feb 2023 4 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

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

Pressure Ulcer Prevention (Tag F0686)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

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

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that residents received the necessary treatment and services, to promote healing and prevent infection for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #105) reviewed for pressure ulcer in that: -Facility staff failed to follow up with Wound Care Doctor's recommendation for left lateral forefoot/left medial foot wound care for Resident #105. This failure could place residents with wounds or who are at risk of developing wounds placing them at risk of infection, a decline in health, pain, and hospitalization. Findings included: Record review of the admission sheet for Resident #105 revealed he was [AGE] year-old male admitted on [DATE]. His diagnoses included pressure ulcer of sacral region, stage 3 (skin injuries that occur in the sacral region of the body, near the lower back and spine), non-pressure chronic ulcer of unspecified part of left lower leg with unspecified severity (result from an inadequate blood supply due to peripheral vascular disease, diabetes mellitus) and peripheral vascular disease (A circulatory condition in which narrowed blood vessels reduce blood flow to the limbs). Record review of Resident#105's care plan, initiated 02/09/23 and revised on 02/22/2023, revealed the following read in part: .Focus: (Resident#105) has infection of the wound. Goal: The resident will be free from complications related to infection through the review date. Interventions/Tasks: Administer antibiotic as per MD orders. Maintain universal precautions when providing resident care . Record review of Resident#105's Comprehensive MDS assessment, dated 02/16/2023, revealed a BIMS score of 10 out of 15 indicating moderately impaired cognitively. Resident required extensive assistance from staff for dressing, toilet use and personal hygiene. Resident had indwelling catheter and frequently incontinent of bowel. Further review M0150. Risk of Pressure Ulcers/Injuries revealed Resident #105 was at risk of developing pressure ulcer or injuries. M0210. Unhealed Pressure ulcers/injuries. Coded- yes. M0300. C. Stage 3: full thickness tissue loss. Subcutaneous fat may be visible, but bone, tendon or muscle is not exposed. Slough may be present but does not obscure the depth the tissue loss. May include undermining and tunneling. M0300. G. Unstageable-Deep tissue injury: 2. Number of these unstageable pressure injuries that were present upon admission/entry or reentry: Coded-1. Record review of Initial wound evaluation & Management Summary dated 2/16/2023 revealed read in part: .Focused Wound Exam (Site 1) Unstageable DTI Sacrum Full Thickness wound size (L x W x D): 3.7 x 4.5x0.1 cm. Surgical excisional debridement procedure: surgically excise 7.49cm² of devitalized tissue and necrotic subcutaneous level tissues along with slough and biofilm were removed at a depth of 0.2 cm and healthy bleeding tissue was observed. Focused Wound Exam (Site 2) Stage 3 Pressure wound of the right lower back full thickness wound size (L x W x D): 12.2 x 3.7 x 0.1 cm. Site 2: Surgical excisional debridement procedure: surgically excise 16.25cm² of devitalized tissue and necrotic subcutaneous level tissues along with slough and biofilm were removed at a depth of 0.2 cm and healthy bleeding tissue was observed. Focused Wound Exam (Site 3) Arterial wound to the left, medial foot partial thickness wound size (L x W x D): 4.1 x 5.0 x Not Measurable cm. Recommendations: Off-load wound; Consult outside specialist: follow up w/ vascular surgery as outpatient; Antibiotic choice: continue topical application of linezolid (2 caps) with bassagel qdaily. Focused Wound Exam (Site 4) Arterial wound to the left, lateral foot partial thickness wound size (L x W x D): 4.3 x 3.4 x Not Measurable cm. Recommendations Off-load wound; Consult outside specialist: follow up w/ vascular surgery as outpatient; Antibiotic choice: continue topical application of linezolid (2 caps) with bassagel qdaily . Record review of Resident#105's physician order, dated 02/17/2023, revealed an order Cleanse left lateral forefoot with wound cleanser, pat dry; apply Betadine to wound base; cover with one layer of xeroform, dry gauge and secured with kerlix and tape once daily and as needed in the morning orders recommended by Wound Care Doctor. The order was discontinued on 02/22/23. Record review of Resident#105's physician order, dated 02/17/2023, revealed an order Cleanse left medial foot with wound cleanser, pat dry; apply Betadine to wound base; cover with one layer of xeroform, dry gauge and secured with kerlix and tape once daily and as needed in the morning orders recommended by Wound Care Doctor. The order was discontinued on 02/22/23. Following order were entered on 02/22/23 in the resident's medical records: Record review of Resident#105's physician order, dated 02/22/2023, revealed an order cleanse left lateral forefoot with wound cleanser, pat dry; apply Betadine to wound base; apply mixture of three Linezolid caps plus 9 pumps bassogel to wound base after cleansing, cover with one layer of Xeroform, dry gauze and secured with kerlix and once daily and as needed in the morning orders recommended by Wound Care Doctor. Record review of Resident#105's physician order, dated 02/22/2023, revealed an order cleanse left medial foot with wound cleanser, pat dry; apply Betadine to wound base; apply mixture of three Linezolid caps plus 9 pumps bassogel to wound base after cleansing, cover with one layer of Xeroform, dry gauze and secured with kerlix and once daily and as needed in the morning for wound healing until 03/17/2023. Record review of Resident#105's physician order, dated 02/22/2023, revealed an order cleanse left lateral forefoot with wound cleanser, pat dry; apply Betadine to wound base; cover with one layer of xeroform, dry gauge and secured with kerlix and tape once daily and as needed every day shift discontinue this order once antibiotic mixture arrive. Record review of Resident#105's physician order, dated 02/22/2023, revealed an order cleanse left medial foot with wound cleanser, pat dry; apply Betadine to wound base; cover with one layer of xeroform, dry gauge and secured with kerlix and tape once daily and as needed every day shift discontinue this order once antibiotic mixture arrive. Observation and attempted interview on 02/21/23 at 9:23 a.m., revealed Resident #105 was resting on an air mattress. He was alert and well groomed. Resident did not respond to the questions asked about his pressure ulcer. In an interview on 02/22/23 at 2:48p.m., with LVN A, she said Unit Manager rounded with the Wound Care Doctor weekly on Thursdays. She said the Unit Manager was responsible for updating wound care orders and reviewing the wound care doctor's evaluation. In an interview on 02/22/23 at 3:04 p.m., with the DON, this Surveyor reviewed Resident #105's Wound Care Doctor's evaluation dated 02/16/23 and the physician orders. The DON said the wound care Doctor recommendation for the topical antibiotic were not followed. She said the Unit Manager was responsible for updating the wound care orders. In an interview on 2/23/23 at 12:20 p.m., with the Medical Director, this Surveyor reviewed Resident #105's wound care evaluation and physician orders with the MD. The MD said Resident was receiving IV antibiotic for sepsis and infected sacral wound. Resident had a positive blood culture at the hospital. When asked if she was aware of Wound Care Doctor's recommendations for topical application from the wound care Doctor's evaluation dated 02/16/23 for left medial foot and left lateral forefoot. The MD said she reviewed the wound evaluation dated 02/16/23 because she needed to know the wound measurement. Size was the concerns for her to see if the wounds were Progressing or deteriorating. She said Wound Care Doctor's recommendation were supposed to be followed. She said recommendations were considered Wound Care Doctor's order. It should have been entered in PCC and treated like an order. She said, unfortunately I didn't look at the recommendations neither did the nurses or else it would have been in place. It was missed. In an interview on 02/23/23 at 1:16p.m., with the DON, she said she talked to the WCD yesterday 02/22/23 and the WCD told her that my recommendations are my orders. She said UM was responsible for rounding with WCD and entering wound care orders in PCC I don't know why she didn't follow up with recommendations. The DON said she was responsible to oversee the Unit Managers. When asked how she monitored staff to ensure they were implementing care planned interventions. How did she monitor the resident's wound progress and how did she determine the appropriate interventions? The DON said she had not been spot-checking or reviewing the wound evaluations with the UM to make sure the orders were being followed. The DON said, I thought UM knew what she was doing. The DON said it was important to follow physician order to prevent wounds from deteriorating. At this time policy on following physician orders was requested. In an interview on 02/23/23 at 1:48p.m., with the DON and the UM, the UM said she reviewed the wound care doctor's evaluations weekly and updated the orders in PCC. She said she failed to look at the WCD's recommendations. In an interview on 02/23/23 at 3:10p.m., with the Wound Care Doctor, she said her recommendations were considered her orders. She said Resident#105's family member was concerned that the vascular doctor had prescribed topical antibiotic that was being used at the hospital and had been stopped intermittently while at the facility. WCD said it was important to complete the course of ABT. If not completed infecting bacterium would become resistant to the antibiotic and we do not want that to happen. It was imported to finish ABT. Therefore, she ordered the ABT. Record review of facility's Wound Observation and Pressure Injury/Ulcer Staging Policy (Last revised: 05/2022) read in part: .Policy overview: All licensed nurses should follow established guidelines and protocols to observe, describe tissue, evaluate, measure wounds and stage of pressure injuries/ulcers . No policy regarding following physician order was provided prior to exit.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0697 (Tag F0697)

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 pain management consistent with professional ...

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 pain management consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' goals and preferences for 1 (Resident #105) of 3 residents reviewed for pain management. -The facility staff failed to stop a wound care treatment and provide Resident #105 with pain reduction care when the resident cried and yelled out from pain he experienced during the wound care treatment. This failure placed residents who received pain medications at risk for unmanaged pain during treatments. Findings included: Record review of the admission sheet for Resident #105 revealed he was [AGE] year-old male admitted on [DATE]. His diagnoses included pressure ulcer of sacral region, stage 3 (skin injuries that occur in the sacral region of the body, near the lower back and spine), non-pressure chronic ulcer of unspecified part of left lower leg with unspecified severity (result from an inadequate blood supply due to peripheral vascular disease, diabetes mellitus) and peripheral vascular disease (A circulatory condition in which narrowed blood vessels reduce blood flow to the limbs). Record review of Resident#105's care plan, initiated 02/09/23 and revised on 02/22/2023, revealed the following read in part: .Focus: (Resident #105) is experiencing pain. OA, L2 compression fx, DVT LLE, urinary retention, multiple pressure and diabetic ulcers. Goal: The resident will not have an interruption in normal activities due to pain through the review date. Interventions: Anticipate the resident's need for pain relief, provide pain interventions and follow up for effectiveness of interventions . Record review of Resident#105's Comprehensive MDS assessment, dated 02/16/2023, revealed a BIMS score of 10 out of 15 indicating moderately impaired cognitively. Resident required extensive assistance from staff for dressing, toilet use and personal hygiene. Resident had indwelling catheter and frequently incontinent of bowel. Section J: J0100: Pain Management-A. Received scheduled pain medication regimen? Coded-No. B. Received PRN pain medications OR was offered and declined: coded- Yes. C. Received non-medication intervention for pain: Coded-No. J0200. Should pain Assessment interview be conducted? Coded-Yes. J0300. Pain Presence: Coded-Yes. J0400. Pain Frequency: Coded-Frequently. J0500: Pain Effect on Function: Coded-No. J0600. Pain Intensity-Coded- 06. Record review of Resident#105's physician order, dated 02/17/2023, revealed an order cleanse wound to sacrum with wound cleanser; pat dry; apply skin prep to Peri wound; apply Santyl to necrotic/slough tissue; cover with calcium alginate; cover with dry dressing daily and as needed if soiled. In the morning for wound healing until 03/17/2023. Record review of Resident#105's physician order, dated 02/17/2023, revealed an order cleanse pressure wound to right lower back with wound cleanser; pat dry; skin prep peri wound; apply Santyl; cover with calcium alginate and dry dressing in the morning for wound healing until 03/17/2023. Record review of Resident#105's physician order, dated 02/09/2023, revealed a traMADol HCL oral tablet 50 MG (Tramadol HCL pain medication) Give 1 tablet by mouth every 6 hours as needed for Mild Pain. Record review of Resident #105's MAR dated February 2023 revealed the resident received PRN Tramadol tablet 50mg by mouth every 6 hours for mild pain on the following dates: 2/10/23 pain level -7, 2/11/23 pain level -3, 2/12/23 pain level -8, 2/12/23 pain level -8, 2/15 /23 pain level- 9, 2/16/23 pain level -9, 2/17/23 pain level -8, 2/18 /23 pain level -5, 2/19/23 pain level -5, 2/20/23 pain level- 6, 2/21/23 pain level -9, 2/22/23 pain level- 5. Record review of Resident #105's Nurses Notes dated February 2023 revealed there was no documentation that the resident was receiving medication or non-pharmacological intervention for pain prior to wound care daily or that the physician was contacted to address pain management for the resident. Following Surveyor's questioning physician orders were entered in the Resident's medical record: Record review of Resident#105's physician order, dated 02/22/2023, revealed an order Tylenol Oral Tablet 325 MG (Acetaminophen) Give 2 tablet by mouth in the morning for pain Give 30 minutes before wound care is done. Record review of Resident#105's physician order, dated 02/23/2023, revealed an order for Lidoderm patch 5% (Lidocaine) Apply to lower back keep it on during day-time and off at bedtime. Observation on 02/22/23 at 2:35 p.m., revealed LVN A performing wound care on Resident #105 assisted by CNA D. Resident #105 was assisted onto his left side revealing there was no dressing on the resident's back. The wounds were covered with dry gauge. Further observation revealed unstageable pressure ulcer to the sacral/coccyx area approximately 3 cm in diameter and a stage 3 pressure ulcer to the right lower wound area approximately 12 cm in diameter. LVN A cleaned the center of the sacral wound the resident cried out in pain and said, it hurts. LVN A cleaned the perimeter of the wound and the resident yelled again ahhhhh. At this time, Resident #105 family member ran in the room and said, are you okay dad. LVN A said, I know it hurts sorry and continued with the treatment. When LVN A dried sacral wound with a dry 4 x 4-inch gauze, the resident cried out in pain. Then, LVN A cleaned the center of the right lower wound the resident cried out in pain. LVN A cleaned the perimeter of the wound and the resident yelled again. LVN A did not ask the resident if he was in pain and continued with the treatment. When the LVN A dried the area with a dry 4 x 4-inch gauze, the resident cried out in pain. LVN A said out loud, I am almost done. LVN A looked at this Surveyor and said, I don't remember the orders do you mind if I go check the orders. LVN A removed her soiled gloves without sanitizing/washing her hands left the room. Returned after few minutes sanitized her hands, donned new gloves and continued the wound care treatment. The resident was seen flinching when LVN A applied skin prep, Santyl and calcium alginate to the sacral and right lower wounds. The resident yelled out in pain when the dry dressing was applied. This surveyor asked the resident if he was in pain and the resident said, yes. LVN A said, he always yells in pain when I do his wound care. When I ask him where he is hurting, he says everywhere. LVN A said he received his prn tramadol earlier this morning. She said resident did not have any break thru pain meds other than the tramadol. She said it was either every 6 hours or every 8 hours was not sure she would have to go and look at his orders. In an interview on 02/22/23 at 3:04 p.m., with the DON, she said Resident #105 was able to verbalize pain. She said the nurse should have stopped, medicated or repositioned the resident, covered the wound with a dressing, and continued the treatment when the pain was managed. In an interview on 02/23/23 at 1:08p.m., with LVN A, she said Resident #105 was given prn tramadol earlier that morning. She said, he always yells when I do his wound care. It's a stage 3 when you touch it. It's not going to hurt. But I should have addressed the pain when he said ahhh! He was verbalizing that he was in pain. He also moved his body away each time I touched the wound. She said she was in serviced on pain management sometime last month. She could not recall the exact date. In an interview on 2/23/23 at 11:04a.m., with the Medical Director, MD reviewed Resident #105's physician orders with the Surveyor. MD said Resident came with Tramadol 50 mg q6hrs order from the hospital. MD said I thought Tramadol was controlling the pain. It was not brought to my attention prior to today that resident was unable to tolerate pain during wound care. She said she saw her NP was in the facility yesterday 2/22/23 and wrote an order for Tylenol 30 minutes prior to wound care. She said Stage 3 was superficial and painful because of the nerves. She said she also ordered the Lidoderm patch today to apply to the lower back for pain. Record review of facility's Pain Management policy (last revised: 10/22) revealed read in part: .Policy Overview: the purpose of the policy is to identify, treat and manage the resident's pain levels. The program should provide a systematic approach to data collection using objective measurements of the wound level in effectiveness of the pain relief medication. Policy Detail: 2. If resident is having pain, the level of pain is measured using one of the following scales: a) using a scale of 0-10: zero (0) being the least pain, and ten (10) being the most severe pain. b) If a resident is unable to verbally communicate, or does not understand English, the resident should be given Faces Pain Intensity Pictures which when pointed to, will indicate the severity of the resident's current pain level. c) A verbal descriptive scale. d) PAINAD scale is used in advance dementia, utilizing observation techniques (e.g., facial expressions, breathing, body language, negative vocalization, and consolability). 3. Pain Management Strategies: a) non-pharmacological interventions may be appropriate alone or in conjunction with medications. b) Pharmacological Medications (i.e., analgesics) may be prescribed to manage pain, however they do not usually address the cause of pain and can have adverse effects on the resident (e.g., drowsiness, increased risk of falling; loss of appetite). i. Identify the level of pain and document effectiveness as indicated .
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0761 (Tag F0761)

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 store all drugs and biologicals in locked compartment...

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 store all drugs and biologicals in locked compartments under proper temperature controls, and permit only authorized personnel to have access for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #3) reviewed for medications in that: -The facility failed to ensure Resident #3 did not have medications clotrimazole cream 1% (a medicated antifungal skin cream. It treats certain kinds of skin fungal or yeast infections) and zinc oxide ointment (a medicated ointment that treats or prevents skin irritation like cuts, burns or diaper rash) in her room. This failure could affect residents and place them at risk for medication diversion, being administered the wrong medication, injury, and hospitalization. Findings include: Record review of the admission sheet (undated) for Resident #3 revealed a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] and re-admitted on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included hypertension (blood pressure that is higher than normal), anemia (A condition in which the blood doesn't have enough healthy red blood cells) and metabolic encephalopathy (an acute condition of global cerebral dysfunction in the absence of primary structural brain disease). Record review of Resident #3's Comprehensive MDS assessment, dated 01/16/2023 revealed BIMS score of 11 out of 15 indicating moderately impaired cognitively. She required extensive assistance from staff for dressing, personal hygiene, transfers and bed mobility. She required total dependence from staff for toilet-use. Record review of Resident #3's care plan, dated 11/08/2022 and revised on 02/11/2023, revealed the following care plan: Focus: (Resident #3) has impaired cognitive function/or impaired thought processes metabolic encephalopathy. Goal: The resident will be able to communicate basic needs on a daily basis through the review date. Interventions/Tasks: Approach resident in calm, gentle manner. Explain care and procedures to resident prior to beginning. Resident #3 was not care planned for having meds at bedside. During an observation and attempted interview on 02/21/2023 at 9:32 a.m. of Resident #3, in her room, revealed a bottle of zinc oxide ointment on top of the dresser across from resident's bed, a tube of clotrimazole cream 1% sitting on top of the side table. Resident #3 mumbled for 5 minutes, while being interviewed, and did not respond appropriately to the questions asked about meds at bedside. During an observation and attempted interview on 02/22/2023 at 9:18 a.m. of Resident #3, in her room, revealed a tube of clotrimazole cream 1% sitting on top of the side table. Resident #3 mumbled for 5 minutes, while being interviewed, and did not respond appropriately to the questions asked about meds at bedside. Record review of Resident #3's physician's order revealed Resident #3 was not prescribed the above-mentioned medication. There were no orders for self-administration. During an observation and interview on 02/22/23 at 11:39a.m., with LVN A, she said residents were not supposed to have any medications at bedside because they could react with any other medications given to them per their orders. She said she threw away the bottle of zinc oxide ointment after using it on the resident this morning because it was empty. At that time, LVN A took the Clotrimazole Cream 1% out of the resident's room and placed it in the treatment cart. LVN A said, I don't know what this cream is used for. I know resident has a wound and the evening shift nurse was assigned to do the wound care on Resident#3. Evening shift nurse might have left it in the room. In a later interview and record review on 02/22/23 at 12:05p.m. with LVN A. This Surveyor reviewed Resident #3's physician orders with the Surveyor. LVN A said the resident did not have an order for zinc oxide and clotrimazole cream. She said, I was not aware resident had meds in her room. She said nurses needed to call the doctor and get an order. In an interview on 02/22/23 at 3:04p.m., the DON said residents were not allowed to have medication in their rooms. She said if a resident was deemed safe to self-administer medication, they would also need a doctor's order. She said Resident #3 was not deemed safe to have medications in her room. DON said Resident was not supposed to have meds at her bedside. She said if med was not identified and not in physician orders the nurse should have not placed it in the treatment cart. She said nurses, cnas, unit manager made rounds and were responsible for checking the rooms for medications. She said risk for leaving meds at bedside was not safe med administration, could have adverse effect, unidentified meds could interact with prescribed meds. She said she was not aware of Resident #3 having meds at bedside. Record review of facility's medical Management Overview- MED-1 policy (last revised 03/2019) read in part: .Policy Detail: A. Medication management services include but are not limited to: keeping medications in a locked and safe place, inaccessible to persons other than employees responsible for their supervision .
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 ...

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 1 of 6 residents (Resident #105) reviewed for infection control, in that: -The facility failed to ensure LVN A performed hand hygiene when moving from a dirty to clean site, while performing Resident #105's wound care. This failure could place residents at risk for or infections. Findings included: Record review of the admission sheet for Resident #105 revealed he was [AGE] year-old male admitted on [DATE]. His diagnoses included pressure ulcer of sacral region, stage 3 (skin injuries that occur in the sacral region of the body, near the lower back and spine), non-pressure chronic ulcer of unspecified part of left lower leg with unspecified severity (result from an inadequate blood supply due to peripheral vascular disease, diabetes mellitus) and peripheral vascular disease (A circulatory condition in which narrowed blood vessels reduce blood flow to the limbs). Record review of Resident#105's care plan, initiated 02/09/23 and revised on 02/22/2023, revealed the following read in part: . Focus: (Resident#105) has infection of the wound. Goal: The resident will be free from complications related to infection through the review date. Interventions/Tasks: Administer antibiotic as per MD orders. Maintain universal precautions when providing resident care. Record review of Resident#105's Comprehensive MDS assessment, dated 02/16/2023, revealed a BIMS score of 10 out of 15 indicating moderately impaired cognitively. Resident required extensive assistance from staff for dressing, toilet use and personal hygiene. Resident had indwelling catheter and frequently incontinent of bowel. Further review M0150. Risk of Pressure Ulcers/Injuries revealed Resident #105 was at risk of developing pressure ulcer or injuries. M0210. Unhealed Pressure ulcers/injuries. Coded- yes. M0300. C. Stage 3: full thickness tissue loss. Subcutaneous fat may be visible, but bone, tendon or muscle is not exposed. Slough may be present but does not obscure the depth the tissue loss. May include undermining and tunneling. M0300. G. Unstageable-Deep tissue injury: 2. Number of these unstageable pressure injuries that were present upon admission/entry or reentry: Coded-1. Record review of Resident#105's physician order, dated 02/11/2023 revealed an order for Cefepime HCL Solution 1 GM/50ML use 1 gram intravenously every 12 hours for infection for 14 days. Record review of Resident#105's physician order, dated 02/09/2023, revealed an order to cleanse Right inner ankle with wound cleanser, pat dry, applied xeroform then covered with dry gauze and dry dressing every day shift. Record review of Resident#105's physician order, dated 02/17/2023, revealed an order cleanse wound to sacrum with wound cleanser; pat dry; apply skin prep to Peri wound; apply Santyl to necrotic/slough tissue; cover with calcium alginate; cover with dry dressing daily and as needed if soiled. In the morning for wound healing until 03/17/2023 Record review of Resident#105's physician order, dated 02/17/2023, revealed an order cleanse pressure wound to right lower back with wound cleanser; pat dry; skin prep peri wound; apply Santyl; cover with calcium alginate and dry dressing in the morning for wound healing until 03/17/2023. Record review of Resident#105's physician order, dated 02/17/2023, revealed an order Cleanse left lateral forefoot with wound cleanser, pat dry; apply Betadine to wound base; cover with one layer of xeroform, dry gauge and secured with kerlix and tape once daily and as needed in the morning orders recommended by Wound Care Doctor. The order was discontinued on 02/22/23. review of Resident#105's physician order, dated 02/17/2023, revealed an order Cleanse left medial foot with wound cleanser, pat dry; apply Betadine to wound base; cover with one layer of xeroform, dry gauge and secured with kerlix and tape once daily and as needed in the morning orders recommended by Wound Care Doctor. The order was discontinued on 02/22/23. Record review of Initial wound evaluation & Management Summary dated 2/16/2023 revealed read in part: .Focused Wound Exam (Site 1) Unstageable DTI Sacrum Full Thickness wound size (L x W x D): 3.7 x 4.5x0.1 cm. Surgical excisional debridement procedure: surgically excise 7.49cm² of devitalized tissue and necrotic subcutaneous level tissues along with slough and biofilm were removed at a depth of 0.2 cm and healthy bleeding tissue was observed. Focused Wound Exam (Site 2) Stage 3 Pressure wound of the right lower back full thickness wound size (L x W x D): 12.2 x 3.7 x 0.1 cm. Site 2: Surgical excisional debridement procedure: surgically excise 16.25cm² of devitalized tissue and necrotic subcutaneous level tissues along with slough and biofilm were removed at a depth of 0.2 cm and healthy bleeding tissue was observed. Focused Wound Exam (Site 3) Arterial wound to the left, medial foot partial thickness wound size (L x W x D): 4.1 x 5.0 x Not Measurable cm. Recommendations: Off-load wound; Consult outside specialist: follow up w/ vascular surgery as outpatient; Antibiotic choice : continue topical application of linezolid (2 caps) with bassagel qdaily. Focused Wound Exam (Site 4) Arterial wound to the left, lateral foot partial thickness wound size (L x W x D): 4.3 x 3.4 x Not Measurable cm. Recommendations Off-load wound; Consult outside specialist: follow up w/ vascular surgery as outpatient; Antibiotic choice : continue topical application of linezolid (2 caps) with bassagel qdaily . Observation on 02/22/23 at 2:35 p.m., revealed the LVN A performing wound care on Resident #105 assisted by CNA D. Resident #105 was assisted onto his left side revealing there was no dressing on the resident's back. The wounds were covered with dry gauge. Further observation revealed unstageable pressure ulcer to the sacral/coccyx area approximately 3 cm in diameter and a stage 3 pressure ulcer to the right lower wound area approximately 12 cm in diameter. LVN A looked at this Surveyor and said, I don't remember the orders do you mind if I go check the orders. LVN A removed her soiled gloves without sanitizing/washing her hands left the room. Returned after few minutes sanitized her hands, donned new gloves and continued the wound care treatment. LVN A removed right inner ankle dressing dated 02/21/23 observation revealed unstageable (had slough) right inner ankle area approximately 0.3 cm in diameter. LVN A cleansed the wound with normal saline, pat dried with the same soiled gloves applied xeroform, dry gauze and covered with dry dressing. With the same soiled gloves LVN A removed left medial foot /left lateral forefoot dressing (kerlix wrapped around the wound) left medial foot area approximately 4 cm in diameter. Left lateral forefoot area approximately 4 cm in diameter. LVN A cleansed both wounds with normal saline, pat dried, with the same soiled gloves applied betadine, xeroform, dry gauge and wrapped with kerlix. In an interview on 02/22/23 at 3:04p.m., with the DON, she said she expected staff to follow standard infection control techniques; to perform handwashing before the treatment, between gloves change and after moving from dirty to clean site as it placed risk for infections. She said staff were provided mass infection control in service on COVID sign and symptoms, infection control and hand washing sometime in January 2023. She said to prepare for the annual survey Unit Mangers had been doing observations on staff providing care don't know how that fell through the cracks. She said she UM were eye bawling and did not have any documentations of the check off/spot checks. She said the potential risk to the resident, due to this failure, was cross contamination. At this time policy on infection control and hand hygiene were requested. In an interview on 02/23/23 at 1:08 p.m., LVN A said she was not a certified wound care nurse and did not receive wound care training at this facility. She said she could not recall having wound care competency check with the DON/ADON/Unit Manager. She said she started working in April 2022 at this facility. She said upon hire she received 3 days training on the floor shadowing another nurse. She said that nurse did run down on how to clean the wound. She said she did not perform hand hygiene or changed gloves when moving from dirty area to clean because I thought we had to switch gloves when switching wound sites. She said, I should have changed my gloves, sanitized my hands before applying santyl and calcium alginate on the wound. While removing old dressing and cleaning the wound I contaminated my gloves. She said this failure placed risk for infections. She said the facility provided in-servicing on infection control sometime last month. She could not recall the exact date. In an interview on 02/23/23 at 1:48 p.m., with the DON and the Unit Manager, UM said she tried to spot check nurses as much as possible at least once a week. She said she observed LVN A do the med pass last week and wound care two weeks ago. UM said it was a simple skin tear dressing change on another resident. She said she could not recall the name of that resident, but it was not on Resident# 105. Record review of facility Wound Care Competency (revised 02/2020) revealed read in part: Skills: 11. Wash tissue around the wound that is usually covered by the dressing, tape or gauze with wound cleanser or normal saline. 12. Perform hand hygiene. 13. Apply treatment as indicated . Record review of facility's Handwashing/Hand Hygiene policy (last revised: 01/2021) revealed read in part: .Policy Overview: This community considers hand hygiene the primary means to prevent the spread of infections. G. CDC recommends using Alcohol Based Hand Sanitizer with 60-95% alcohol in healthcare settings. Unless hands are visibly soiled, and alcohol -based hand rub is preferred over soap and water in most clinical situations due to evidence of better compliance compared to soap and water during routine resident care. 7. Before handling clean or soiled dressings, gauze pads, etc.; 8. Before moving from a contaminated body site to a clean body site during resident care; 11. After handling used dressings, contaminated equipment, etc.; 13. After removing gloves; I. The use of gloves does not replace hand washing/hand hygiene . Record review of facility's Infection Prevention and Surveillance policy (Last revised: 01/20) revealed read in part: .Policy overview: The Nurse Leader designee shall track, trend and monitor infections on an ongoing basis to assist with the prevention, development and transmission of disease and infections . Policy regarding infection control was not provided prior to exit.
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Life-Threatening (Immediate Jeopardy)
J - Isolated K - Pattern L - Widespread
Actual Harm
G - Isolated H - Pattern I - Widespread
Potential for Harm
D - Isolated E - Pattern F - Widespread
No Harm (Minor)
A - Isolated B - Pattern C - Widespread

Questions to Ask on Your Visit

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

Our Honest Assessment

Strengths
  • • Licensed and certified facility. Meets minimum state requirements.
Concerns
  • • Multiple safety concerns identified: 2 life-threatening violation(s), 2 harm violation(s), $72,239 in fines. Review inspection reports carefully.
  • • 19 deficiencies on record, including 2 critical (life-threatening) violations. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
  • • $72,239 in fines. Extremely high, among the most fined facilities in Texas. Major compliance failures.
  • • Grade F (6/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
Bottom line: Trust Score of 6/100 indicates significant concerns. Thoroughly evaluate alternatives.

About This Facility

What is Brookdale Galleria's CMS Rating?

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

How is Brookdale Galleria Staffed?

CMS rates BROOKDALE GALLERIA's staffing level at 3 out of 5 stars, which is average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 63%, which is 17 percentage points above the Texas average of 46%. High turnover can affect care consistency as new staff learn residents' individual needs. RN turnover specifically is 78%, which is notably high. RNs provide skilled clinical oversight, so turnover in this role can affect medical care quality.

What Have Inspectors Found at Brookdale Galleria?

State health inspectors documented 19 deficiencies at BROOKDALE GALLERIA during 2023 to 2025. These included: 2 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death), 2 that caused actual resident harm, and 15 with potential for harm. Immediate Jeopardy findings are rare and represent the most serious regulatory concerns. They require immediate corrective action.

Who Owns and Operates Brookdale Galleria?

BROOKDALE GALLERIA is owned by a for-profit company. For-profit facilities operate as businesses with obligations to shareholders or private owners. The facility is operated by HEALTHPEAK PROPERTIES, INC., a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 56 certified beds and approximately 42 residents (about 75% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in HOUSTON, Texas.

How Does Brookdale Galleria Compare to Other Texas Nursing Homes?

Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Texas, BROOKDALE GALLERIA's overall rating (2 stars) is below the state average of 2.8, staff turnover (63%) is significantly higher than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (2 stars) is below the national benchmark.

What Should Families Ask When Visiting Brookdale Galleria?

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

Is Brookdale Galleria Safe?

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

Do Nurses at Brookdale Galleria Stick Around?

Staff turnover at BROOKDALE GALLERIA is high. At 63%, the facility is 17 percentage points above the Texas average of 46%. Registered Nurse turnover is particularly concerning at 78%. RNs handle complex medical decisions and coordinate care — frequent RN changes can directly impact care quality. High turnover means new staff may not know residents' individual needs, medications, or preferences. It can also be disorienting for residents, especially those with dementia who rely on familiar faces. Families should ask: What is causing the turnover? What retention programs are in place? How do you ensure care continuity during staff transitions?

Was Brookdale Galleria Ever Fined?

BROOKDALE GALLERIA has been fined $72,239 across 4 penalty actions. This is above the Texas average of $33,801. Fines in this range indicate compliance issues significant enough for CMS to impose meaningful financial consequences. Common causes include delayed correction of deficiencies, repeat violations, or care failures affecting resident safety. Families should ask facility leadership what changes have been made since these penalties.

Is Brookdale Galleria on Any Federal Watch List?

BROOKDALE GALLERIA is not on any federal watch list. The most significant is the Special Focus Facility (SFF) program, which identifies the bottom 1% of nursing homes nationally based on persistent, serious quality problems. Not being on this list means the facility has avoided the pattern of deficiencies that triggers enhanced federal oversight. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review the facility's inspection history directly.