Does AVALON PLACE KIRBYVILLE have any serious inspection findings?

Yes, AVALON PLACE KIRBYVILLE has 1 Immediate Jeopardy citation on record, which represent the most serious type of deficiency. The facility has 19 total deficiencies from recent inspections.

What are the staffing levels at AVALON PLACE KIRBYVILLE?

AVALON PLACE KIRBYVILLE has a two-star staffing rating from CMS with 0.42 RN hours per resident per day. This rating is based on registered nurse (RN), licensed practical nurse (LPN), and nurse aide staffing hours.

Where is AVALON PLACE KIRBYVILLE located?

AVALON PLACE KIRBYVILLE is located in KIRBYVILLE, TX. It is a Medicare and Medicaid certified skilled nursing facility.

How many beds does AVALON PLACE KIRBYVILLE have?

AVALON PLACE KIRBYVILLE has 114 certified beds.

Who owns AVALON PLACE KIRBYVILLE?

AVALON PLACE KIRBYVILLE is a government - hospital district facility and is part of the CREATIVE SOLUTIONS IN HEALTHCARE chain.

What questions should families ask when visiting AVALON PLACE KIRBYVILLE?

Families visiting AVALON PLACE KIRBYVILLE should ask about how serious violations have been addressed. Also ask to speak with current residents or families, tour during mealtime, and request a copy of the most recent inspection report.

How does AVALON PLACE KIRBYVILLE compare to other nursing homes?

AVALON PLACE KIRBYVILLE has a 3-star overall rating, which is average compared to other nursing homes in TX. Consider visiting multiple facilities before making a decision.

AVALON PLACE KIRBYVILLE

Name: AVALON PLACE KIRBYVILLE
Address: 700 N HERNDON, KIRBYVILLE, TX, 75956, US
Telephone: (409) 423-6111
Rating: 3.0

700 N HERNDON, KIRBYVILLE, TX 75956 · (409) 423-6111

Government - Hospital district 114 Beds CREATIVE SOLUTIONS IN HEALTHCARE Data: November 2025 1 Immediate Jeopardy citation

Trust Grade

51/100

#396 of 1168 in TX

Share this report:

AVALON PLACE KIRBYVILLE nursing home in KIRBYVILLE, TX - Photo 1 of 5

AVALON PLACE KIRBYVILLE nursing home in KIRBYVILLE, TX - Photo 2 of 5

Photo by Cam W.

AVALON PLACE KIRBYVILLE nursing home in KIRBYVILLE, TX - Photo 3 of 5

Photo by Russel McKinney

AVALON PLACE KIRBYVILLE nursing home in KIRBYVILLE, TX - Photo 4 of 5

Photo by Russel McKinney

AVALON PLACE KIRBYVILLE nursing home in KIRBYVILLE, TX - Photo 5 of 5

1 / 5 photos

Last Inspection: September 2024

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

Overview

Avalon Place Kirbyville has a Trust Grade of C, indicating average performance compared to other facilities. It ranks #396 out of 1,168 in Texas, placing it in the top half of all state facilities, and #2 out of 3 in Jasper County, meaning only one local option is better. The facility is on an improving trend, with issues decreasing from 3 in 2024 to 2 in 2025, though it still has a concerning history, including a critical incident where a resident was allowed to exit the building unsupervised, posing a serious risk. Staffing is a strength, with a low turnover rate of 0%, but the facility received a below-average rating for staffing. While the $14,020 in fines is average, it reflects some compliance issues, and there are concerns about food safety management and equipment maintenance, which could impact residents' health and safety.

Trust Score: C
In Texas: #396/1168
Safety Record: High Risk
Inspections: Getting Better
Staff Stability: Turnover data not reported for this facility.
Penalties: $14,020 in fines. Lower than most Texas facilities. Relatively clean record.
Skilled Nurses: Each resident gets only 25 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for Texas. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
Violations: 19 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.

★★★☆☆

3.0

Overall Rating

★★☆☆☆

2.0

Staff Levels

★★★★★

5.0

Care Quality

★★☆☆☆

2.0

Inspection Score

↔

Stable

2024: 3 issues

2025: 2 issues

The Good

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

Facility shows strength in quality measures, fire safety.

The Bad

3-Star Overall Rating

Near Texas average (2.8)

Meets federal standards, typical of most facilities

Federal Fines: $14,020

Below median ($33,413)

Minor penalties assessed

Chain: CREATIVE SOLUTIONS IN HEALTHCARE

Part of a multi-facility chain

Ask about local staffing decisions and management

The Ugly 19 deficiencies on record

1 life-threatening

Sept 2025 2 deficiencies 1 IJ

CRITICAL (J) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation

Accident Prevention (Tag F0689)

Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident

Read full inspector narrative →

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure each resident received adequate supervision to prevent accidents for 1 of 7 residents (Resident #101) reviewed for accidents and supervision. The facility failed to provide adequate supervision for Resident #101 on 05/12/25 when the resident was removed from the secured unit and brought out to the main dining room for an activity. The resident exited the facility through a door that did not alarm and without staff knowledge and was found walking outside the back of the facility walking down a sidewalk. The non-compliance was identified as past non-compliance (PNC). The Immediate Jeopardy began on 05/12/2025 and ended on 05/12/25. The facility had corrected the noncompliance before the survey began. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving appropriate supervision and interventions which could lead to residents sustaining serious injury or harm. Findings include: Record review of a face sheet dated 09/09/25 indicated Resident #101 was a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted [DATE] with diagnoses which included catatonic schizophrenia (severe mental condition combined with pronounced psychomotor disturbances) dementia (loss of cognitive functioning), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (lung disease that causes difficulty breathing by blocking airflow from the lungs), hemiplegia (paralysis of one side of the body associated with varying degrees of abnormal muscle tone, impaired sensation, visual impairment and loss of movement control on the affected side) and anxiety (persistent and excessive worry that interferes with daily activities). Record review of a quarterly MDS, dated [DATE], indicated Resident #101 had a BIMS score of 3 indicated severely impaired cognition and cognitive patterns of inattention and disorganized thinking continuously. Diagnoses were dementia, schizophrenia, anxiety, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The assessment indicated Resident #101 wandered 1 to 3 days of the look back period and was independent of sitting to stand and walking 150 feet in a corridor or similar space. Record review of Resident #101's care plan, with a target date of 12/04/25, indicated Resident #101 was at risk for wandering related to impaired safety awareness and required secure unit placement due to being a wander threat, elopement risk, disorientation and impaired safety awareness. The care plan indicated Resident #101 had an actual elopement attempt; he wandered outside the facility unattended initiated on 05/12/25. Resident #101's care plan interventions included resident will reside in the secure unit. Record review of Resident #101's Elopement Risk assessment dated [DATE], indicated Resident #101 was a high elopement risk and resided on a secure unit. Record review of a progress note dated 05/12/25, LVN G indicated it was reported to the DON that Resident #101 was brought off the secured unit to attend a facility activity in the dining room and when staff were returning residents to the unit Resident #101 was not readily available. The progress note indicated staff immediately made a thorough search of the facility and surrounding premises and noted Resident #101 walking along the sidewalk. Resident was returned to the secure unit with no injury or pain noted. The progress note indicated a family member and physician were notified Resident #101 had wandered outside unsupervised. Record review of an Event Nurses' Note Elope or Attempt dated 05/12/25 indicated Resident #101 was brought off the secured unit to attend a facility activity in the dining room and when staff was returning residents to the secured unit, Resident #101 was not readily available. The note indicated staff immediately made a thorough search of the facility and surrounding premises and noted the resident outside the facility walking along the sidewalk. Resident was returned to the secured unit. The note indicated he exited the left side dining room door, was missing less than 5 minutes, and was discovered on the sidewalk at the left side rear of the building. The note indicated Resident #101 was cognitively impaired, wandered, and required cueing and acquired no injury. Record review of the investigation worksheet for Resident #101's dated 05/12/25 indicated the allegation was made on 05/12/25 at 3:00 p.m. and was reported to state on 05/12/25 at 5:14 p.m. Record review of Resident #101's Provider Investigation Report dated 05/12/25 indicated the nursing facility was hosting a carnival in the dining room. Several residents from the Secured unit were brought out to enjoy the festivities. Resident #101 was sitting on the left side of the dining room with several residents from the secure unit. Resident #101 was not at the table. The facility began a search and called code orange. The DON located Resident #101 as he was walking on the sidewalk. She asked why he was outside and his response was not clear, but the DON walked Resident #101 back inside with no hesitation. Resident #101 was assessed with no injury or pain. The investigation summary indicated Resident #101 was outside for 1-2 minutes at most. Resident 101 was returned to the Secured unit and not noted exit seeking. The facilities findings were inconclusive. Staff were in-serviced on Elopement prevention, Elopement prevention of secured unit resident attending activities away from the secured unit, Resident Rights, Abuse/ Neglect, color code system, no alarms are to be turned off and no doors propped open, demonstration for operation of doors in dining room and secured unit. The facility performed environmental rounds, reviewed Resident #101's care plan and MDS. The facility notified the family, physician, ombudsman and HHSC. A new mag-lock keypad alarm system was installed on exit door on left side of dining room and the Incident was presented during QAPI. Record review of Resident #101's Elopement Risk assessment dated [DATE], indicated Resident #101 was a high elopement risk, resided on a secure unit and had an elopement attempt. During an interview on 09/08/25 at 11:55 a.m., CNA L said on 05/12/25 CNA Y took Resident #101 out to the carnival and left him with a nurse. She said she was unsure which nurse. She said she was taking her dirty laundry barrel out to the end of Hall 200 to laundry and as she passed the dining room, she saw Resident #101 sitting at the table in front of the window in the dining room about 8 to 10 steps from the door to exit the dining area to the outside of building. CNA L said she took her barrel to the laundry at the end of Hall 200 when she came back, Resident #101 was not sitting in his chair and she asked the DON where Resident #101 was. She said she notified the Administrator who called for a Code Orange and she went down Hall 200 and exited to the left. CNA L said Resident #101 was brought back to the secured unit and started on q 15-minute checks for a few days. She said Resident #101 wandered but did not push on the doors. CNA L said the secured unit residents now attend activities on the unit only. During an Interview on 09/08/25 at 1:55 p.m., the AD said it was nursing home week, and the facility was having a carnival in the dining room on 05/12/25. She said she and the ADON went to the secured unit and chose 3 appropriate residents from the unit to enjoy the carnival. She said she was taking pictures of residents when she saw CNA Y bring Resident #101 into the carnival. The AD said she assisted the 3 residents from the secured unit playing games and did not see Resident #101 exit the facility. She said the last time she saw Resident #101 CNA Y was with him. The AD said when she was returning the 3 residents from the secured unit back to the unit, she asked CNA Y if Resident #101 was back there, and CNA Y said she had left him at the carnival. The AD said she immediately notified the Administrator to call a Code Orange, but the DON had already found and returned him into the building. The AD said CNA Y did not ask her to monitor Resident #101 before she left him. The AD said the residents on the secured unit were now enjoying on the unit activities at this time. She said after the incident, she was educated on abuse/ neglect, resident rights, and elopement prevention. She said she was educated on removing secured unit resident off the secured unit to include notifying the charge nurse when staff removed the resident from the unit, stay with them the whole time, and notifying the charge nurse when the resident was returned to the unit. The AD said if a resident eloped, she would notify the charge nurse, the DON, the Administrator and whole team, a Code Orange would be announced, and everyone would start looking for the missing resident inside and outside. The AD said she would start looking where the resident was last seen and spread out including resident rooms, closets, bathrooms in every room, the kitchen, and outside of the facility. During an interview on 9/8/25 at 3:50 p.m., CNA Y said she was educated on abuse/ neglect, resident rights and elopement prevention on hire. She said after the incident she was educated if a resident eloped, she would notify the charge nurse, a Code Orange would be called, and everyone would start looking for the resident inside and outside of the facility. She said she had been there 2 weeks when the incident with Resident #101 happened. She said a carnival was going on in the main dining room off the secured unit and some staff had come to the unit and asked if any residents wanted to go to the carnival. CNA Y said Resident #101 wanted to go, so she told LVN G on the secured unit at the time and she said to take him to the carnival, but she would have to come back to the unit. She said she and Resident #101 stayed in the main dining room for about 15 to 20 minutes and she handed him over to the ADON. CNA Y said, I asked the ADON do you have him I have to go back to the Unit. I had to say do you have him twice before she agreed. She said the ADON took a picture of Resident #101 and then CNA Y said she left Resident #101 sitting at a table by himself. She said after she returned to the secured unit, within a few minutes, she heard a Code Orange called. CNA Y said she believed the alarm was disabled on the door to exit the dining room and Resident #101 walked out the door and was found on the driveway behind the building. CNA Y said she verified with the ADON twice before she left Resident #101. She said when she left the carnival area, the ADON was taking Resident #101 to get popcorn. During an Interview on 09/08/25 at 3:40 p.m. the ADON said it was nursing home week and on 05/12/25, the facility was having a carnival in the main dining room. She said she and the AD went to the secured unit and chose 3 appropriate residents to come off the unit to enjoy the carnival. She said she noticed Resident #101 was in the dining room with CNA Y who was a new CNA to the facility. She said during the event she gave Resident #101 some popcorn while he was at the table at the corner of the main dining room with CNA Y with him. The ADON said when the residents from the secured unit were being taken back to the secured unit, she noticed Resident #101 was not there. The ADON said a Code Orange was called, and Resident #101 was found outside the back of the building. She said she was aware CNA Y said she left Resident #101 with her but she said she did not accept supervision of Resident #101 from CNA Y; she already was monitoring 3 residents from the secured unit that were chosen due to appropriateness to be removed from the secured unit. She said CNA Y did not ask her to monitor Resident #101. The ADON said the DON found Resident #101 and returned him to the unit, but she was not sure how long he was missing. She said the secured unit residents were now only attending activities on the secure unit and not leaving the unit for activities at this time. She was educated on abuse/ neglect, resident rights, elopement prevention, the procedures for removing residents from the secured unit, and on demonstration of operating the doors of secured unit and dining room exit doors, to remain locked and alarmed at all times. She said if a resident eloped, she would notify the charge nurse, the DON, the Administrator, a code orange would be announced, and everyone would start looking for the missing resident inside and outside of the facility. During an Interview on 09/08/25 at 3:35 p.m., the Maintenance Director said on 05/12/25 he was outside of the facility right outside Hall 100 talking to a painter and heard the DON outside. He said he then saw Resident #101 walking down the sidewalk behind the facility at the side of the building and the DON met Resident #101 and walked him back into the facility. He said before and after the incident he was educated on abuse/neglect, resident rights, and elopement prevention. During an interview on 09/08/25 at 5:25 p.m., the DON said she was down Hall 100 and ran out hall 100 exit door and toward the back of the building, she reached the driveway in the back of the building, she could see Resident #101 on the sidewalk and called for the Maintenance Director to get to him. She said the Maintenance Director was standing at the end of Hall 100. She said she ran past the Maintenance Director and met Resident #101 and walked him around the building and entered through the end of Hall 100. The DON said Resident #101 was outside the back of the building about 45 steps from the external exit door of kitchen. She said he walked out the door by the left side of the kitchen. She said a new keypad was installed on 05/12/25 to the dining room and new alarms on both exit doors. The DON said she sat in the kitchen all day on 05/12/25 with her laptop monitoring the exit doors to the dining room until the lock was installed and both door alarms were functioning. The DON said the facility had only on the secured unit activities at this time. She said she in-served staff on elopement prevention and resident rights before and after the incident. She said she in-serviced staff on doors not to be propped open and no alarms to be turned off after the incident. The DON said CNA Y did not come back to the facility after the incident and self-termed. The DON said she was unable to do a one-on-one training with CNA Y. The DON said she in-serviced all staff including ADON on the process of bringing residents off the secured unit, if they remove a resident from the unit they notify the charge nurse before and when they return the resident to the secured unit and to stay with the resident at all times when the resident was off the secured unit. During an interview on 09/08/25 at 3:45 p.m., HR said CNA Y no longer worked at the facility and she self-terminated after the incident on 05/12/25. During an interview on 09/08/25 at 5:00 p.m., the Administrator said on 05/12/25, she was notified Resident #101 was missing and she called a Code Orange. She said the DON ran down Hall 100 and out of Hall 100's exit door toward the back of the building and found Resident #101 on the sidewalk about 45 steps from the door by the kitchen at the back of the building. She said they determined the left side dining room exit door did not alarm when Resident #101 went out of it while at the carnival. She said the resident was found within 1 to 3 minutes and was about 20 feet from the Maintenance Director and a painter who were looking at the building roof. The Administrator said after the incident, they installed a new keypad on the left door to the dining room and new alarms on 05/12/25. She said the facility would do activities directly on the unit with residents who resided on the secured unit. The Administrator said the facility in-served staff on elopement prevention, alarms, doors not to be propped open, resident rights, no alarms to were to be turned off and if they removed a resident from the unit, they were to notify the charge nurse before and upon returning the resident to the unit. While off the unit, staff were instructed to stay with the resident at all times. She said she thought the alarm had malfunctioned. During an observation and interview on 09/08/25 at 12:05 p.m., Resident #101 was in his room on the secured unit lying in bed. He was confused and only able to answer simple questions. Resident #101 said he did not remember going outside on carnival day. During an observation on 09/08/25 at 3:15 p.m., with the Administrator the dining room exit doors were tested. The left side of the dining room exit to the outside door was pressed on the door and held for 15 seconds, the door immediately alarmed and released to open at 15 seconds. The right side of the dining room exit door to the outside of the facility opened with a loud alarm after pushing on the door. During an observation on 09/09/25 at 2:00 p.m., residents in the main area were participating in BINGO. There were no residents from the secured unit participating in BINGO off the secured unit. During an observation on 09/09/25 at 3:45 p.m., the left side of the dining room exit door to the outside was pressed and held for 15 seconds, and the door immediately alarmed and released to open at 15 seconds. The right side of the dining room exit door to the outside opened with a loud alarm on pushing door. During an observation on 09/10/25 at 8:00 a.m., the left side of the dining room exit door to the outside was pressed and held for 15 seconds, the door immediately alarmed and released to open at 15 seconds. The right side of the dining room exit door to the outside opened with a loud alarm on pushing door. During an Interview on 9/10/25 at 8:30 a.m., LVN G said on 05/12/25 she was the charge nurse responsible for the secured unit the day Resident #101 got out. She said CNA Y, a new CNA, took Resident #101 to an activity off the unit. She said she was unaware Resident #101 had left the unit until the facility staff started looking for him, but he was found within minutes. She said a Code Orange was called. LVN G said she was educated on abuse/ neglect, resident rights, elopement prevention and removing secured unit resident off the secured unit before and after the incident. During an interview on 09/10/25 at 10:30 a.m., the DON said her expectation was all residents be free from abuse/ neglect and stay safe and secure in the facility. She said all staff have been educated frequently on abuse/ neglect and elopement prevention. She said they now re-educate monthly on abuse/ neglect and elopement prevention. During an interview on 09/10/25 at 10:45 a.m., the Administrator said her expectation was all residents be free from abuse/ neglect and stay safe and secure in the facility. She said all staff have been educated frequently on abuse/ neglect and elopement prevention. Record review of an undated facility policy, titled Elopement Prevention indicated, .Every effort will be made to prevent elopement episodes while maintaining the lease restrictive environment for residents who are at risk for elopement. 1. The Elopement Risk Assessment will be completed upon admission. The resident's care plan will be modified to indicate that the resident is at risk of elopement episodes.7. If a resident is discovered to be missing, a search shall begin immediately. Intervention Strategies .keypad exit magnetic locks, Keyed Alarms, Secured Unit.Staff will receive training during their orientation process and then annually regarding Elopement prevention. During interviews on 09/08/25 from 11:30 a.m. - 09/09/25 at 4:00 p.m., 7 LVNs (4 days and 3 from nights shift- LVN A, LVN B, LVN C, LVN D, LVN E, LVN F, LVN G), 2 RNS, RN H and RN J were educated on abuse/neglect, resident rights, elopement prevention, removing secured unit residents off the secured unit, and demonstration of operating the doors. They said if a resident eloped, they would notify the charge nurse, DON, Administrator, a code orange would be announced, and everyone would immediately start looking for the missing resident inside and outside the facility. They said during the search all resident rooms, closets, bathrooms and all other rooms were searched, including outside the facility. They said the responsible party, physician, ombudsman and HHSC were notified. If the resident was not found the police would be notified. During interviews on 09/08/25 from 11:30 a.m. - 09/09/25 at 4:00 p.m., 16 CNAs (from each shift- CNA K, CNA L, CNA M, CNA N, CNA O, CNA P, CNA Q, CNA R, CNA S, CNA T, CNA T, CNA U, CNAV, CNA X, CNA Z, CNA HH) were educated on abuse/ neglect, resident rights, elopement prevention, removing secured unit residents off the secured unit, and demonstration of operating the doors. They said if a resident eloped, they would notify the charge nurse, DON and Administrator and a code orange would be announced. They said everyone would immediately start looking for the missing resident inside and outside the facility. They said all resident rooms, closets, bathrooms and all other rooms were searched. They said outside area around the facility would also be searched. During interviews on 09/08/25 from 11:30 a.m. - 09/09/25 at 4:00 p.m., HR, DM, [NAME] AA, Dietary Aid BB, Dietary aid GG, Maintenance director, Laundry CC, HK Supervisor, HK DD, HK DD, HK EE, Floor Tech FF were educated on abuse/ neglect, resident rights, elopement prevention, removing a secured unit resident off the secured unit, and demonstration of operating the doors. They said if a resident eloped, they would notify the charge nurse, DON and Administrator and a code orange would be announced. They said everyone would immediately start looking for the missing resident both inside and outside the facility. They said the search would include all resident rooms, closets, bathrooms and all other rooms were searched. They said the outside the facility would also be searched. Record review of an in-service sign in sheet titled, No Alarms are to be turned off and no doors are to be Propped Open dated 05/12/25 for department Maintenance indicated 1 staff member Maintenance Director signature. Record review of in-service sign in sheet titled, Demonstration for operating the door(s) in the dining room dated 05/12/25, indicated 54 staff members signed the in-service record which included AD, LVN D, CNA W, LVN G, CNA L, ADON, CNA Y CNA X, CNA Z, HK DD, Laundry CC, Rehab Director, RN H, CNA R, CNA N, CNA HH, DM, CNA M, RN J, LVN A, and CNA S. Record review of in-service sign in sheet titled, Demonstration for operating the door(s) on the secure unit dated 05/12/25, indicated 54 staff members signed the in-service record which included AD, LVN D, CNA W, LVN G, CNA L, ADON, CNA Y CNA X, CNA Z, HK DD, Laundry CC, Rehab Director, RN H, CNA R, CNA N, CNA HH, DM, CNA M, RN J, LVN A, and CNA S. Record review of in-service sign in sheet for policy on Color code program dated 05/12/25, indicated it was important to know the color code when an emergency happened, and code orange indicated a resident elopement. 54 staff members signed the in-service record which included AD, LVN D, CNA W, LVN G, CNA L, ADON, CNA Y CNA X, CNA Z, HK DD, Laundry CC, Rehab director, RN H, CNA R, CNA N, CNA HH, DM, CNA M, RN J, LVN A, and CNA S. Record review of in-service sign in sheet for new policy on Elopement Prevention (Secured Unit Residents attending Activities away from the Secured Unit), dated 05/12/25, indicated 54 staff members signed the in-service record which included AD, LVN D, CNA W, LVN G, CNA L, ADON, CNA Y CNA X, CNA Z, HK DD, Laundry CC, Rehab Director, RN H, CNA R, CNA N, CNA HH, DM, CNA M, RN J, LVN A, and CNA S. Record review of an AD Hoc QAPI Contributors form, dated 05/12/25, indicated there was a meeting held on 09/15/25 consisting of the Administrator, the assistant Administrator, the DON, the ADON, the AD, Laundry Worker CC, Rehab Director and BOM. The following interventions were put in place: New Policy: Elopement Response. The non-compliance was identified as past non-compliance (PNC). The Immediate Jeopardy began on 05/12/2025 and ended on 05/12/2025. The facility had corrected the noncompliance before the survey began.

CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Free from Abuse/Neglect (Tag F0600)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

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 were free from abuse for 1 of 7 residents (Resident #50) reviewed for resident abuse. The facility failed to ensure Resident #50's was free from physical abuse when Resident #3 pushed a rolling bedside table into his roommate Resident #50 causing a skin tear and Resident #50 to fall to the ground on 03/25/25. This failure could place residents at risk of physical harm, mental anguish, or emotional distress.The findings include: 1. Record review of Resident #3's face sheet dated 09/09/25 indicated he was a [AGE] year-old-male admitted on [DATE] and readmitted [DATE] with diagnoses of Alzheimer's disease (progressive brain disorder that causes a gradual and irreversible loss of memory, thinking skills and the ability to carry out daily activities), dementia with psychotic disturbance (involves symptoms like hallucinations (seeing hearing or smelling things that are not there) delusion (false, fixed beliefs) such as paranoia) and anxiety disorder (a mental health condition characterized by excessive worry, fear or apprehension that is difficult to control and interferes with daily life). Record review of a skin assessment dated [DATE] for Resident #50 indicated he received a skin tear to his left forearm 8 cm x 5.1 cm in size. Record review of Resident #3's Annual MDS assessment dated [DATE] indicated he had a BIMS of 3 which indicated he was severely impaired of cognition. The assessment indicated Resident #3 behaviors present including inattention that comes and goes, disorganized thinking continuously. The assessment indicated Resident #3 had diagnoses of Alzheimer's disease and dementia with psychotic disturbance and received an antianxiety medication received during the last 7 days. Record review of Resident #3's Care plan updated 08/27/25 indicated he was at risk for delirium and confusion episodes related to Alzheimer's disease and dementia and had a behavior problem on 03/20/25 Resident #3 pushed a bedside table into another male resident causing Resident #50 to fall to the floor. The care plan did not indicate any other behavior problems. Record review of Resident #3's SBAR (a standard communication tool to communicate a resident's status) dated 03/20/25 indicated a behavior change of Resident #3 told his roommate to get out of their room, then pushed resident with a bedside table knocking Resident #50 to the floor. The SBAR indicated orders received to send Resident #3 to in patient hospice. Record review of Resident #3's nursing note dated 03/20/25 indicated a resident-to-resident behavior observed. Resident #3 pushed a bedside table into Resident #50 knocking him down. Resident #3 was redirected away from the area, placed on one-on-one supervision. The nurse's note indicated that Resident #3 stated his roommate stole his belongings. Record review of Q 15 Minute Monitoring dated 03/20/25 indicated Resident #3 was monitored one on one and every 15 minutes documentation until discharged to inpatient hospital. During an observation and interview on 09/08/25 at 12:30 p.m. Resident #3 was sitting in a chair and said he was treated well and denied any residents were rough, hit or pushed him. Resident #3 denied he pushed or hit Resident #50 with a bedside table or any other resident. 2. Record review of Resident #50's face sheet dated 09/09/25 indicated he was a [AGE] year-old-male admitted on [DATE] and readmitted [DATE] with diagnoses of Alzheimer's disease, dementia with psychotic disturbance, hallucinations and anxiety disorder. Record review of Resident #50's quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] indicated he had a BIMS of 3 which indicated that he was severely impaired of cognition. The assessment indicated Resident #50 diagnoses of Alzheimer's disease and received an antidepressant and antipsychotic medication received during the last 7 days. Record review of Resident #50's Care plan updated 09/08/25 indicated he had impaired cognition, refused care and had a communication problem, and had difficulty understanding some verbal content related to Alzheimer's disease and dementia. The care plan indicated Resident #50 had a fall on 03/20/25, he was knocked down by a bedside table pushed into him by his roommate. The care plan did not indicate any other behavior problems. Record review of Resident #50's nursing note dated 03/20/25 indicated Resident #50 received a skin tear to left upper arm. During an observation and interview on 09/08/25 at 12:20 pm, Resident #50 was sitting in a chair and denied any residents were rough, hit or pushed him. Resident #3 denied he pushed or hit Resident #50 with a bedside table or anything. Record review of the investigation worksheet for Resident #3's dated 03/20/25 indicated the allegation was made on 03/20/25 at 3:00 p.m. and was reported to state on 03/20/25 at 4:32 p.m. Record review of Resident #3's Provider Investigation Report dated 03/20/25 indicated a resident-to-resident altercation in which Resident #3 pushed a bedside table into Resident #50 causing a skin tear and Resident #50 to fall to the floor. The findings indicated inconclusive for the allegation of abuse. Investigation Summary indicated the intent of Resident #3 was not to hurt Resident #50 by pushing the table out of the way, but pushing the table caused Resident #50 to fall and resulted in a skin tear. Resident #3 was monitored one on one with documentation every 15 minutes until discharged from the facility to inpatient hospice. During an interview on 09/08/25 at 11:45 a.m., LVN A said she was providing care for Resident #3 and #50 today and she witnessed the incident between the residents on 03/20/25. She said on 03/20/35 she was sitting in the nurse's office looking at them. LVN A said Resident #50 was inside the room in her view with a rolling bedside table in front of him and Resident #3 was standing in front of him just talking. She said there was no yelling, arguing or aggression. She said there was no indication anything was wrong. LVN A said Resident #3 told Resident #50 he was looking for his suitcase, I know you took it and pushed the rolling bedside table into Resident #50 causing a skin tear and fall. She said there were no previous or prior incidents. LVN A said she immediately separated them, Resident #3 was immediately placed on one-on-one monitoring with documentation of every 15 minutes but watched constantly. LVN A said she provided wound care to Resident #50 and had him x-rayed with results of no fractures. She said Resident #3 was sent to the behavior hospital the next morning. LVN A said she was educated on abuse and neglect and notified the Administrator immediately. During an interview on 09/10/25 at 10:30 a.m., the DON said her expectation was all residents be free from abuse and neglect. She said all staff had been educated frequently on abuse and neglect and elopement prevention. She said related to the incident with Resident #3 and #50 there was no sign of a problem, no urinary tract infection or lab problems, or no new medication that could have caused behaviors. She said the residents had no prior signs or symptoms that would lead us to suspect an incident and no triggers or suspected behavior that could lead up to an incident. The DON said there was no way we could have predicted an incident would happen between these roommates. She said we addressed the situation, removed Resident #3 and monitored him one on one until he was sent to the hospital. The DON said when Resident #3 returned to the facility he had a different roommate. She said Residents #3 and #50 have not had any incidents since. During an interview on 09/10/25 at 10:45 a.m., the Administrator said her expectation was all residents be free from abuse and neglect and stay safe and secure in the facility. She said all staff were educated frequently on abuse and neglect. She said the incident with Resident #3 and #50 was unable to be predicted. She said there no signs of a problem; the residents had no prior incidents or behaviors. She said there have been no incidents since and the residents were no longer roommates. The Administrator said the residents were immediately separated; Resident #3 was placed on one-on-one monitoring until sent to the hospital and Resident #50 was assessed and x-rayed with no fracture. She said the facility investigated the incident, in-serviced staff, interviewed staff and residents and notifications as required. The Administrator said there was nothing to predict an incident would happen. Record review of and undated facility policy titled, Abuse/ Neglect indicated, The resident has the right to be free from abuse, neglect, . Residents should not be subjected to abuse by anyone, including but not limited to, facility staff, other residents, . 5. Physical Abuse: Includes, hitting, slapping.Resident to Resident The above policy will apply to potential resident-to-resident abuse.

Sept 2024 3 deficiencies

CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0661 (Tag F0661)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Read full inspector narrative →

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record review the facility failed to ensure that when the facility anticipated discharge, a resident must have a discharge summary that included, but was not limited to, the following: A recapitulation of the resident's stay that included, but was not limited to, diagnoses, course of illness/treatment or therapy, and pertinent lab, radiology, and consultation results for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for discharge summary (Resident #48). The facility did not furnish a completed and physician signed Discharge Summary at the time of discharge for Resident #48. These failures could place discharged residents at risk for a lack of continued care and services. Findings included: Record review of a face sheet printed 09/11/24 indicated Resident #48 was a [AGE] year-old male admitted [DATE]. His diagnoses included diabetes mellitus type 2 (chronic condition that affects the way the body processes blood sugar), respiratory failure (inadequate gas exchange by the respiratory system), kidney failure (a condition in which the kidneys lose the ability to remove waste and balance fluids), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (a group of lung diseases that block airflow and make it difficult to breathe) and hypertension (elevated/high blood pressure). The face sheet also indicated he was discharged home on [DATE]. Record review of Resident #48's discharge MDS dated [DATE] indicated this was a planned discharge, to home/community and Resident #48 was cognitively intact with a BIMS score of 15. Record review of Resident #48's discharge summary with an effective date of 06/24/24 opened by the medical records personnel, indicated Resident #48 went home but did not include a discharge date , discharge disposition, rehabilitation potential, admission diagnosis, discharge diagnosis, summary of care, prognosis or nursing documentation and no physician signature or date. The discharge summary did include therapy documentation, activity documentation, dietary documentation, and social service documentation. Record review of Resident #48's progress note dated 06/22/2024 indicated he was discharged home with medication, oxygen and set up of a company to provide oxygen and was completed by the ADON. During an interview on 09/11/24 at 12:07 p.m., the ADON said she wrote the discharge note, educated the resident and family on medication, oxygen and provided the medication list and appointments for Resident #48 on discharge. She said when Resident #48 discharged floor nurses did not complete the discharge summary. She said that was before the change in management companies. The ADON said she was not responsible for completing the discharge summary for Resident #48. During an interview on 09/11/24 at 12:10 p.m., the DON said at the time of Resident #48's discharge on [DATE] she was on vacation and RN A was responsible for ensuring discharge summaries were completed and signed by the physician. She said at that time the policy was the medical records person, was responsible for opening the discharge summary in the computer system and notify the IDT (interdisciplinary team) of a discharge and the IDT were responsible for completing their sections and then physician came in and signed the discharge summary in the system within 20 days. She said as of 07/01/24 they had a change in management and the staff and physicians were unable to access the old computer system. The DON said Resident #48 should have had a completed discharge summary, she said all residents discharged home should have a discharge summary completed. She said the IDT was responsible for ensuring the discharge summary was completed. The DON said the risk for the resident with a discharge summary not completed and signed by the physician was potential improper education or instruction given to the resident at the time of discharge and a potential delay in care or treatment. The DON said her expectation was she would be trained next week on the requirements of discharge summaries. Attempted phone interview with RN A on 09/11/24 at 12:20 p.m., with no return call or answer. Attempted phone interview with medical records person on 09/11/24 at 12:24 p.m., with no return call or answer. During an interview on 09/11/24 at 12:30 p.m., the Administrator said the DON was now responsible for completing the discharge summary and ensuring the physician signed it. She said the ADON would now be her back up to ensure the discharge summary was completed and signed by the physician. She said the DON and ADON would be educated on the completion and signature by physician for discharge summaries this week. She said Resident #48 should have had a discharge summary completed and they were completing a 100% audit of all discharges for June 2024. She said there was a change in management on 07/01/24 and the staff were unable to access the previous records. She said the resident risk of a discharged resident with an incomplete discharge summary not signed by the physician was a Resident may not receive continued proper care. She said her expectation was all discharge summaries be completed timely. Record review of a facility policy titled, Discharge Summary/ Discharge Plan effective before 7/1/24 dated 2015 indicated 1. The entire discharge summary will be completed with each resident that discharges regardless of where they discharge to, or if they expire in house. For electronic discharge summaries, once completed, the DC summary will be printed on blue paper, a white copy made to be placed in the medical record and the original will be sent out for physician's signature. The white copy will remain in place until the signed original returns. Record review of a facility policy effective after 07/01/24 titled, Discharge Summary/ Discharge Plan dated 2015 indicated1. The entire discharge summary will be completed with each resident that discharges regardless of where they discharge to, or if they expire in house. For electronic discharge summaries, once completed, the DC summary will be printed on blue paper, a white copy made to be placed in the medical record and the original will be sent out for physician's signature. The white copy will remain in place until the signed original returns.

CONCERN (F)

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

Deficiency F0801 (Tag F0801)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

Read full inspector narrative →

Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to employ sufficient staff with appropriate competencies and skill sets to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service for 1 of 1 facility kitchen reviewed for food and nutrition services. The facility failed to designate a person to serve as the dietary manager who met the required qualifications. The facility designated Dietary Supervisor did not have a dietary manager's certification or any other qualifying credentials. This failure could place residents at risk for the spread of foodborne illness and residents not having their nutritional needs met. The findings included: During an interview on 09/9/24 at 8:30 a.m., the DM said she had taken her food handler test, however had not been sent to classes for certified dietary manager. She said the company had talked about sending her for certification classes but did not send her to classes. She said she had worked as the Dietary Manager for almost a year. During an interview on 09/11/24 at 10:00 a.m., the Administrator said she had tried to send the DM to become certified and the class was canceled. She said the next class would be in February 2025. The Administrator said she was trying to help the DM become certified. During an interview on 09/11/24 at 12:30 p.m., the HR staff said the DM was not certified and thought she had been hired as the DM about a year ago was rehired by their new managing company. The HR staff said the Administrator had tried to send the DM to class and said the class was canceled. Record review of an email addressed to the Administrator dated 09/11/24 indicated the dietary manager class would be February 22, 2025. Record review of a list provided by HR staff dated 09/11/24 indicated the DM was hired on 04/22/21, then promoted to DM on 09/15/23. The HR staff said the Administrator had tried to send the DM to class and said the class was canceled. Record review of training indicated the dietary manager had completed a food handler for DM and had 8 hours of training dated 09/10/23. Record review of the undated job description indicated Clinical Dietary Manager The following is a non-exhaustive criteria that relates to the job of clinical dietary manager, and it is consistent with the business needs of the facility. These are legitimate measure of the qualifications, and are related to the functions that are essential to the job of a Clinical Dietary Manager. Base Knowledge: Must obtain and maintain Certified Dietary Manager (CDM), Certified Food Protection Professional (CFPP) credential from ANFP (Association of Nutrition and Foodservice Professionals).

CONCERN (F)

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

Room Equipment (Tag F0908)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

Read full inspector narrative →

Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain all mechanical, electrical, and patient care equipment in safe operating condition for 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed for essential equipment. The facility did not ensure the gas stove, and the convection ovens were in safe operating condition. This failure could place the residents at risk of a fire and not receiving their meals in a timely manner. Findings included: During an observation and interview on 09/09/24 at 7:50 a.m., [NAME] A turned on the burners on the stove. 2 of 6 burners did not light using their pilot lights and she picked up a long lighter and lit pilot. She turned the burners on and the burners lit. She said occasionally the pilot lights go out and we must light the pilots . She said the DM knew about the pilot lights going out. During an interview on 09/10/24 at 2:00 p.m., the Administrator said the portable AC in the kitchen might have blown out the pilot lights, but she would have the maintenance supervisor to check on the pilot lights. During an interview on 09/11/24 at 12:55 p.m. the DM said the pilot lights would have to be lit occasionally for the last month, but her staff knew to watch for the pilot lights and to light if needed. She said the pilot lights going out might have been related to the portable AC units. During an interview on 09/11/24 at 1:00 p.m., the Maintenance Supervisor said he would go to the kitchen and clean the pilot lights. He said the staff had not reported the pilot lights not being lit. He said the equipment should be in good working order and if not, the burner might not work as required. The maintenance supervisor said some pilot lights will leak small amounts of gas, and some do not, he said he was new and was unsure what type of pilots were on the stove. He said he would check the burners. Record review of the Preventive Maintenance dated March 2003 indicated The facility will ensure that a comprehensive preventive maintenance program is in place for essential operating equipment.

Aug 2023 8 deficiencies

CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0578 (Tag F0578)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

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 right to formulate an advance directive was provided for 1 of 4 residents reviewed for advanced directives. (Resident #7). - The facility did not have a valid OOH-DNR for Resident #7. This failure could place residents at risk of lifesaving procedures performed against their wishes resulting in bruising, broken ribs, electrical shocking of the heart, having a tube placed in the throat and provided artificial breathing methods, and possibly being brought back to life in an unaware and unresponsive state. Findings included: 1. Record review of a face sheet dated 05/10/23 indicated Resident #7 was an [AGE] year-old female admitted on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included high blood pressure, progressive disease that destroys memory and other important mental functions, and loss of cognitive functioning. She was designated as DNR. Record review of the current MDS dated [DATE] indicated Resident #23 was alert to person, place, and time with a BIMS of 99 indicating she was unable to complete the interview. Record review of physician orders for May 2023 indicated Resident #23 had an order dated 09/20/22 for DNR. Record review of the EMR for Resident #7 indicated a scanned OOH-DNR with physician signature dated 04/01/13 indicated the following: -Section B had nothing marked as to who the declarant was signing the OOH-DNR for the resident, -Section B had nothing marked as to why they are implementing the OOH-DNR, -Section B had no printed name of the Declarant signing the OOH-DNR and no date when they signed it, -#3 Witness Section had no date when it was signed by and no printed name for the 1st witness signature, and -#3 Witness Section had no date when it was signed by the 2nd witness signature. During an interview on 08/22/23 at 02:08 p.m. the DON said the OOH-DNR was incomplete like it was. She said the resident would be a full code because the OOH-DNR was null and void. She said it was hers and nursing responsibility to ensure the OOH-DNR was complete and accurate to be valid. Record review of the Out-of-Hospital Do-Not-Resuscitate Order nstructions for Issuing An OOH-DNR Implementation: The OOH-DNR Order may be executed as follows: Section B - If an adult person is incompetent or otherwise mentally or physically incapable of communication and has either a legal guardian, agent in a medical power of attorney, managing conservator, or a qualified relative, the guardian, agent, a qualified relative, or parent of a minor child may execute the OOH-DNR Order by signing and dating it in Section B . In addition, the OOH-DNR Order must be signed and dated by two competent adult witnesses, who have witnessed either the competent adult person making his/her signature in section A, or authorized declarant making his/her signature in section B.

CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0645 (Tag F0645)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

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 individuals identified with MI, DD or ID were evaluated for 1 of 6 residents reviewed for PASRR (Resident #3) The facility did not have an accurate PASRR level 1 screening for Resident #3. This failure could place residents who have a diagnosis of mental disorder, developmental disability or intellectual disability at risk for a diminished quality of life and not receiving necessary care and services in accordance with individually assessed needs. Findings included: Record review of a face sheet dated 08/21/23 indicated Resident #3 admitted [DATE], and readmitted [DATE] was an [AGE] year-old female, with diagnoses of major depressive disorder (mental disorder characterized by persistent hopelessness, disinterest in and lack of enjoyment of normal activities, and prolonged sadness that affects people on a daily basis and can be recurring) and anxiety (intense, excessive, and persistent worry and fear about everyday situations) Record review of PASRR level 1 screening completed by the transferring facility dated 05/15/22 indicated Resident #3 was negative for mental illness, intellectual disability, and developmental disability. No PASRR Level II (PE) Screening or form 1012 (Mental Illness/Dementia Resident Review) was found in the clinical record from 05/18/22 through 8/21/23. Record review of an annual MDS dated [DATE] indicated Resident #3 had a BIMS score of 11 indicating she had moderately impaired cognition, was negative for PASRR, and had a diagnosis of depression and received medication for depression 7 of 7 days. Record review of a care plan revised 03/21/23 indicated Resident #3 was currently taking psychotropic medication for depression and anxiety and required monitoring for side effects, behaviors, and mood problems. Record Review of physician orders dated August 2023 indicated Resident #3 had a diagnosis of major depressive disorder. The orders indicated Resident #3 was prescribed Remeron (an antidepressant medication) 15 mg daily for major depressive disorder with a start date of 02/26/23; sertraline (a medication to treat depression and anxiety) 100 mg at bedtime for depression related to major depressive disorder with a start dated of 02/26/22; and buspirone (an antianxiety medication) 10 mg three times a day for anxiety with a start date of 07/18/23. During an interview on 08/21/23 at 2:06 p.m., the MDS nurse said she was responsible for PASRR forms. She said when the facility had a social worker the social worker would help with PL1s. She said no one double checked the PASRR forms. The MDS nurse said she received education on PASRR including webinars and training with the most recent training in May or June 2023. The MDS nurse said Resident #3's PL1 was negative and should have been corrected. She said it was missed. The MDS nurse said she reviewed the residents' admission documentation and diagnoses to ensure the PL1s were correct. She said the risk of an incorrect PL1 was a resident may not receive needed services. During an interview on 08/21/23 at 2:12 p.m., the DON said Resident #3's PL1 was negative and should have been positive. She said it was just missed. The DON said the MDS nurse was responsible for PASRR forms. She said the MDS nurse was educated on completing PASRR forms. The DON said her expectation was PASRR form be completed correctly and timely. She said the risk of an incorrect PL1 was a resident could miss needed services. During an interview on 08/22/23 at 12:14 p.m., Corporate Nurse F said the facility did not have a policy on PASRR, they followed best practice and the RAI. During an interview on 08/22/23 at 2:30 p.m., the administrator said the MDS nurse was responsible for making sure the PL1 was correct and uploaded into the system. She said her expectation was for all residents to receive the required services. She said Resident #3's PL1 was just missed. The administrator said she expected PASRR forms to be completed timely and correctly. She said the potential risk was a resident might not receive services they deserved. Record review of the Long-Term Care Facility Resident Assessment Instrument 3.0 User's Manual titled, A1500: Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) Item Rationale Health-related Quality of Life indicated . o All individuals who are admitted to a Medicaid certified nursing facility, regardless of the individual's payment source, must have a Level I PASRR completed to screen for possible mental illness (MI), intellectual disability (ID), developmental disability (DD), or related conditions o Individuals who have or are suspected to have MI or ID/DD or related conditions may not be admitted to a Medicaid-certified nursing facility unless approved through Level II PASRR determination. Those residents covered by Level II PASRR process may require certain care and services provided by the nursing home, and/or specialized services provided by the State.

CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0661 (Tag F0661)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Read full inspector narrative →

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record review the facility failed to have a final summary of the resident's status at the time of the discharge that is available for release to authorized persons for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for discharge summary (Resident #50). The facility did not have a physician signed Discharge Summary within 20 business days after Resident #50 discharged from the facility and did not return. This failures could place discharged residents at risk for a lack of continued care and services. Findings included: Record review of the face sheet printed 08/23/23 indicated Resident #50 was a [AGE] year-old male admitted on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. His diagnoses included diabetes mellitus type 2 (chronic condition that affects the way the body processes blood sugar), benign neoplasm of cerebral meninges (non-cancer tumor that arises from the membranes that surround the brain), obstructive hydrocephalus (any condition that blocks the flow of fluid in the brain or spinal cord), hypertension (elevated/high blood pressure), and convulsions (burst of uncontrolled electrical activity between brain cells). The face sheet also indicated he was discharged to the hospital on [DATE]. Record review of Nurse Notes indicated on 06/07/23 Resident #50 had with issues of penile swelling and pus drainage; he had an elevated potassium level of 6.9; and the physician ordered the resident to be sent to the hospital for evaluation. The ambulance arrived and the resident was sent to the hospital due to lab values. Record review of the EMR indicated Resident #50 had a Discharge Summary with effective date of 06/07/23. The form had no information filled out on it and was not signed by the physician. During an interview on 08/23/23 at 12:15 p.m. the DON said she and the MR staff were responsible for filling out the Discharge Summary reports and either sending or taking over to the physician office for him to sign. She said Resident #50 was sent and admitted to the hospital on [DATE]. She said when she reviewed Resident #50's Discharge Summary it was blank and so she filled it out today and it was taken to the physician for him to sign. According to the Texas Administration Code §554.1202(4) The physician must: (4)write, sign, and date a physician's discharge summary within 20 working days of being notified by the facility of the discharge, except as specified in §19.1912(e) of this title (relating to Additional Clinical Record Service Requirements), if the resident has been temporarily discharged for 30 days or less, and readmitted to the same facility.

CONCERN (D)

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

Respiratory Care (Tag F0695)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

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 a resident who needed respiratory care was provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' goals and preferences for 1 of 13 residents reviewed for respiratory care and services. (Resident #29) The facility failed to administer the correct dose of oxygen to Resident #29. This failure could place the residents at risk of not receiving the appropriate care and services to maintain their highest level of well-being. Findings included: Record review of physician orders dated August 2023 indicated Resident #29, admitted [DATE], was [AGE] years old with a diagnosis of congestive heart failure (a chronic condition in which the heart does not pump blood adequately). The orders indicated the resident received oxygen at 3 liters per minute via nasal cannula continuously effective 05/01/22. Record review of the most recent MDS assessment dated [DATE] indicated Resident #29 was alert, oriented with a BIMS of 9 (indicates moderate cognitive impairment) and received oxygen therapy in the last 14 days. Record review of a care plan updated 08/02/23 indicated Resident #29 was short of breath with exertion/activity secondary to congestive heart failure. One of the interventions was to administer oxygen at 3L NC continuously. During the following observations, Resident #29's oxygen was administered at 4.5L NC. The resident's speech was garbled and was not comprehensible for interview. *on 08/21/23 at 9:43 a.m., *on 08/21/23 at 11:55 a.m., *on 08/22/23 at 9:35 a.m., *on 08/22/23 at 3:11 p.m., and *on 08/23/23 at 9:42 a.m. During observation and interview on 08/23/23 at 9:42 a.m., after observing Resident #29's oxygen setting, LVN C said Resident #29's oxygen was in progress via NC at 4.5 L NC. She said the resident's oxygen should be set at 3L NC and the resident received the incorrect dose of oxygen. She said she was responsible for checking to ensure the resident received the correct dose, but she had not checked it. She said the possible negative outcome of the resident receiving oxygen at 4.5L could be the resident would receive too much oxygen and it would cause increased confusion. During an interview on 08/23/23 at 10:00 a.m., the DON said her expectations were for the oxygen to be administered as prescribed. She said administering too high of a dose of oxygen could cause Resident #29 to become dependent on it. She said it was the charge nurses' responsibility to check the resident's oxygen dosage to ensure they received the correct dose, and they should be checking it every shift. Record review of an Oxygen Administration policy revised October 2010 indicated: . Verify that there is a physician's order for this procedure. Review the physician's orders or facility protocol for oxygen administration.

CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0760 (Tag F0760)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

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 were free from significant medication errors for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #43) reviewed for significant medication errors. -LVN B failed to administer 2 scheduled medications (Metoprolol and Spironolactone) and 1 prn medication (clonidine) (all to treat high blood pressure) as ordered by the physician for Resident #43 when his blood pressure was elevated at 231/180. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving the therapeutic effect of the mediations and could result in declining health status. Findings included: Record review of the face sheet dated indicated Resident #43 was a [AGE] year-old male admitted on [DATE]. His diagnoses included cerebral infarction (disrupted blood flow to the brain (stroke)), hypertension (elevated/high blood pressure), diabetes mellitus type 2 (chronic condition that affects the way the body processes blood sugar), convulsions (burst of uncontrolled electrical activity between brain cells), and atrial fibrillation (a type of irregular heartbeat). During an observation and interview on 08/22/23 (Tuesday) at 07:27 a.m. LVN B administered medications to Resident #43. Prior to administering his medications, she obtained vital signs of BP and P. She said his BP was elevated at 231/180 (normal BP level was 120/80). She then administered Hydralazine (medication used to treat high blood pressure) 50mg, Jardiance (to treat elevated blood sugar) 25mg, Eliquis (to treat a type of irregular heartbeat) 5 mg, Keppra (to treat seizures (a burst of uncontrolled electrical activity between brain cells)) 750mg, Losartan (to treat high blood pressure) 100mg, Metformin (to treat elevated blood sugar) 1000mg, and Vitamin D3 (to treat vitamin deficiency) 125mcg with a glass of water. She did not ask the resident any questions about how he was feeling or anything else. Record review of the August 2023 physician order summary on 08/22/23 at 11:45 a.m. indicated Resident #43 indicated Resident #43 was to receive medications to help treat high blood pressure to include: Metoprolol 75 mg at 08:00 AM; Spironolactone 25 mg on Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays on Day; and a prn order for Clonidine 0.1 mg every 8 hours prn for BP 170/90 or greater. These medications were not administered to the resident. During a record review and interview on 08/22/23 at 11:55 a.m. with LVN B and the DON the August 2023 MAR for Resident #43 indicated there was no indication the Metoprolol, Spironolactone, or Clonidine were administered by LVN B on the eMAR. LVN B said she asked Resident #43 if he wanted his prn Clonidine and he said no. She said she did not realize she missed the Metoprolol and Spironolactone. The DON said a resident should not be asked if they want a prn blood pressure medication when their blood pressure level was elevated and required the medication per orders and parameters. The DON said not administering the blood pressure medications could result in the resident having a stroke or dying. An Administering Medications policy and procedure revised December 2012 indicated Policy Statement: Medications shall be administered in a safe and timely manner, and as prescribed In Accordance with Orders: 3. Medications must be administered in accordance with orders, including any required timeframe

CONCERN (E)

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

Unnecessary Medications (Tag F0759)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Read full inspector narrative →

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a medication error rate of less than 5 percent. There were 4 errors out of 30 opportunities, resulting in an 13.33% percent medication error involving 2 of 4 residents reviewed for medication pass. (Residents #43 and #18) -LVN B failed to administer 2 scheduled medications (Metoprolol and Spironolactone) and 1 prn medication (clonidine) (all to treat high blood pressure) as ordered by the physician for Resident #43 -LVN C did not administer 1 scheduled medication (ascorbic acid 500mg) (used to treat wound healing) as ordered by the physician for Resident #18. This failure could place residents at risk for inaccurate drug administration resulting in decline in health and decreased quality of life. Findings included: 1. Record review of the face sheet dated indicated Resident #43 was a [AGE] year-old male admitted on [DATE]. His diagnoses included cerebral infarction (disrupted blood flow to the brain (stroke)), hypertension (elevated/high blood pressure), diabetes mellitus type 2 (chronic condition that affects the way the body processes blood sugar), convulsions (burst of uncontrolled electrical activity between brain cells), and atrial fibrillation (a type of irregular heartbeat). Record review of an MDS dated [DATE] indicated Resident #43 had moderately impaired cognition with a BIMS score of 08 out of 15 and had diagnoses of hypertension and stroke. Record review of a care plan reviewed on 04/29/23 indicated Resident #43 was at risk for complications related to hypertension and included interventions of give medications as ordered and monitor/document/report prn any headache, visual problems, confusion, disorientation, lethargy, nausea and vomiting, irritability, seizure activity, or difficulty breathing (signs/symptoms of elevated blood pressure). During an observation and interview on 08/22/23 (Tuesday) at 07:27 a.m. LVN B administered medications to Resident #43. Prior to administering his medications she obtained vital signs of BP and P. She said his BP was elevated at 231/180 (normal BP level was 120/80). She then obtained his medications and administered hydralazine (medication used to treat high blood pressure) 50mg, Losartan (to treat high blood pressure) as well as his other medications and administered them with a glass of water. She did not ask the resident any questions about how he was feeling or anything else. Record review of the August 2023 physician order summary on 08/22/23 at 11:45 a.m. indicated Resident #43 was to also receive medications to help treat high blood pressure to include: Metoprolol 75 mg at 08:00 AM; Spironolactone 25 mg on Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays on Day; and a prn order for Clonidine 0.1 mg every 8 hours prn for BP 170/90 or greater. During a record review and interview on 08/22/23 at 11:55 a.m. with LVN B and the DON the August 2023 MAR for Resident #43 indicated he was to receive Metoprolol 75 mg at 08:00 AM, Spironolactone 25mg was to be administered on 08/22/23 on Day, and Clonidine 0.1 mg every 8 hours as needed for BP 170/90 or greater; there was no indication the medications were administered by LVN B. LVN B said she asked Resident #43 if he wanted his prn medication and he said no. The DON said a resident should not be asked if they want a prn blood pressure medication because the medication should be administered if the parameters warrant it to be given. 2. Record review of the face sheet dated 08/22/23 indicated Resident #18 was a [AGE] year-old female admitted on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included hypertension (elevated/high blood pressure), vitamin deficiency, and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) stomach contents leak backward from the stomach into the esophagus (food pipe)). Record review of an MDS dated [DATE] indicated Resident #18 had moderately impaired cognition with a BIMS score of 08 out of 15 and had diagnosis of vitamin deficiency. Record review of a care plan dated 03/08/23 indicated Resident #18 had vitamin deficiency with interventions including to give medications as ordered. During an observation and interview on 08/22/23 at 08:10 a.m. LVN C administered medications to Resident #18. Prior to administering her medications she obtained vital signs of BP and P. She said her BP was low at 94/42. She said because Resident #18's BP was below the parameters to administer the blood pressure medications she was to hold them.She then administered aspirin 325mg, Ducolax 5mg, Calcium 600mg + Vitamin D 5mcg, Cetirizine 10mg, Colace 100mg, Vitamin B12 1000mcg, Famotadine 20mg, Magnesium oxide 400mg, Miralax 17 gm with 5 ounces of water, multivitamin with minerals, Protonix 20mg, sodium chloride 1 gm, Vitamin D3 125mcg, zinc 50 mg, and Nitro Bid apply 2 inches to each leg. Record review of the August 2023 physician order summary on 08/22/23 at 11:25 a.m. indicated Resident #18 was to receive the medications administered by LVN C. The orders also indicated she was to receive ascorbic acid (Vitamin C) 500mg for wound healing. During a record review and interview on 08/22/23 at 11:35 a.m. with LVN C she said there was an order on the August 2023 physician orders dated 07/03/23 for Resident #18 to have ascorbic acid 500mg for wound healing. She said she did not see the ascorbic acid order on the August MAR for Resident #18. Reviewing the EMR MAR LVN C said it listed on the wrong MAR and was missed by the staff including her to administer the medication since the first of August. During an interview on 08/22/23 at 02:06 p.m. the DON said she expected all staff to administer medications as ordered by the physician. She said missed doses of the ascorbic acid ordered for wound healing could result in the wound not healing or worsening. An Administering Medications policy and procedure revised December 2012 indicated Policy Statement: Medications shall be administered in a safe and timely manner, and as prescribed In Accordance with Orders: 3. Medications must be administered in accordance with orders, including any required timeframe

CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0761 (Tag F0761)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Read full inspector narrative →

Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure all drugs were stored in a locked compartment and not left on top of the medication cart for 1 of 3 medication carts (400 hall medication cart); failed to ensure expired medications were not stored with current medications for 1 of 3 medication carts (200 hall) and 1 of 1 medication room (Secured Unit); and medications of different routes were not stored together for 2 of 3 medication carts (400 hall and Secured Unit) observed for medication storage. -The facility did not ensure the 400 hall medication cart was secured and unable to be accessed by unauthorized personnel, residents, or visitors. -The facility did not ensure medications were not stored on top of the 400 hall medication cart when unattended. -The facility did not ensure expired medications were not accessible and available for use on the 200 hall medication cart and the Secured Unit medication room. -The facility did not ensure medications of different routes were not stored together on the 400 hall medication cart and the Secured Unit medication cart. These failures could place residents at risk for not receiving drugs and biologicals as needed, medications being used past their effective or expiration date, and drug diversion. Findings include: 1. During an observation on 08/22/23 at 7:27 a.m., LVN B performed FSBS and drew up insulin to administer to Resident #43. LVN B left the 400 hall medication cart outside of the resident room with the drawers facing the hallway, the cart was unlocked, and a vial of Lantus insulin was left on top of the cart while she entered the resident room and administered his insulin. LVN B was in the resident's room with her back to the doorway. LVN B then went back to the medication cart and obtained Resident #43's medications. LVN B again she left the medication cart outside of the resident room with the drawers facing the hallway, the cart was unlocked, and a vial of Lantus insulin was left on top of the cart while she entered the resident room and administered his insulin. LVN B was in the resident's room with her back to the doorway. During an interview on 08/22/23 07:45 a.m. LVN B said she did not think leaving the insulin on top of the cart unlocked was an issue because the medication cart was within her eyesight, and it was at the end of the hall. She said she forgot to lock the cart before walking away from it. During an interview on 08/23/23 at 01:10 p.m., the DON said medications were not to be left on top of medication carts and medication carts were to be locked when staff walked away from them because any confused resident or visitor could access the cart. 2. During an observation and interview on 08/23/23 at 10:50 a.m. of the 200-hall medication cart, the CN indicated there was a card of Allopurinol 100 mg with an expiration date of 05/23/23. The CN said expired medications should not be on the medication cart. During an interview on 08/23/23 at 01:10 p.m. the DON said expired medications were not to be on the medication carts available for use; they were to be pulled to be destroyed. 3. During an observation and interview on 08/23/23 at 11:15 a.m. of the 400-hall medication cart with the CN indicated there was a box of acetaminophen 650mg rectal suppositories and an enema stored with oral medications. The CN said the rectally administered items should not be stored with oral medications; they should be stored separately. During an observation and interview on 08/23/23 at 11:40 a.m. of the Secured Unit medication cart with the CN indicated a bottle of nitroglycerin oral medication, a box of Exelon topical patches, and a vial of Vitamin B-12 injectable medication were stored together in the top drawer of the medication cart. LVN D said she did not know the medications were not supposed to be stored together on the cart. During an interview on 08/23/23 at 01:10 p.m. the DON said medications of different routes should not be stored together on the medication carts. 4. During an observation and interview on 08/23/23 at 01:55 p.m. of the Secured Unit medication room with LVN D indicated a box of prescribed promethegan suppositories expired 11/2022. LVN D said expired medications should be pulled to be destroyed and not available for use. An Administering Medications policy and procedure revised December 2012 indicated Safety of Medication Cart 16. During administration of medications, the medication cart will be kept closed and locked when out of the sight of the medication nurse of aide. It may be kept in the doorway of the resident's room, with open drawers facing inward and all other sides closed. No medications are kept on top of the cart. The cart must be clearly visible to the personnel administering medications, and all outward sides must be inaccessible to resident or others passing by A Storage of Medications policy and procedure revised April 2007 indicated Policy Statement: The facility shall store all drugs and biologicals in a safe, secure, and orderly manner. Policy Interpretation and Implementation: Unusable Drugs or Biologicals 4. The facility shall not use discontinued, outdated, or deteriorated drugs or biologicals. All such drugs shall be returned to the dispensing pharmacy or destroyed Marking Drugs for External Use/Poisons: 4. Drugs for external use, as well as poisons, shall be clearly marked as such, and shall be stored separately from other medications Orderly Storage and Dispensing: 8. Drugs shall be stored in an orderly manner in cabinets, drawers, carts, or automatic dispensing systems

CONCERN (E)

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

Infection Control (Tag F0880)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Read full inspector narrative →

Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to maintain infection control prevention and practices for point of care equipment by 3 of 3 LVNs reviewed for infection control. (LVN A, LVN B, and LVN C) * The facility failed to ensure LVN A, LVN B, and LVN C cleaned and disinfected glucometers appropriately after resident use. This failure could place residents at risk of infections or diseases from blood borne pathogens. Findings included: 1. During an observation and interview on 08/21/23 at 10:55 a.m. LVN A pulled a glucometer out of the top drawer of the medication cart. She cleaned the glucometer with a wipe from a red topped container for less than a minute. She performed a FSBS test on a resident. She then cleaned the glucometer again with the wipe from the red topped container and cleaned the glucometer for less than a minute and placed the glucometer into the top drawer of the medication cart. LVN A said she would not have done anything differently. 2. During an observation and interview on 08/21/23 at 11:20 a.m., LVN B pulled a glucometer out of the top drawer of the medication cart and did not clean the glucometer. She performed FSBS on a resident. Without cleaning the glucometer, she placed it in the top drawer of the medication cart. LVN B said she would not have done anything different. During an observation and interview on 08/22/23 at 07:27 a.m., LVN B pulled a glucometer out of the top drawer of the medication cart and did not clean the glucometer. She performed FSBS on a resident. Without cleaning the glucometer, she placed it in the top drawer of the medication cart. LVN B said she would not have done anything different. 3. During an observation and interview on 08/22/23 at 11:10 a.m., LVN C pulled a glucometer out of the top drawer of the medication cart and did not clean the glucometer. She performed FSBS on a resident. She then placed the glucometer on top of the medication cart. LVN C said she would not have done anything differently. LVN C said the glucometer was to be cleaned before and after the resident's FSBS was done. LVN C said the glucometer was supposed to be cleaned with an alcohol wipe. LVN C said she had been trained in the proper cleaning/disinfecting of a glucometer but did not remember all the steps to be done or what to clean with. LVN C pulled the red top container (Micro Kill +) on the medication cart out of the bottom drawer. She said the contact time on the container was 2 minutes for most pathogens so the glucometer needed to be cleaned for 2 minutes with the wipe before the next use. During an interview on 08/22/23 at 11:50 a.m., the DON said staff were to use the purple top container of wipes to clean the glucometers. She said staff staff were provided with 2 glucometers on each medication cart so that one was wrapped with the wipe while the other one could be used. She said the glucometers were to be cleaned before and after each resident use. An Obtaining a Fingerstick Glucose Level Policy and Procedure revised December 2011 indicated Equipment and Supplies: .3. Disinfected blood glucose meter (glucometer) Steps in Procedure: 3. Always ensure that blood glucose meters intended for reuse are cleaned and disinfected between resident uses 18. Clean and disinfect reusable equipment between uses according to the manufacturer's instructions and current infection control standards of practice An undated manufacturer guide indicated on page 46 Cleaning and Disinfecting Your Meter and Lancing Device: 4. To clean your meter, clean the meter with one of the validated disinfecting wipes listed below Medline Micro Kill + Wipe all external areas of the meter or lancing device including both front and back surfaces until visibly clean Allow the surface of the meter or lancing device to remain wet at room temperature for the contact time listed on the wipe's directions for use

Jun 2022 6 deficiencies

CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0561 (Tag F0561)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Read full inspector narrative →

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice for 1 of 26 (Resident #37) residents reviewed for self-determination. The facility failed to support Resident #37's choice to not have CNA A work with her. This failure placed residents at risk for psychosocial decline and their needs and preferences not being met. Findings included: Record review of Resident #37's face sheet revealed an [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included: dementia with behavioral disturbance (impaired ability to remember, think, or make decisions that interferes with doing everyday activities), mood disorder (a mental health problem that primarily affects a person's emotional state), depressive disorder (A mental health disorder characterized by persistently depressed mood or loss of interest in activities, causing significant impairment in daily life), and anxiety (a feeling of fear, dread, and uneasiness). Record review of Resident #37's admission MDS revealed a BIMS score of 15 indicating her cognition was intact. Further review of the MDS revealed Resident #37 had no history of falls and required supervision with bed mobility, transfers, dressing, eating, and personal hygiene. Resident #37 used a wheelchair as an assistive device. Record review of Resident #37's care plan dated 5/24/22 revealed she was at risk for injury/falls related to general weakness with additional risk related to poor safety awareness secondary to dementia. Her interventions included to, encourage participation in activities, encourage, remind, and assist with using the bathroom at more frequent intervals, inform me about safety reminders and what to do if a fall occurs. Provide a safe environment. PT to evaluate and treat as ordered by MD. Remind resident to use assistive devices. Remind to use call light. Further review of the care plan dated 5/24/22 revealed Resident #37 makes repetitive false accusation regarding staff and care. The interventions included to, document behavior in clinical record, psych referral as needed, reassure resident when she has complaints, try to determine what complaint is and resolve the issue, two staff members to assist with care when resident is in room (added 6/15/22). Further review of the care plan revised on 6/13/22 revealed Resident #37 had an actual fall with no injuries and the alleged unwitnessed fall was on 6/13/22 with no injuries. The interventions included, after a fall and before moving resident, staff will evaluate for changes in range of motion and notify the nurse/MD, check with resident frequently to ascertain needs, obtain and record vital signs after fall event and as ordered by MD, pharmacy consult for drug regimen review, remind resident to use assistive devices, and remind resident to use call light. Further review of the care plan dated 6/13/22 revealed Resident #37 alleged that staff member was rough with her assisting her back to bed after fall. The interventions included, nurse educated resident to always report fall to nurse, staff will make rounds and check on resident frequently while she is in room, staff will allow resident to voice her needs and concerns. Nursing staff will assess resident for any injury related to alleged fall/alleged abuse . Record review of Resident #37's progress notes dated 6/13/22 at 9:26AM written by the DON revealed, Resident reports to this nurse this AM: states she had a fall in her room, that she called out for help and that an aide (CNA A) came in and picked her up off the flood and transferred her to the bed, she alleges that the CNA was rough with her and threw her in the bed and stated she was 'being lazy'. This nurse assessed resident for any injury. No bruises, redness or breaks in skin found. Resident stated she was not hurt, she was okay. She is up ambulating facility in her wheelchair. Able to move all extremities. Resident is her own RP; MD and Administration notified of incident and investigation in progress. Record review of facility grievance dated 6/13/22 revealed Resident #37 gave a verbal grievance to the DON about care. The details of the grievance revealed, Patient states she fell to the floor in her room and [CNA A] picked her up and shoved her onto the bed. Record review of CNA A typed statement dated 6/13/22 at 12:04PM revealed, To whom it may concern last night [Resident #37] hit the call light I went down there to her room she in the restroom she told me to get her some pants out the closet and I got them for her and laid it on her bed for when she got done, I left her room and I went to the other resident room to change them, [Resident #37] hit the call light again and she was sitting on the floor, like she always do, I got her when [CNA B] came in. I didn't abuse her and [CNA B] was right there and Resident #37 was calling me bitches for no reason and [CNA B] was right there when she was doing it. I have been knowing [Resident #37] for a long time and she make false allegations for no reason and laugh in your face about it I have reported to the nurses. Record review of CNA B typed statement dated 6/13/22 at 12:39PM revealed, I [CNA B] was on hall 2 on last night when [Resident #37] light came on and CNA A walked down the hall and asked Resident #37 did she need anything, she said pants. CNA A went and got her some pants she came back, and Resident #37 was on the floor by her bed, she assisted onto the bed with no problems at all. Resident #37 was extremely aggravated calling CNA A out her name which was the (b word). I did not see CNA A abuse Resident #37 in any way. CNA A told her she would be reporting her for the foul language she used when she cussed at CNA A and Resident #37 did not care at all, I myself was there and vouch that this statement is true. Record review of Resident #37's progress notes dated 6/17/22 at 9:31PM revealed, Upon administering nighttime medication [CNA A] was walking down hallway and resident stated I can't stand that big bitch directed toward [CNA A]. Resident was redirected not to use swear words when addressing other people resident verbalized understanding. Record review of CNA A time sheet from 6/10/22 - 6/23/22 revealed she worked 6pm - 6am on 6/12/22, 6pm - 6am on 6/17/22, 6pm - 6am on 6/18/22. Record review of the facility schedule revealed CNA A worked 6/20/22 from 6pm - 6am . Interview on 6/21/22 at 5:40PM , CNA A said she knew Resident #37 from her previous facility and said they had a lot of issues there. CNA A said Resident #37 would make accusations against her and others at the previous facility and caused a lot of problems. CNA A said she found out Resident #37 was coming to the facility and talked to the Administrator and the DON about Resident #37's history. She said they told her they would look into what she disclosed about Resident #37's history. CNA A said on 6/13/22 Resident #37 had her call light on and she was requesting some pants. She said she took some pants out and put them on the resident's bed and left out. CNA A said she came back to the room and found Resident #37 on the floor next to her bed. CNA A said Resident #37 would always place herself on the floor and claim she fell when she worked with her at the previous facility. CNA A said she helped Resident #37 up from the floor and back onto her bed and left out the room. CNA A said CNA B was present in the room and saw she did not throw her onto the bed or say anything to her. CNA A said Resident #37 became upset with her and started cursing at her and she told Resident #37 she was going to report her to the nurse for cursing at her. CNA A said she was suspended for three days and counseled with regarding fall procedures and said if a resident was on the floor it was considered a fall and needed to be reported to the nurse. CNA A said she continued to work with Resident #37 since she returned to work from her suspension, but she only cared for Resident #37 with another staff member present. CNA A denied there being any more accusations against her from Resident #37, but CNA A said she would rather not work with Resident #37 because the resident continued to not like her and make comments towards her. Interview on 6/21/22 at 6:30PM, Resident #37 said about a week ago, CNA A came into her room because she had fallen on the floor next to her bed. Resident #37 said CNA A came in and picked her up from the floor and threw her onto the bed roughly. Resident #37 said CNA A called her lazy for not getting herself up. Resident #37 said she knew CNA A from her previous facility, and she had issues with CNA A at the other facility as well. Resident #37 said CNA A had always been mean to her. Resident #37 said CNA A worked with her since the incident when CNA A threw her on the bed. Resident #37 said CNA A came in her room last night (6/20/22) and made remarks to her. Resident #37 said CNA A came in by herself and was not with another staff. Resident #37 said she did not like CNA A and said she did not want her touching her. Resident #37 said she was tired and did not want to talk anymore. Interview on 6/22/22 at 2:58PM , the DON said they had thought about trying to not assign CNA A to Resident #37 because Resident #37 stated she did not like CNA A but because of their staffing pattern it was not possible unless Resident #37 were to move halls. The DON said Resident #37 was willing to move rooms so CNA A would not work with her, but she would have a roommate in the room she would move to and she did not want a roommate. The DON said Resident #37 chose to stay in her current room. The DON said CNA A worked with Resident #37 2 - 3 nights a week and she had continued to work with Resident #37 because her abuse claim was unfounded. The DON said staff always went into Resident #37's room two at a time due to her false accusations. The DON said the only accusations Resident #37 made at the facility was towards CNA A but said CNA A reported to them Resident #37 had a history of making false allegations. The DON said she personally had not talked to Resident #37 about how she felt about CNA A continuing to work with her but said the social worker had. Interview on 6/22/22 at 4:16PM, Resident #37 said she did not want CNA A working with her and said she would prefer if CNA A did not come near her or into her room. Resident #37 said she was offered to move rooms, but she did not want to lose her private room. Resident #37 said she did not like how CNA A talked to her and did not like how she handled her. Resident #37 said staff knew she did not want CNA A to work with her and they knew she did not like CNA A. Resident #37 said she had no issues working with any other staff in the facility except CNA A. Interview on 6/22/22 at 5:33PM , the Administrator said CNA A reported Resident #37 had a history of behaviors she knew of from working with her at the previous facility. The Administrator said CNA A did not report personal issues with Resident #37. The Administrator said they were having two staff work with Resident #37 at a time and they still had CNA A working with Resident #37 because of their staffing setup. The Administrator said she did not tell Resident #37 CNA A would not work with her anymore and said the Social Worker had spoken to Resident #37. The Administrator said Resident #37 reported to the Social Worker that she felt safe in the facility. The Administrator said the negative outcome of having a staff work with a resident who does not want them working with them could be abuse or abuse claims. Interview on 6/22/22 at 6:10PM, the Social Worker was unable to locate documentation of her interview with Resident #37 or her safety interview with her, but the Social Worker was able to recall speaking with Resident #37 about CNA A. The Social Worker said Resident #37 was very upset with CNA A. The Social Worker said Resident #37 told her she felt safe in the facility but did not ask her specifically about how she felt about CNA A continuing to work with her or if she was afraid of CNA A. The Social Worker said Resident #37 did not want to leave the facility and felt safe there. She said Resident #37 did not like CNA A, but she did not want to move rooms to avoid CNA A working with her. Record review of the facility Resident Rights Guidelines for All Nursing Procedures policy (Revised April 2013) did not address area of deficient practice.

CONCERN (D)

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

Comprehensive Care Plan (Tag F0656)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

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/or implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, consistent with resident rights, that included measurable objectives and time frames to meet residents' mental and psychosocial needs for 1 of 26 Residents (Resident #37) reviewed for comprehensive care plans, in that: Resident #37 was not care planned for behavior of placing herself on the floor. These failures placed residents at risk of their care and needs not being met. Findings include: Record review of Resident #37' face sheet revealed an [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included: dementia with behavioral disturbance (impaired ability to remember, think, or make decisions that interferes with doing everyday activities), mood disorder (a mental health problem that primarily affects a person's emotional state), depressive disorder (A mental health disorder characterized by persistently depressed mood or loss of interest in activities, causing significant impairment in daily life), and anxiety (a feeling of fear, dread, and uneasiness). Record review of Resident #37's admission MDS revealed a BIMS score of 15 indicating her cognition was intact. Further review of the MDS revealed Resident #37 had no history of falls and required supervision with bed mobility, transfers, dressing, eating, and personal hygiene. Resident #37 used a wheelchair as an assistive device. Record review of Resident #37's care plan, initiated on 5/24/22, revealed no mention of behavior of placing herself on the floor. Record review of Resident #37's progress notes dated 6/19/22 at 5:39AM written by LVN B revealed, Resident observed by this nurse and another CNA x 2 putting herself on floor holding wheelchair as lowering herself down. Resident also observed yelling help as she lowered herself to the floor. When walking in resident states, good thing you're here I almost fell. Assisted resident to wheelchair. When asked what happened resident states, I needed to pee. Resident then tells CNA I need some water before going to the restroom. Resident observed taking sips of water. Resident assisted to the bathroom by CNA then back to wheelchair. Resident observed by CNA standing up and flopping down in bed. Then reports, my legs hurts. When assessed for pain resident state, oh its fine now that I am in bed. No signs or symptoms of distress or discomfort noted. Will continue to monitor. Interview on 6/21/22 at 5:40PM, CNA A said she knew Resident #37 from her previous facility and said they had a lot of issues there. CNA A said Resident #37 would make accusations against her and others at the previous facility and caused a lot of problems. CNA A said she found out Resident #37 was coming to the facility and talked to the Administrator and the DON about Resident #37's history. She said they told her they would look into what she disclosed about Resident #37's history. CNA A said on 6/13/22 Resident #37 had her call light on and she was requesting some pants. She said she took some pants out and put them on the resident's bed and left out. CNA A said she came back to the room and found Resident #37 on the floor next to her bed. CNA A said Resident #37 would always place herself on the floor and claim she fell when she worked with her at the previous facility. CNA A said she helped Resident #37 up from the floor and back onto her bed and left out the room. CNA A said she knew the resident had not fallen because of this behavior she had of placing of herself on the floor, but she was later reprimanded by the DON who told her if she did not witness Resident #37 putting herself on the floor, it was considered a fall. CNA A said after that incident on 6/13/22 her and LVN B witnessed Resident #37 placing herself on the floor on 6/19/22 and claimed she fell so now the facility saw for themselves what she did Interview on 6/22/22 at 11:18AM, the MDS Coordinator said she added new areas to the resident's care plans if new problems were discovered. The MDS Coordinator said she was not made aware of Resident #37's behavior of placing herself on the floor and said if she knew about it she would have added it to her care plan. The MDS Coordinator said the nurses would come directly to her and report changes or they would discuss the changes in the morning meeting, and she would add the areas to the care plan during the meeting. The MDS Coordinator said if she was not at work when a change happened, they would inform a supervisor on duty who would get the information to her when she arrived to work. Interview on 6/22/22 at 12:09PM, LVN B said she observed Resident #37 placing herself on the floor on 6/19/22 and it was the first time she observed her do that. LVN B said Resident #37 tried to tell her she had fell but did not know her and CNA A had saw her purposely placing herself on the floor. LVN B said CNA A had told her about Resident #37 placing herself on the floor, but that was the first time she observed it. LVN B said the DON was present in the facility when it happened, and she told her what she observed. Interview on 6/22/22 at 1:37PM, the DON said LVN B told her on 6/19/22 about Resident #37 placing herself on the floor, and she had previously spoken to CNA A about Resident #37 having a history of doing so. The DON said there was a lot going on that morning and she forgot to bring it up in the morning meeting for the MDS Coordinator to add it to the care plan. The DON said the behavior should be care planned to prevent her from placing herself on the floor so she would not hurt herself and to make staff aware of the behavior. The DON said she would make sure the area was added to the care plan. Record review of the facility Care Plans - Comprehensive policy (Revised October 2010) revealed in part, .An individualized comprehensive care plan that includes measurable objectives and timetables to meet the residents medical, nursing, mental and psychosocial needs is developed for each resident . 3. Each resident's comprehensive care plan is designed to: a. incorporate problem areas; b. incorporate risk factors associated with identified problems . 8. Assessments of resident are ongoing and care plans are revised as information about the resident and the residents condition change .

CONCERN (D)

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

Unnecessary Medications (Tag F0759)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Read full inspector narrative →

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a medication error rate of less than 5 percent for 3 errors out of 34 opportunities which resulted in an 8 percent error rate involving 3 of 7 residents (Residents #34, #47 and #53) reviewed for medication administration. LVN C gave 100 mcg of B12 (used to treat chronic anemia) to Resident #34 instead of the 1000 mcg ordered by the physician. LVN C failed to administer 10 ml of Megestrol 40mg/ml (appetite stimulant) to Resident #47. LVN A crushed delayed release pantoprazole (used to treat gastro-reflux) (a medication that should not be crushed), and administered it to Resident #53. These failures could place residents at risk for inaccurate drug administration, adverse reaction and not receiving the intended therapeutic benefit of their medications if medications are not taken as directed. Finding included: Error #1 During an observation of the medication pass and an interview on 6/21/22 at 8:35 a.m., LVN A administered one 40 mg tablet of Pantoprazole delayed released to Resident #53. LVN A counted the medications after they were punched into a cup and said Resident #53 received 1 tablet for her morning medications. She crushed the 1 tablet and mixed it with pudding, entered Resident #53's room, and administered the crushed pill mixed in pudding. LVN A returned to her computer and documented the 1 medication she administered. Record review of Resident #53's face sheet dated 6/22/22 revealed, a [AGE] year-old admitted to the facility on [DATE] and re-admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses which included: hypertension (high blood pressure) and gastro-esophageal reflux disease(stomach acid or bile irritates the food pipe lining). Record review of Resident #53's Quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed, resident usually understood others, and a BIMS of 3 indicated severely impaired cognition. Record review of Resident #53's Care Plan dated 6/22/22 revealed, the resident was at risk for alteration in nutrition and weight loss related to diabetes and GERD with additional risk related to HTN with interventions of: is prescribed protonix=GERD. Record review of Resident #53's physician orders dated 6/22/22 revealed, Protonix tablet delayed release 40 mg (pantoprazole Sodium) give 1 tablet by mouth one time a day related to gastro-esophageal reflux disease start date 5/1/22. In an interview on 6/22/22 at 9:15 AM, LVN A said that enteric coated and delayed release pantoprazole should not be crushed because crushing the medication would change how it was absorbed in the resident's system. She said she would call the doctor to have the medication changed to a liquid or medication that could be crushed. LVN A stated she had been trained on Medication Administration this year but could not remember when. LVN A stated her training included following the 5 rights to medication administration which included making sure to give medications in the right form. LVN A said not giving the resident the right form could place the resident at risk of not getting a sufficient dose of the medication and it might not be effective. Error #2 Observation on 6/22/22 at 8:00 AM revealed LVN C administered the following medications to Resident #47: Aspirin 325mg 1 tablet, (used to prevent blood clots) Famotidine 20mg 1 tablet, (treat stomach ulcers) NaCl (sodium chloride) 1gm 1 tablet, (used as electrolyte replacement) Meclizine 25mg 1 tablet, (treat motion sickness) Metformin 500mg 1 tablet, (treat diabetes) Hydrochlorothiazide 12.5mg 1 tablet (treat fluid retention) Lisinopril 20 mg 1 tablet, (treat high blood pressure) Potassium 20meq 1 tablet (used as electrolyte replacement) LVN C counted the medications after they were punched into a cup and said Resident #47 received 8 tablets/capsules for his morning medications. LVN C crushed the 8 tablets, mixed it with pudding, entered Resident #47's room, and administered the crushed pills mixed in pudding. LVN C returned to her computer and documented the 8 medications she administered. Record review of Resident #47's face sheet dated 6/22/22 revealed, a [AGE] year-old admitted to the facility on [DATE] and re-admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses which included: hypertension (high blood pressure) and gastro-esophageal reflux disease (stomach acid or bile irritates the food pipe lining), abnormal weight-loss and dysphagia (difficulty swallowing). Record review of Resident #47's Annual MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed resident usually understands others and usually understood by others, and a BIMS of 8 indicated moderately impaired cognition. Record review of Resident #47's Care Plan Dated 6/22/22 revealed, the resident was at risk for alteration in nutrition and weight loss related to HTN & HLD with additional risk related to diabetes mellitus and has lost weight interventions of: is prescribed weight-loss medications, is at risk for complications/side effects from antidepressant medication use diagnosis: weight loss interventions included administer medications as ordered by physician. Record review of medication reconciliation with Resident #47's physician orders dated 6/22/22 reflected MA H failed to administer Megestrol Acetate Suspension 40mg/ml give 10ml by mouth two times a day for weight loss start date 5/1/22. Error #3 Observation on 6/22/22 at 8:30 AM revealed LVN C administered the following medications to Resident #34: Ativan 0.5mg 1 tablet, (aids in anxiety) Vit d3 125mcg(5000iu) 1 tablet, (mineral replacement0 Calcium+vit D 600mg/10meq(400iu) 1 tablet, (mineral replacement) B12 100mcg 1 tablet, (mineral replacement) Daily Multi-Vit. With minerals 1 tablet, (vitamin/mineral replacement Nateglinide 120mg 1 tablet,(aids in glucose control) Allopurinol 300mg 1 tablet, (aids in gout) Lisinopril 10 mg 1 tablet, (aids in lowering blood pressure) Metformin 1,000mg 1 tablet,(aids in glucose control) Atenolol 50mg 1 tablet, (aids in lowering blood pressure) Farxiga 5mg 1 tablet (aids in glucose control) LVN C counted the medications after they were punched into a cup and said Resident #34 received 11 tablets for his morning medications. LVN C entered Resident #47's room and administered the pills. LVN C returned to her computer and documented the 11 medications she administered. Record review of Resident #34's face sheet dated 6/22/22 revealed, a [AGE] year-old admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included: hypertension (high blood pressure), anemia (low blood) and deficiency of other vitamins. Record review of Resident #34's Annual MDS dated [DATE] revealed, resident understands/understood, BIMS of 15 indicated independent for cognition. Record review of Resident #34's Care Plan Dated 6/22/22 revealed, the resident was at risk for alteration in nutrition and weight loss related to HTN & DM with additional risk related schizoaffective disorder interventions of: observe and record/report to MD s/sx of malnutrition: emaciation (cachexia) muscle wasting, significant weight loss, is prescribed MVI= long-term use of medications. Record review of medication reconciliation with Resident #34's physician orders dated 6/22/22 reflected LVN C failed to administer B12 1000mcg 1 tablet by mouth one time a day related to deficiency of other vitamins start date 5/1/22. During a telephone interview on 6/22/22 at 12:45 p.m., a pharmacist with the facility's drug vendor pharmacy said Pantoprazole delayed release should not be crushed but the resident should be given liquid or a pill that can be crushed instead. In an interview on 6/22/22 at 1:30 PM with LVN C revealed she was not aware that she did not administer Megestrol Acetate Suspension 40mg/ml give 10ml to Resident #47. LVN C stated she did not know how she missed the medications because she completed the medication count and matched with the number observed during the medication administration. LVN C then pulled the house stock OTC B12 bottle from the medication cart and said Resident #34 should have received 10 of the B12 tablets to equal 1000 mcg. LVN C said she did not give 1000 mcg of B12 to resident #34 during the medication pass, she only gave 100 mcg. She said she had not noticed that before and she would have to check to see if the medication is in stock to give 1 tab instead of 10 of the same pill. LVN C stated she was expected to and had been trained to follow the 5 rights for medication administration and physician orders during medication administration. She stated failure to administer medications per the orders could have a negative effect on the resident, like the resident who missed the weight-loss medication could have increased the risk of further weight-loss and Resident #34 anemia could get worse. In an interview on 6/22/22 at 3:30 PM, DON said licensed nurses were responsible for administering medications to the residents. DON said she was responsible for monitoring that the nurses were following the facility's policy on administering medications and did so by randomly spot checking behind nurses. DON said she expected the staff to verify the orders in the medication administration record and administer medications per order, and also administer medication per the instructions in the orders. DON stated if there was any question about an order, the nurse was expected to call and clarify the order with the doctor if the dosage was not clear or pills were excessive. DON said, prior to administering medications, nursing staff must verify medications against the resident's order in the EMR. She said that delayed release and enteric coated medications should not be crushed because the coating on these medications cause variable patterns of release and that crushing the medication disrupts the release pattern. The DON said that administering inappropriately crushed medication can lead to inappropriate dosing. Record Review of facility policy revised dated 12/2012 titled Administering Medications indicated: Medications shall be administered in a safe and timely manner as prescribed .3. Medications must be administered in accordance with the orders including any required time frame .5. If a dosage is believed to be inappropriate or excessive for a resident or a medication has been identified as having potential adverse consequences for the resident or is suspected of being associated with adverse consequences the person preparing or administering the medication shall contact the residence attending physician are the facilities medical director to discuss concerns . Record reviewed of facility policy revised dated April 2007 title Adverse Consequences and Medication Errors indicated: .5. A medication error is defined as the preparation or administration of drugs or biological which is not in accordance with physician's orders, manufacturer specifications, or except it professional standards and principles of the professional providing services. 6. examples of medication errors include: a. omission -a drug is ordered but not at ministered; .c. wrong dose . e. wrong dosage form.

CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0790 (Tag F0790)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

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 and obtain dental services from an outside source for 1 (Resident #43) of 19 residents reviewed for dental services. The facility failed to obtain dental services for Resident #43, who had missing dentures prior to her admission. This failure could place the residents at risk for not having their dental needs met. Findings included: Record review of face sheet indicated Resident #43 admitted on [DATE] was [AGE] years old with diagnoses fracture of the left leg, high blood pressure, heart disease and on Medicare part A. Record review of Resident #43's physician order summary report dated June 2022 indicated an order for Dental care PRN and had a start date of 5/18/22. Her diet order with a start date of 5/25/22 was for mechanical soft diet with chopped meat texture ., Resident lost dentures. The most recent MDS assessment dated [DATE] indicated Resident #43 had clear comprehension (understanding) and was able to voice needs. The BIMS (brief interview for mental status) of Resident #43's score was 8 and indicated moderately impaired cognition with current date and recall. Section K indicated Resident #43 required a mechanical altered diet and section L indicated No natural teeth or tooth fragments (edentulous) [lacking teeth]. A care plan dated 6/1/22 indicated Resident #43 was (edentulous) [lacking teeth]. Interventions included coordinate arrangements for dental care, transportation as needed. Record review of the nurse progress notes dated 5/18/22 to present indicated no referral to the Social Worker or dental referral for Resident #43. A progress noted dated 5/18/22 at 8:16 p.m. indicated no teeth were noted by admitting LVN B. During an observation of Resident #43's oral cavity and interview on 06/21/22 at 8:13 a.m. revealed she had no teeth or dentures. Resident #43 said she lost her dentures before moving to the facility, and she was given a chopped meat diet. She stated she would like to get new dentures, if possible. During an interview on 6/21/22 at 8:29 a.m., the Social Worker said she was responsible for making the referrals for dental services. She said none of the nurses reported the need for a dental referral or missing dentures for Resient #43. She said she completed a social history on Resident #43 and the social history did not have a section for dental. During an interview on 6/21/22 at 9:49 a.m., the DON said the nurses were responsible for making referrals to social services and then the Social Worker would refer the resident to a dentist of their choice. She said Resident #43 was not referred to social services and the resident needed the referral. A dental services policy indicated Policy Statement Routine and emergency dental services are available to meet the resident's oral health services in accordance with the resident's assessment and plan of care.

CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0761 (Tag F0761)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Read full inspector narrative →

Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure that drugs and biologicals used in the facility were labeled and stored in accordance with currently accepted professional principles, and include the appropriate accessory and cautionary instructions, and the expiration dates for 2 (hall 200 and 400 nurse medication cart) of 2 medication carts reviewed for medication storage, in that: The facility did not dispose of opened insulin vials beyond the recommended 28 days of use from the 200 and 400-hall nurse medication carts. The facility failed to ensure that expired medications were removed from the 200 and 400 hall medication carts. The facility failed to ensure the 400-hall nurse medication cart did not contain loose pills. These failures place residents who receive medications at-risk for drug diversion, inadequate therapeutic benefits of their medications and a delay in healing. Findings included: Observation on 06/21/2022 at 11:35 AM of the Hall 200 nurse medication cart with LVN A revealed the following expired insulin medication alongside non-expired medications: - Humalog - open date: 5/21/22. (aids in lower-blood glucose) - Humulin R - open date: 5/20/22. (aids in lower-blood glucose) - Novolin R - open dated:5/17/22(aids in lower-blood glucose) - Novolin R - open dated: 5/21/22(aids in lower-blood glucose) In an interview on 06/21/2022 at 11:38 AM LVN A said she checked her cart every day for expired medications. She said she had not seen the expired Humalog. She said expired medication should not be in the medication cart because giving expired meds can cause the resident to not get full effects of the medication. LVN A stated that Humalog insulin is only good for 28-days after opening and it should have been replaced. LVN A stated she had been trained in medication storage and to make sure to check the expiration date before giving the medication. Observation on 06/21/2022 at 12:00 PM of the Hall 400 nurse medication cart with LVN B revealed the following expired medication alongside non-expired medications and loose pills: Draw#1 in the back of the middle section had 3 loose medication pills of various shapes (1 red,1 brown and 1 white) and 1 bottle of OTC ocular vitamins (aids in in vitamin replacement) with an expiration date of 5/2022 and 1 bottle of OTC vitamin B-6 (aids in in vitamin replacement) with an expiration date of 5/2022. Draw #2 containing multiple residents' blister packs of medications sectioned in 3 separate rows, located in the back of the rows, there were 21 loose medication pills of various shapes, markings and colors (2 caps (1 white and 1 yellow), 6 pink, 1 brown, 11 white and 1 blue). These pills were not in packaging and contained no labeling that indicated what they were or when they may expire. Further observation of the Hall 400 nurse medication cart with LVN B revealed the following expired insulin medication alongside non-expired medications: - Lantus - open date: 5/20/22. (aids lower-blood glucose) - Humulin R - open date: 5/20/22 (aids in lower-blood glucose) - Aspart Flex-pen - open dated:5/20/22 (aids in lower-blood glucose) In an interview on 6/21/2022 at 12:10 PM, LVN B stated she was not sure what the pills were or what resident they belonged to. She said loose unidentified pills could not be used and they should have been discarded LVN B stated that all nurses were responsible for maintaining the medication carts and checking for loose pills and she had not done so yet. LVN B said that the presence of loose pills in the cart could place residents at risk of receiving the incorrect or missed medication or a resident could run out of medication too fast. LVN B said that it was every nurse's duty to look in the carts prior to administering any medications to make sure they were not expired, and that giving expired medications could not be beneficial to the resident that was receiving it because it may lose its potency and cause a change in their health status. During an interview on 6/22/2022 at 3:30 PM, the DON said the floor nurses had to check for expired and discontinued medications on their carts daily. DON indicated she was the one responsible for monitoring that the nurses were storing medications properly and cleaning their carts. DON said she randomly rounded and checked the medication rooms and carts for storage and cleanliness. She said a pharmacy consultant came monthly and did cart audits. She said the pharmacy consultant reminded nursing staff to date open medications. She said it was important to date open medication to ensure medication was not expired. She said if residents got expired medication, they could be at risk for inadequate therapeutic benefits. DON said these steps were important to ensure residents did not get expired medication, decrease the effectiveness, and could cause a resident to become ill. She said it was important to place dates on opened medication due to some expiring at certain times after opening. DON stated she believed the facility had a policy regarding medication cart cleanliness, but she was not sure what it contained. She stated she expected the nursing staff to have kept the medication cart tidy, to have reviewed for loose pills and expired medications at least once weekly. DON stated it was not acceptable to have loose pills in the medication cart. DON stated a resident could have received the wrong medication. DON stated she was not sure if there had been any training on medication cart auditing for loose pills. Record review of facility nurse reference (in front of nurse medication binder in a plastic sleeve) titled Storage and expiration - insulin revealed: .Humalog(insulin lispro) expiration=28days, Lantus expiration=28days, Novolog flexpen(insulin aspart) expiration=28days . Record review of the facility's policy titled Administering Medication, revised December 2012, revealed: .9. The expiration beyond use date on the medication label must be checked prior to administering when opening a multi dose container the date open shall be recorded on the container . Record review of the facility's policy titled Storage of Medication, revised April 2007, revealed: .2. The nursing staff shall be responsible for maintaining medication storage and preparation areas in a clean safe and sanitary manner . 4. The facility shall not use discontinued outdated or deteriorated drugs or biologicals all such drugs shall be returned to the dispensing pharmacy or destroyed . 8. drugs shall be stored in an orderly manner in cabinets drawers carts automatic dispensing systems each resident medication shall be assigned to an individual cubicle drawer or other holding area to prevent the possibility of mixing medications of several residents .

CONCERN (E)

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

Safe Environment (Tag F0921)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Read full inspector narrative →

Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide a safe, functional, sanitary, and comfortable environment for residents for 1 of 4 shower rooms (hall 200 shower room) reviewed for physical environment in that: The facility failed to ensure the hall 200 shower room was safe and clean. This failure could place residents that reside on the 200 hall at risk of living in an unsafe, unsanitary, and uncomfortable environment and a diminished quality of life. Findings included: During an observation on 6/20/22 at 10:00 a.m., of the Hall 200 shower room, three of the shower walls had a gray chalky residue on the tiles up the wall seven tiles high. The right shower wall had yellow grout two tiles up the wall. The back shower wall had yellow grout, nine tiles up the wall. The left shower wall had yellow grout ten tiles up the wall. The floor grout, that met up with the left shower wall, was black. The handrail on the back wall had rust under the rail. Further observation was made of Hall-200 with a census of 21 residents. During an observation and interview on 6/20/22 at 3:15 p.m., of the Hall 200 shower room with the DON. The three shower walls had a gray chalky residue on the tiles up the wall seven tiles high. The right shower wall had yellow grout two tiles up the wall. The back shower wall had yellow grout, nine tiles up the wall. The left shower wall had yellow grout ten tiles up the wall. The floor grout that meets up with the left shower wall was black. The handrail on the back wall had rust under the rail. A pink loofa was hanging from a wire rack. The DON said the showers were cleaned daily. The DON said the tile and grout needed to be scrubbed and cleaned. The DON said the handrail needed to be addressed by maintenance. The DON said the loofa should have been taken back to the resident's room after their shower. During an observation on 6/21/22 at 8:30 a.m., of the Hall 200 shower room. The gray chalky residue on the tiles was no longer there. The loofa was removed. The right shower wall had yellow grout two tiles up the wall. The back shower wall had yellow grout, nine tiles up the wall. The left shower wall had yellow grout ten tiles up the wall. The floor grout, that met up with the left shower wall, was black. The handrail on the back wall had rust under the rail. During an observation and interview on 6/22/22 at 2:15 p.m., of the Hall 200 shower room with the Housekeeping Supervisor said the shower rooms were cleaned daily. The Housekeeping Supervisor said shower rooms were deep cleaned weekly on Fridays. The Housekeeping Supervisor said they used chemicals like peroxide, Clorox, and grout cleaner to clean the shower rooms. The Housekeeping Supervisor said they tried using the floor cleaning machine to clean the grout on the floor. The Housekeeping Supervisor said they had even used a butter knife to scrape the grout on the floor and it would not get the black stains out of the grout. The Housekeeping Supervisor said nothing they tried helped with removing the black or yellow stains from the grout. During an interview on 6/22/22 at 2:30 p.m., the Maintenance Supervisor said he was informed about the rust on the handrail in the hall 200 shower room on Monday. The Maintenance Supervisor said he ordered a new handrail to install to replace the rusted one. During an observation and interview on 6/22/22 at 2:45 p.m., of the Hall 200 shower room with the DON. The DON said hall 200 shower room was deep cleaned on Monday 6/20/22. The DON said they needed to continue to work on cleaning the grout. The DON said if the shower room was unsanitary, it could cause residents to not want to take their shower. During an interview on 6/22/22 at 3:45 p.m., the Administrator said she expected for the shower rooms to be cleaned as planned. The Administrator said if the shower room was unsanitary, it could cause issues for residents including infection control and cross contamination. Review of an undated Housekeeping Policy, titled, Standard Bathroom Cleaning, indicated, . The facility will maintain a schedule that provides that all . tub-shower rooms will be cleaned and disinfected daily. Review of the Housekeeping policy dated June 2016, titled, Deep Clean Checkoff List, indicated, . Clean and disinfect shower stall/tub.

Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)

Life-Threatening (Immediate Jeopardy)

J - Isolated K - Pattern L - Widespread

Actual Harm

G - Isolated H - Pattern I - Widespread

Potential for Harm

D - Isolated E - Pattern F - Widespread

No Harm (Minor)

A - Isolated B - Pattern C - Widespread

Questions to Ask on Your Visit

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

Our Honest Assessment

Strengths

• Licensed and certified facility. Meets minimum state requirements.

Concerns

• Multiple safety concerns identified: 1 life-threatening violation(s). Review inspection reports carefully.
• 19 deficiencies on record, including 1 critical (life-threatening) violation. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
• $14,020 in fines. Above average for Texas. Some compliance problems on record.
• Grade C (51/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.

Bottom line: Mixed indicators with Trust Score of 51/100. Visit in person and ask pointed questions.

Email me this report

About This Facility

What is Avalon Place Kirbyville's CMS Rating?

CMS assigns AVALON PLACE KIRBYVILLE an overall rating of 3 out of 5 stars, which is considered average nationally. Within Texas, this rating places the facility higher than 99% of the state's 100 nursing homes. This mid-range rating indicates the facility meets federal standards but may have areas for improvement.

How is Avalon Place Kirbyville Staffed?

CMS rates AVALON PLACE KIRBYVILLE's staffing level at 2 out of 5 stars, which is below average compared to other nursing homes.

What Have Inspectors Found at Avalon Place Kirbyville?

State health inspectors documented 19 deficiencies at AVALON PLACE KIRBYVILLE during 2022 to 2025. These included: 1 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death) and 18 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 Avalon Place Kirbyville?

AVALON PLACE KIRBYVILLE is owned by a government entity. Government-operated facilities are typically run by state, county, or municipal agencies. The facility is operated by CREATIVE SOLUTIONS IN HEALTHCARE, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 114 certified beds and approximately 51 residents (about 45% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in KIRBYVILLE, Texas.

How Does Avalon Place Kirbyville Compare to Other Texas Nursing Homes?

Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Texas, AVALON PLACE KIRBYVILLE's overall rating (3 stars) is above the state average of 2.8 and health inspection rating (2 stars) is below the national benchmark.

What Should Families Ask When Visiting Avalon Place Kirbyville?

Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "What changes have been made since the serious inspection findings, and how are you preventing similar issues?" "Can you walk me through typical staffing levels on day, evening, and night shifts?" "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 below-average staffing rating.

Is Avalon Place Kirbyville Safe?

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

Do Nurses at Avalon Place Kirbyville Stick Around?

AVALON PLACE KIRBYVILLE has not reported staff turnover data to CMS. Staff turnover matters because consistent caregivers learn residents' individual needs, medications, and preferences. When staff frequently change, this institutional knowledge is lost. Families should ask the facility directly about their staff retention rates and average employee tenure.

Was Avalon Place Kirbyville Ever Fined?

AVALON PLACE KIRBYVILLE has been fined $14,020 across 1 penalty action. This is below the Texas average of $33,219. While any fine indicates a compliance issue, fines under $50,000 are relatively common and typically reflect isolated problems that were subsequently corrected. Families should ask what specific issues led to these fines and confirm they've been resolved.

Is Avalon Place Kirbyville on Any Federal Watch List?

AVALON PLACE KIRBYVILLE 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.

Facility Details

Beds: 114
Avg. Residents: 51
Occupancy: 44.8%
Ownership: Government - Hospital district
Chain: CREATIVE SOLUTIONS IN HEALTHCARE
Medicare: Yes
Medicaid: Yes
Sprinklers: Yes

Trust Score Breakdown

Base Score: 50
3-Star Rating: +20
1 Immediate Jeopardy citation: -12
19 Deficiencies: -5
Fines ($14,020): -2
Final Score: 51/100

Nearby Alternatives

TIMBERIDGE NURSING AND REHABIL... 5-star RAYBURN HEALTH CARE & REHABILI... 3-star

View all in KIRBYVILLE →

Check Bed Availability

Data: CMS Medicare Care Compare

Updated: November 2025

Facility ID: 675220