GLENVIEW WELLNESS & REHABILITATION

7625 GLENVIEW DR, NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TX 76180 (817) 284-1427
Government - Hospital district 163 Beds OPCO SKILLED MANAGEMENT Data: November 2025 4 Immediate Jeopardy citations
Trust Grade
0/100
#720 of 1168 in TX
Last Inspection: August 2025

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

Overview

Glenview Wellness & Rehabilitation has received a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns and poor performance. It ranks #720 out of 1168 facilities in Texas, placing it in the bottom half, and is #41 out of 69 in Tarrant County, meaning only a handful of local options are better. The facility's trend is worsening, having increased from 4 issues in 2024 to 8 in 2025, and reported 22 total deficiencies, including critical incidents related to neglect and inadequate staffing. Staffing is a weakness here, with a low 1-star rating and a turnover rate of 60%, which is above the state average. There are concerning incidents, including a delay in providing necessary x-ray services for a resident who suffered a fall, resulting in a hip fracture and cervical spine injuries, highlighting serious lapses in care. While the facility has good RN coverage, it is overshadowed by the critical issues and overall poor ratings.

Trust Score
F
0/100
In Texas
#720/1168
Bottom 39%
Safety Record
High Risk
Review needed
Inspections
Getting Worse
4 → 8 violations
Staff Stability
⚠ Watch
60% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
Penalties
✓ Good
$23,970 in fines. Lower than most Texas facilities. Relatively clean record.
Skilled Nurses
⚠ Watch
Each resident gets only 27 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for Texas. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
Violations
⚠ Watch
22 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
★★☆☆☆
2.0
Overall Rating
★☆☆☆☆
1.0
Staff Levels
★★★★★
5.0
Care Quality
★★☆☆☆
2.0
Inspection Score
Stable
2024: 4 issues
2025: 8 issues

The Good

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

Facility shows strength in quality measures, fire safety.

The Bad

2-Star Overall Rating

Below Texas average (2.8)

Below average - review inspection findings carefully

Staff Turnover: 60%

14pts above Texas avg (46%)

Frequent staff changes - ask about care continuity

Federal Fines: $23,970

Below median ($33,413)

Minor penalties assessed

Chain: OPCO SKILLED MANAGEMENT

Part of a multi-facility chain

Ask about local staffing decisions and management

Staff turnover is elevated (60%)

12 points above Texas average of 48%

The Ugly 22 deficiencies on record

4 life-threatening
Sept 2025 2 deficiencies
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Report Alleged Abuse (Tag F0609)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure that all alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, explo...

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 all alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, exploitation or mistreatment, including injuries of unknown source and misappropriation of resident property, were reported immediately, but not later than 2 hours if the alleged violation involved abuse or neglect and resulted in bodily injury, to other officials (including the state Agency) and the administrator of the facility for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for reporting abuse. CNA A failed to notify the ADM and DON about an accident/hazard regarding Resident #1 that happened on 08/27/25. This failure could place residents at risk for abuse and neglect. Findings included:Record Review of Resident #1's face sheet, dated 09/09/25, reflected a [AGE] year-old female with an initial admission date of 03/24/25 and a re-admission date of 09/03/25. Resident #1 had diagnoses of Paraplegia (loss of voluntary movement and sensation in the lower half of the body), Personality Disorder (mental health conditions characterized by long-term patterns of thinking, feeling, and behaving that deviate significantly from societal expectations and cause distress or impairment in various aspects of life), Anxiety (a common mental health condition characterized by excessive and persistent worry, fear, and unease), Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (a mental health condition that can develop after experiencing or witnessing a traumatic event, such as a natural disaster, violent crime, or serious accident), Paralytic Syndrome (a medical condition characterized by muscle weakness or paralysis), Tobacco Use, Neuromuscular Dysfunction of Bladder (a condition where the nerves and muscles that control bladder function are impaired)Lack of Coordination (the inability to perform smooth, precise, and controlled movements).Record review of Resident #1's Comprehensive Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE], reflected: Section B Hearing, Speech, and Vision reflected that Resident #1 had clear speech and Vision, had the ability to make herself understood and had the ability to understand others. Section C Brief Interview for Mental Status score reflected a score of 15, which indicated the resident's cognition was normal. Record review of Resident #1's Care Plan, dated 09/09/25, reflected the following:‘Focus'Resident #1 utilizes a motorized wheelchair to move around in the room/facility. Resident #1 has been evaluated by Therapy in the usage of a power wheelchair.‘Goal'Safe use daily of the electric wheelchair by Resident #1.‘Interventions/Tasks'Transfer: The resident is able to transfer self but should use x1 staff for participation in safety.Resident#1 educated on safe use of electric wheelchair, not to allow other residents to hold on to the back on her wheelchair while in operation. In an interview on 09/09/25 at 9:54 AM, Resident #1 stated on 08/27/25 CNA A came in her room pissed off that she had work the 300 hall. Resident #1 stated she was soaked in urine and CNA A changed her diaper, but her bed was soaked in urine. Resident #1 stated she had asked CNA A if she was going to change the bed sheets, and CNA A responded she would change the sheets when Resident #1 got out of bed. Resident #1 stated she told CNA A that she was ready to get out of bed and that's when CNA A started transferring her to the motorized wheelchair. Resident #1 stated CNA A then pushed a button on the motorized wheelchair and the wheelchair ran into the wall and hit Resident #1's foot when the wheelchair hit the wall. Resident #1 stated that her foot was in pain at the time of the incident, but it was no longer in pain at the time of the interview. In an interview on 09/09/25 at 10:44 AM, CNA A stated she was getting Resident #1 ready to go outside for her smoke break. CNA A said she had gotten the motorized wheelchair next to the bed so Resident #1 could transfer from the bed to the wheelchair. CNA A stated that she pressed the joystick on the motorized wheelchair and the wheelchair zoomed off fast and hit the wall and Resident #1's right foot. CNA A told Resident #1 that she was going to get the nurse and Resident #1 stopped CNA A and stated she was fine and not in any pain and that it was not a big deal. CNA A stated that she was unsure why she did not report the incident immediately to a nurse. She stated that she meant to report it to a nurse when the incident happened, but she had forgot to report it because she was doing multiple things at once. She stated the risk of not reporting incident/accidents in a timely manner can prolong care and it is bad to not report. CNA A stated she was inserviced on how to properly use the motorized wheelchair by unlocking the wheelchair from the bottom and pushing it manually next time. In an interview on 09/09/25 at 2:03 PM, the DON stated that the incident happened on 08/27/25. The DON stated she did not find out about the incident until the next day on 08/28/25 when Resident #1 went to the DON and voiced that she was going to make a complaint to the state and that's when Resident #1 told her that her foot was hurting because of the motorized wheelchair hitting her foot and she requested some pain medicine. The DON stated that she immediately assessed Resident #1's foot, and orders were submitted for x-rays on 08/29/25. The DON stated x-ray results returned on 08/30 were negative, which indicated no injuries. The DON stated she expects staff to report all incidents to a nurse. The DON stated if a nurse was not available then she expects staff to report all incidents to her immediately. She stated the risk of staff not reporting incidents in a timely manner can cause care to be delayed. The DON stated if they would have known about the incident when it first occurred staff could have implemented the next steps right away. In an interview on 09/09/25 at 3:06 PM, the ADM stated that she had found out about the wheelchair hitting Resident #1's foot when the DON came to her on 08/28/2025. ADM stated that she immediately made an incident report to the state. She stated that Resident #1 knows how to adjust the speed on the motorized wheelchair, and she increases the speed on the wheelchair all the time. The ADM stated that when she was made aware of the incident she immediately went and had the wheelchair assessed by therapy to be sure the wheelchair was set to a safe speed. ADM stated the CNA has been in service on how to properly use the motorized wheelchair. ADM stated the risk of a CNA not knowing how to properly operate a motorized wheelchair can cause residents to get hurt. ADM stated her expectations of the CNA are to get assistance from therapy before operating the motorized wheelchair. Review of the facility policy, Abuse & Neglect, date revised 08/20 reflected: I. The facility is committed to protecting residents from abuse by anyone, including but not limited to Facility Staff, other residents, consultants, volunteers, staff from other agencies serving residents, family members, legal guardians, surrogates, sponsors, friends, and visitors. This policy statement also includes deprivation by any individual, including a caretaker, of goods, services or rights that are necessary for a resident to attain or maintain physical, mental, and psychosocial wellbeing. The administrator is responsible for coordinating and implementing the Facility' abuse prevention policies, ii. Facility Staff will report known or suspected instances of abuse to the administrator, and his/her designee. A. Reporting Requirements i. If the reportable event does not result in serious bodily injury, the administrator, and his/her designee, will make a telephone report to the local law enforcement agency within 24 hours of the observation, knowledge, or suspicion of physical/sexual abuse.
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

Accident Prevention (Tag F0689)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

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

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that each resident received adequate supervision for one (Resident #1) of three residents reviewed for supervision and ensured the environment remained free of accidents hazards. The facility failed to ensure CNA A appropriately transferred Resident #1 from the bed to the motorized wheelchair to ensure accidents did not occur. This failure could place residents at risk of being in an unsafe environment and at risk of accidents and injury. Findings included: Record Review of Resident #1's face sheet, dated 09/09/25, reflected a [AGE] year-old female with an initial admission date of 03/24/25 and a re-admission date of 09/03/2025. Resident #1 had diagnoses of Paraplegia (loss of voluntary movement and sensation in the lower half of the body), Personality Disorder (mental health conditions characterized by long-term patterns of thinking, feeling, and behaving that deviate significantly from societal expectations and cause distress or impairment in various aspects of life), Anxiety (a common mental health condition characterized by excessive and persistent worry, fear, and unease), Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (a mental health condition that can develop after experiencing or witnessing a traumatic event, such as a natural disaster, violent crime, or serious accident), Paralytic Syndrome (a medical condition characterized by muscle weakness or paralysis), Tobacco Use, Neuromuscular Dysfunction of Bladder (a condition where the nerves and muscles that control bladder function are impaired), Lack of Coordination (the inability to perform smooth, precise, and controlled movements).Record review of Resident #1's Comprehensive Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE], reflected: Section B Hearing, Speech, and Vision reflected that Resident #1 had clear speech and Vision, had the ability to make herself understood and had the ability to understand others. Section C Brief Interview for Mental Status score reflected a score of 15, which indicated the resident's cognition was normal. Record review of Resident #1's Care Plan, dated 09/09/25, reflected the following:‘Focus'Resident #1 utilizes a motorized wheelchair to move around in the room/facility. Resident #1 has been evaluated by Therapy in the usage of a power wheelchair.‘Goal'Safe use daily of the electric wheelchair by Resident #1.‘Interventions/Tasks'Transfer: The resident is able to transfer self but should use x1 staff for participation in safety.Resident#1 educated on safe use of electric wheelchair, not to allow other residents to hold on to the back on her wheelchair while in operation. In an interview on 09/09/25 at 9:54 AM, Resident #1 stated on 08/27/25 CNA A came in her room pissed off that she had work the 300 hall. Resident #1 stated she was soaked in urine and CNA A changed her diaper, but her bed was soaked in urine. Resident #1 stated she had asked CNA A if she was going to change the bed sheets, and CNA A responded she would change the sheets when Resident #1 got out of bed. Resident #1 stated she told CNA A that she was ready to get out of bed and that's when CNA A started transferring her to the motorized wheelchair. Resident #1 stated CNA A then pushed a button on the motorized wheelchair and the wheelchair ran into the wall and hit Resident #1's foot when the wheelchair hit the wall. Resident #1 stated that her foot was in pain at the time of the incident, but it was no longer in pain at the time of the interview. In an interview on 09/09/25 at 10:44 AM, CNA A stated she was getting Resident #1 ready to go outside for her smoke break. CNA A said she had gotten the motorized wheelchair next to the bed so Resident #1 could transfer from the bed to the wheelchair. CNA A stated that she pressed the joystick on the motorized wheelchair and the wheelchair zoomed off fast and hit the wall and Resident #1's right foot. CNA A told Resident #1 that she was going to get the nurse and Resident #1 stopped CNA A and stated she was fine and not in any pain and that it was not a big deal. CNA A stated that she was unsure why she did not report the incident immediately to a nurse. She stated that she meant to report it to a nurse when the incident happened, but she had forgotten to report it because she was doing multiple things at once. She stated the risk of not reporting incidents in a timely manner can prolong care and it is bad to not report. CNA A stated she was inserviced on how to properly use the motorized wheelchair by unlocking the wheelchair from the bottom and pushing it manually next time. In an interview on 09/09/25 at 2:03 PM, the DON stated that the incident happened on 08/27/25. The DON stated she did not find out about the incident until the next day on 08/28/25 when Resident #1 went to the DON and voiced that she was going to make a complaint to the state and that's when Resident #1 told her that her foot was hurting because of the motorized wheelchair hitting her foot and she requested some pain medicine. The DON stated that she immediately assessed Resident #1's foot, and orders were submitted for x-rays on 08/29/25. The DON stated x-ray results returned on 08/30 were negative, which indicated no injuries. The DON stated she expects staff to report all incidents to a nurse. The DON stated if a nurse was not available then she expects staff to report all incidents to her immediately. She stated the risk of staff not reporting incidents in a timely manner can cause care to be delayed. The DON stated if they would have known about the incident when it first occurred staff could have implemented the next steps right away. In an interview on 09/09/25 at 3:06 PM, the ADM stated that she had found out about the wheelchair hitting Resident #1's foot when the DON came to her on 08/28/2025. ADM stated that she immediately made an incident report to the state. She stated that Resident #1 knows how to adjust the speed on the motorized wheelchair, and she increases the speed on the wheelchair all the time. The ADM stated that when she was made aware of the incident she immediately went and had the wheelchair assessed by therapy to be sure the wheelchair was set to a safe speed. ADM stated the CNA has been in service on how to properly use the motorized wheelchair. ADM stated the risk of a CNA not knowing how to properly operate a motorized wheelchair can cause residents to get hurt. The ADM stated her expectations of the CNA are to get assistance from therapy before operating the motorized wheelchair. On 09/09/25 at 4:04 PM, surveyor requested a policy for accidents/hazards, but the ADM stated that they did not have a policy on accidents/hazards.
Aug 2025 4 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

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

Safe Environment (Tag F0584)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike envir...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, for 3 of 18 residents (Resident #81, Resident #5, and Resident #18) reviewed for maintenance services. The facility failed to ensure Resident #81's ceiling tile was repaired and maintained around the air vent. The facility failed to ensure Resident #5's air vent was cleaned and free of debris. The facility failed to ensure a hole in the wall of Resident #18's room was repaired. The facility failed to ensure resident #18 had sufficient lighting in the bathroom. These failures could place residents at risk of living in an unclean, unsanitary, and accident-free environment which could lead to a decreased quality of life.Findings included: Record Review of Resident #81's Face Sheet, not dated, indicated a [AGE] year-old female with an initial admission date of 03/29/24 and a re-admission date of 05/13/24. Resident #81 had diagnoses of Senile Degeneration of the brain (a progressive decline in thinking, memory, and daily function), Dysphagia (difficulty swallowing), Atherosclerosis of Native Arteries (the buildup of plaque within the body's arteries), Adjustment Disorder (a mental health condition where someone experiences excessive emotional or behavioral symptoms in response to a stressful life event or change), Insomnia (a sleep disorder characterized by persistent difficulty falling asleep, staying asleep, or not feeling rested after sleep, which disrupts daily activities), Lack of Coordination (difficulty in controlling and coordinating movements), Cognitive Communication Deficit (Attention and concentration difficulties), Dementia (a progressive loss of mental functions, such as memory, language, and reasoning), Delirium (a change in a person's mental state), Muscle Weakness, Anemia (a condition where the blood has a reduced ability to carry oxygen), and Hyperlipidemia (a condition in which there are abnormally high levels of lipids (fats) in the bloodstream). Record Review of Resident #5's Face sheet, not dated, indicated a [AGE] year-old with an admission date of 07/08/25. Resident #5 had diagnoses of Dementia (a progressive loss of mental functions, such as memory, language, and reasoning, Muscle weakness), Lack of Coordination (difficulty in controlling and coordinating movements), Type 2 Diabetes (when the body cannot use insulin correctly and sugar builds up in the blood), Hyperlipidemia (a condition in which there are abnormally high levels of lipids (fats) in the bloodstream), Bipolar Disorder a (mental health condition that causes extreme mood swings), Insomnia (a sleep disorder characterized by persistent difficulty falling asleep, staying asleep, or not feeling rested after sleep, Chronic Pain, Visual loss, Hearing loss, Hypertension (where the force of blood against the artery walls is consistently too high), Vascular Disease (conditions that affect the body's blood vessels, including arteries and veins), and Chronic Kidney Disease (where the kidneys are damaged and cannot filter blood effectively). Record Review of Resident of #18's Face sheet, not dated, indicated a [AGE] year-old with an admission date of 03/25/25. Resident #18 had diagnoses of Traumatic Subarachnoid Hemorrhage (bleeding into the space between the brain and its surrounding membranes), Lack of Coordination, Cataracts (clouding of the eye's natural lens), Convulsions (where muscles contract and relax rapidly, causing uncontrolled shaking of the body), Psychotic Disorder (a mental health condition that causes a person to lose touch with reality), Adjustment Disorder (a mental health condition where someone experiences excessive emotional or behavioral symptoms in response to a stressful life event or change), Muscle Weakness, Communication Deficit (a difficulty or impairment in the ability to effectively receive, send, process, or comprehend information), Aphasia (a language disorder that affects a person's ability to communicate), and Hypokalemia (low potassium levels in the blood), Depression. An observation on 08/17/25 at 1:51 PM, of Resident #81's room reflected brown water stains on the ceiling tile around the air vent that had condensation on the vent. An observation on 08/17/25 at 2:26 PM, of Resident #5's room reflected gray flakes that covered the air vent. An observation on 08/18/25 at 10:30 AM, of Resident #18's room reflected a hole in the wall behind the door. In an observation and interview on 08/18/25 at 10:35 AM, Resident #5's bathroom light was dim. Resident #5 stated the light was so dim she could not see when she entered the bathroom. In an interview on 08/19/2025 at 1:15 PM, the Maintenance Director stated he was responsible for changing the ceiling tiles, cleaning the air vents, repairing holes in the walls, and changing out the light bulbs in the facility. He stated the risk of the brown stains on the ceiling tile with condensation on the air vent could cause internal black mold. He stated the risk of not repairing the hole in the wall could cause a resident to get their arm stuck in the wall or they could cut themselves. He stated the risk of the dim light in the resident's bathroom could cause a fall. In an interview on 08/19/2025 at 6:30 PM, the ADM stated she expected the Maintenance Director to patch all holes. She stated the risk of the hole not being patched could cause pests to come through the wall. She stated she expected the Maintenance Director to change out light bulbs when there is little to no light, and the risk of failing to do so could cause a fall. She stated she also expected for the Maintenance Director to repair the ceiling tile that contained the brown stain with condensation on the vent and clean the debris off of the other vent as soon as they received the work order, and she stated the risk was the condensation, or debris could drop onto the resident. Record Review of the facility policy, revised 08/2020, titled Resident Rooms and Environment stated: Purpose: To provide residents with a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment. Policy: The facility provides residents with a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment. Facility Staff will provide residents with a pleasant environment and person-centered care that emphasizes the residents' comfort, independence, and personal needs and preferences. This shall include ensuring that residents can receive care and services safely and that the physical layout of the Facility maximizes resident independence and does not pose a safety risk. To this end, the facility encourages residents to use their personal belongings to the extent possible. Procedure: l. Facility Staff aim to create a personalized, homelike atmosphere, paying close attention to the following: A. Cleanliness and order; C. Lighting that is comfortable (minimum glare) yet adequate (suitable to the task) F. Comfortable levels of ventilation. Vlll. The Facility provides comfortable and adequate lighting throughout the Facility to promote a safe, comfortable and homelike environment. The lighting design emphasizes: Sufficient general lighting in all areas; Task lighting as needed; Even light levels.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0761 (Tag F0761)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure medication was stored in locked compartments f...

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 medication was stored in locked compartments for 1 of 7 Medication Carts (Cart A) and 1 of 2 Treatment Carts (Cart B) reviewed for drug security. 1. A medication cart (Cart A) was left unlocked when not in use, unattended, and out of nurse's view while Resident #15 sat across from medication Cart A on 08/17/25. 2. A treatment cart (Cart B) was left unlocked when not in use and unattended on 08/17/25. These deficiencies could place residents at risk of medications loss, drug diversion, or harm due to accidental ingestion of unprescribed medications.Findings included: Record review of Resident #15's face sheet dated 08/18/25 revealed a [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a primary diagnosis of unspecified dementia (this is a brain disease that alters brain function and causes a cognitive decline). In an observation on 08/17/25 at 08:20 AM and at 08:45 AM, it was revealed a medication cart (Cart A) was unlocked and unattended with the lock mechanism out (indicating it was unlocked) against the nursing station facing the foyer with Resident #15 seated across from the unlocked and unattended medication cart (Cart A). There was no staff in sight of the unlocked Cart A. In an observation on 08/17/25 at 08:45 AM, it was revealed that the Treatment cart (Cart B) was unlocked and unattended with the lock mechanism out (indicating it was unlocked) outside the secure unit double doors against the wall facing outwards to the nursing station. There were no staff close or working from the unlocked treatment cart (Cart B). In an interview on 08/17/25 at 08:50 AM with LVN A it was revealed she was responsible for Cart A. She said she forgot to lock Cart A when unattended and out of sight. She stated the expectation was to lock and secure the medication cart when not in use. LVN A stated treatment cart (Cart B) was not left unlocked by her. She said the treatment nurse may have left it unlocked when she went to do wound care in a resident's room. She said all nursing staff were responsible for securing medication carts when not in use. She said the potential risk was a resident may get into the cart and grab something. In an interview with the DON on 08/17/25 at 10:56 AM, she revealed LVN A told her that she left the medication cart (Cart A) and treatment cart (Cart B) unlocked because she was in a hurry to go and stop the bleeding for a resident. She said LVN A said it was the urgent situation that lead to her quickly grabbing bandages and rushing to a resident's room leaving the carts unlocked. DON said Cart A and Cart B should not be left unlocked when not in nurse's view and not actively working in it. The DON said the actual treatment cart was locked inside the wound care nurse's office and Cart B was just overflow stock for weekend nurses to have access to bandages and creams and wound items that may not be on the medication carts. She said the expectation for all staff was that they would follow policy and procedure and lock and secure the medication carts and treatment carts when not in use. She said the risk was unauthorized access to the carts. DON stated she would do an in-service with LVN A. In an interview with ADON B on 08/18/25 at 1:00 PM, it was revealed she was the treatment nurse and did not leave Cart B unlocked when unattended. She stated Cart B was an overflow treatment cart for nurses. She said Cart B was an extra treatment cart for the nursing staff to use when she was not in the building and for PRN treatments by nurses. She said all the nurses have access to Cart B and were responsible for locking it up after use. She said it was a safety risk to the residents especially with betadine on the treatment cart could burn the eyes if accidentally exposed to the hands and into the eyes. Interview on 08/19/25 at 3:49 PM with Administrator it was revealed, the medication carts and treatment carts should be locked when they were out of sight and staff were not actively working in the carts. She said the expectation was that all staff would follow company policies and procedures and the expectation for all staff was to keep the residents safe. Record review of in-service one on one titled Corrective Action Memo completed by LVN A on 08/17/25 lead by DON revealed education to ensure medication/treatment carts are secured and locked when unattended to prevent unauthorized access and ensure resident safety. Record review of facility policy Administering Medication revised 08-2020 reflected 15. During administration of medications, the medication cart is kept closed and locked when out of sight of the medication nurse or aide. No medications are kept on top of the cart. The cart must be clearly visible to the personnel administering the medication, and all outward sides must be inaccessible to residents or others passing by. In addition, privacy is always maintained for all resident information by closing the MAR when not in use.
CONCERN (E)

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

PASARR Coordination (Tag F0644)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to coordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and residen...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to coordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review (PASRR) and refer all level II residents and all residents with possible serious mental disorder, intellectual disability, or a related condition for one (Resident #8) of one residents reviewed for PASRR screenings. The facility failed to ensure Resident #8's PASRR Level One screening accurately reflected their diagnosis of mental illness. This failure placed residents at risk of not receiving specialized therapy and equipment services they may benefit from. Findings included: Review of Resident #8's admission Record, dated 08/19/25, reflected he was a [AGE] year-old male, admitted on [DATE], and having diagnoses of cerebral infarction (stroke), unspecified dementia, severe with mood disturbance, delirium due to known physiological condition (occurring as an effect of a diagnosed disease process), bi-polar disorder current episode mixed, moderate (individual experiences both moderate manic and depressive symptoms simultaneously), and anxiety disorder. Review of Resident #8's quarterly MDS assessment, dated 05/16/25, reflected he was admitted to the facility from a short-term hospital stay. Resident #8 was usually able to understand others and be understood by others. His BIMs score was seven, indicating severe cognitive impairment. He displayed no signs of delirium or psychosis, no behavioral problems, and had no indicators of a mood problem during the assessment period. Resident #8 had impaired range of motion on one side of his upper body, and both sides of his lower body. He was able to feed himself but was dependent on staff for movement and ADL care. Review of Resident #8's care plans reflected the following: - A care plan created on 05/04/24, for of psychotropic medications for depression (sertraline and Depakote) - A care plan created on 05/22/24 for a history of trauma - A care plan created on 05/24/24 for impaired cognitive function or dementia, or impaired thought processes related to his stroke - A care plan created on 05/24/24 for depression and antidepressant medication Review of a psychiatry progress note, dated 08/04/25, reflected Resident #8's primary treating diagnosis was bipolar disorder, current episode mixed, moderate, and was on two medications which were each being used to treat multiple psychiatric diagnoses, including his primary diagnosis. Review of Resident #8's PASRR Level 1 Screening reflected the screening was done on 08/17/24, the day before Resident #8 was admitted to the facility, at an acute care hospital. Section C of the document reflected Resident #8 did not have a primary diagnosis of dementia, did not have mental illness, developmental disability, or intellectual disability. An interview on 08/19/25 at 5:37 PM with Regional MDS revealed if Resident #8 came from the hospital with a diagnosis of bi-polar, and the hospital marked it negative, she would have to enter the information as-is, as a draft, and try to get a new, correct form from the hospital. She said the admissions person, who received the form from the hospital when someone was admitted , did not review the form, and just scanned it in, and she (MDS) would be the one to review the form. She said she had a form she consulted with the diagnoses, because she could not remember them all. The surveyor asked for a copy of this list at that time, but did not receive one prior to exit. An interview on 08/19/25 at 6:11 PM with Regional MDS revealed the physician had moved Resident #8's dementia diagnosis to the primary spot, but she realized it was not there when the survey began. She said if a resident had mental illness when admitted , and the form was incorrect, MDS was to ask the admissions person to get a correct one from the hospital. She said it was important for the forms to be correct so that residents would have access to services available to them, but Resident #8 would not qualify for services, and his mental health needs were being addressed by the facility. Review of the facility policy Pre-admission Screening Resident Review (PASRR), revised 06/2020, reflected Purpose: To ensure that all Facility applicants are screened for mental illness and/or intellectual disability prior to admission and to ensure this assessment effort is coordinated with the appropriate state agencies if indicated. Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) is a federal requirement to help ensure that individuals who have a mental disorder or intellectual disabilities are not inappropriately placed in nursing homes for long term care. (.)I. The Facility, as a medicaid certified nursing facility, ensures that Level I of the Preadmission Screening Resident Review (PASRR) is completed prior to admission of all applicants, regardless of payor, to determine if they are have a Mental Disorder ( MD) or Intellectually Disabled ( ID). A. All applicants to the Facility, whether or not they receive or are eligible for Medicaid, receive the Level I screening. (.) V. A negative Level I screen permits admission to proceed and ends the PASARR process, unless a possible serious mental disorder or intellectual disability arises later. A positive Level I screen necessitates an in-depth evaluation of the individual by the state-designated authority, known as PASARR Level II, which must be conducted prior to admission to a nursing facility. (.) VII. Failure to pre-screen residents prior to admission to the facility may result in the failure to identify residents who have or may have MD, ID or a related condition. (.) Procedure: I. Procedure for New Applicants A. PASRR Level I screening is to be completed before the individual is admitted to the Facility. If it is not completed by the sending institution, it should be completed byNursing Staff prior to admission.B. All first-time applicants to the Facility, regardless of Medicaid status or payer, must undergo a Level I PASRR screening before being admitted to the Facility, or on the first day in which Medicaid reimbursement is requested. (.) C. If the Level I screening reveals no sign of mental illness or intellectual disability, the applicant may be admitted to the Facility without further review. III. Screening Results A. If the Level I screening results indicate that the applicant should receive the Level II screening, the Facility shall contact the appropriate state agency for additional screening. i. The state agency will arrange for Level II screening and determine whether the individual should be admitted to the Facility and, if so, what services the individual will need. The Level II screening must be completed prior to admission. (.) iii. Recommendations from the Level II screening will be incorporated into the residents' care plan.
CONCERN (E)

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

Infection Control (Tag F0880)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 1 (Resident #2) of 8 residents, and 1 of 1 laundry room reviewed for infection control in that: 1. ADON B did not wear PPE during wound care for Resident #2 who was on Enhanced Barrier Precautions for wounds. 2. The facility failed to prevent cross contamination of three racks of clean residents' clothing by placing the racks in front of two washing machines in the soiled area of the laundry room. 3. The Laundry Aide failed to keep the clean laundry folding table clean, when she placed her shoes on the table next to residents' clean clothing. These failures could place residents at risk for infections due to lack of separation between clean and soiled laundry and by not following Enhancement Based Precautions.The findings included: Record review of Resident #2's face sheet dated 08/18/25 revealed a [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility with pressure ulcer of the sacral region, stage 4 (this is a wound with full thickness tissue lose with exposed bone, tendon or muscle. Slough or eschar may be present on some parts), unspecified wrist fracture and urinary tract infection. Record review of Resident #2's [NAME] MDS dated [DATE] revealed Resident #2 had a BIM's score of 14, indicating cognitively intact. Further review of MDS revealed Resident #2 had skin and ulcer treatment plans of pressure reducing device for bed, nutrition or hydration interventions to manage skin problem and pressure ulcer care. Review of Resident #2's physician orders dated 08/18/25 reflected resident was on Enhanced Barrier Precautions r/t wound: Staff members will wear a clean gown and gloves while performing high contact resident care activities to include Dressing, Bathing/Showering, transferring, providing hygiene, changing linens, changing briefs or toileting assistance, and/or caring for indwelling medical devices like central lines, catheters, feeding tube, tracheostomy/ ventilator. every shift for Standard Precautions, order start date 04/28/25. Review of Resident #2's care plan, initiated 08/05/25, revealed: Focus: On Enhanced Barrier Precautions for wounds.Goal: Enhanced Barrier Precautions will be followed through review period. Interventions: Enhanced Barrier Precautions r/t sacrum wound requires dressing: Staff members will wear a clean gown and gloves while performing high contact resident care activities to include Dressing, Bathing/Showering, transferring, providing hygiene, changing linens, changing briefs or toileting assistance, and/or caring for indwelling medical devices like central lines, catheters, feeding tube, tracheostomy/ventilator During wound care observation on 08/18/25 at 1:30 PM, revealed door signage for Resident #2 for Enhanced Barrier Precautions. ADON B did not put on a gown during wound care for Resident #2. In an interview on 08/18/25 at 1:50 PM, ADON B said that she forgot to wear a gown. She said that she did not know why she forgot to wear a gown. She said she was usually very careful to make sure that she followed all PPE precautions. She said the risk of not following EBP was spread of infection. Observation and interview of laundry room on 08/19/25 at 11:00 AM, revealed the laundry room had a clean area and a dirty area that were separated by a partial wall. Further in the laundry room revealed three racks of clothing placed a few feet in front of two washing machines on the soiled area of the laundry room next to a sink. Further observation on the clean area of laundry room on the folding table revealed a pair of black shoes placed on top of clothing facing upwards with the soles of the shoes up. The Housekeeping Supervisor stated that the Laundry Aide had placed the two racks of clean residents clothing in the area (dirty area) after sorting them from the dryer before transporting them out to residents. She said the third rack was for missing residents' items or items that could be donated to residents that had no clothing. She said the laundry room was small, and they tried to use the areas as best as they could. She said that the laundry aide should have placed the clean clothing racks on the clean area to avoid cross contamination. In an interview with the Laundry Aide on 08/19/25 at 11:10 AM, she said that the shoes were hers. She did not say why she put her shoes on top of the table that was used to fold residents clothing when she was asked by housekeeping supervisor. The Laundry Aide said she would move her shoes and that the risk of placing shoes in an area used for folding residents clothing was contamination of laundry items. The Laundry Aide said that it was easier for her to have the racks of clothing in the area by the washing machines because it was closer to the sorting table after taking the cloths out of the dryer. She said she could see how mixing dirty and clean could cause a risk of cross contamination. In an interview with the DON on 08/19/25 at 5:04 PM, she said the expectation during wound care was for the nurses to wear a gown and gloves and to follow EBP. She said EBP was put in place as an extra layer of protection for staff and residents to prevent the spread of MDRO's infection. She said she and ADON were responsible for monitoring infection control policies and procedures that were being followed. The DON said she had in-serviced on infection control and how to handle linens but other than that she was not familiar with the laundry room. She said that the expectation was for all staff to follow infection control policies and procedures. In an interview with the ADM on 08/19/25 at 6:57 PM, it was revealed that she expected all staff to follow the infection control policy and to follow EBP. The ADM said that laundry room should follow the infection control by separating clean areas from soiled areas to prevent cross contamination. ADM said that she would bring up the incidents during the meeting and have OAPI team involved, and she would make sure that in-services for laundry department for infection control was completed by all staff. Record review of facility policy titled Standard and Enhanced Precautions dated April 1, 2024, revealed .EBP are indicated for residents with any of the following: 1. Infection or colonization with a CDC-targeted MDRO .Wounds and/or indwelling medical devices even if a resident is not known to be infected or colonized with a MDRO .post signage .high-contact resident care activities requiring gown and glove use . Record review of facility policy titled Laundry-Route & Process, revision date 08/2020 reflected: K. A clean and safe environment is always maintained.
Jun 2025 1 deficiency
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

ADL Care (Tag F0677)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

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

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident who is unable to carry out activities of daily living receives showers to maintain grooming and personal hygiene for 1 (Resident #1) of 3 residents reviewed for ADL care. The facility did not provide showers or baths to Resident #1 as scheduled. This failure can affect residents by decreasing their quality of life. Findings include: Record Review of Resident #1 face sheet dated 06/10/2025, revealed an [AGE] year-old woman who was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with primary diagnoses of transient cerebral ischemic attack (brief blockage of blood flow to the brain) and sepsis (infection in the blood stream), with secondary diagnoses of acute kidney failure (kidneys unable to filter waste products out of blood), dependence on renal dialysis, unsteadiness on feet, unspecified abnormalities of gait and mobility (change in walking pattern as a result of issues with the legs or feet), unspecified lack of coordination, muscle weakness (generalized), and cognitive communication deficit (trouble with communicating). Record Review of Resident #1's MDS dated [DATE] reflected a BIMS score of 15, indicating cognitively intact. Resident #1 required extensive assistance with 3 ADLs (bed mobility, transfer, and toilet use). Resident #1's care plan, date initiated 05/13/2023, reflected: Problem: Resident #1 has an ADL Self Care Performance Deficit r/t recent weakness. The resident needs assistance performing ADLs. Interventions: BATHING: The resident requires total dependence from one person staff participation with bathing. Goal: The resident will maintain current level of functioning in late loss ADLs thought the next review date; Problem: Resident#1 has a behavior problem r/t refusal of all showers. Resident#1 will not take a shower and does not get out of bed other than to go to Dialysis. Tells staff that therapy is the only people that can get her out of bed and back into bed. Interventions: Caregivers to provided opportunity for positive interaction, attention. Stop and talk with him/her as passing by; Explain all procedures to (resident) before starting. Goals: Will understand that (nursing) staff can get her out of bed; Resident#1 will have fewer episodes of refusal by review date. Record review of Resident #1's care plan, initiated date 05/13/2023, did not address the resident not being able to take a shower and how that need was going to be addressed. Observation and interview with Resident #1 on 06/10/2025 at 12:03PM revealed resident dressed in hospital gown and the roots of her hair appeared greasy. The resident stated she had been receiving dialysis treatment 3 days a week. She had a dialysis port on the right side of her chest. The resident stated she did wear briefs and received incontinent care. The resident stated she would like to receive showers, but she receives bed baths, and she was told she cannot have showers. The resident further stated she was told it was because of her dialysis port. Resident #1 said she did not receive bed baths often and that the last bed bath was around 2 months ago. Record Review of Resident #1's bathing task sheet of baths given the last 30 days (from 06/10/2025) reflected that the resident has had 4 baths, 05/17/2025, 05/26/2025, 05/29/2025 and 5/30/2025. Record Review of Resident #1's progress note written by LVN A, dated 05/26/2025 revealed patient refused shower even after this writer tried to advise patient the need for shower . Record review of Resident #1's progress note dated 04/09/25, reflected Skin assessment completed, no skin issues noted. Interview with CNA B on 06/10/2025 at 1:55PM revealed that CNA B provides showers to residents in the mornings. She explained that residents are on a schedule for every other day of the week. The surveyor asked CNA B if she provided Resident #1 with showers; she stated she normally did bed baths with the resident, but she previously got her up for showers. She stated that Resident #1 told her that dialysis said she (Resident #1) cannot get showers but could get bed baths, so she gets bed baths on Monday, Wednesday, and Fridays . CNA B said she gave Resident #1 one (bed bath) yesterday (06/09/2025). CNA B then stated that Resident #1 refused a bed bath on 06/09/2025 because she wanted to get up for therapy. This surveyor asked if CNA B covered the resident's dialysis port for previous showers, CNA B stated she did not cover the port or watched it get covered. She said the nurse covered it, but she could not recall which nurse covered the dialysis port. She said she was not trained to cover the dialysis port because it was not in her scope as a CNA. She said only nurses covered the dialysis port. CNA B described the port cover as plastic and sticky, and hard to get off the resident. After the shower, CNA B said, a nurse (she could not recall name of nurse) told her that dialysis said the port was infected (indicating the resident could only further receive bed baths). Record review of Resident #1's bathing task sheet of baths given the last 30 days (from 05/10/2025) reflected no record of if the resident received or denied a bed bath or shower. Interview with the Nurse Practitioner on 06/10/2025 at 2:01PM revealed that Resident #1 should be able to receive showers and the dialysis port can be covered up. She said she was not aware of the issue, but she will make sure that she educates the nursing staff. Interview with the Regional Compliance Nurse on 06/10/2025 at 3:12PM revealed that initial refusal of showers was to be charted and care planned. She stated the residents have the right to refuse the shower, but staff can keep encouraging the residents. She said that just because they refuse doesn't mean they won't change their mind. The Regional Compliance Nurse stated she had not heard of a dialysis port being why a resident cannot have a shower. The Regional Compliance Nurse said staff can cover the access port; saying that may be a way to make someone have bed baths. The Regional Compliance Nurse stated she has had dialysis patients her whole career and never had that a situation where residents could only have bed baths due to their dialysis port and did not think nephrology would say that. The Regional Compliance Nurse explained dialysis did dressing changes on the ports and facility nurses monitor the sites. Interview with the ADM on 06/10/2025 at 4:34PM revealed the expectation for ADL care and showers was that they were resident rights and residents were to be asked if they want a shower. If residents refuse, staff were to put a note in their care plan or chart. The ADM stated that residents who were on dialysis do get showers. She named another resident who was on dialysis and took showers. The ADM stated dialysis ports need to be covered and taped for showers. Record review of facility in-service titled showers dated 05/07/25, revealed LVN A and CNA B had completed the training. Record review of the facility's Dialysis Care policy and procedure, revised 06/2020, reflected .IV. Care Plan A. The Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) will ensure that the resident's Care Plan includes documentation of the resident's renal condition and necessary precautions. Record review of the facility Resident Rights policy and procedure, revised 8/2020, reflected .II. Each resident is allowed to choose activities, schedules and health care that are consistent with his or her interests, assessments and plans of care, including: A. Sleeping, eating, exercise and bathing schedules; B. Personal care needs, such as bathing methods, grooming styles and dress; and C. Health care scheduling, such as times of day for therapies and certain treatments.
Apr 2025 1 deficiency
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Pressure Ulcer Prevention (Tag F0686)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

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

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure residents with pressure ulcers receive necessary treatment and services, consistent with professional standards of practice, to promote healing, prevent infection and prevent new ulcers from developing for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for treatment of pressure ulcers. The facility failed to follow their Wound Care management protocol when they failed to refer Resident #1 to the Wound care consultant at the time of her re-admission to the facility when she was admitted with a sacral pressure ulcer. Resident #1 was readmitted on [DATE] and facility did not refer the resident to the Wound Care consultant until 03/25/25. The noncompliance was identified as Past Noncompliance (PNC). The noncompliance began on 03/17/25 and ended on 03/25/25. The facility had corrected the noncompliance before the survey began. This failure could place residents at risk for worsening wounds, infection, and hospitalization. Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's Face sheet dated 04/07/25 revealed she was a [AGE] year-old female admitted on [DATE] and re-admitted on [DATE]. Resident #1 had diagnoses of unspecified displaced fracture of cervical vertebrae (neck region), fusion of spine-cervical region, osteoporosis (condition where bones become weak and brittle) with current pathological fractures (a bone break caused by underlying disease that weakens the bone structure) and severe protein-calorie malnutrition, Record review of Resident #1's 5-day MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected the resident had a BIMS of 14 which indicated she was cognitively intact, required substantial to maximum assistance with ADLs, was always incontinent of bowel and urine, was at risk of developing pressure ulcers and had one stage III pressure (exposing the underlying fatty tissue, but not reaching muscle or bone) and one surgical wound. She had received Speech therapy, physical therapy, and occupation therapy with a start date of 03/18/25. Record Review of Resident #1's Physician order summary dated 04/07/25 reflected, Pressure relieving mattress and Pressure relieving chair cushion with a start date of 03/17/25 .Wound care for coccyx stage 2 pressure injury. Cleanse with wound cleanser. Apply Mepilex padded dressings every day and PRN .with a start date of 03/07/25 . Record review of Resident #1's care plan with an initiation date of 03/17/25, reflected, [Resident #1] is at increased risk for impaired skin integrity and additional skin breakdown due to impaired ability to move and the resident being mostly incontinent of bowel and bladder. Resident with pressure injury to coccyx (the small bone at the bottom of the spine)upon admission .Goal .Resident's pressure injury will resolve or show improvement by review date .the resident will not have any additional skin breakdown through the next review period .Interventions .Educate resident/representative about the proper usage of pressure reducing devices .The resident has a low-air-loss mattress due to admitting with pressure injuries .Wound care to coccyx as ordered by the physician . Record review of Resident #1's skin assessments: 03/18/25- Pressure Injury to buttocks 03/21/25- Pressure injury to coccyx 2x3x.5 on admission 03/28/25- open wound to coccyx Record Review of Resident #1 Physician Telephone order dated 03/25/25 reflected, Wound Care Consult. Record review of Resident #1's Progress Note dated 03/27/25 at 11:22 am by ADON A, reflected, NP ordered Medi honey (supports the removal of necrotic tissue), calcium alginate (dressing used to absorb wound drainage) to cover with foam dressing. [Family member] aware of the order . Record Review of Resident #1's Wound care Physician's report dated 03/31/25, Location: Sacrum Measurement: 1.5 cm length 3.0 cm width Depth 0.50 cm Etiology: Pressure Stage/Severity: Stage 4 Date Wound Acquired: 03/17/25. Wound Status: Present on Admission %Slough (by product of the inflammatory phase of wound healing comparison of dead and living cells): 100% Treatment- daily wound cleanser, apply Santyl, Calcium alginate and cover with dry dressing. Record Review of Resident #1's Wound Care consult report dated 04/07/25, Location: Sacrum Measurement: 1.5 cm length 3.0 cm width Depth 0.50 cm Etiology: Pressure Stage/Severity: Stage 4 Date Wound Acquired: 03/17/25. Wound Status: Subsequent- Stable Undermining: From 5 o'clock to 7 o'clock 2.5 cm %Granulation (health new tissue) 50% %Slough: 50% Treatment: Treatment- daily wound cleanser, apply Santyl, Calcium alginate and cover with dry dressing. In an interview and observation with Resident #1 on 04/07/25 at 08:30 a.m. revealed resident in her room lying on an alternating pressure mattress. Resident was turned on her side with pillows supporting her arms and a pillow between her legs. Resident's family member was at bedside. Family member stated the Resident had been living at home when she suffered a fall and was taken to the hospital around the first of February. She stated she was transferred to this facility around the end of February. Family stated the resident was not progressing and getting weaker, so she requested an MRI to be completed since the resident was having decreased sensation in her arms. She stated the facility transferred her to the hospital for the MRI on 03/07/25 where it was determined she had C1 fracture. She stated the resident underwent cervical neck fusion of the C1 through C7 (neck vertebrae) and she had done remarkable through the surgery. She stated she knew she had a wound while at the hospital and requested the hospital order an alternating pressure mattress for her when she returned to the facility on [DATE]. She stated the pressure mattress the facility provided was not working properly and it took them 4 days to get another pressure mattress. She stated the wound care they were providing in the beginning was not effective and she requested the wound care physician be consulted. She stated she was told the Wound Care physician only came once a week to the facility. She stated she asked if they could call the physician and let her know the condition of the wound. She stated later that week the NP came by and ordered a new treatment for the wound. She stated the wound care physician came last week on 03/31/25 and is due to return today (04/07/25). She stated she just wanted to make sure they were doing everything they could for Resident #1 to aide in her healing. She stated she was going to discuss with the wound care physician about a wound vac to see if that would aide in the healing of the wound. In an interview with the Wound Care Physician on 04/07/25 at 09:15 a.m. she stated she had received a referral on 03/27/25 for Resident #1. She stated she saw her on 03/31/25 which was her normal scheduled day at the facility. She stated she staged the wound at a stage 4 (involves full-thickness tissue loss where muscle, tendon or bone is exposed), but stated it was going to take time to be able to determine its true size until all of the slough had been removed. She stated she had debrided (removing non-viable tissue) the wound some on her first visit. She stated the facility had the resident on an alternating pressure mattress and were off loading and turning her. She stated she would visit with the Family member today about the possibility of a wound vac but stated it would depend on the progression of the wound. She stated the facility would usually obtain a consent for a wound care consult on any admission or any resident who acquired a wound, and she would evaluate them on her next onsite visit. She stated the facility would usually continue the hospital wound care orders if they came with orders or would have the primary physician give wound care orders until she evaluated the resident. She stated had they referred her when she admitted she would have seen her on 03/24/25, but instead saw her on 03/31/25. She stated she can't really say the delay caused any harm, since she was receiving wound care and did have interventions in place. An observation of the Wound Care Physician's evaluation of Resident #1 on 04/07/25 at 09:35 a.m. revealed the Physician measuring and assessing the wound. The Wound Care Physician spoke with the resident and the family member and explained the wound had made some progression with 50 % less slough than last week, but stated it was difficult to tell how deep the wound was until all the slough was removed. She told the Family member the wound was most likely going to get larger due to the removal of the devitalized tissue. The wound care physician told the Family member she would consider a wound vac in the future, but the wound was not at the point that it would benefit from a wound vac at this time. She stated she wanted to continue with the current wound care orders, turning side to side, continue with the alternating pressure mattress and limit her out of bed to an hour 3 times a day. ADON A proceeded with the prescribed wound care and covered the wound with a border gauze. In an interview with Medical Records clerk on 04/07/25 at 11:00 a.m. she stated she had received a request to order an alternating pressure mattress for Resident #1 on 03/25/25. She stated she ordered it that day and it was delivered the same day and was placed on the bed for the resident. She stated she was not aware of any problems with the previous air loss mattress, she was just told to order a new one. In in an interview with CNA C on 04/07/25 at 11:00 a.m. she stated she had been assigned to Resident #1 since her return to the facility. She stated they were turning her every 2 hours. She stated the resident had an alternating pressure mattress since her admission. She stated the wound on the resident's bottom had a small opening. She stated the nurses were putting a dressing over the wound. In an interview with the RA D on 04/07/25 at 11:05 a.m. she stated Resident #1 had an alternating pressure mattress on her bed as soon as she came into the facility. She stated the family member did not like the one the facility had and had brought in an egg crate mattress to put over the bed. She stated then she got a different alternating pressure mattress. She stated she had never seen the wound uncovered, stating it always had a dressing over it. In an interview with LVN E on 04/07/25 at 11:10 a.m. she stated she works the 6 a.m. to 2 p.m. shift Monday through Friday. She stated Resident #1 admitted with a wound to her sacral area. She stated they were providing wound care to the wound on the days the Treatment Nurse did not. She stated the Treatment nurse was the one who made the referrals for the Wound Care Consult. She stated any time a resident had a wound the Treatment Nurse would refer them to the Wound Care physician. She stated she had assumed the Treatment Nurse had referred Resident #1 to the wound care physician. She stated Resident #1 had an alternating pressure mattress, but stated it was not working properly, so they ordered another mattress. She stated the Treatment Nurse had resigned a few weeks ago. She stated when they were looking back to see if the referral had been made, she did not find a consent form for them to refer the resident, so she obtained the consent from the family and placed it in the Wound Care Physician's folder. She stated they had an Inservice a few weeks back and stated all the nurses would be responsible for wound care, obtaining the consents and treatment orders until a new Treatment Nurse could be put in place. In an interview with the DON on 04/07/25 at 11:30 a.m. she stated she had started for the facility around the first of March 2025. She stated the Treatment Nursed quit on 03/20/25 with no notice. She stated she had assumed all the weekly treatments, wound measurements and referrals were current and up to date. She stated she worked the floor on 03/22/25 and 03/23/25 and had done Resident #1's treatments. She stated when she saw the wound she would have staged it as unstageable due to the amount of slough. She stated the hospital had it staged as a Stage 2 but stated that was not where she would have staged it. She stated the family was very upset about the wound care treatment that was being provided and stated the Treatment Nurse had informed the family that the Wound Care Physician would be seeing her. She stated she offered to send the resident to the hospital for wound care management, but stated the family declined and wanted to wait to be seen in house. She stated after this they did a complete skin sweep of the building and an audit of the records and referrals and that was when they discovered the consent had not been obtained for the wound care consult. She stated they did obtain the consent, update the physician, and make the referral to the wound care physician. She stated the resident was provided an alternating pressure mattress upon the family members request, and when the family was not happy with the one, they provided, they ordered a replacement mattress the same day. She stated they had made an offer for ADON A to take the full-time position as ADON/Treatment nurse. She stated she had a background in wound care. She stated in addition she met with the staff and reviewed the process for all residents with wounds. She stated the admitting nurse is responsible for documenting the location and a description of the wound. She stated only the Wound Care Physician, the Treatment Nurse or ADON will stage the wounds. She stated the admitting nurse will obtain the signed consent for the Wound Care referral. She stated if the resident comes with treatment orders, they will review those orders with the physician upon admission. She stated herself and the ADONs will perform a chart audit after the admission to ensure all the orders had been obtained as well as any consents required or interventions. She stated the Treatment Nurse will provide weekly updates with the progress and measurements of all pressure and non-pressure wounds. In an interview with ADON B on 04/07/25 at 12:54 a.m. she stated the previous ADON/Treatment nurse was responsible for the Rehab Hall and for the wound care management. She stated the previous ADON/Treatment Nurse was still working when Resident #1 re-admitted . She stated they were aware the resident was admitting with a wound, and she had told her to make sure she went and assessed the wound. She stated she knew the family had requested an alternating pressure mattress and she stated one was provided. She stated they were not aware there was a problem with the mattress until 03/25/25, and that was when they ordered a new mattress for her. She stated the protocol had always been to refer anyone admitted with a wound or even a surgical wound for the Wound Care physician to evaluate and treat if necessary. She stated she was surprised the previous Treatment nurse had not made the referral. She stated as soon as the lapse was discovered they obtained the necessary consent, and the Wound Care physician was notified. An attempt to contact the previous Treatment Nurse by phone was made on 04/07/25 at 01:13 p.m. Message was left, with no return call received prior to survey exit. In an interview with the NP on 04/07/25 at 01:02 p.m. she stated the staff had informed her at the time of Resident #1's admission that she had a sacral wound, and they wanted an air mattress for her. She stated the facility always referred any resident with a wound to the Wound Care physician, so she had assumed they would be obtaining any treatment orders needed from the Wound Care physician. She stated the Family member reached out to her on 03/27/25 and sent her a picture of the wound and was requesting a different treatment for the wound care. She stated she gave a new order for wound care and started the resident on Antibiotics as a precaution, until the Wound Care Physician could see her. She stated the wound did not appear to be infected. She stated the Wound care Physician saw the resident on 03/31/25. In an interview with the Administrator on 04/07/25 at 2:15 p.m. stated she the non-compliance was the result of the sudden departure of the Previous/Treatment nurse who had failed to complete her responsibilities. She stated the nursing staff had been re-educated on the process. She stated through the audits and skin sweeps it was determined no other oversight had occurred. She stated going forward chart audits will be conducted on all new admission to ensure any resident admitted with a wound received the necessary referrals, treatments and interventions required to promote wound healing and prevention for further decline. Record review of the facility's policy, Wound Management, dated June 2020, reflected, Purpose: To provide a system for the treatment and management of resident with wounds including pressure and non-pressure injury. A resident who has a wound will receive necessary treatment and services to promote healing, prevent infection and prevent new pressure injuries from developing .An assessment of care needs for pressure injury and wound management will be made with emphasis on, but not limited to .Treatment .Mechanical offloading and pressure reducing devices .Evaluating and modifying interventions for a resident with an existing Pressure ulcer/Pressure injury .The Attending Physician will be notified to advise on appropriate treatment promptly . Record Review of Resident #1's consent for Wound Care Treatment reflected consent was provided by Resident #1's Family member on 03/25/25. Record Review of the Facility's Mandatory staff meeting dated 03/26/25 reflected the nursing staff would be responsible for all aspects of wound care until a Treatment Nurse could be hired. In addition, the staff were re-educated on the facility's wound care protocol. In an interview with the DON, ADON A and ADON B on 04/07/25 at 2:20 p.m. they stated they had been in serviced on the wound care protocol and knew they were responsible for ensuring the wound care consent and referral were made on any wound upon admission or any new wound acquired while in the facility going forward. The noncompliance was identified as Past Noncompliance (PNC). The noncompliance began on 03/17/25 and ended on 03/25/25. The facility had corrected the noncompliance before the survey began.
Jul 2024 1 deficiency
CONCERN (F)

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

Garbage Disposal (Tag F0814)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the facility's only garbage storage dumpster, and surrounding area, was maintained in a sanitary condition to prevent ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the facility's only garbage storage dumpster, and surrounding area, was maintained in a sanitary condition to prevent the harborage and feeding of pest. 1. The facility failed to ensure the trash dumpster's door, located outside the facility's building, was closed., 2. The facility failed to ensure trash was not left outside of the dumpster on the ground. This failure could place residents at risk of contracting disease by attracting pest, disease carrying rodents, and having debris dangerous to residents. Findings included: 1. During an observation on 7-9-2024 at 9:15 AM, the facility's only trash dumpster was observed to be 3/4 full of trash with its door open. The area surrounding the trash dumpster was observed to have used latex gloves, a pack of metal screws, a chicken bone, an uncovered rolling cart with a large trash bag full of trash (unsealed), a piece of broken glass, various trash debris, a metal rolling cart with a yellowish/brownish liquid substance with a strong odor, and a 3-tier plastic rolling cart. 2. In the dock area, next to a back door, observation was made on 7-9-2024 at 9:20 AM of stacked pallets having trash debris in-between a few pallets. In an interview on 7-10-2024 at 1:10 PM, with the Dietary Manager, it was revealed the Dietary Manager, Housekeeping Supervisor, and Maintenance Director were responsible to keep the outside trash dumpster secure and the surrounding area clean. The expectation of the Dietary Manager was for staff to keep the trash dumpster door closed, ensure sure trash was put in the trash dumpster, ensure there was no trash left on the surrounding ground by the trash dumpster, and to ensure the trash between the pallets, by the back door, was put in the trash dumpster. The Dietary Manager stated the potential risk to residents, by not properly disposing of trash, was it could attract rodents or insects. In an interview on 7-10-2024 at 1:30 PM, the Housekeeping Supervisor stated the Housekeeping Supervisor, Kitchen Supervisor, and Maintenance Director were responsible for ensuring trash was properly disposed of and kept off the ground. The Housekeeping Supervisor expected staff, who were disposing of trash, to use a cart with a lid when transporting trash from the facility building to the outside dumpster. He expected the staff member to put the trash in the dumpster and close the dumpster door. The Housekeeping Supervisor stated he did not expect staff to leave a trash bag full of trash, sitting in an open cart next to the dumpster and not put the trash bag into the dumpster; closing the door when finished. The Housekeeping Supervisor expected staff to not leave trash debris on the ground surrounding the dumpster area. His concerns for not properly disposing of trash by leaving a piece of broken glass on the ground, a metal pack of screws on the ground, leaving use nitrile gloves on the ground, and other debris was a resident could get cut, it could attract rodents and/or insects, and it was an infection control issue. In an interview on 7-10-2024 at 2:15 PM, the Maintenance Director revealed the Maintenance Director, Housekeeping Supervisor, and the Dietary Manager were all responsible for ensuring the proper disposal of trash for the facility. After showing the Maintenance Director photos of the trash dumpster that was observed on 7-10-2024 at 9:15 AM which included used latex gloves, a pack of metal screws, a chicken bone, an uncovered rolling cart with a large trash bag full of trash (unsealed), a piece of broken glass, various trash debris, a metal rolling cart with a yellowish/brownish liquid substance having a strong odor, and a 3-tier plastic rolling cart, surrounding the trash dumpster, he stated it was all trash and belonged in the trash dumpster. The Maintenance Director stated if staff were not physically able to put the trash into the dumpster, staff should have contacted the Housekeeping Supervisor, Kitchen Supervisor, or Maintenance Director so one of them would have been able to dispose of the trash properly. The Maintenance Director stated if the trash dumpster was full, staff should have contacted one of the three managers so they could have pushed the trash down lower, creating more room or they could make other arrangements. The Maintenance Director stated the potential risk to residents, for not properly disposing of trash debris, was it could cause injury, contamination, and roaches could get into the building. Record review of the facility's Operational Manual - Physical Environment Maintenance Services Policy, dated 8-2020, states: Purpose: To protect the health and safety of residents, visitors, and Facility Staff. Policy: The Maintenance Department maintains all areas of the building, grounds, and equipment. Procedure: I. The Maintenance Department is responsible for maintaining the buildings, grounds, and equipment in a safe and operable manner at all times. II. Functions of the Maintenance Department may include, but are not limited to: A. Maintaining the building in compliance with current federal, state, and local laws, regulations, and guidelines; B. Maintaining the building free from hazards . I. Maintaining the grounds, sidewalks, parking lots, etc., in good order . III. The Director of Maintenance is responsible for developing and maintaining a schedule of maintenance service to assure that the buildings, grounds, and equipment are maintained in a safe and operable manner. IV. As part of their duties, Maintenance Staff will comply with established infection control Precautions . IX. Maintenance Staff follow established safety regulations to ensure the safety and well-being of all concerned. Record review of the Texas Food Establishment Rules dated 3-15-2006 stated: §229.166(k) (4) Receptacles. (A) Except as specified in subparagraph (B) of this paragraph, receptacles and waste handling units for refuse, recyclables, and returnables and for use with materials containing food residue shall be durable, cleanable, insect and rodent-resistant, leakproof, and nonabsorbent. (B) Plastic bags and wet strength paper bags may be used to line receptacles for storage inside the food establishment, or within closed outside receptacles . (6) Outside receptacles. (A) Receptacles and waste handling units for refuse, recyclables, and returnables used with materials containing food residue and used outside the food establishment shall be designed and constructed to have tight-fitting lids, doors, or covers. (B) Receptacles and waste handling units for refuse and recyclables such as an on-site compactor shall be installed so that accumulation of debris and insect and rodent attraction and harborage are minimized, and effective cleaning is facilitated around and, if the unit is not installed flush with the base pad, under the unit.
Apr 2024 1 deficiency
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Deficiency F0919 (Tag F0919)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure resident rooms were adequately equipped to allo...

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 resident rooms were adequately equipped to allow residents to call for staff assistance through a communication system which relays the call directly to a staff member or to a centralized staff work area for 7 residents (#1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #7, #8) of 8 residents reviewed for resident call system in that: The facility failed to ensure 7 out of 8 Resident's (#1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #7, #8) call buttons were accessible on 4/9/24 to residents on the secured unit. This failure could have placed 20 residents on the secured unit at risk of being unable to obtain assistance for activities of daily living or in the event of an emergency. Findings included: 1. Record Review of the face sheet for Resident #1 showed a [AGE] year-old female who was admitted [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. Resident diagnoses included: Muscle Wasting (a weakening, shrinking and loss of muscle), Unspecified abnormalities of gait and mobility (a change to your walking pattern), Muscle weakness (decreased strength in muscles), Lack of Coordination (not able to move different parts of the body together well or easily), Dementia (progressive loss of intellectual functioning), Major Depressive Disorder (mental health disorder characterized by persistently depressed mood or loss of interest in activities), Unsteadiness on Feet (a pattern of walking that is unstable), Anxiety Disorder (Intense, excessive and persistent worry and fear about everyday situations), Insomnia (persistent problems falling and staying asleep), Chronic Pulmonary Disease (COPD; a group of lung diseases that block airflow and make it difficult to breath), and a History of Falling. Record review of Resident #1's MDS dated [DATE] reflected a BIMS score of 02, which indicated she was severely cognitively impaired. Resident #1's Care Plan dated 2/10/24 revealed resident was care planned for falls. Also, the resident's care plan stated to Encourage the resident to use call bell for assistance. Record review revealed resident had a fall with no injuries on 3/5/24. Observation on 4/9/24 at 9:54 a.m. of Resident #1 revealed she was sleeping, and her call light was not in her reach. The call light was on the wall behind her bed which was a foot away from the wall. 2. Record Review of the face sheet for Resident #2 revealed an [AGE] year-old female initially admitted on [DATE] and a readmission on [DATE]. Resident diagnoses included: Anxiety, Dementia, Difficulty Walking, Unspecified Abnormal Gait and Mobility, Cognitive Communication Deficit (difficulty with any aspect of communication that is affected by disruption of cognition), Lack of Coordination, Muscle Weakness, Depressive Episodes, Need Assistance for Personal Care, Unsteadiness and History of Falls. Record review of Resident #2's MDS dated [DATE] revealed a BIMS score of 02, which indicated she was severely cognitively impaired. Resident #2's care plan dated 1/11/24 showed she was care planned for Elopement Risk and Falls which stated, Be sure the resident's call light is within reach and encourage the resident to use it for assistance as needed. Record review revealed Resident #2 had a fall with no injuries on 1/17/24. Interview and observation on 4/9/24 at 9:54 a.m. of Resident #2 said she could not reach the call light. Observation revealed the call light was out of reach of resident. The call light was on the wall behind her bed which was 1 foot away from the wall. 3. Record Review of the face sheet for Resident #3 revealed an [AGE] year-old woman who was initially admitted on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. Resident diagnoses included: Alzheimer's Disease (progressive mental deterioration due to generalized degeneration of the brain; common cause of senility), Dementia, Major Depressive Disorder, Muscle Wasting and Atrophy, Unsteadiness on Feet, Lack of Coordination, Anxiety, Insomnia and Need Assistance for Personal Care. Record Review of Resident #3's MDS dated [DATE] revealed a BIMS score of 01, which indicated she was severely cognitively impaired. Resident #3's care plan dated 3/6/24 showed she was care planned for her communication deficit. Resident was to develop communication abilities by staff anticipating her needs and to Ensure/provide a safe environment: Call light in reach. Observation on 4/9/24 at 10:04 a.m. revealed Resident #3 was sleeping, and the call light was out of her reach. The call light could not been seen anywhere around the resident's bed. 4. Record Review of the face sheet for Resident #4 revealed a [AGE] year-old woman who was admitted on [DATE]. Resident diagnoses included: Dementia, Abnormality of gait and mobility, Lack of Coordination, Unsteadiness on Feet, Muscle Wasting and Atrophy, Depressive Episodes, Anxiety, Difficulty in Walking, Cognitive Communication Deficit, and Needs Assistance with Personal Care. Record review of Resident #4's MDS dated [DATE] revealed a BIMS score of 00, which indicated she was severely cognitively impaired. Observation on 4/9/24 at 10:04 a.m. of Resident #4 revealed she was sleeping, and her call light was out of reach. The call light was not observed anywhere around her bed. 5. Record Review of the face sheet for Resident #5 revealed an [AGE] year-old man who was initially admitted on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. Resident's diagnoses included: Dementia, Anxiety, Dysphagia Oropharyngeal phase (swallowing problems occurring in the mouth and/or the throat), Difficulty Walking, Unspecified Lack of Coordination, Abnormal Gait and Mobility, Major Depressive Disorder, History of falling, Coagulation Defect, Muscle Wasting and Atrophy, Unsteadiness on Feet, Repeated Falls, Cognitive Communication Defect, and History of Sudden Cardiac Arrest (sudden unexpected loss of heart function, breathing and consciousness). Record review of Resident #5's MDS dated [DATE], revealed a BIMS score of 03, which indicated he was severely cognitively impaired. Resident #5's Care Plan dated 1/24/24 showed he was care planned for aggressive behaviors and falls. Record Review showed resident had a fall with no injury on 5/20/23, on 6/13/23 and slid out of bed with no injury on 7/20/23. Observation on 4/9/24 at 10:06 a.m. of Resident #5 revealed he was sleeping with pillow partially over his head and the call light was out of his reach. The call light was lying on the floor next to the bed. 6. Record Review of the face sheet for Resident #7 revealed a [AGE] year-old woman who was initially admitted on [DATE] with a readmission date on 1/21/22. Resident Diagnoses included: Dementia, Unspecified Lack of Coordination, Major Depressive Disorder, Muscle Weakness, Anxiety, Muscle Wasting and Atrophy, Unsteadiness on Feet, and Iron Deficiency Anemia (too few healthy red blood cells which could cause extreme tiredness, weakness headache, dizziness, and shortness of breath). Record review of Resident #7's MDS dated [DATE] revealed a BIMS score of 8, which indicated she was moderately cognitively impaired. Resident #7's care plan dated 3/11/24 revealed she was care planned for falls, elopement risk, refusing showers and fighting staff. Also, care plan stated resident had an ADL (Activities of Daily Living) self-care performance deficit with interventions to Encourage the resident to use bell to call for assistance. Record review revealed a fall on 1/09/23 with no injuries. Observation on 4/9/24 at 10:26 a.m. revealed Resident #7 to be sleeping and her call light was out of her reach. The call light was not observed anywhere around the resident's bed. 7. Record Review of the face sheet for Resident #8 revealed an [AGE] year-old woman who was initially admitted on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. Resident Diagnosis included: Alzheimer's Disease, Delirium (a disturbed state of mind/consciousness), Primary Insomnia, Anemia, Major Depressive Disorder, Atrial Fibrillation (irregular, often rapid heart rate that causes poor blood flow), Chronic Systolic Congestive Heart Failure (specific type of heart failure that occurs in the heart's left ventricle), Muscle Wasting and Atrophy, Unsteadiness on Feet, Repeated Falls and Lack of Coordination. Resident #8's MDS dated [DATE] revealed a BIMS score of 00, which indicated she was severely cognitively impaired. Resident #8's Care Plan dated 3/9/24 showed she was care planned for a risk of falls due to gait/balance problems, unaware of safety needs, Alzheimer's and history of falls with the interventions as Be sure the resident's call light is within reach and encourage the resident to use it for assistance as needed. Observation on 4/9/24 at 10:29 a.m. of Resident #8's room revealed her call light was not in reach of her bed area. The call light was not observed anywhere around her bed. Interview on 4/9/24 at 10:33 a.m. with CNA (Clinical Nurse Assistant) A stated she answers the call light as soon as it came on. She stated she checks the call light on rounds to make sure it is within reach of the resident. Interview on 4/9/24 at 10:39 a.m. with CNA B stated she did her rounds every two hours and checked to make sure the call light was in reach of the resident, and she would put the call light on the bed if it was not in reach. CNA B said a lot of things could happen if the call light was not in reach of a resident. Interview on 4/9/24 at 10:58 a.m. with RN (Registered Nurse) C stated if a call light goes off, she just goes and answers it as her CNA's may be busy with another resident. She stated she would check if call light was in reach when she checked on residents. RN C said it would be a problem if a resident's call button was not in reach if they had a fall or had gotten hurt. Interview on 4/9/24 at 2:20 p.m. with DON (director of nursing) stated the call lights should be answered as soon as they came on. Her expectation was for staff to check to see if call lights were in reach of residents when they did their rounds. DON said some residents on the secured unit had pads if they could not use the call light which would also be care planned. DON stated she was retraining some staff on call lights. Interview on 4/9/24 at 2:39 p.m. with Admin/Administrator who stated call lights should be answered in 10-15 minutes and depended on what the CNA was doing at the time. She expected staff to check on call lights on the secured unit to make sure they were in resident's reach during rounds. She stated the call lights should be specifically care planned for each resident. The facility resident roster dated 4/9/24 revealed 20 residents resided on the secured unit. Record review of facility's Fall Procedures revealed under Universal Fall Prevention Measures: A. Environmental - ii. Position call bell, urinal if applicable, and bedside stand within reach.
Mar 2024 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

**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 and ...

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 and assistance to prevent accidents for one of seven residents (Resident #2) reviewed for accidents and supervision . The facility failed to ensure Resident #2 was transferred by two staff, which resulted in a fall with fracture of her distal left Femur (a distal femur is a fracture of the thighbone that occurs just above the knee joint) on 01/19/24 . The noncompliance was identified as PNC. The IJ began on 01/19/24 and ended on 01/22/24. The facility had corrected the noncompliance before the survey began. This failure could place residents at risk for serious injury due to unsafe transfers. Findings included: Review of the admission Record for Resident #2. A discharged resident, dated 03/06/24 reflected a [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to facility on 10/15/20. Her diagnoses included unspecified dementia, Senile degeneration of the brain, glaucoma (a vision problem), lack of coordination, muscle weakness, cognitive communication deficit (difficulty with thinking in regard to language use), unsteadiness on feet, neuropathy (nerve pain), need for assistance with personal care, repeated falls and high blood pressure. Review of Resident #2's annual MDS assessment, dated 12/02/23, reflected Resident #2 had a BIMs score of 2, which indicated severe cognitive impairment, and showed no behavioral issues or psychosis. Resident #2 was dependent on staff for movement in bed, and for transfers from chair to bed/ bed to chair. Dependent defined in the MDS assessment was Helper does ALL of the effort. Resident does none of the effort to complete the activity. Or, the assistance of 2 or more helpers is required for the resident to complete the activity. The document reflected Resident #2 had no prior falls. Review of Resident #2's care plan undated due to discharge status printed on 03/06/24 reflected Focus: The resident has had an actual fall with no injury on 2/17/2021, 6/7/21, 7/31/21, Fall with injury (pain) at a later date 1/20/24, Goal: The resident will resume usual activities without further incident through the review date, Interventions: Anti-skid mat placed on W/C [wheel chair] o Bed in low position o Call for assistance before you fall LVN o Continue interventions on the at-risk plan.o Fracture left femur sent to Hospital The Care Plan further reflected Focus: The resident has an ADL Self Care Performance Deficit r/t Activity Intolerance, Fatigue. Goal: The resident will maintain current level of function in Transfers, Eating, Dressing, Toilet Use through the review date. Interventions/tasks o Hoyer Lift for transfers, o Toilet Use: The resident requires assistance to adjust clothing, transfer onto toilet, transfer off toilet. o Transfer: Two-person Hoyer post fall 1/19/24. o Encourage the resident to participate to the fullest extent possible with each interaction. o Encourage the resident to use bell to call for assistance. o Bathing: The resident requires (1) staff participation with bathing. o Dressing: Assist the resident to choose simple comfortable clothing that maximizes the president's ability to dress self. o Dressing: The resident requires (1) staff participation to dress. CNAo Eating: The resident is able to feed self . Review of Resident #2's Transfer/Discharge, dated 03/06/24, reflected Resident #1 was discharged to an acute care hospital on [DATE]. Review of Resident #2's progress notes, dated 01/19/24 at 9:05 PM by LVN B, reflected CNA A called him to report Resident #1 had an assisted fall while transferring from the Geri chair to bed. LVN B said Resident #1 was alert and confused to base line, Blood Pressure 121/62, Heart rate 65, Temperature 97.7, Oxygen saturation 94 %, Respiration Rate 17. He wrote skin was intact. Hospice, daughter and DON were notified. Review of the ambulance run sheet, dated 01/20/2024, reflected Resident #2 was transported to a nearby hospital due to pain in her lower extremity caused by a fall from the bed, and her level of distress was mild. Review of Resident #1's emergency room admission documentation, dated 01/21/2024, reflected she was admitted on [DATE] for a fractured left femur in a nursing home. It reflected [AGE] year-old female with a history of hypertension, hypothyroidism, colon cancer, dementia, CVA with left sided weakness presenting to the ED via EMS from her facility for a fall that happened 2 days ago. Per EMS, patient reportedly had an x-ray at the facility which showed a left nondisplaced fracture which prompted them to send her to the ER. History obtained from prior record reviews. Patient has a history of dementia and there is no family member at bedside. Patient was tender to palpation over the left female close to the knee. No active bleeding, no obvious dislocation noted. Was given 75 mcg fentanyl IV x 1 for her pain Control. The document reflected Pertinent imaging interpreted ( .) X-ray of the left femur shows periprosthetic (fractures that occur in association with an implant) fracture involving the distal femoral metadiaphysis (wide portion of a long bone). No abnormalities noted on the anterolateral (outside front) pelvis. Medications ordered the ED: 75 mcg IV fentanyl x 1. The document included a Supervising Physician note, which reflected [AGE] year-old female history of dementia advanced requires help with all ADLs here with the left knee pain found to have left periprosthetic fracture occurred during transfer from chair to bed; Had a long discuss ion with orthopedics given age and current baseline status low likely to improve quality of Iife surgery agree posterior long leg and can outpatient follow up. Review of the radiology report included in the emergency room documentation for Resident #2, dated 01/21/2024, reflected Radiology - [NAME] Femur Min 2 Views Lt 01/21 1258 * * * Report Impress Ion - Status: Signed Entered: 01/21/2024 1355 (1:55 PM) Im Pression: Left total knee arthroplasty in place with a nondisplaced periprosthetic fracture involving the distal femoral metadiaphysis . Adjacent soft tissue swelling and knee joint effusion. Review of Resident #2's Hospice Combined Disciplinary Comprehensive Assessment, dated 01/09/2024, reflected Musculo/ Skeletal- Nurse; Mobility Score:3 on a scale of 10 (Full range of activity) to 0 (Immobile); Ambulation: Mainly sit/lie; Uses device; Two person assist; Strength: Weak; Grips: Weak; Conditions: Joint stiffness; Foot drop left; Foot drop right Needs assistance with: Bathing; Ambulation; Dressing; Continence; Transfer Interview with LVN B on 03/06/24 at 4:08 PM revealed CNA A was transferring Resident #2 by herself from the Geri chair to bed around 8 or 9 PM. He said CNA A reported to him Resident #2 began to fall and CNA A assisted her to the floor in a seated position. LVN B said when he entered Resident #2's room, the resident was sitting on the floor with one of her arms holding onto the bed rail. LVN B said CNA A did not ask him for help during transfer. He said he did a full assessment of Resident #2. After Resident #2 denied pain, CNA A and LVN B lifted Resident #2 into her bed. LVN B said he monitored Resident #2 and asked her roommate if anything had changed. LVN B said he notified the family, physician, hospice company and the DON. He said he entered a change in condition in the MAR. He said it was important for the physician, family and the DON to be aware of what was going on with residents . Interview with the DON on 03/06/24 at 02:07 PM, revealed the DON was aware Resident #2 had a fall on 01/19/24. She said the hospice nurse came to assess Resident #2 on 01/20/24 and the resident denied pain. The DON said on 01/21/24 when physical therapy assessed Resident #2 and moved her left leg, was when Resident #2 screamed in pain. She said the hospice physician ordered x-rays and after results showed a femur fracture, Resident #2 was sent to the hospital. An interview on 03/28/2024 at 12:47 PM with the DON revealed Resident #2 was care planned as a one-person transfer prior to the incident on 01/19/2024, and he believed she was care planned appropriately. He said he thought the care plan was adjusted after that, and he was not aware of the resident ever falling prior to that incident. He said if the MDS said two-person assistance, there would need to be two people there for the transfer. The DOR said therapy was not working with Resident #2 on transfers, but they were working on more positioning-based issues, like seated balance. An interview on 03/28/2024 at 1:29 PM with MDS revealed she was the person who coded Resident #2's MDS assessment. She said in the seven-day lookback period, if a CNA happened to chart a resident was a limited two-person transfer three times, she had to code it that way in the MDS. She said she could have changed the care plan to say Resident #2 needed one to two staff assist for transfers, but the problem with that was transferring someone three times in a seven-day period did not mean the person always needed to be transferred by two people. If they care planned a two-person transfer, then two staff would have to go transfer that resident all the time, even if the resident did not need two people. She said sometimes a resident needed more assistance early in the morning, or in the evening when they were sleepy, but not any other time, and that was the case with Resident #2. Resident #2 was normally a one-person transfer. She said because she did not transfer the resident herself, she went by the documentation the staff entered. She said one MDS where a CNA happened to use limited two-person transfer three times was not enough of a change to have an IDT meeting . The IDT meetings were where they would normally discuss a change in someone's functional needs and make changes to the care plans . An interview on 03/28/2024 at 2:04 PM with the ADON revealed Resident #2 was a one-person gait belt the majority of the time, but required the assistance of two people if she was sleepy, in the morning, or at night. She said the resident was not cognitively able to tell staff if she needed more help, so the staff had to judge for themselves. (Progress notes from 01/19/24 indicated CNA A transferred Resident #2 at night by herself ). An interview on 03/28/2024 at 4:50 PM with the Administrator, DON and RNC revealed when informed of the Past Non-Compliance Immediate Jeopardy, the RNC stated she did not agree that it was an IJ. She said the facility and hospice documentation reflected Resident #2 was a one-person transfer, and that was safe and appropriate for her. The DON stated the staff were all aware they had residents who had changing conditions throughout the day. The DON said the staff based whether a one-to-two-person transfer was done by one or two by considering what the resident needed at the time, and the skill and strength of the CNA doing the transfer. She said her male CNAs or larger, stronger female CNAs, for example, might be able to do a one-person transfer when it might not be recommended for a smaller female CNA. The RNC stated the facility initiated an ad hoc QAPI and were auditing each chart to make sure all transfer status for residents were correct. She stated the MDS should have changed the care plan to one-to-two assist, instead of one-person, when she coded the MDS that way, but the resident was safe to be a one-to-two person assist, and the RAI manual supported this. The Administrator stated they started in-servicing staff after Resident #2's fall, and in-serviced all of the staff in the building, and the ADON went to the building on all shifts, and made sure every nurse and CNA was in-serviced and signed competencies before they worked a shift. Interview on 03/28/24 at 6:20 PM with CNA A revealed when she transferred Resident #1 on 01/19/24, the resident was unable to stand and hold herself up. CNA A stated she yelled for help and LVN B was in the hallway but not close to the room. While CNA A was waiting for LVN B, CNA A let the resident down to the ground. She stated it was not a fall and the use of the gait belt was to let Resident #1 down slowly. LVN B came in to assess. CNA A stated Resident #1 was a one-person transfer. She stated no one told her Resident #1 required two people to transfer. CNA A stated Resident #1 did not have a Hoyer lift sling or anything in the room. She stated Resident #1 was in a reclining chair and not a regular wheelchair. CNA A stated she was trained on transfers and had not worked with Resident #1 before until that day (01/19/24 ), and everyone had received training after that. Interviews on 03/28/2024 between 8:00 AM and 6:30 PM with CNA A, LVN A, ADON, LVN J, CNA K, CNA L, RA M, LVN N, and CNA O , staff who covered all shifts, revealed they received additional training on transfers after Resident #2's fall, which included how to know how a resident needed to be transferred, what to do if a resident appeared to need more assistance than usual or the information they received about the transfer did not seem correct, and included competency demonstrations for all types of transfer. All staff interviewed stated therapy staff were accessible at any time if they had any questions or concerns concerning a resident's transfer. All staff interviewed stated they were always able to get assistance when needed for resident transfers. Review of the hospice IDT assessment, Combined Disciplinary Comprehensive Assessment, dated 01/23/24, reflected, .mobility score: 3 on scale of 10 .ambulation: Mainly sit/lie; Uses device; Two person assist . Review of the facility's In-service Training Report .Falls, revised 06/2020, reflected nursing staff were in-serviced on falls involving procedures to proper transfers such as checking the care plan, body mechanics, transfer techniques and different transfer types. Review of the facility's In-service Training Report .Transfers, dated 01/22/24, reflected nursing staff were in-serviced on transfers involving fall management, resident assessment, care plan, universal fall precautions, documentation, and quality assurance. Review of the facility's transfer competency checklist, dated 01/22/24, reflected staff were tested for transfer competency in: Demonstrating how to correctly perform a pivot transfer with a resident Demonstrating how to correctly perform a pivot disk transfer with a resident Demonstrating how to correctly utilize a gait belt during transfer Demonstrating how to correctly utilize a slide board during transfer Demonstrating how to correctly use a mechanical lift during transfer Demonstrating knowledge of proper body mechanics for safe transfers Review of a list of residents who required two-person assistance with transfers, provided by the Administrator on 03/28/2024, reflected seven current residents . Observations on 03/28/24 between 8:00 AM and 6:30 PM of transfers included a two-person gait belt transfer, and a mechanical lift transfer, by CNAs . Both transfers were done correctly. Review of Employee files for CNA A reflected she was provided Abuse and neglect policy and reporting requirements upon hire on 04/13/23. Review of Employee file for LVN B reflected he was provided Abuse and neglect policy and reporting requirements upon hire on 03/07/23. Review of the facility's Transfer, revised 06/2020, reflected, ( .)check the care plan( .) The noncompliance was identified as PNC. The IJ began on 01/19/24 and ended on 01/22/24. 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

Report Alleged Abuse (Tag F0609)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure that all alleged violations involving abuse, neg...

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 all alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, exploitation or mistreatment, including injuries of unknown source and misappropriation of resident property, were reported immediately, but not later than 2 hours after the allegation was made, if the events that caused the allegation involved abuse or resulted in serious bodily injury, or not later than 24 hours if the events that caused the allegation did not involve abuse and did not result in serious bodily injury, to the administrator of the facility and to other officials (including to the State Survey Agency and adult protective services where state law provides for jurisdiction in long-term care facilities) in accordance with State law through established procedures for 1 of 8 residents (Resident #2) reviewed for abuse and neglect. The facility failed to report a fall with fracture for Resident #2 after an X-ray was done on 01/21/24. This failure could place residents at risk of injury or worsening of conditions due to failure to report to state agency for investigation. Findings include: Record review of Resident #2 admission Record, dated 03/06/24, reflected a [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included unspecified dementia, Senile degeneration of the brain, glaucoma, lack of coordination, muscle weakness, cognitive communication deficit, unsteadiness on feet, neuropathy, need for assistance with personal care, repeated falls and high blood pressure . Record review of Resident #2's Quarterly MDS assessment, dated 09/01/23, reflected a BIMS score of 00, which indicated Resident #2 had a severely impaired cognitive status. Section G of the MDS, reflected Resident #2's activities of daily living self-performance transfer between surfaces which included to or from: bed, chair, wheelchair, standing position required extensive assistance. Resident #2 required staff to provide weight-bearing support of 2 or more (2+) persons physical assist to transfer. Record review of Resident #2's care plan undated due to discharge status printed on 03/06/24 reflected focus: The resident has had an actual fall with no injury on 2/17/2021, 6/7/2021, 7/31/21, Fall with injury (pain) at a later date 1/20/24, Goal: The resident will resume usual activities without further incident through the review date. Interventions: Anti-skid mat placed on W/C, Bed in low position, Call for assistance before you fall LVN, Continue interventions on the at-risk plan., Fracture left femur sent to Hospital 1/20/24 The Care Plan further reflected Focus: The resident has an ADL Self Care Performance Deficit r/t Activity Intolerance, Fatigue. Goal: The resident will maintain current level of function in Transfers, Eating, Dressing, Toilet Use through the review date. Interventions/tasks Hoyer Lift for transfers, Toilet Use: The resident requires assistance to adjust clothing, transfer onto toilet, transfer off toilet. Transfer: Two-person Hoyer post fall 1.19.2024 . Encourage the resident to participate to the fullest extent possible with each interaction. Encourage the resident to use bell to call for assistance. Bathing: The resident requires (1) staff participation with bathing. Dressing: Assist the resident to choose simple comfortable clothing that maximizes the president's ability to dress self. Dressing: The resident requires (1) staff participation to dress. CNA, Eating: The resident is able to feed self. Record review of Resident #2 progress notes, dated 01/19/24 at 9:05 PM by LVN B, reflected CNA A called him to report Resident #2 had an assisted fall while transferring from the Geri chair to the bed. LVN B said Resident #2 was alert and confused to base line, Blood Pressure 121/62, Heart rate 65, Temperature 97.7, Oxygen saturation 94 %, Respiration Rate 17. He wrote skin was intact. Hospice, [family member] and DON were notified. Record review of Resident #2's Transfer/Discharge, dated 03/06/24, reflected Resident #2 was discharged to acute care hospital on [DATE]. Record review of Resident#2 progress note, dated 01/21/24 at 09:14 AM entered by LNV H, reflected the therapy director accessed Resident # 2 related to fall on 01/19/24. Pain was noted to the left leg during gentle range of motion. LVN H contacted physician and received an order for an immediate (STAT ) x-ray of the left lower leg. Record review of Resident #2's progress note, dated 01/21/24 at 12:16 PM entered by LVN H, reflected X-ray results received, indicated Resident #2 sustained a fracture of the distal Left Femur. Physician was notified and Resident #2 was transferred to the emergency Room. Attempted interview with CNA A on 03/06/24 at 3:25 PM and 4:39 PM could not be completed because CNA A could not be reached by phone call to interview about incident. Review of facility records revealed facility had no witness statement from CNA A about the incident. Interview with LVN B on 03/06/24 at 4:08 PM revealed CNA A was transferring Resident #2 by herself from a Geri chair to the bed around 8 or 9 PM. He said CNA A reported to him Resident #2 began to fall and CNA A assisted her to the floor in a seated position. LVN B said when he entered Resident #2's room, the resident was sitting on the floor with one of her arms holding onto the bed rail. LVN B said CNA A did not ask him for help during the transfer. He said he did a full assessment of Resident #2. After Resident #2 denied pain, CNA A and LVN B lifted Resident #2 into her bed. LVN B said he monitored Resident #2 and asked her roommate if anything had changed. LVN B said he notified family, physician, hospice company and the DON. He said he entered a change in condition in the MAR. He said the risk of not reporting an incident could be very dangerous for the resident . He said he reported the fall according to policy and chain of command. He said it was important for the physician, family, and DON to be aware of what was going on with residents. Interview with the DON on 03/06/24 at 02:07 PM, revealed the DON was aware Resident #2 had a fall on 01/19/24 because that was the same day she removed and banned CNA F out of the building . She said the hospice nurse came to assess Resident #2 on 01/20/24 and the resident denied pain. The DON said on 01/21/24 when physical therapy assessed Resident #2 and moved her left leg, was when Resident #2 screamed in pain. She said the physician ordered x-rays and after results showed a femur fracture, Resident #2 was sent to the hospital. The DON said she did not report the fall with fracture because per facility policy, if a fall was witnessed and an assisted fall at that, she did not need to report to State Survey Agency . An interview on 03/06/24 at 3:08 PM with the Administrator revealed he did not self-report the incident for Resident #2 who had a serious injury because the Long -Term Care Regulatory Provider letter did not say to report witnessed falls. She said the provider letter said that if injury was not observed by any person or the source of injury could not be explained then the facility would report the incident. She said the nature of Resident #2's fall did not meet the criteria listed in the letter since the fall was witnessed and resident was assisted in the fall . Review of the state agency's PL 19-17, dated 07/10/19, revealed, .A NF must report to HHSC the following types of incidents, in accordance with applicable state and federal requirements: .neglect, exploitation or mistreatment, including injuries of unknown source and misappropriation of resident property, that result in serious bodily injury .immediately, but not later than two hours after incident occurs of is suspected . Record review of Employee files for CNA A reflected she was provided Abuse and neglect policy and reporting requirements upon hire on 04/13/23. Record review of Employee file for LVN B reflected he was provided Abuse and neglect policy and reporting requirements upon hire on 03/07/23. Record review of the facility's Reportable Incident Protocol, dated November 2017, reflected: In response to allegations of abuse, neglect, exploitation, or mistreatment, the facility must: 1. Ensure all alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, exploitation or mistreatment, including injuries of unknown source and misappropriation of patient property, are reported immediately, but no later than 2 hours after allegation is made, if the events that cause the allegation involve abuse or result in serious bodily injury, or not later than 24 hours if the events that cause the allegation do not involve abuse and do not result in serious bodily injury, to the Executive Director of the Facility to other officials (including State Survey Agency .)in accordance with state law through established procedures.
Oct 2023 5 deficiencies 3 IJ (3 affecting multiple)
CRITICAL (K) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation

Free from Abuse/Neglect (Tag F0600)

Someone could have died · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure the resident has the right to be free from neglect for one...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure the resident has the right to be free from neglect for one (Resident #1) of 6 residents reviewed for neglect. The facility failed to provide necessary x-ray services in a timely manner and failed to follow up to get results in a timely manner for Resident #1. The facility failed to provide education and training for nursing staff on how to carry out carry out physician orders for x-rays and follow up on the results in a timely manner. The facility failed to follow their policies for laboratory, diagnostic and radiology services and physician orders. Resident #1 fell on 9/28/2023 at 2:00 PM and sustained an injury, the order for an x-ray was obtained on 9/28/2023 at 5pm. The x-ray was completed on 9/29/2023 at 1:15 PM (20 hours delay). The facility was notified of results at 8:00 PM on 9/29/2023. Thirty hours after the fall with fracture, the resident was sent to the hospital for treatment. Resident #1 had a hip fracture and 2 cervical (related to the neck) spine fracture. Resident #1 was hospitalized and had a hip surgery on 9/30/23. These failures resulted in an identification of an Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) on 10/02/2023 at 5:00 PM. While the IJ was removed on 10/05/2023 at 4:15 PM, the facility remained out of compliance at actual harm with a scope identified as isolated. This failure resulted in delayed diagnosis, medical treatment, and hospitalization. Findings include: Record review of Resident #1's Quarterly MDS assessment, dated 08/13/23, reflected he was an [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses including Parkinson's disease (a progressive disease of the nervous system marked by tremor, muscular rigidity, and slow, imprecise movement), muscle weakness, lack of coordination, unsteadiness on feet, generalized osteoarthritis, and history of falling. He had a BIMS score of 10 indicated his cognition was moderately impaired. Resident #1 required extensive assistance of one-person for physical assistance with bed mobility, dressing, and toilet use. Review of Resident #1's Comprehensive Care Plan, dated 04/23/23, reflected the following: Focus: Resident is at high risk for falls related to gait/balance problems due to Parkinson's with falls recorded on 2/14/23, 8/17/23, and 9/28/23 resulting in skin tear and intertrochanteric fracture of right hip. Record review of nurses note dated 9/28/23 completed by LVN A at 2:31 PM reflected Resident #1 was found laying on the floor, on his right side, in his room. Resident #1 complained of pain to his right leg. Record review of nurses note dated 9/28/23 completed by LVN B at 5:14 PM reflected the hospice nurse and LVN B assessed Resident #1. PCP gave an order to obtain x-ray to right shoulder, right hip, and right leg. Record review of physician order for Resident #1, dated 9/28/20223 at 5:09 PM, stated to obtain x-ray to right shoulder, right hip, and right leg due to fall and complaint of pain. Review of the record revealed Resident # 1 had pain and received pain medication routinely every 4 hours and he received break through pain medication as needed on 9/28/23 at 2:05 PM and on 9/29/23 at 9:35 AM. Record review of client coordination note report dated 9/28/23 completed by hospice nurse reflected the hospice nurse called LVN B to notify him to call in the x-ray and to call hospice with the results of the x-ray. Record review of nurses note dated 9/29/23 completed by LVN A at 11:06 AM reflected LVN A called the x-ray company to place a STAT x-ray to right shoulder, right hip, and right leg. Record review of radiology results report dated 9/29/23 reflected an x-ray was done to Resident #1's right hip, right leg, and right shoulder on 9/29/23 at 1:15 PM. The x-ray company sent the report to the facility on [DATE] at 2:01 PM. The radiology results report reflected Resident #1 had facture to the right hip. Record review of a nurses note dated 9/29/2023 completed by LVN B reflected Resident #1 was sent to the emergency room at 8:20 PM. Record review of hospital records dated 10/05/2023 reflected Resident #1 was admitted to the emergency room (ER) on 9/29/23 at 8:50 PM. Resident #1 had a hip fracture and 2 cervical (related to the neck) spine fracture. Resident #1 was hospitalized and had a hip surgery on 9/30/23. In an interview on 10/01/2023 at 2:23 PM, LVN A stated Resident #1 had a fall on 09/28/2023 at 2:00 PM. LVN A stated she assessed Resident #1; he complained of pain to the right leg. She medicated resident for pain. LVN A stated on 9/29/2023 around 11:00 AM, the ADON told her to follow up if the x-ray was done. She checked Resident#1's records; the x-ray was not done. She called the x-ray company for a STAT x-ray. The x-ray technician came on 09/29/23 at 1:15 PM. In an interview on 10/03/2023 at 1:22 PM, MA E stated on 9/28/2023 around 2:30 PM, her and LVN A assisted Resident #1 to change his pants. MA E stated she observed swollen area at the right hip of Resident #1. In an interview on 10/01/2023 at 3:02 PM, LVN B stated he was aware of an order received from Resident #1's PCP for x-ray to right shoulder, right hip, and right leg due to fall and complain of pain. LVN B stated since the hospice nurse was in the building, he assumed the Hospice Nurse would follow up and carry out the x-ray order. In an interview on 10/01/2023 at 5:01 PM, the Hospice Nurse stated on 09/28/2023 around 5:00 PM she assessed Resident #1 after the fall, he complained of pain to the right hip and right leg. She received an order for x-ray to right shoulder, right hip and right leg. Hospice nurse stated she gave the order to LVN B to call the x-ray company. In a follow up interview on 10/03/23 at 12:32 PM, the Hospice Nurse stated she contacted LVN B on 09/28/2023 around 7:00 PM, she told him to call in the x-ray and to inform hospice about the findings. In an interview on 10/01/2023 at 3:45 PM, RN C stated on 09/28/2023, on the change of the shift, LVN B reported to her that Resident #1 had a fall, and an order for x-ray was received. She stated she did not follow-up with the x-ray order. In an interview on 10/02/2023 at 2:00 PM, the Hospice Physician stated he expected the facility to get the x-ray ordered as soon as possible. He stated waiting 20 hours was too long. In an interview on 10/01/2023 at 3:50 PM, the ADON stated on 09/29/2023 around 9:00 AM, in the morning meeting, she learned Resident #1 had a fall on 09/28/2023. The ADON stated she told LVN A to follow up with the x-ray order. The ADON stated she did not know when the x-ray was done, and she did not know when the results of the x-ray were received by the facility. The ADON stated the nurses were responsible to follow up with the x-ray orders and the x-ray results. In an interview on 10/01/2023 at 3:59 PM, the DON stated on the afternoon of 09/28/2023, LVN A notified her about the fall. The DON stated she expected the LVN to follow up the x-ray order and to follow up to get the results in a timely manner. The DON stated she had been working in the facility for about a month and she was still in training. In a follow up interview on 10/02/2023 at 3:16 PM, the DON stated LVN A called in the STAT x-ray on 10/29/2023. The DON stated no documentation showing that the x-ray was called in to the x-ray company on 10/28/2023. The DON stated delay in x-ray would potentially prolong pain and would delay the implementation of appropriate interventions. The DON stated the nurses were responsible for implementing the order of x-ray for Resident #1. In a phone interview on 10/03/23 at 12:19 PM, Resident #1's RP stated a nurse notified her, on 09/28/2023 that Resident #1 had a fall. The RP stated on 09/29/2023, in the morning, she asked LVN A about the x-ray. LVN A told the RP that she ordered the x-ray. The RP stated on 09/29/2023, Resident #1's other family member was in the facility around 7:30 PM, and she insisted Resident #1 go to the hospital or she would call 911. The RP stated Resident #1 was sent to the hospital on [DATE], in the evening and he had a hip surgery on 09/30/2023. In an interview on 10/03/2023 at 4:30 PM, The x-ray company representative stated the x-ray's final reported for Resident#1 was sent to the facility on [DATE] at 2:04 PM via fax to the facility. In an interview on 10/03/2023 at 5:00 PM, the Regional Director of Operations and Nurse Consultant I stated the phone number provided by the x-ray company was an electronic fax where the critical labs and x-ray results were sent to the facility. The Regional Director of Operations and Nurse Consultant I stated they could not find when the x-ray result was sent on 9/29/2023 to the facility for Resident #1. In an interview on 10/02/23 at 4:48 PM, the Corporate Administrator stated he expected nursing management to follow up to ensure x-ray services were provided to residents. Record review of the facility policy titled Laboratory, Diagnostic and Radiology Services, revised June 2020 reflected . II. The facility is responsible for the quality and timeliness of services provided by the laboratory, diagnostic or radiology provider . Record review of the facility's policy, Physician Orders revised June 2020, revealed . IV. Whenever possible, the Licensed Nurse receiving the order will be responsible for documenting and implementing the order . Review of facility's policy Abuse Prevention and Prohibition Program last revised October 2022 reflected Each resident has the right to be free from .neglect This policy statement also includes .deprivation by any individual, including caretaker, of goods, services or rights that are necessary for a resident to attain or maintain physical, mental, and psychosocial wellbeing. The Administrator is responsible for coordinating and implementing the facility's abuse prevention polices, procedures, training programs, and systems . The Corporate Administrator was notified on 10/02/2023 at 5:00 PM that an Immediate Jeopardy situation had been identified due to the above failures. The IJ template provided at this time and plan of removal was requested. The facility's plan of removal was accepted on 10/04/2023 at 3:54 PM. The accepted plan of removal for the Immediate Jeopardy included the following: Identify residents who could be affected. All residents have the potential to be affected. Identify responsible staff/ what action taken. 1. Abuse Coordinator (Corporate Administrator) reeducated on abuse/neglect by Regional Nurse Consultant on 10/2/23. New Administrator/ Abuse Coordinator educated on abuse/ neglect by Director Clinical Education on 10/3/2023. 2. Director of Nurses and ADON re-educated by the Regional Clinical Nurse on the facility fall evaluation and prevention policy. X-ray ordering and follow up. Education on laboratory, diagnostic and radiology services and educated on carrying out physician orders immediately no greater than 30mins of receiving order from physician on all patients including hospice patients Completed 10/1/23. Reeducated on abuse/neglect by Regional Nurse Consultant on 10/2/23. 3. All licensed nurses Registered Nurses and Licensed Vocational Nurses educated on carrying out orders for x-rays and Education on laboratory, diagnostic and radiology services on all patients immediately no greater than 30mins of receiving order from physician including hospice patients by Director of Nursing initiated on 10/1/2023 with completion date of 10/2/23. 4. All licensed nurses and LVN were re-educated on abuse/neglect by Director of Nursing initiated 10/2/23 with a completion date of 10/3/23. 5. Training for all licensed nurses RN and LVN's, follow up on x-ray results in a timely manner initiated on 10/1/2023 by the Director of Nursing. with the completion date of 10/2/23. 6. Licensed Nurses RN and LVN's in serviced by the DON on the facility policy and procedure regarding facility fall prevention policy, assessment, and notify the physician regarding change of condition. Training was initiated on 10/1/2023 with the completion date of 10/2/23. 7. Licensed Nurses RN and LVN's educated on carrying out orders on hospice patients immediately no greater than 30mins of receiving order from physician. Initiated by Director of Nursing on 10/1/2023. with the completion date of 10/2/23. 8. Director of Nursing, Assistant Director of Nursing and Weekend supervisor educated on procedure to pull report on New X-rays ordered and Falls. Completed on 10/2/23 by Regional Nurse Consultant. 9. An audit on all patients receiving x-ray in last 7 days to assure follow up completed, initiated on 10/1/2023 and completed by the Regional Nurse Consultant with no adverse findings. 10. Self-Report on Neglect made to Health and Human Services on 10/3/2023 by the Administrator. Abuse and Neglect Inservice initiated by the Regional Nurse Consultant on 10/3/2023 with a completion date of 10/4/2023. Abuse and Neglect investigation in process. Resident Safe Survey completed by the director of social services on 10/3/2023 with no negative outcome noted. 11. The licensed Nurse that didn't follow up with the X-ray was suspended on 10/1/2023 and termination of employment effective 10/3/2023. 12. New Licensed Nursing Home Administrator- Abuse Coordinator started at the facility on 10/2/2023. 13. Training and Education on Abuse and Neglect started by the Regional Nurse Consultant on 10/3/2023. In-Service conducted. 1. Abuse Coordinator reeducated on abuse/neglect by Regional Nurse Consultant on 10/2/23. The New Abuse Coordinator was reeducated on abuse/ neglect by the Director of Clinical Education on 10/3/2023. 2. Director of Nurses and ADON re-educated by the Regional Clinical Nurse on facility fall evaluation and prevention policy. X-ray ordering and follow up and. Education on laboratory, diagnostic and radiology services, and educated on carrying out physician orders on all patients including hospice patients completed 10/1/23. Re-educated on abuse/neglect policy by Regional nurse consultant on 10/2/23. 3. Director of Nursing, Assistant Director of Nursing and Weekend supervisor educated on procedure to pull report on New X-rays ordered and Falls. Completed on 10/2/23 by Regional Nurse Consultant. 4. All licensed nurses RN and LVN educated on carrying out orders for x-rays and. Education on laboratory, diagnostic and radiology services on all patients including hospice patients by Director of Nursing initiated on 10/1/2023 with completion date of 10/2/23. 5. Training for all licensed nurses RN and LVN's, follow up on x-ray results in a timely manner initiated on 10/1/2023 by the Director of Nursing with completion date of 10/2/23. 6. Licensed Nurses RN and LVN's in serviced by the DON on the facility policy and procedure regarding facility fall prevention policy, assessment, and notify the physician regarding change of condition. Training was initiated on 10/1/2023 with a completion date of 10/2/23. 7. Licensed Nurses RN and LVN's educated on carrying out orders on hospice patients immediately no greater than 30mins of receiving order from physician. Initiated by Director of Nursing on 10/1/2023 with completion date of 10/2/23. 8. All licensed nurses and LVN were re-educated on abuse/neglect by Director of Nursing initiated 10/2/23 with a completion date of 10/3/23. 9. An audit on all patients including hospice patients receiving x-ray in last 7 days to assure follow up initiated and completed on 10/1/2023 by the Regional Nurse Consultant with no adverse findings. 10. Staff Training and Education on Abuse and Neglect Policy and Process initiated by the Regional Nurse Consultant on 10/3/2023 with completion date of 10/4/2023. Any staff member that doesn't go through the training will not be allowed to work in the facility. All new hires will be trained in Abuse and Neglect policy and Process. 11. The licensed Nurse that didn't follow up with the X-ray was suspended on 10/1/2023 and termination of employment effective 10/3/2023. Implementation of Changes Abuse Coordinator reeducated on abuse/neglect by Regional Nurse Consultant on 10/2/23. New Administrator and Abuse Coordinator reeducated on abuse/neglect by the Director of Clinical Education on 10/3/2023. Director of Nurses re-educated by the Regional Clinical Nurse on facility fall prevention and evaluation, X-ray ordering and follow up Education on laboratory, diagnostic and radiology services. and educated on carrying out physician orders on all patients including hospice patients. Abuse and Neglect policy. Completed 10/2/23. Director of Nursing, Assistant Director of Nursing and Weekend supervisor educated on procedure to pull report on New X-rays ordered and Falls. Completed on 10/2/23 by Regional Nurse Consultant. Licensed nurse's RN's and LVN's re-educated on abuse/neglect policy by Director of Nursing. Initiated on 10/2/23 with completion date of 10/3/23. Licensed staff RN, LVN will review daily Monday through Friday with IDT (Therapy, Nurse managers, social worker, administrator.) all falls, and any patient receiving an X-ray. Weekend Supervisor RN to review all falls and X rays on weekends. The Director of Nursing, Assistant Director of Nursing or designee will run a daily report to identify any resident with fall or new order for X-ray. The changes were started by the Regional Nurse Consultant. The changes were implemented effective on 10/1/2023 and training was completed on 10/2/2023. Staff will not be allowed to work until they have been fully re-educated. All new hires will be educated on fall policy, ordering x-rays and follow-up results, Education on laboratory, diagnostic and radiology services prior to working the floor. The Director of Nursing will ensure competency through signing of in service, verbalization of understanding and completion of returned questionnaire. Director of Nursing will complete audit of falls, x-rays with results daily x 30 days then weekly thereafter. The X-ray company contacted by facility leadership Director of Nursing/Administrator, beginning 10/2/23 all adverse/negative Xray results will be texted to both DON/Administrator phones for notification. Monitoring The Administrator/Director of Nursing/Assistant Director of Nursing/Regional Nurse Consultant will be responsible for monitoring the implementation and effectiveness of in-service on 10/1/2023. The Abuse Coordinator/Director of Nursing/Assistant Director of Nursing/Regional Nurse Consultant will monitor/review all falls, new Xray orders and follow up results daily x4 weeks, then weekly thereafter and report any adverse finding during QAPI. Director of Nursing/Assistant Director of Nursing will conduct a daily audit of falls, Xray and result follow up x4 weeks, then weekly thereafter and report any adverse findings during QAPI. Involvement of Medical Director The Medical Director met with the Interdisciplinary team on 10/2/2023 and conducted an Ad HOC QAPI regarding the facility allegedly failing to provide services, facility failed to provide necessary x-ray services in a timely manner for a hospice resident, who sustained an injury/pain with fall. The facility failed to follow up to get results in a timely manner. The facility failed to follow their policy for x-rays with residents who sustain an injury/pain with fall. The Medical Director was notified about the immediate Jeopardy on 10/2/2023, the Plan of removal was reviewed and accepted by Medical Director. Involvement of QA An Ad Hoc QAPI meeting was held with the Medical Director, facility administrator, director of nursing, to review the plan of removal on 10/2/2023. Who is responsible for the implementation of the process? The Director of Nursing and Administrator will be responsible for the implementation of New Process. The New Process/ system was started on 10/2/2023. The facility's implementation of the IJ Plan of Removal was verified through the following: Review of facility's in-service initiated for 10/02/23 reflected nursing and nursing administration (ADON, Weekend RN Supervisor and DON) was in-serviced on pulling x-ray and fall reports for residents, nursing documentation, change of condition notification, pain management, physician orders, fall evaluation/prevention and laboratory, diagnostic and radiology services and abuse/neglect policy. On 10/04/2023 between 4:41 PM and 5:54 PM and on 10/05/2023 between 10:13 AM and 12:31 PM eight (8) licensed vocational nurses and 2 registered nurses including Weekend RN Supervisor, were interviewed, from different shifts, on training and new system to ensure compliance. All staff were able to verbalize understanding of in-service training regarding x-rays to be completed in timely manner and to follow up to get results in a timely manner. They were knowledgeable of expectation of hospice residents orders for x-rays that they needed to obtain x-ray orders and contact x-ray company to follow the physician x-ray orders. They were all knowledgeable of abuse/neglect policy on reporting, neglect definition including a delay in treatment and to report any allegations immediately. In an interview on 10/05/23 at 10:14 AM, RN C stated she received in-service training regarding obtaining x-ray orders including hospice residents facility responsible for ensuring x-ray ordered obtained and followed up in a timely manner. She stated a delay in obtaining and getting results of an x-ray was neglect. RN C stated she would contact physician, DON, and Administrator if a delay in resident x-ray order being completed or getting results. She was knowledgeable of abuse/neglect policy, definition of neglect and reporting requirements for abuse/neglect. In an interview on 10/05/23 at 11:25 AM, LVN A stated she received in-service training regarding x-ray orders to be obtained from physician and contact x-ray company for STAT x-ray for a resident who had unwitnessed fall and complained of pain requiring pain medication. She stated if there was a delay in obtaining x-ray or getting x-ray results for residents she would contact physician, DON and Administrator of the delay. She stated a delay in obtaining and following up on x-ray results was neglect and must be reported immediately to Administrator Review of the clinical record for Resident #7 who had a fall and x-ray ordered revealed x-ray ordered on 10/01/23 with no issues of lack timeliness of x-ray result for Resident #7. X-ray result revealed negative for fracture. Review of clinical record revealed appropriate notifications to RP, physician and DON. Review of LVN B's employee file revealed facility terminated employee as of 10/03/23. In an interview on 10/05/23 at 12:15 PM the ADON stated as of yesterday (10/04/23) she will be the Interim DON for the facility. She stated x-ray company had been contacted and will be alerting her, Administrator and Nurse Consultant of critical x-ray results so they will be able to follow-up to ensure charge nurses follow up on x-ray results for residents. She stated each morning she will review the log on new labs or x-ray resident orders and check to ensure x-rays were obtained in a timely manner. She stated she expected nurses to contact her and keep her apprised of residents status with x-ray orders and results. ADON stated she expected all nurses to notify her and the Administrator of abuse/neglect allegations immediately. She was knowledgeable of neglect definition of failure to provide services for a resident. She was knowledgeable of facility's abuse/neglect policy and reporting guidelines. In an interview on 10/05/2023 at 1:25 PM, the Administrator stated she was the abuse coordinator for the facility and any allegations of abuse/neglect must be reported to the state. She was knowledgeable of definition of neglect of failure to provide goods or services for a resident. She stated she just started on Monday as the new Administrator. She stated she expected all staff to report any allegations of abuse/neglect to her immediately. She stated she was responsible for reporting neglect to the state within 2 hours, initiate investigation, and must send in the provider investigation report within 5 days. On 10/05/2023 at 4:15 PM, the Regional Director of Operations and the Administrator were informed the IJ was removed. However, the facility remained out of compliance at a severity of actual harm that is not immediate with a scope identified as isolated. The facility needs to ensure in-service training and evaluate the effectiveness of the corrective systems.
CRITICAL (K) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation

Deficiency F0726 (Tag F0726)

Someone could have died · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to have sufficient nursing staff with the appropriate competencies and...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to have sufficient nursing staff with the appropriate competencies and skills sets to provide nursing and related services to assure resident safety and attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident, as determined by resident assessments and individual plans of care and considering acuity of the facility residents for 4 ( LVN A, LVN B, LVN C, and ADON) of 6 nurses reviewed for competency, in that : The facility failed to ensure: - LVN B carried out an x-ray for Resident #1. - RN C followed up with the x-ray order for Resident #1. - LVN A followed up with the x-ray order in timely manner and to get results for Resident #1. - ADON monitored that the nurses followed up with the x-ray order and received the x-ray results in timely manner for Resident #1 Resident #1 fell on 9/28/2023 at 2:00 PM and sustained an injury, the order for an x-ray was obtained on 9/28/2023 at 5pm. The x-ray was completed on 9/29/2023 at 1:15 PM (20 hours delay). The facility was notified of results at 8:00 PM on 9/29/2023. Thirty hours after the fall with fracture, the resident was sent to the hospital for treatment. These failures resulted in an identification of an Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) on 10/02/2023 at 5:00 PM. While the IJ was removed on 10/05/2023 at 4:15 PM, the facility remained out of compliance at actual harm with a scope identified as isolated. These failures resulted in delayed diagnosis, medical treatment, and hospitalization. Findings include: Record review of Resident #1's Quarterly MDS assessment, dated 08/13/23, reflected he was an [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses including Parkinson's disease (a progressive disease of the nervous system marked by tremor, muscular rigidity, and slow, imprecise movement), muscle weakness, lack of coordination, unsteadiness on feet, generalized osteoarthritis, and history of falling. He had a BIMS score of 10 indicated his cognition was moderately impaired. Resident #1 required extensive assistance of one-person for physical assistance with bed mobility, dressing, and toilet use. Review of Resident #1's Comprehensive Care Plan, dated 04/23/23, reflected the following: Focus: Resident is at high risk for falls related to gait/balance problems due to Parkinson's with falls recorded on 2/14/23, 8/17/23, and 9/28/23 resulting in skin tear and intertrochanteric fracture of right hip. Record review of nurses note dated 9/28/23 completed by LVN A at 2:31 PM reflected Resident #1 was found laying on the floor, on his right side, in his room. Resident #1 complained of pain to his right leg. Record review of nurses note dated 9/28/23 completed by LVN B at 5:14 PM reflected the hospice nurse and LVN B assessed Resident #1. PCP gave an order to obtain x-ray to right shoulder, right hip, and right leg. Record review of physician order for Resident #1, dated 9/28/20223 at 5:09 PM, stated to obtain x-ray to right shoulder, right hip, and right leg due to fall and complaint of pain. Record review of client coordination note report dated 9/28/23 completed by hospice nurse reflected the hospice nurse called LVN B to notify him to call in the x-ray and to call hospice with the results of the x-ray. Record review of nurses note dated 9/29/23 completed by LVN A at 11:06 AM reflected LVN A called the x-ray company to place a STAT x-ray to right shoulder, right hip, and right leg. Record review of radiology results report dated 9/29/23 reflected an x-ray was done to Resident #1's right hip, right leg, and right shoulder on 9/29/23 at 1:15 PM. The x-ray company sent the report to the facility on [DATE] at 2:01 PM. The radiology results report reflected Resident #1 had facture to the right hip. Record review of a nurses note dated 9/29/2023 completed by LVN B reflected Resident #1 was sent to the emergency room at 8:20 PM. Record review of hospital records dated 10/05/2023 reflected Resident #1 was admitted to the emergency room (ER) on 9/29/23 at 8:50 PM. Resident #1 had a hip fracture and 2 cervical (related to the neck) spine fracture. Resident #1 was hospitalized and had a hip surgery on 9/30/23. In an interview on 10/01/2023 at 2:23 PM, LVN A stated Resident #1 had a fall on 09/28/2023 at 2:00 PM. LVN A stated she assessed Resident #1; he complained of pain to the right leg. She medicated resident for pain. LVN A stated on 9/29/2023 around 11:00 AM, the ADON told her to follow up if the x-ray was done. She checked Resident#1's records; the x-ray was not done. She called the x-ray company for a STAT x-ray. The x-ray technician came on 09/29/23 at 1:15 PM. In an interview on 10/03/2023 at 1:22 PM, MA E stated on 9/28/2023 around 2:30 PM, her and LVN A assisted Resident #1 to change his pants. MA E stated she observed swollen area at the right hip of Resident #1. In an interview on 10/01/2023 at 3:02 PM, LVN B stated he was aware of an order received from Resident #1's PCP for x-ray to right shoulder, right hip, and right leg due to fall and complain of pain. LVN B stated since the hospice nurse was in the building, he assumed the Hospice Nurse would follow up and carry out the x-ray order. In an interview on 10/01/2023 at 5:01 PM, the Hospice Nurse stated on 09/28/2023 around 5:00 PM she assessed Resident #1 after the fall, he complained of pain to the right hip and right leg. She received an order for x-ray to right shoulder, right hip and right leg. Hospice nurse stated she gave the order to LVN B to call the x-ray company. In a follow up interview on 10/03/23 at 12:32 PM, the Hospice Nurse stated she contacted LVN B on 09/28/2023 around 7:00 PM, she told him to call in the x-ray and to inform hospice about the findings. In an interview on 10/01/2023 at 3:45 PM, RN C stated on 09/28/2023, on the change of the shift, LVN B reported to her that Resident #1 had a fall, and an order for x-ray was received. She stated she did not follow-up with the x-ray order. In an interview on 10/02/2023 at 2:00 PM, the Hospice Physician stated he expected the facility to get the x-ray ordered as soon as possible. He stated waiting 20 hours was too long. In an interview on 10/01/2023 at 3:50 PM, the ADON stated on 09/29/2023 around 9:00 AM, in the morning meeting, she learned Resident #1 had a fall on 09/28/2023. The ADON stated she told LVN A to follow up with the x-ray order. The ADON stated she did not know when the x-ray was done, and she did not know when the results of the x-ray were received by the facility. The ADON stated the nurses were responsible to follow up with the x-ray orders and the x-ray results. In an interview on 10/01/2023 at 3:59 PM, the DON stated on the afternoon of 09/28/2023, LVN A notified her about the fall. The DON stated she expected the LVN to follow up the x-ray order and to follow up to get the results in a timely manner. The DON stated she had been working in the facility for about a month and she was still in training. In a follow up interview on 10/02/2023 at 3:16 PM, the DON stated LVN A called in the STAT x-ray on 10/29/2023. The DON stated no documentation showing that the x-ray was called in to the x-ray company on 10/28/2023. The DON stated delay in x-ray would potentially prolong pain and would delay the implementation of appropriate interventions. The DON stated the nurses were responsible for implementing the order of x-ray for Resident #1. In a phone interview on 10/03/23 at 12:19 PM, Resident #1's RP stated a nurse notified her, on 09/28/2023 that Resident #1 had a fall. The RP stated on 09/29/2023, in the morning, she asked LVN A about the x-ray. LVN A told the RP that she ordered the x-ray. The RP stated on 09/29/2023, Resident #1's other family member was in the facility around 7:30 PM, and she insisted Resident #1 go to the hospital or she would call 911. The RP stated Resident #1 was sent to the hospital on [DATE], in the evening and he had a hip surgery on 09/30/2023. In an interview on 10/03/2023 at 4:30 PM, The x-ray company representative stated the x-ray's final reported for Resident#1 was sent to the facility on [DATE] at 2:04 PM via fax to the facility. In an interview on 10/03/2023 at 5:00 PM, the Regional Director of Operations and Nurse Consultant I stated the phone number provided by the x-ray company was an electronic fax where the critical labs and x-ray results were sent to the facility. The Regional Director of Operations and Nurse Consultant I stated they could not find when the x-ray result was sent on 9/29/2023 to the facility for Resident #1. In an interview on 10/02/23 at 4:48 PM, the Corporate Administrator stated he expected nursing management to follow up to ensure x-ray services were provided to residents. Record review of the facility's policy titled Laboratory, Diagnostic and Radiology Services, revised 06/2020 reflected . II. The facility is responsible for the quality and timeliness of services provided by the laboratory, diagnostic or radiology provider . The Corporate Administrator was notified on 10/02/2023 at 5:00 PM that an Immediate Jeopardy situation had been identified due to the above failures. The IJ template provided at this time and plan of removal was requested. The facility's plan of removal was accepted on 10/04/2023 at 3:54 PM. The accepted plan of removal for the Immediate Jeopardy included the following: Plan to remove immediate jeopardy. The resident is no longer in the facility and is now at the hospital. LVN B was terminated on 10/03/2023. On 10/01/2023 LVN A and RN C were educated on carrying out orders for x-rays immediately no greater than 30mins of receiving order from physician and Education on laboratory, diagnostic and radiology services on all patients including hospice residents. LVN A and RN C were also trained on carrying out physician orders on all residents including hospice patients. On 10/02/2023 ADON was educated on procedure on how to generate a report on new x-ray orders, falls and to notify the physician of any adverse findings no greater than 30min after receiving results. 10/01/2023 the nurse consultant conducted an audit on all residents receiving x-ray in last 7 days to ensure follow up were completed. No concern has been identified at this time. 10/01/2023 to 10/02/2023 the DON educated all licensed nurses RNs and LVNs on carrying out orders for x-rays immediately no greater than 30mins of receiving order from physician and Education on laboratory, diagnostic and radiology services on all residents including hospice residents. RNs and LVNs were also educated if STAT x-ray was not received within 2hours of x-ray completion, the licensed nurse should call the x-ray company for the reason of delay. The licensed nurse will notify the physician and DON immediately of the delay and seek further guidance. On 10/02/2023 x-ray company was contacted by the DON and the Administrator, beginning 10/2/23 all adverse and negative x-ray results will be texted to both DON, ADON, and Administrator phones, and an alert of x-rays added in the EMAR system. The Director of Nursing, Assistant Director of Nursing or designee will run a daily report to identify any resident with fall or new order for X-ray and immediately report any adverse findings to physician. 10/01/2023 a QAPI meeting was held with the Medical Director, facility administrator, director of nursing, to review the plan of removal. The facility's implementation of the IJ Plan of Removal was verified through the following: Review of facility's in-service initiated for 10/02/23 reflected nursing and nursing administration (ADON, Weekend RN Supervisor and DON) was in-serviced on pulling x-ray and fall reports for residents, nursing documentation, change of condition notification, pain management, physician orders, fall evaluation/prevention and laboratory, diagnostic and radiology services and abuse/neglect policy. On 10/04/2023 between 4:41 PM and 5:54 PM and on 10/05/2023 between 10:13 AM and 12:31 PM eight (8) licensed vocational nurses and 2 registered nurses including Weekend RN Supervisor, were interviewed, from different shifts, on training and new system to ensure compliance. All staff were able to verbalize understanding of in-service training regarding x-rays to be completed in timely manner and to follow up to get results in a timely manner. They were knowledgeable of expectation of hospice residents orders for x-rays that they needed to obtain x-ray orders and contact x-ray company to follow the physician x-ray orders. In an interview on 10/05/23 at 10:14 AM, RN C stated she received in-service training regarding obtaining x-ray orders including hospice residents facility responsible for ensuring x-ray ordered obtained and followed up in a timely manner. She stated when she received order for x-ray for a resident who had complaints of pain after an unwitnessed fall she would ask physician if STAT x-ray can be ordered. RN C stated she would contact x-ray company by phone for STAT x-ray and it should be completed within 4 hours. She stated after x-ray obtained by x-ray company, she would follow-up within 2 hours if x-ray results not received. She stated she would contact physician and DON if have any issues with x-ray order not being completed or not receiving x-ray results. In an interview on 10/05/23 at 11:25 AM, LVN A stated she received in-service training regarding x-ray orders to be obtained from physician and contact x-ray company for STAT x-ray for a resident who had unwitnessed fall and complained of pain requiring pain medication. She stated STAT x-ray orders were to be completed within 4 hours of contacting x-ray company and should follow up with x-ray company within 2 hours after x-ray technician came out to facility if not received results of x-ray. She stated if there was a delay in obtaining x-ray or getting x-ray results, she would contact physician and the DON for guidance. Review of the clinical record for Resident #7 who had a fall and x-ray ordered revealed x-ray ordered on 10/01/23 with no issues of lack timeliness of x-ray result for Resident #7. X-ray result revealed negative for fracture. Review of clinical record revealed appropriate notifications to RP, physician and DON. Review of LVN B's employee file revealed facility terminated employee as of 10/03/23. In an interview on 10/05/23 at 12:15 PM the ADON stated as of yesterday (10/04/23) she would be the Interim DON for the facility. She stated x-ray company had been contacted and will be alerting her, Administrator and Nurse Consultant of critical x-ray results so they will be able to follow-up to ensure charge nurses follow up on x-ray results for residents. She stated each morning she will review the log on new labs or x-ray resident orders and check to ensure x-rays were obtained in a timely manner. She stated she expected nurses to contact her and keep her apprised of residents' status with x-ray orders and results. In an interview on 10/05/2023 at 1:25 PM, the Administrator stated herself, ADON, and nurse consultant would get critical labs and x-ray results from the x-ray company along with nurses. She stated they would get alerts on their phones. On 10/05/2023 at 4:15 PM, the Regional Director of Operations and the Administrator were informed the IJ was removed. However, the facility remained out of compliance at a severity of actual harm that is not immediate with a scope identified as isolated. The facility needs to ensure in-service training and evaluate the effectiveness of the corrective systems.
CRITICAL (K) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation

Deficiency F0776 (Tag F0776)

Someone could have died · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review the facility failed to provide radiology or other diagnostic services to meet the needs of ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review the facility failed to provide radiology or other diagnostic services to meet the needs of its residents in a timely manner for 1 (Resident #1) of 6 residents reviewed for radiology services. 1. The facility failed to ensure that an x-ray was completed in a timely manner for Resident #1 2. The facility failed to follow up to get Resident #1's x-ray results in a timely manner. Resident #1 had an unwitnessed fall on 9/28/23 at 2pm and sustained an injury, The order for an x-ray was obtained on 9/28/23 at 5pm. The x-ray was completed on 9/29/23 at 1:15pm (20 hours delay). The facility was aware of results on 9/29/23 at 8:00 PM. Resident #1 had a fracture to the right hip. Thirty hours after the fall with fracture, the resident was sent to the hospital for treatment. Hospital Records indicated Resident #1 had a hip fracture and 2 cervical (related to the neck) spine fracture. Resident #1 was hospitalized and had a hip surgery on 9/30/23. These failures resulted in an identification of an Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) on 10/02/2023 at 10:38 AM. While the IJ was removed on 10/05/2023 at 4:15 PM, the facility remained out of compliance at actual harm with a scope identified as isolated. These failures resulted in delayed diagnosis, medical treatment, and hospitalization. Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's Quarterly MDS assessment, dated 08/13/23, reflected he was an [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses including Parkinson's disease (a progressive disease of the nervous system marked by tremor, muscular rigidity, and slow, imprecise movement), muscle weakness, lack of coordination, unsteadiness on feet, generalized osteoarthritis, and history of falling. He had a BIMS score of 10 indicated his cognition was moderately impaired. Resident #1 required extensive assistance of one-person for physical assistance with bed mobility, dressing, and toilet use. Review of Resident #1's Comprehensive Care Plan, dated 04/23/23, reflected the following: Focus: Resident is at high risk for falls related to gait/balance problems due to Parkinson's with falls recorded on 2/14/23, 8/17/23, and 9/28/23 resulting in skin tear and intertrochanteric fracture of right hip. Record review of nurses note dated 9/28/23 completed by LVN A at 2:31 PM reflected Resident #1 was found laying on the floor, on his right side, in his room. Resident #1 complained of pain to his right leg. Record review of nurses note dated 9/28/23 completed by LVN B at 5:14 PM reflected the hospice nurse and LVN B assessed Resident #1. PCP gave an order to obtain x-ray to right shoulder, right hip, and right leg. Record review of physician order for Resident #1, dated 9/28/20223 at 5:09 PM, stated to obtain x-ray to right shoulder, right hip, and right leg due to fall and complaint of pain. Record review of client coordination note report dated 9/28/23 completed by hospice nurse reflected the hospice nurse called LVN B to notify him to call in the x-ray and to call hospice with the results of the x-ray. Record review of nurses note dated 9/29/23 completed by LVN A at 11:06 AM reflected LVN A called the x-ray company to place a STAT x-ray to right shoulder, right hip, and right leg. Record review of radiology results report dated 9/29/23 reflected an x-ray was done to Resident #1's right hip, right leg, and right shoulder on 9/29/23 at 1:15 PM. The x-ray company sent the report to the facility on [DATE] at 2:01 PM. The radiology results report reflected Resident #1 had facture to the right hip. Record review of a nurses note dated 9/29/2023 completed by LVN B reflected Resident #1 was sent to the emergency room at 8:20 PM. Record review of hospital records dated 10/05/2023 reflected Resident #1 was admitted to the emergency room (ER) on 9/29/23 at 8:50 PM. Resident #1 had a hip fracture and 2 cervical (related to the neck) spine fracture. Resident #1 was hospitalized and had a hip surgery on 9/30/23. In an interview on 10/01/2023 at 2:23 PM, LVN A stated Resident #1 had a fall on 09/28/2023 at 2:00 PM. LVN A stated she assessed Resident #1; he complained of pain to the right leg. She medicated resident for pain. LVN A stated on 9/29/2023 around 11:00 AM, the ADON told her to follow up if the x-ray was done. She checked Resident#1's records; the x-ray was not done. She called the x-ray company for a STAT x-ray. The x-ray technician came on 09/29/23 at 1:15 PM. In an interview on 10/03/2023 at 1:22 PM, MA E stated on 9/28/2023 around 2:30 PM, her and LVN A assisted Resident #1 to change his pants. MA E stated she observed swollen area at the right hip of Resident #1. In an interview on 10/01/2023 at 3:02 PM, LVN B stated he was aware of an order received from Resident #1's PCP for x-ray to right shoulder, right hip, and right leg due to fall and complain of pain. LVN B stated since the hospice nurse was in the building, he assumed the Hospice Nurse would follow up and carry out the x-ray order. In an interview on 10/01/2023 at 5:01 PM, the Hospice Nurse stated on 09/28/2023 around 5:00 PM she assessed Resident #1 after the fall, he complained of pain to the right hip and right leg. She received an order for x-ray to right shoulder, right hip and right leg. Hospice nurse stated she gave the order to LVN B to call the x-ray company. In a follow up interview on 10/03/23 at 12:32 PM, the Hospice Nurse stated she contacted LVN B on 09/28/2023 around 7:00 PM, she told him to call in the x-ray and to inform hospice about the findings. In an interview on 10/01/2023 at 3:45 PM, RN C stated on 09/28/2023, on the change of the shift, LVN B reported to her that Resident #1 had a fall, and an order for x-ray was received. She stated she did not follow-up with the x-ray order. In an interview on 10/02/2023 at 2:00 PM, the Hospice Physician stated he expected the facility to get the x-ray ordered as soon as possible. He stated waiting 20 hours was too long. In an interview on 10/01/2023 at 3:50 PM, the ADON stated on 09/29/2023 around 9:00 AM, in the morning meeting, she learned Resident #1 had a fall on 09/28/2023. The ADON stated she told LVN A to follow up with the x-ray order. The ADON stated she did not know when the x-ray was done, and she did not know when the results of the x-ray were received by the facility. The ADON stated the nurses were responsible to follow up with the x-ray orders and the x-ray results. In an interview on 10/01/2023 at 3:59 PM, the DON stated on the afternoon of 09/28/2023, LVN A notified her about the fall. The DON stated she expected the LVN to follow up the x-ray order and to follow up to get the results in a timely manner. The DON stated she had been working in the facility for about a month and she was still in training. In a follow up interview on 10/02/2023 at 3:16 PM, the DON stated LVN A called in the STAT x-ray on 10/29/2023. The DON stated no documentation showing that the x-ray was called in to the x-ray company on 10/28/2023. The DON stated delay in x-ray would potentially prolong pain and would delay the implementation of appropriate interventions. The DON stated the nurses were responsible for implementing the order of x-ray for Resident #1. In a phone interview on 10/03/23 at 12:19 PM, Resident #1's RP stated a nurse notified her, on 09/28/2023 that Resident #1 had a fall. The RP stated on 09/29/2023, in the morning, she asked LVN A about the x-ray. LVN A told the RP that she ordered the x-ray. The RP stated on 09/29/2023, Resident #1's other family member was in the facility around 7:30 PM, and she insisted Resident #1 go to the hospital or she would call 911. The RP stated Resident #1 was sent to the hospital on [DATE], in the evening and he had a hip surgery on 09/30/2023. In an interview on 10/03/2023 at 4:30 PM, The x-ray company representative stated the x-ray's final reported for Resident#1 was sent to the facility on [DATE] at 2:04 PM via fax to the facility. In an interview on 10/03/2023 at 5:00 PM, the Regional Director of Operations and Nurse Consultant I stated the phone number provided by the x-ray company was an electronic fax where the critical labs and x-ray results were sent to the facility. The Regional Director of Operations and Nurse Consultant I stated they could not find when the x-ray result was sent on 9/29/2023 to the facility for Resident #1. In an interview on 10/02/23 at 4:48 PM, the Corporate Administrator stated he expected nursing management to follow up to ensure x-ray services were provided to residents. Record review of the facility's policy titled Laboratory, Diagnostic and Radiology Services, revised June 2020 reflected . II. The facility is responsible for the quality and timeliness of services provided by the laboratory, diagnostic or radiology provider . An Immediate Jeopardy was identified on 10/02/23. The corporate administrator was notified on 10/02/2023 at 10:38 AM of the Immediate Jeopardy. IJ template provided at this time and plan of removal was requested. The facility's plan of removal was accepted on 10/04/2023 at 3:54 PM. The accepted plan of removal for the Immediate Jeopardy included the following: Plan to remove immediate jeopardy. The resident is no longer in the facility and is now at the hospital. LVN B was terminated on 10/03/2023. [Facility's name] submits the following Plan of Removal for the alleged failure to provide diagnostic services. By submitting this plan of removal [facility name] does not admit to the accuracy of the alleged deficient practice. What corrective actions have been implemented for the identified resident(s)? Resident with alleged deficient practice was discharged to hospital on 9/29/23. How were other residents at risk to be affected by this deficient practice identified? An audit on all patients receiving x-ray in last 7 days to assure follow up completed, initiated on 10/1/2023 and completed by the Nurse Consultant H with no adverse findings. What does the facility need to change immediately to keep residents safe and ensure it does not happen again? On 10/01/2023 Nurse Consultant H re-educated the DON and the ADON on the facility fall evaluation and prevention policy. X-ray ordering and follow up. She educated them on laboratory, diagnostic and radiology services and educated on carrying out physician orders on all residents including hospice residents. On 10/01/2023 and 10/02/2023 the DON educated all licensed nurses RNs and LVNs on carrying out orders for x-rays and educated them also on laboratory, diagnostic and radiology services on all residents including hospice residents. The DON also educated them on follow up on x-ray results in a timely manner and on the facility policy and procedure regarding facility fall prevention policy, assessment, and notify the physician regarding change of condition. On 10/2/23 by Nurse Consultant H educated the DON, ADON, and weekend supervisor on procedure to pull report on new x-rays ordered and falls. The DON and the Administrator contacted the x-ray company, beginning 10/2/23 all adverse and negative x-ray results will be texted to both DON's and Administrator's phones for notification. LVN B was suspended on 10/1/2023 and termination of employment effective 10/3/2023. How will the system be monitored to ensure compliance? The Administrator, DON, ADON, and Nurse Consultant H will be responsible for monitoring the implementation and effectiveness of in-service on 10/1/2023. The DON, ADON, and Nurse Consultant H will monitor and review all falls, new x-ray orders and follow up results daily for 4 weeks, then weekly thereafter and report any adverse finding during QAPI. The DON and ADON will conduct a daily audit of falls, x-ray and result follow up for 4 weeks, then weekly thereafter and report any adverse findings during QAPI. Quality Assurance A QAPI meeting was held with the Medical Director, facility administrator, director of nursing, to review the plan of removal on 10/1/2023. The facility's implementation of the IJ Plan of Removal was verified through the following: Review of facility's in-service initiated for 10/02/23 reflected nursing and nursing administration (ADON, Weekend RN Supervisor and DON) was in-serviced on pulling x-ray and fall reports for residents, nursing documentation, change of condition notification, pain management, physician orders, fall evaluation/prevention and laboratory, diagnostic and radiology services and abuse/neglect policy. On 10/04/2023 between 4:41 PM and 5:54 PM and on 10/05/2023 between 10:13 AM and 12:31 PM eight (8) licensed vocational nurses and 2 registered nurses including Weekend RN Supervisor, were interviewed, from different shifts, on training and new system to ensure compliance. All staff were able to verbalize understanding of in-service training regarding x-rays to be completed in timely manner and to follow up to get results in a timely manner. They were knowledgeable of expectation of hospice residents' orders for x-rays that they needed to obtain x-ray orders and contact x-ray company to follow the physician x-ray orders. In an interview on 10/05/23 at 10:14 AM, RN C stated she received in-service training regarding obtaining x-ray orders including hospice residents facility responsible for ensuring x-ray ordered obtained and followed up in a timely manner. She stated when she received order for x-ray for a resident who had complaints of pain after an unwitnessed fall she would ask physician if STAT x-ray can be ordered. RN C stated she would contact x-ray company by phone for STAT x-ray and it should be completed within 4 hours. She stated after x-ray obtained by x-ray company she would follow-up within 2 hours if x-ray results not received. She stated she would contact physician and DON if have any issues with x-ray order not being completed or not receiving x-ray results. In an interview on 10/05/23 at 11:25 AM, LVN A stated she received in-service training regarding x-ray orders to be obtained from physician and contact x-ray company for STAT x-ray for a resident who had unwitnessed fall and complained of pain requiring pain medication. She stated STAT x-ray orders were to be completed within 4 hours of contacting x-ray company and should follow up with x-ray company within 2 hours after x-ray technician came out to facility if not received results of x-ray. She stated if there was a delay in obtaining x-ray or getting x-ray results she would contact physician and the DON for guidance. Review of the clinical record for Resident #7 who had a fall and x-ray ordered revealed x-ray ordered on 10/02/23 with no issues of lack timeliness of x-ray result for Resident #7. X-ray result revealed negative for fracture. Review of clinical record revealed appropriate notifications to RP, physician and DON. Review of LVN B's employee file revealed facility terminated employee as of 10/03/23. In an interview on 10/05/23 at 12:15 PM the ADON stated as of yesterday (10/04/23) she will be the Interim DON for the facility. She stated x-ray company had been contacted and will be alerting her, Administrator and Nurse Consultant of critical x-ray results so they will be able to follow-up to ensure charge nurses follow up on x-ray results for residents. She stated each morning she will review the log on new labs or x-ray resident orders and check to ensure x-rays were obtained in a timely manner. She stated she expected nurses to contact her and keep her apprised of residents status with x-ray orders and results. In an interview on 10/05/2023 at 1:25 PM, the Administrator stated herself, ADON, and nurse consultant would get critical labs and x-ray results from the x-ray company along with nurses. She stated they would get alerts on their phones. On 10/05/2023 at 4:15 PM, the Regional Director of Operations and the Administrator were informed the IJ was removed. However, the facility remained out of compliance at a severity of actual harm that is not immediate with a scope identified as isolated. The facility needs to ensure in-service training and evaluate the effectiveness of the corrective systems.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Abuse Prevention Policies (Tag F0607)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

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

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to implement their written policies and procedures that prohibit and prevent neglect of residents for one (Resident #1) of six residents reviewed for neglect. The facility failed to implement a policy and process for immediately investigating and reporting allegation of neglect related to facility's failure to obtain an x-ray and send Resident #1 to the hospital in a timely manner when facility became aware on 09/29/23 of Resident #1's delay in x-ray result. This deficient practice could place residents at risk for delayed treatment and neglect. Findings included: Review of facility's policy Abuse Prevention and Prohibition Program last revised October 2022 reflected Each resident has the right to be free from .neglect .This policy statement also includes deprivation by any individual, including caretaker, of goods, services or rights that are necessary for a resident to attain or maintain physical, mental, and psychosocial wellbeing. The Administrator is responsible for coordinating and implementing the facility's abuse prevention polices, procedures, training programs, and systems .The Facility promptly and thoroughly investigates report of resident .neglect .Administrator, or his/her designee, as Abuse Coordinator i. In order to facilitate reporting, ensure confidentiality, and promote order at the Facility, the Administrator, or his/her designee, shall be the individual who reports known or suspected instances .of residents at the Facility to the proper authorities .The facility will report allegations of .neglect .immediately, but no later than 2 hours after forming the suspicion - if the alleged violation involves abuse or results in serious bodily injury to the state survey agency . Record review of Resident #1's Quarterly MDS assessment, dated 08/13/23, reflected he was an [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses included parkinson's disease (a progressive disease of the nervous system marked by tremor, muscular rigidity, and slow, imprecise movement), muscle weakness, lack of coordination, unsteadiness on feet, generalized osteoarthritis, and history of falling. She was unable to complete the interview to determine the BIMS. He had a BIMS of 10 indicated his cognition was moderately impaired . Resident #1 required extensive assistance of one-person physical assistance with bed mobility, dressing, and toilet use. Review of Resident #1's Comprehensive Care Plan, dated 04/23/23, reflected the following: Focus: Resident is at high risk for falls related to gait/balance problems due to parkinson's with falls recorded on 2/14/23, 8/17/23, and 9/28/23 resulting in skin tear and intertrochanteric fracture of right hip. Record review of nurses note dated 9/28/23 completed by LVN A at 2:31 PM reflected Resident #1 was found laying on the floor, on his right side, in his room. Resident #1 complained of pain to his right leg. Record review of nurses note dated 9/28/23 completed by LVN B at 5:14 PM reflected the hospice nurse and LVN B assessed resident #1. PCP gave an order to obtain x-ray to right shoulder, right hip, and right leg. Record review of physician order for Resident #1, dated 9/28/2023 at 5:09 PM, stated to obtain x-ray to right shoulder, right hip, and right leg due to fall and complaint of pain. Record review of client coordination note report dated 9/28/23 completed by hospice nurse reflected the hospice nurse called LVN B to notify him to call in the x-ray and to call the hospice with the results of the x-ray. Record review of nurses note dated 9/29/23 completed by LVN A at 11:06 AM reflected LVN A called the x-ray company to place a STAT x-ray to right shoulder, right hip, and right leg. Record review of radiology results report dated 9/29/23 reflected an x-ray was done to Resident #1's right hip, right leg, and right shoulder on 9/29/23 at 1:15 PM. The x-ray company sent the report to the facility on [DATE] at 2:01 PM. The radiology results report reflected Resident #1 had facture to the right hip. Record review of nurses note dated 9/29/2023 completed by LVN B reflected Resident #1 was sent to the emergency room at 8:20 PM. Record review of hospital records dated 10/05/2023 reflected Resident #1 was admitted to the emergency room (ER) on 9/29/23 at 8:50 PM. Resident #1 had a hip fracture and 2 cervical (related to the neck) spine fracture. Resident #1 was hospitalized and had a hip surgery on 9/30/23. In an interview on 10/01/2023 at 2:23 PM, LVN A stated Resident #1 had a fall on 09/28/2023 at 2:00 PM. LVN A stated she assessed Resident #1; he complained of pain to the right leg. She medicated resident for pain. LVN A stated on 9/28/2023 around 11:00 AM the ADON told me to follow up if the x-ray was done. I checked Resident#1 records; the x-ray was not done. I called the x-ray company for STAT x-ray. The x-ray technician came at 1:15 PM. In an interview on 10/03/2023 at 1:22 PM, MA E stated on 9/28/2023 around 2:30 PM, her and LVN A assisted Resident #1 to change his pants. MA E stated she observed swollen area at the right hip of Resident #1. In an interview on 10/01/2023 at 3:02 PM, LVN B stated he was aware of an order received from Resident #1 PCP for x-ray to right shoulder, right hip, and right leg due to fall and complain of pain. LVN B stated since the hospice nurse was in the building, he assumed she would follow up and carry out the x-ray order. In an interview on 10/01/2023 at 5:01 PM, the Hospice Nurse stated on 09/28/2023 around 5:00 PM she assessed Resident #1 after the fall, he complained of pain to the right hip and right leg. I received an order for x-ray to right shoulder, right hip and right leg. The Hospice nurse stated she gave the order to LVN B to call the x-ray company. In a follow up interview on 10/03/23 at 12:32 PM, the Hospice Nurse stated she contacted LVN B on 09/28/2023 around 7:00 PM, she told him to call in the x-ray and to inform hospice about the findings. In an interview on 10/01/2023 at 3:45 PM, RN C stated on 09/28/2023, on the change of the shift, LVN B reported to her that Resident #1 had a fall, and an order for x-ray was received. She did not follow-up about the x-ray order. In an interview on 10/02/2023 at 2:00 PM, the Hospice Physician stated he expected the facility to get x-ray ordered as soon as possible. He stated waiting 20 hours was too long. In an interview on 10/01/2023 at 3:50 PM, the ADON stated on 09/29/2023 around 9:00 AM, in the morning meeting, she learned Resident #1 had a fall on 09/28/2023. The ADON stated she told LVN A to follow up with the x-ray order. The ADON stated she did not know when the x-ray was done, and she did not know when the results of the x-ray were received by the facility. In an interview on 10/01/2023 at 3:59 PM, the DON stated on the afternoon of 09/28/2023, LVN A notified her about the fall. The DON stated she expected the LVN to follow up the x-ray order and to follow up to get the result on timely manner. The DON stated she had been working in the facility for about a month and she still in training. In a follow up interview on 10/02/2023 at 3:16 PM, the DON stated LVN A called in the STAT x-ray on 10/29/2023. The DON stated no documentation showing that the x-ray was called in to the x-ray company on 10/28/2023. The DON stated delay in x-ray would potentially prolong pain and would delay the implementation of appropriate interventions. She stated the definition of neglect was a failure to provide care or services to a resident. She stated in facility's policy it indicated neglect example could be inadequate provision of care which was what happened to Resident #1's delay in x-ray services. In a phone interview on 10/03/23 at 12:19 PM, Resident #1's RP stated a nurse notified her, on 09/28/2023 that Resident #1 had an unwitnessed fall. The wife stated on 09/29/2023, in the morning, she asked LVN A about the x-ray. LVN A told the RP that she ordered the x-ray. The RP stated on 09/29/2023 Resident #1 other family member was in the facility, and she insisted Resident #1 to go to the hospital or she would call 911. The RP stated Resident #1 was sent to the hospital on [DATE], in the evening and he had a hip surgery on 09/30/2023. She stated Resident #1 only mumbled and was not able to communicate what happened on 09/28/23 when he was found on the floor. In an interview on 10/02/23 at 4:48 PM, the Corporate Administrator stated the definition of neglect was the willful attempt not to provide something. He stated he did not agree that Resident #1's delay in x-ray services was neglect since the nurses were providing pain medication as ordered to resident and physician was notified who increased pain regiment. He stated he expected nursing management to follow up to ensure x-ray services were provided to residents. He stated if it was an allegation of Neglect he would have reported it to the state within 2 hours, investigated the incident and turned in provider investigation report. In an interview on 10/05/23 at 10:48 AM and 11:40 AM, the Regional Director of Operations revealed a definition of neglect was not providing services or meeting resident needs. He stated allegations of neglect with serious bodily injury must be reported within 2 hours to the state. He stated the Administrator of the facility was the abuse coordinator and responsible for ensuring allegations of neglect were reported and investigated per the regulations. He stated the investigation was initiated and investigation could include abuse/neglect in-services to staff, interview witnesses if any, facility staff and residents. He was not aware of the delay in reporting to the state until 10/03/23 for the allegation of Resident #1's neglect. He stated the facility's findings of the investigation which was the provider investigation report was to be sent to the state within 5 working days of initial report to the state.
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

Report Alleged Abuse (Tag F0609)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure all alleged violations involving neglect were reported immedi...

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 all alleged violations involving neglect were reported immediately, but not later than 2 hours after the allegations were made, if the events that cause the allegation involve abuse or result in serious bodily injury, or not later than 24 hours if the events that cause the allegation do not involve abuse and do not result in serious bodily injury, for one (Resident #1) of six residents reviewed for neglect. The facility failed to ensure an allegation of neglect related to facility's failure to obtain an x-ray and send Resident #1 to the hospital in a timely manner when facility became aware on 09/29/23 of Resident #1's delay in x-ray result. This deficient practice could place residents at risk for delayed treatment and neglect. Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's Quarterly MDS assessment, dated 08/13/23, reflected he was an [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses included parkinson's disease (a progressive disease of the nervous system marked by tremor, muscular rigidity, and slow, imprecise movement), muscle weakness, lack of coordination, unsteadiness on feet, generalized osteoarthritis, and history of falling. She was unable to complete the interview to determine the BIMS. He had a BIMS of 10 indicated his cognition was moderately impaired . Resident #1 required extensive assistance of one-person physical assistance with bed mobility, dressing, and toilet use. Review of Resident #1's Comprehensive Care Plan, dated 04/23/23, reflected the following: Focus: Resident is at high risk for falls related to gait/balance problems due to parkinson's with falls recorded on 2/14/23, 8/17/23, and 9/28/23 resulting in skin tear and intertrochanteric fracture of right hip. Record review of nurses note dated 9/28/23 completed by LVN A at 2:31 PM reflected Resident #1 was found laying on the floor, on his right side, in his room. Resident #1 complained of pain to his right leg. Record review of nurses note dated 9/28/23 completed by LVN B at 5:14 PM reflected the hospice nurse and LVN B assessed resident #1. PCP gave an order to obtain x-ray to right shoulder, right hip, and right leg. Record review of physician order for Resident #1, dated 9/28/2023 at 5:09 PM, stated to obtain x-ray to right shoulder, right hip, and right leg due to fall and complaint of pain. Record review of client coordination note report dated 9/28/23 completed by hospice nurse reflected the hospice nurse called LVN B to notify him to call in the x-ray and to call the hospice with the results of the x-ray. Record review of nurses note dated 9/29/23 completed by LVN A at 11:06 AM reflected LVN A called the x-ray company to place a STAT x-ray to right shoulder, right hip, and right leg. Record review of radiology results report dated 9/29/23 reflected an x-ray was done to Resident #1's right hip, right leg, and right shoulder on 9/29/23 at 1:15 PM. The x-ray company sent the report to the facility on [DATE] at 2:01 PM. The radiology results report reflected Resident #1 had facture to the right hip. Record review of nurses note dated 9/29/2023 completed by LVN B reflected Resident #1 was sent to the emergency room at 8:20 PM. Record review of hospital records dated 10/05/2023 reflected Resident #1 was admitted to the emergency room (ER) on 9/29/23 at 8:50 PM. Resident #1 had a hip fracture and 2 cervical (related to the neck) spine fracture. Resident #1 was hospitalized and had a hip surgery on 9/30/23. In an interview on 10/01/2023 at 2:23 PM, LVN A stated Resident #1 had a fall on 09/28/2023 at 2:00 PM. LVN A stated she assessed Resident #1; he complained of pain to the right leg. She medicated resident for pain. LVN A stated on 9/28/2023 around 11:00 AM the ADON told me to follow up if the x-ray was done. I checked Resident#1 records; the x-ray was not done. I called the x-ray company for STAT x-ray. The x-ray technician came at 1:15 PM. In an interview on 10/03/2023 at 1:22 PM, MA E stated on 9/28/2023 around 2:30 PM, her and LVN A assisted Resident #1 to change his pants. MA E stated she observed swollen area at the right hip of Resident #1. In an interview on 10/01/2023 at 3:02 PM, LVN B stated he was aware of an order received from Resident #1 PCP for x-ray to right shoulder, right hip, and right leg due to fall and complain of pain. LVN B stated since the hospice nurse was in the building, he assumed she would follow up and carry out the x-ray order. In an interview on 10/01/2023 at 5:01 PM, the Hospice Nurse stated on 09/28/2023 around 5:00 PM she assessed Resident #1 after the fall, he complained of pain to the right hip and right leg. I received an order for x-ray to right shoulder, right hip and right leg. The Hospice nurse stated she gave the order to LVN B to call the x-ray company. In a follow up interview on 10/03/23 at 12:32 PM, the Hospice Nurse stated she contacted LVN B on 09/28/2023 around 7:00 PM, she told him to call in the x-ray and to inform hospice about the findings. In an interview on 10/01/2023 at 3:45 PM, RN C stated on 09/28/2023, on the change of the shift, LVN B reported to her that Resident #1 had a fall, and an order for x-ray was received. She did not follow-up about the x-ray order. In an interview on 10/02/2023 at 2:00 PM, the Hospice Physician stated he expected the facility to get x-ray ordered as soon as possible. He stated waiting 20 hours was too long. In an interview on 10/01/2023 at 3:50 PM, the ADON stated on 09/29/2023 around 9:00 AM, in the morning meeting, she learned Resident #1 had a fall on 09/28/2023. The ADON stated she told LVN A to follow up with the x-ray order. The ADON stated she did not know when the x-ray was done, and she did not know when the results of the x-ray were received by the facility. In an interview on 10/01/2023 at 3:59 PM, the DON stated on the afternoon of 09/28/2023, LVN A notified her about the fall. The DON stated she expected the LVN to follow up the x-ray order and to follow up to get the result on timely manner. The DON stated she had been working in the facility for about a month and she still in training. In a follow up interview on 10/02/2023 at 3:16 PM, the DON stated LVN A called in the STAT x-ray on 10/29/2023. The DON stated no documentation showing that the x-ray was called in to the x-ray company on 10/28/2023. The DON stated delay in x-ray would potentially prolong pain and would delay the implementation of appropriate interventions. She stated the definition of neglect was a failure to provide care or services to a resident. She stated in facility's policy it indicated neglect example could be inadequate provision of care which was what happened to Resident #1's delay in x-ray services. In a phone interview on 10/03/23 at 12:19 PM, Resident #1's RP stated a nurse notified her, on 09/28/2023 that Resident #1 had an unwitnessed fall. The wife stated on 09/29/2023, in the morning, she asked LVN A about the x-ray. LVN A told the RP that she ordered the x-ray. The RP stated on 09/29/2023 Resident #1 other family member was in the facility, and she insisted Resident #1 to go to the hospital or she would call 911. The RP stated Resident #1 was sent to the hospital on [DATE], in the evening and he had a hip surgery on 09/30/2023. She stated Resident #1 only mumbled and was not able to communicate what happened on 09/28/23 when he was found on the floor. In an interview on 10/02/23 at 4:48 PM, the Corporate Administrator stated the definition of neglect was the willful attempt not to provide something. He stated he did not agree that Resident #1's delay in x-ray services was neglect since the nurses were providing pain medication as ordered to resident and physician was notified who increased pain regiment. He stated he expected nursing management to follow up to ensure x-ray services were provided to residents. He stated if it was an allegation of Neglect he would have reported it to the state within 2 hours, investigated the incident and turned in provider investigation report. In an interview on 10/05/23 at 10:48 AM and 11:40 AM, the Regional Director of Operations revealed a definition of neglect was not providing services or meeting resident needs. He stated allegations of neglect with serious bodily injury must be reported within 2 hours to the state. He stated the Administrator of the facility was the abuse coordinator and responsible for ensuring allegations of neglect were reported and investigated per the regulations. He stated the investigation was initiated and investigation could include abuse/neglect in-services to staff, interview witnesses if any, facility staff and residents. He was not aware of the delay in reporting to the state until 10/03/23 for the allegation of Resident #1's neglect. He stated the facility's findings of the investigation which was the provider investigation report was to be sent to the state within 5 working days of initial report to the state. Review of facility's policy Abuse Prevention and Prohibition Program last revised October 2022 reflected Each resident has the right to be free from .neglect .This policy statement also includes deprivation by any individual, including caretaker, of goods, services or rights that are necessary for a resident to attain or maintain physical, mental, and psychosocial wellbeing. The Administrator is responsible for coordinating and implementing the facility's abuse prevention polices, procedures, training programs, and systems .The Facility promptly and thoroughly investigates report of resident .neglect .Administrator, or his/her designee, as Abuse Coordinator i. In order to facilitate reporting, ensure confidentiality, and promote order at the Facility, the Administrator, or his/her designee, shall be the individual who reports known or suspected instances .of residents at the Facility to the proper authorities .The facility will report allegations of .neglect .immediately, but no later than 2 hours after forming the suspicion - if the alleged violation involves abuse or results in serious bodily injury to the state survey agency .
Jul 2023 2 deficiencies
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Infection Control (Tag F0880)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program de...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable disease and infection for 1 of 1 (Resident #1) reviewed for infection control. Facility staff failed to place used PPE correctly in biohazard boxes. Facility staff failed to remove biohazard boxes from Resident #1's room after contact precautions ended. This failure could place residents at risk for the spread of infection. Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's face sheet, dated 07/05/2023, revealed a [AGE] year-old female with original admission date of 01/30/2023 with diagnoses that included metabolic encephalopathy and dementia, severe, with other behavioral disturbance. Record review of Resident #1's MDS dated [DATE], revealed a BIMS of 1, indicating severe cognitive impairment. Further review of the MDS revealed Resident #1 had an active diagnosis of UTI in the last 30 days. Review of undated list provided by the facility of residents on TBP (precuations used in addition to standard precautions) revealed Resident #1 was the only resident on precautions for ESBL in Urine (infection caused by antibiotic resistant bacteria). Observation and interview on 07/07/2023 at 9:11 am, in the secure unit, Resident #1's room revealed a sign for contact precautions (gown and gloves) on the door and a cart with PPE in the room. LVN B entered the room and stated Resident was off of precautions and no PPE was needed. A resident walked into the room and said she needed to use the restroom and went inside. Observation and interview 07/07/2023 at 1:04 pm, in Resident #1's room, revealed another resident lying in the A bed. CNA C stated Resident #1 was on precautions for ESBL and came off this morning. CNA C said the resident came back from the hospital yesterday (07/06/23) and she asked LVN B this morning if the resident was off precautions. Observation on 07/07/2023 at 1:36 pm, in Resident #1's bathroom, revealed 2 biohazard boxes in front of the sink. One box had the flaps open and was overflowing with inside out PPE gowns on top, not contained in a bag. The second box had a large, clear plastic bag with linens, towels, and hospital gowns sitting on top of the box. Interview on 07/07/2023 at 1:59 pm, LVN B stated Resident #1 came off of isolation today and the aides and nurse were responsible to close up the boxes, and the nurse was the one that should take the boxes to the biohazard area on 300 hall. She said if the box was filled during the shift, it would be their responsibility to take it to the biohazard room. LVN B said there should have been a yellow bag for linens and a red bag (used for waste) for the other box. LVN B stated the boxes should have been out of the room by now and the risk was contamination. LVN B said Resident #1 did not currently have a roommate because she was moved out for Resident #1's isolation. Interview on 07/07/2023 at 4:27 pm, RN D stated in that instant it was not truly biohazard what Resident #1 was technically on and bagging trash and linens in regular bags would be acceptable. She stated the risk would be spreading of the disease and she started an in-service on biohazard. The Administrator stated they did not have a policy on biohazard. Record review of CDC website of Isolation Precautions Guideline updated July 2023, reflected, in part Contact Precautions are intended to prevent transmission of infectious agents, including epidemiologically important microorganisms, which are spread by direct or indirect contact with the patient or the patient's environment .Healthcare personnel caring for patients on Contact Precautions wear a gown and gloves for all interactions that may involve contact with the patient or potentially contaminated areas in the patient's environment.
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

ADL Care (Tag F0677)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

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

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure residents who were unable to carry out activities of daily living received necessary services to maintain personal hygiene for 1 of 1 (Resident #1) residents reviewed for ADL care. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 received showers on scheduled shower days. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving personal care services and a decreased quality of life. Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's face sheet, dated 07/05/2023, revealed a [AGE] year-old female with original admission date of 01/30/2023 with diagnoses that included metabolic encephalopathy and dementia, severe, with other behavioral disturbance. Record review of Resident #1's MDS dated [DATE], revealed a BIMS of 1, indicating severe cognitive impairment. Further review of the MDS revealed Resident #1 required extensive assistance of one staff for bed mobility, dressing, eating and personal hygiene. Record review of Resident #1's ADL sheets for May and June 2023 reflected no entries for bathing on the following dates: 05/08/23, 05/19/23, 05/22/23, 05/31/23, 06/12/23, 06/14/23, 06/21/23, 06/23/23, 06/26/23 and 06/30/23. Interview on 07/07/2023 at 11:01 am, Resident #1's family member stated when she visits, she always looked at Resident #1's feet because she was diabetic, and her feet appear dirty. She said during one visit she took Resident #1's socks off and they were covered in what looked like feces. She said she then cleaned them with antibacterial wipes, but thought it was odd that the resident was not able to dress herself or put socks on and she was wearing socks when her feet appeared to have feces on them. The family member said she went to the nurse's station to ask about Resident #1's bathing schedule and the staff replied Monday, Wednesday, Friday and the resident always takes her showers, but they did not reply about the days in between. Observation and interview on 07/07/2023 at 1:15 PM with CNA A, CNA A removed Resident #1's socks, and the bottoms of both feet were black on the toes and ball of the foot. When asked what the black was, CNA A said it was her skin. Interview on 07/07/2023 at 1:59 PM, LVN B stated Resident #1's shower days were Monday, Wednesday and Friday on 7 AM to 3 PM shift and referenced a schedule posted at the nurse's station. Interview on 07/07/2023 at 1:59 PM, CNA C stated Resident #1 was supposed to get a shower today, but she was resting today (resident had returned from the hospital on [DATE]). CNA C stated they were going to go in there and clean her and maybe give her a bed bath to have her clean. CNA C stated she last showered her on Monday 07/03/23. Interview on 07/07/2023 at 4:16 PM, RN D (DON from a sister facility) stated she was not able to find refusal for showers in Resident #1's careplan. RN D stated facilities have been having problems in the EHR where the box was not popping up when the aides chart. She said she has done in-services with the aides and telling them to chart to show credit for their work. She said she understands it looks like no showers were being given because of the saying if it was not documented it was not done. Interview on 07/07/2023 at 4:27 PM, the Administrator stated she knew if a resident got a shower from the documentation. She stated if residents did not get showers they could be dirty, stink, or risk of infection and they could feel better when clean. Record review of facility policy titled Showering a Resident, undated, reflected A shower bath is given to the resident to provide cleanliness, comfort and to prevent body odors. Residents are offered a shower at a minimum of once weekly and given per resident request .
Jun 2023 1 deficiency
CONCERN (F)

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

Food Safety (Tag F0812)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food safety in the facility's only ki...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food safety in the facility's only kitchen. The facility failed to ensure food items in the refrigerator, freezer and dry storage were dated, labeled and properly sealed. These failures could affect residents by placing them at risk for food-borne illness. Findings included: Observation on 05/30/23 at 8:46 AM revealed the following items in the refrigerator: -Multiple trays of cups of water with lids -Multiple trays of what appeared to be cups of iced tea -Multiple trays of assorted beverages with cups with lids -All trays were unlabeled and undated and should be labeled with type of beverage and dated for when they were stored in the refrigerator Observation on 05/30/23 at 8:52 AM revealed the following items in the freezer: -One tray with ice cream or sherbet scoops in containers with lids on them undated and unlabeled -One unsealed bag with 5 frozen waffles undated and unlabeled -One bag unsealed bag of what appeared to be breaded shrimp undated and unlabeled -These items should have been dated for when they were opened Observation on 05/30/23 at 9:00 AM revealed the following items in dry storage: -One pre-opened bag of pasta tied in a knot but not inside a sealed container -One pre-opened bag of elbow macaroni not in a sealed container -Two bundles of pre-opened packs of spaghetti wrapped in plastic wrap, but not in sealed containers. These bags were undated and unlabeled. It is unknown when these items were opened. Observation and interview on 05/30/23 at 9:10 AM with the Nutrition Service Director (NSD) revealed when he saw the items of concern in the refrigerator, freezer and dry storage he stated the pasta should have been in Ziploc bags and the beverages should have been dated. He stated he had done in-services with staff and educated over and over. He stated the risk of items not being dated and labeled correctly was not knowing if the food was spoiled. Interview on 06/01/23 at 1:42 PM with the NSD revealed the expectation was for staff to date and label everything. The NSD stated that he would go around and check everything for dating and labeling first thing on Monday mornings. He stated the risk of food not being in airtight containers was it could get contaminated. He stated not following the protocol for food storage could lead to resident illness or aggravation of an existing health issue for a resident. Policy titled, Review of Food Storage Policy, dated 12/2020 revealed, Food items will be stored, thawed, and prepared in accordance with good sanitary practice Foods to be frozen should be stored in airtight containers or wrapped in heavy-duty aluminum foil or special laminated papers Label and date all food items Dry storage guidelines . g. any opened products should be placed in storage containers with tight fitting lids. H. label and date storage products. Review of the U.S. Public Health Service Food Code, dated 2017, reflected: 3-501.18 Ready-to-Eat, Time/Temperature Control for Safety Food, Disposition. (A) A food specified in 3-501.17(A) or (B) shall be discarded if it: (1) Exceeds the temperature and time combination specified in 3-501.17(A), except time that the product is frozen; (2) Is in a container or package that does not bear a date or day; P or (3) Is inappropriately marked with a date or day that exceeds a temperature and time combination as specified in 3501.17(A). (D) A date marking system that meets the criteria stated in (A) and (B) of this section may include: (2) Marking the date or day of preparation, with a procedure to discard the food on or before the last date or day by which the food must be consumed on the premises, sold, or discarded as specified under (A) of this section; (3) Marking the date or day the original container is opened in a food establishment, with a procedure to discard the food on or before the last date or day by which the food must be consumed on the premises, sold, or discarded as specified under (B) of this section .
Nov 2022 2 deficiencies
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Abuse Prevention Policies (Tag F0607)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to implement their written policies and procedures that prohibited and...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to implement their written policies and procedures that prohibited and prevented abuse for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for abuse. The facility failed to follow their abuse policy when facility staff, Marketer A was notified Resident #1 made an allegation of abuse against RN B, and the facility failed to report to HHSC. This failure could place residents at risk for abuse and neglect. Findings include: A record review of the facility's policy titled Abuse Prevention and Prohibition Program, dated August 2020, revealed IX. Reporting/Response: A. Facility Staff are Mandatory Reporters: i. Facility owners, operators, employees, managers, agents, and contractors are obligated by the Elder Justice Act and any state specific regulation to report known or suspected instances of abuse of elder or dependent adults. B. Administrator, and his/her designee as Abuse Coordinator: i .the Administrator, and his/her designee, of the Facility shall be the individual who reports known or suspected instances of abuse of residents at the Facility to the proper authorities. ii. Facility Staff will report known or suspected instances of abuse to the Administrator, and his/her designee. C. Reporting Requirements: i. The Facility will report known or suspected instances of physical abuse including sexual abuse, and criminal acts to the proper authorities by telephone or through a confidential internet reporting toll as required by the state and federal regulations. A record review of Resident #1's electronic face sheet, dated 11/21/22, revealed a [AGE] year-old female who admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #1 had diagnoses which included: end stage renal disease, chronic kidney disease, cerebral infarction, pulmonary disease, and dependence on renal dialysis. A record review of Residents #1's MDS assessment, dated 10/11/22, revealed a BIMS score of 15, which indicated the resident's cognition was intact. An attempt to interview Resident #1 was made. Resident #1 was discharged from the facility and was unable to be reached via phone. In a phone interview on 11/22/22 at 8:52 AM, the hospital SW stated Marketer A was contacted on 10/19/22 and was advised Resident #1 would not return to the facility because she alleged RN B threatened to kill her and was forcing her to take medications. The hospital SW stated Resident #1 was discharged from the hospital on [DATE] to another nursing facility. In a phone interview on 11/22/22 at 12:37 PM, Marketer A stated she reviewed her documentation and on 10/19/22 she spoke to the hospital SW, who informed her Resident #1 would not return to the facility because she alleged RN B threatened her. Marketer A said because Resident #1 was alleging abuse, she immediately called the Administrator and DON to let them know Resident #1 alleged she was threatened by RN B, and she would not be returning to the facility. In an interview on 11/22/22 at 1:32 PM, the Administrator stated Marketer A is an employee at the facility. She stated she might have spoken to Marketer A on 10/19/22, but she was not for sure because that was a month ago. The Administrator said she was not told by Marketer A that Resident #1 alleged she was threatened by RN B because she would have called in a report to the state right away. The Administrator stated she would submit a report to the state. In an interview on 11/22/22 at 2:57 PM, RN B stated she assessed Resident #1 when she first entered the facility and when she was attempting to assess her, the Resident #1 was screaming and didn't want her to touch her. She stated she did the best she could do. RN B stated the next day, she attempted to administer medication to Resident #1, and she refused. RN B stated Resident #1 was complaining about her accent and told her she did not trust her. RN B stated she showed Resident #1 her orders and the medications, but she still said she didn't trust her and refused her medications. She stated she notified the DON of what happened, and that Resident #1 was refusing medications after she educated her. RN B stated the DON told her she would get another nurse to take care of Resident #1. RN B stated she never threatened Resident #1 nor did she force her to take her medications.
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

Report Alleged Abuse (Tag F0609)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure that all alleged violations involving abuse, were reported im...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure that all alleged violations involving abuse, were reported immediately, but not later than 2 hours after the allegation was made, if the events that caused the allegation involved abuse, to the State Survey Agency in accordance with State law through established procedures for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for abuse. The facility failed to report an allegation of abuse to HHSC in a timely manner, after facility staff, Marketer A was notified Resident #1 made an allegation of abuse against RN B. This failure could place residents at risk for abuse and neglect. Findings include: A record review of the facility's policy titled Abuse Prevention and Prohibition Program, dated August 2020, revealed IX. Reporting/Response: A. Facility Staff are Mandatory Reporters: i. Facility owners, operators, employees, managers, agents, and contractors are obligated by the Elder Justice Act and any state specific regulation to report known or suspected instances of abuse of elder or dependent adults. B. Administrator, and his/her designee as Abuse Coordinator: i .the Administrator, and his/her designee, of the Facility shall be the individual who reports known or suspected instances of abuse of residents at the Facility to the proper authorities. ii. Facility Staff will report known or suspected instances of abuse to the Administrator, and his/her designee. C. Reporting Requirements: i. The Facility will report known or suspected instances of physical abuse including sexual abuse, and criminal acts to the proper authorities by telephone or through a confidential internet reporting toll as required by the state and federal regulations. A record review of Resident #1's electronic face sheet, dated 11/21/22, revealed a [AGE] year-old female who admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #1 had diagnoses which included: end stage renal disease, chronic kidney disease, cerebral infarction, pulmonary disease, and dependence on renal dialysis. A record review of Residents #1's MDS assessment, dated 10/11/22, revealed a BIMS score of 15, which indicated the resident's cognition was intact. An attempt to interview Resident #1 was made. Resident #1 was discharged from the facility and was unable to be reached via phone. In a phone interview on 11/22/22 at 8:52 AM, the hospital SW stated Marketer A was contacted on 10/19/22 and was advised Resident #1 would not return to the facility because she alleged RN B threatened to kill her and was forcing her to take medications. The hospital SW stated Resident #1 was discharged from the hospital on [DATE] to another nursing facility. In a phone interview on 11/22/22 at 12:37 PM, Marketer A stated she reviewed her documentation and on 10/19/22 she spoke to the hospital SW, who informed her Resident #1 would not return to the facility because she alleged RN B threatened her. Marketer A said because Resident #1 was alleging abuse, she immediately called the Administrator and DON to let them know Resident #1 alleged she was threatened by RN B, and she would not be returning to the facility. In an interview on 11/22/22 at 1:32 PM, the Administrator stated Marketer A is an employee at the facility. She stated she might have spoken to Marketer A on 10/19/22, but she was not for sure because that was a month ago. The Administrator said she was not told by Marketer A that Resident #1 alleged she was threatened by RN B because she would have called in a report to the state right away. The Administrator stated she would submit a report to the state. In an interview on 11/22/22 at 2:57 PM, RN B stated she assessed Resident #1 when she first entered the facility and when she was attempting to assess her, the Resident #1 was screaming and didn't want her to touch her. She stated she did the best she could do. RN B stated the next day, she attempted to administer medication to Resident #1, and she refused. RN B stated Resident #1 was complaining about her accent and told her she did not trust her. RN B stated she showed Resident #1 her orders and the medications, but she still said she didn't trust her and refused her medications. She stated she notified the DON of what happened, and that Resident #1 was refusing medications after she educated her. RN B stated the DON told her she would get another nurse to take care of Resident #1. RN B stated she never threatened Resident #1 nor did she force her to take her medications.
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Life-Threatening (Immediate Jeopardy)
J - Isolated K - Pattern L - Widespread
Actual Harm
G - Isolated H - Pattern I - Widespread
Potential for Harm
D - Isolated E - Pattern F - Widespread
No Harm (Minor)
A - Isolated B - Pattern C - Widespread

Questions to Ask on Your Visit

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

Our Honest Assessment

Strengths
  • • Licensed and certified facility. Meets minimum state requirements.
Concerns
  • • Multiple safety concerns identified: 4 life-threatening violation(s). Review inspection reports carefully.
  • • 22 deficiencies on record, including 4 critical (life-threatening) violations. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
  • • $23,970 in fines. Higher than 94% of Texas facilities, suggesting repeated compliance issues.
  • • Grade F (0/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
Bottom line: This facility has 4 Immediate Jeopardy findings. Serious concerns require careful evaluation.

About This Facility

What is Glenview Wellness & Rehabilitation's CMS Rating?

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

How is Glenview Wellness & Rehabilitation Staffed?

CMS rates GLENVIEW WELLNESS & REHABILITATION's staffing level at 1 out of 5 stars, which is much below average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 60%, which is 14 percentage points above the Texas average of 46%. High turnover can affect care consistency as new staff learn residents' individual needs. RN turnover specifically is 56%, which is notably high. RNs provide skilled clinical oversight, so turnover in this role can affect medical care quality.

What Have Inspectors Found at Glenview Wellness & Rehabilitation?

State health inspectors documented 22 deficiencies at GLENVIEW WELLNESS & REHABILITATION during 2022 to 2025. These included: 4 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 Glenview Wellness & Rehabilitation?

GLENVIEW WELLNESS & REHABILITATION is owned by a government entity. Government-operated facilities are typically run by state, county, or municipal agencies. The facility is operated by OPCO SKILLED MANAGEMENT, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 163 certified beds and approximately 90 residents (about 55% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, Texas.

How Does Glenview Wellness & Rehabilitation Compare to Other Texas Nursing Homes?

Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Texas, GLENVIEW WELLNESS & REHABILITATION's overall rating (2 stars) is below the state average of 2.8, staff turnover (60%) is significantly higher than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (2 stars) is below the national benchmark.

What Should Families Ask When Visiting Glenview Wellness & Rehabilitation?

Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "What changes have been made since the serious inspection findings, and how are you preventing similar issues?" "How do you ensure continuity of care given staff turnover, and what is your staff retention strategy?" "Can 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?" These questions are particularly relevant given the facility's Immediate Jeopardy citations, the facility's high staff turnover rate, and the below-average staffing rating.

Is Glenview Wellness & Rehabilitation Safe?

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

Do Nurses at Glenview Wellness & Rehabilitation Stick Around?

Staff turnover at GLENVIEW WELLNESS & REHABILITATION is high. At 60%, the facility is 14 percentage points above the Texas average of 46%. Registered Nurse turnover is particularly concerning at 56%. RNs handle complex medical decisions and coordinate care — frequent RN changes can directly impact care quality. High turnover means new staff may not know residents' individual needs, medications, or preferences. It can also be disorienting for residents, especially those with dementia who rely on familiar faces. Families should ask: What is causing the turnover? What retention programs are in place? How do you ensure care continuity during staff transitions?

Was Glenview Wellness & Rehabilitation Ever Fined?

GLENVIEW WELLNESS & REHABILITATION has been fined $23,970 across 2 penalty actions. This is below the Texas average of $33,319. 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 Glenview Wellness & Rehabilitation on Any Federal Watch List?

GLENVIEW WELLNESS & REHABILITATION 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.