PRESTONWOOD REHABILITATION & NURSING CENTER INC

2460 MARSH LN, PLANO, TX 75093 (214) 731-5955
Government - Hospital district 132 Beds Independent Data: November 2025 3 Immediate Jeopardy citations
Trust Grade
22/100
#322 of 1168 in TX
Last Inspection: April 2025

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

Overview

Prestonwood Rehabilitation & Nursing Center in Plano, Texas, has received a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns about the facility's quality and safety. It ranks #322 out of 1168 facilities in Texas, placing it in the top half, while locally it is #5 out of 18 in Denton County, meaning only four facilities nearby are better. However, the trend is worsening, with reported issues increasing from 6 in 2024 to 10 in 2025. Staffing is a strength, with a 5/5 star rating and a turnover rate of 31%, which is well below the Texas average of 50%. Unfortunately, the facility has faced serious issues, including critical incidents of sexual abuse where staff failed to report and protect residents, raising significant red flags about resident safety.

Trust Score
F
22/100
In Texas
#322/1168
Top 27%
Safety Record
High Risk
Review needed
Inspections
Getting Worse
6 → 10 violations
Staff Stability
○ Average
31% turnover. Near Texas's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
Penalties
○ Average
$22,205 in fines. Higher than 73% of Texas facilities. Some compliance issues.
Skilled Nurses
✓ Good
Each resident gets 64 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than 97% of Texas nursing homes. RNs are the most trained staff who catch health problems before they become serious.
Violations
⚠ Watch
16 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
★★★★☆
4.0
Overall Rating
★★★★★
5.0
Staff Levels
★★★★★
5.0
Care Quality
★★☆☆☆
2.0
Inspection Score
Stable
2024: 6 issues
2025: 10 issues

The Good

  • 5-Star Staffing Rating · Excellent nurse staffing levels
  • 5-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
  • Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
  • No fines on record
  • Staff turnover below average (31%)

    17 points below Texas average of 48%

Facility shows strength in staffing levels, quality measures, fire safety.

The Bad

Staff Turnover: 31%

14pts below Texas avg (46%)

Typical for the industry

Federal Fines: $22,205

Below median ($33,413)

Minor penalties assessed

The Ugly 16 deficiencies on record

3 life-threatening
Apr 2025 10 deficiencies 3 IJ (3 affecting multiple)
CRITICAL (K)

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 interview and record review, the facility failed to protect the residents right to be free from sexual abuse for 2 resi...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to protect the residents right to be free from sexual abuse for 2 residents (Resident #22 and Resident #52) of 24 residents reviewed for abuse and neglect. On 02/21/25, Resident # 1 inappropriately touched Resident # 22 and asked Resident #22 to kiss him. On 02/21/15, Resident # 1 grabbed the hand of Resident #52 and put Resident # 52's hand in his groin area. Resident # 1 then attempted to bend over and kiss Resident # 22. Resident # 1 asked Resident #52 to go to his room. A past noncompliance IJ was identified on 04/17/2025, and the IJ template was provided to the facility on [DATE] at 01:45 PM. The noncompliance began on 02/21/2025 and ended on 02/25/2025. The facility had corrected the noncompliance before the Incident investigation began on 03/31/2025. This failure placed the facility's residents at risk for abuse and neglect. Findings included: 1. Review of Resident #1's face sheet dated 03/31/2025 reflected Resident #1 was a [AGE] year-old male, with an admission date of 08/01/2023 and diagnoses of Dementia (memory loss), psychotic disturbance (a mental health condition characterized by a loss of touch with reality, leading to distorted perceptions, thoughts and behaviors), and was discharged on 03/17/2025. Review of Resident #1's MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected Resident #1 had a BIMS score of 07 indicating severe cognitive impairment, was independent in transition from sitting to standing position and walking. Review of Resident #1's care plan dated 02/15/2025 reflected Resident #1 displays inappropriate behavior of a sexual manner towards females at times. He has also asked other female residents to go back to his room with him . Monitor resident in activities as needed . Remove other residents from harm and sexual advances as needed . Remove resident from public areas if behavior is demonstrated. 2. Review of Resident #22's face sheet dated 04/02/2025 reflected she was an [AGE] year-old female, with an admission date of 01/20/2022 and diagnoses of Dementia (memory loss), psychotic disturbance (a mental health condition characterized by a loss of touch with reality, leading to distorted perceptions, thoughts and behaviors). Review of Resident #22's MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected Resident #22 had a BIMS score of 02 indicating severe cognitive impairment, was dependent in chair to bed transfers. Review of Resident #22's care plan dated 01/24/2022 reflected resident #22 had a diagnosis of Dementia, 09/19/2022 reflected resident #22 was unable to perform ADL functions independently. 3. Review of Resident #52's face sheet dated 04/02/2025 reflected she was a [AGE] year-old female, with an admission date of 05/31/2024 and diagnoses of encephalopathy (brain disfunction leading to symptoms such as altered mental status, memory loss), Cognitive communication deficit (impaired cognitive process). Review of Resident #52's MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected Resident #52 had a BIMS score of 10 indicating moderate cognitive impairment and she required moderate assistance with chair to bed transfers. Review of Resident #52's care plan dated 01/28/2025 reflected she was taking psychotropic medications for depression and anxiety, had a diagnosis of dementia/Alzheimer's and was at risk for increased confusion. Review of Resident #22's progress note dated 02/21/2025 at 09:36 AM reflected LVN M heard Resident #22 yell No, do not touch me. LVN M observed Resident #1 inappropriately touching Resident #22 and asking her to kiss Resident #1. Review of Resident #52's progress note dated 02/21/2025 at 01:34 PM reflected LVN E observed Resident # 1 grab the hand of Resident #52 and said, come to my room, then attempted to bend over and kiss Resident #52. Record review of the provider investigation report reflected the Administrator completed the investigation on 03/04/2025, notified HHSC, ombudsman, medical director, police department, psych services, responsible parties of Residents #1, #22 and #52, Resident #1's medications were reviewed by the medical director, Resident #22 and Resident #52 were assessed and no emotional distress was noted, staff interviews were conducted, and Resident safe surveys were completed. Record review of the in-service training revealed 63 employees, including LVN E and LVN M, received in service on the topic Reporting abuse neglect and exploitation on 02/25/2025. Record review of the in-service training revealed 92 employees received in-service on the topic ANE reporting response on 03/31/2025. Review of Resident #1's progress note dated 03/04/2025 at 02:53 PM revealed social services had a care plan meeting with Resident #1's family member to address Resident #1's behavior issues and appropriate discharge plan, revealed a 30-day discharge notice was issued to Resident #1's family member . Review of the Q 15-minute check list revealed Resident #1 was checked every 15 minutes from 02/25/25 till 03/17/25. Record review of the physician order dated 02/26/2025 reflected Resident #1 received a new standing order for Prozac 20 mg, once a day, to address his behavior issues. Review of the Quality Assurance Committee sign in sheet revealed the facility had the committee meeting on 04/01/2025 to address the identified issue of staff did not report potential ANE to the administrator immediately. Record review of Resident #1's progress note revealed he had displayed inappropriate behaviors towards females prior to February 2025. An observation and interview with Resident #22 in the facility TV room on 03/31/2025 at 03:59 PM revealed she was sitting in her wheelchair and watching TV. Resident #22 did not remember the alleged incident which happened on 02/21/2025. Resident #22 felt safe at the facility, she was not afraid of any residents or employees. An observation and interview with Resident #52 in her room on 03/31/2025 at 04:15 PM revealed she was sitting in her wheelchair watching TV. Resident #52 stated on an unknown date Resident #1 approached her while she was sitting in her wheelchair in the 500 hallway and told her to go to Resident #1's room, Resident #1 grabbed Resident #52's hands and put her hand in Resident #1's private area. Resident #52 stated she told Resident #1 to stop, and an unknown nurse came and separated both. Resident # 52 stated this was the first such incident, she was not injured, she was not afraid of any residents, and she felt safe. Resident #52 stated Resident #1 did not stay at the same hall and he stayed in 600 hall, she did not have any similar experience from Resident #1 anymore. She stated later ADON H and the Administrator came and spoke to her and assured they were addressing the concern, and she would be safe. Interview with the Administrator on 03/31/2025 at 4:32 PM revealed she had worked at the facility for 3 years and she was the abuse coordinator. She stated she expected all the employees to report to her any suspicion of abuse immediately, all the employees had her contact information available, and all the employees were given in-service training on a regular basis on abuse/neglect. The Administrator stated two female residents, Residents #22 and #52 were inappropriately touched by Resident #1 on 02/21/2025. The Administrator said she first learned about the incident involving Resident # 52 from LVN E on 02/25/2025. As part of the investigation of that incident, she spoke with LVN M on the same day and learned about another incident involving Resident #1 inappropriately touching Resident #22. The Administrator stated both female residents were assessed and they found no injuries, discoloration, pain, or emotional distress. The Administrator stated she educated LVN M on the importance of timely notification of instances where ANE could potentially have taken place. The Administrator stated she instructed staff to complete a 15-minute check on Resident #1 until further notice, reported the alleged incident to the police, and an officer came and spoke with residents. The Administrator stated the incidents were reported to the medical director, responsible parties of each resident who were involved and to the Ombudsman. Resident #1 was referred for psych services and he received new order for medication Prozac. Safe surveys were conducted and ensured no other residents were affected and the residents felt safe and comfortable at the facility. In-service training on ANE and notification was provided to all the employees. The Administrator stated she had a care plan meeting with Resident #1's family and Resident #1 was discharged from the facility. The Administrator stated both incidents involving Residents #22 and #52 were considered as abuse, and abuse was supposed to be reported to the state within 2 hours. She stated she expected the employees to report to her the abuse incident immediately rather than waiting until 02/25/2025. She stated those were the only two incidents involving Resident #1 inappropriately behaving with residents. Interview with LVN E on 03/31/2025 at 05:10 PM revealed she observed the inappropriate behavior of Resident #1 towards Resident #52 on 02/21/2025 when Resident #52 told her about the incident. She stated she did not consider that incident as abuse since Resident #1was attempting to touch Resident #52. She stated she documented the incident in the nurses note on the same day. She stated she sent an email on 02/25/2025 to the Administrator/abuse coordinator notifying her of the alleged incident. She stated she was expected to report any suspected abuse immediately to the abuse coordinator. She stated she was not aware of any sexually inappropriate behavior by Resident #1. She stated she had received in-services on abuse regularly. She stated once she learned about the incident, she separated both residents, redirected Resident #1, and made sure Resident #52 was safe and comfortable. She stated there were several types of abuse such a physical, sexual, verbal, emotional. She stated she would also report abuse to the physician and family of the residents involved. Interview with LVN M on 04/01/2025 at 09:30 AM revealed she had worked at the facility for over two years, and she worked on the 600 hall. She stated abuse was hitting or speaking to a resident inappropriately, and there were several types of abuse such as physical, sexual, emotional. She stated she received in-service training on abuse and the most recent one was in February. She stated she would notify the DON and the Administrator/the abuse coordinator immediately of any suspected abuse/neglect. She stated not immediately reporting abuse can lead to continuation of the abusive behavior towards more residents. She stated if she observed a resident was abused, she would immediately intervene and separate them, redirect the aggressor, and make sure the victim was safe. She stated there would be interventions in place to make sure the aggressor was not repeating the behavior, he/she would be always monitored. She stated she would also report the incident to the physician and family. LVN M stated on 02/21/2025, she was working on the 600 hall nurses' station when she heard Resident #22, who was sitting in her wheelchair on the hallway, yelling don't touch me to Resident #1. She stated she saw Resident #1 touching the side of Resident #22's breast, holding, and pulling her arm, asking her to come to his room. LVN M stated she immediately separated both, took Resident #22 to her room and Resident #1 to his room, educated Resident #1 about inappropriate behaviors and boundaries. She stated she made sure Resident #1 stayed in his room, and monitored him frequently. She stated she did not report this incident to the Abuse Coordinator/the Administrator, but she reported this incident to ADON H, soon after the incident. She stated that was a suspected abuse incident and she was supposed to report it immediately to the abuse coordinator. She stated she had reported this incident she witnessed to the Administrator on 02/25/2025 when the Administrator approached her to ask about a similar incident. An interview with ADON H on 04/01/2025 at 01:34 PM revealed he had worked at the facility for 15 years and he was the supervisor for 400, 500 and 700 halls. He stated there were several types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual, verbal, and the most recent in-service he received on abuse was yesterday. He stated Resident #1 was staying in 600 hall, and one of the nurses had made a complaint about Resident #1 inappropriately talking but they did not have any abuse incidents involving other residents. He stated he learned from the Administrator on 02/25/2025 about Resident #1 holding the hand of a female resident. He stated he was not told by any LVN about this incident. He said he received in-service on abuse and reporting abuse. He stated if an employee witnessed abuse/suspected abuse, his expectation was the employee should immediately separate the residents and made sure the residents were safe, right away call the abuse coordinator on her phone, and notify her, the physician, and family. He stated all the employees had the abuse coordinator's phone number and it was important to report the abuse to the state and have interventions in place to stop similar incidents from happening. He stated the incidents involving Resident #1 inappropriately touching Resident #22 and #52 were considered as suspected abuse and it had to be reported to the abuse coordinator immediately. Interview with CNA N on 04/02/2025 at 02:37 PM revealed she had worked at the facility for 11 years; she worked on 500 hall. She stated Resident #1 once inappropriately touched her and she reported this to the Administrator. She stated she was not aware of any other incidents where Resident #1 behaved inappropriately with female residents, other than to Resident #52 sometime in February 2025. She said she received in-service on abuse regarding this incident. She stated Resident #1 never went to other resident's rooms. She stated there were several types of abuse such as physical, sexual, verbal, financial, and she would immediately report any suspected abuse to the abuse coordinator and make sure the residents involved were safe. Observation and Interview with Resident #22 on 04/16/2025 at 11:36 AM revealed she was sitting in her wheelchair and watching TV in the common area. She appeared clean and stated she did not know Resident #1. She stated she never had any experience of inappropriate touch/behavior towards her by anybody at the facility. She stated she had no concerns about abuse. Observation and interview with Resident #52 in the dining room on 04/16/2025 at 11:49 AM revealed she was sitting in her wheelchair, ready to have her lunch. Resident #52 stated there was only one incident of an inappropriate behavior since she came to the facility, that was regarding Resident #1 touching her and asking her to come to his room. Resident #52 stated she was not aware of any similar incidents involving Resident #1, she was not afraid of any resident or employees at the facility, and she felt safe. She stated Resident #1 held her hand, asked to go to his room, then moved her hand towards his groin area, she suddenly realized his intention and moved her hand, raised her hand, and got the attention of a nurse. She stated the nurse suddenly separated Resident #1 and took her to her room. Interview with the Administrator on 04/16/2025 at 01:48 PM revealed once she learned about the sexually inappropriate behavior by Resident #1, she interviewed Resident #22 and #52, asked about the inappropriate behavior by Resident #1. The Administrator stated Resident #22 was confused and she did not remember anything about the incident. Resident #52 told the Administrator Resident #1 came to her, grabbed her hand and asked her to go to his room. Resident #52 said no, and the nurse intervened at this point and separated both residents, redirected Resident #1. The Administrator stated Resident #52 never told her about Resident #1 putting Resident #52's hand in Resident #1's groin area. The Administrator stated she was not aware of any previous sexually inappropriate incidents by Resident #1 towards other residents. She stated she had not put any interventions in place from 02/21/2025 till 02/25/2025 regarding Resident #1's behavior but LVN M monitored Resident #1 frequently. She stated once she learned about the incident on 02/25/2025, interventions were in put in place such as: notified medical director, family, 15-minute check on Resident #1, psychiatric services referral, investigated the incident and made sure there were no other similar incidents, provided in service on abuse reporting and reeducated LVN E and LVN M, discharged Resident #1 from the facility on 03/17/2025. She stated she had given verbal waning to LVN E and LVN M for not notifying the abuse coordinator immediately about the abuse incidents which happened on 02/21/2025. Interview with RN S on 04/17/2025 at 12:29 PM revealed there were several types of abuse such as physical, verbal, sexual. She stated inappropriate touch was an example of sexual abuse, and she would immediately report it to the abuse coordinator. She stated not reporting immediately would lead to more abuse incidents. She stated she received in service on abuse twice a month. She stated the only incident she knew was Resident #1 inappropriately touched staff and she did not know of any other incidents. Interview with LVN I on 04/17/2025 at 12:50 PM revealed she was working as a nurse at the facility for 2 years. She stated abuse was in different forms such as verbal, physical, emotional and it could happen between resident to resident or employee to resident. She stated an inappropriate touch was example for sexual abuse, she would immediately report to the Administrator of any abuse because delaying would lead to the abuse to continue. She stated she knew Resident #1 and heard from other staff that he inappropriately touched staff and residents. She stated she was not aware of any similar incidents; she received in service on abuse every two weeks. Interview with ADON H on 04/17/2025 at 2:17 PM revealed there were several types of abuse such as mental, physical, sexual and an example for sexual abuse was inappropriate touch. He stated if he knew about an abuse incident, he made sure the resident was safe, immediately reported to the abuse coordinator/the Administrator because it was a reportable incident to the state. He stated not notifying the abuse coordinator about abuse immediately would put resident at risk for repeated abuse incidents. He stated he received in service every two weeks, most recent one was last week, and there were no incidents of abuse at that time. He stated he learned about Resident #1's inappropriate behavior towards Resident #22 and #52 from the Administrator. Interview with CNA Q on 04/17/25 at 02:33 PM revealed she was working on the 300 hall and abuse was of several types such as sexual, emotional, physical, verbal. An example for sexual abuse was unnecessary touch of body parts, which she would let the Administrator know immediately. She stated not reporting the abuse would lead to repeat such incidents. She stated she received in services on abuse every two weeks. She stated she had one inappropriate touch incident from Resident #1, and she had reported that incident to the abuse coordinator. She stated she was not aware of any abuse incidents at that time. Interview with CNA P on 04/17/25 at 03:13 PM revealed she was working at the facility for a year. She stated abuse had several forms such as physical, verbal, sexual and inappropriate touch was sexual abuse. She stated she would immediately report to the Administrator about any abuse incident and not notifying abuse would put more residents at risk and it affected resident safety. She stated the most recent in-service on abuse was a week ago, she was not familiar with Resident #1, and she was not aware of any such abuse incidents in the facility. Interview with CNA O on 04/17/25 at 03:22 revealed she was working at the facility for 12 years. She stated abuse was of several types such as verbal, physical, sexual, neglect. She stated hitting, sexual touch were examples of abuse. She stated she received in service on abuse a week ago, she would immediately notify the Administrator of aby suspected abuse, not notifying would lead to more abuse. She stated she heard about Resident #1's sexually inappropriate behavior towards others but she had not experienced it, and she was not aware of any other such abuse incidents. Interview with RN K on 04/17/25 at 03:27 PM revealed abuse was of various types such as physical, verbal, sexual, mental. She stated inappropriate touch and comments were examples of sexual abuse. She stated she had received in-services on abuse every two weeks and she received the most recent one last week. She stated she would immediately notify the abuse coordinator whenever she learned about abuse, the risk for not notifying the Administrator about abuse would lead to continue the abuse towards more residents. She stated she was not aware of any abuse incidents at the facility. She stated she was not familiar with Resident #1; she learned from other staff about his inappropriate behavior towards females. Review of the facility's undated abuse policy titled Prohibition of abuse, neglect, and exploitation standards of practice. The Facility will ensure a safe environment for residents by prohibiting ANE. The Facility establishes and implements mechanisms for reporting, investigating, and protecting residents from actual or potential harm . SEXUAL ABUSE: Is non-consensual sexual contact of any type with a resident, including, but not limited to, sexual harassment, sexual coercion, or sexual assault PREVENTION 3. Residents identified as exhibiting abusive behaviors will be assessed and appropriate interventions included in the plan of care Definition: HHSC rules define abuse as: The negligent or willful infliction of injury, unreasonable confinement, intimidation, or punishment with resulting physical or emotional harm or pain to a resident; or sexual abuse, including involuntary or nonconsensual sexual conduct that would constitute an offense under Penal Code §21.08 (indecent exposure) or Penal Code Chapter 22 (assaultive offenses), sexual harassment, sexual coercion, or sexual assault. Sexual abuse: Is non-consensual sexual contact of any type with a resident, including, but not limited to, sexual harassment, sexual coercion, or sexual assault .
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

Abuse Prevention Policies (Tag F0607)

Someone could have died · 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 implement written policies and procedures that prohibi...

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 implement written policies and procedures that prohibit and prevent abuse, neglect and exploitation of 2 (Resident #22 and Resident #52) of 24 residents reviewed for abuse and neglect. 1) LVN E and LVN M failed to immediately report sexual abuse incidents involving Resident #1 against Residents #22 and #52 to the Abuse Coordinator/the Administrator. 2) The facility failed to follow their policy to immediately protect Resident #22 and #52 from harm. 3) LVN E failed to identify sexual abuse when Resident #1 attempted to inappropriately touch Resident #52. A past noncompliance IJ was identified on 04/17/2025, and the IJ template was provided to the facility on [DATE] at 01:45 PM. The noncompliance began on 02/21/2025 and ended on 02/25/2025. The facility had corrected the noncompliance before the Incident investigation began on 03/31/2025. This could place residents at risk for abuse, neglect and exploitation. Findings included: Review of the undated facility policy titled PROHIBITION OF ABUSE, NEGLECT, AND EXPLOITATION (ANE) STANDARDS OF Practice revealed . STANDARDS . This Facility's abuse prohibition program includes standards and practice guidelines that address the essential components of an ANE prohibition program to include screening, training, prevention, identification, investigation, protection, reporting and response. The Facility will ensure a safe environment for residents by prohibiting ANE.The Facility establishes and implements mechanisms for reporting, investigating, and protecting residents from actual or potential harm ABUSE: HHSC rules define abuse as: The negligent or willful infliction of injury, unreasonable confinement, intimidation, or punishment with resulting physical or emotional harm or pain to a resident; or sexual abuse, including involuntary or nonconsensual sexual conduct that would constitute an offense under Penal Code §21.08 (indecent exposure) or Penal Code Chapter 22 (assaultive offenses), sexual harassment, sexual coercion, or sexual assault. SEXUAL ABUSE: Is non-consensual sexual contact of any type with a resident, including, but not limited to, sexual harassment, sexual coercion, or sexual assault . PREVENTION . 4. Facility staff will immediately report and protect the resident if an allegation or observation of abuse has occurred . IDENTIFICATION 1. Potential ANE is identified through, but not limited to: a. Allegations of abuse / neglect or misappropriation of resident property as immediately reported to the Administrator. PROTECTION 1. Residents will be immediately protected from harm. REPORTING 1. Any employee who becomes aware of an allegation of abuse, neglect or misappropriation of resident property, shall report the incident to the abuse coordinator, Administrator immediately. 1. Review of Resident #1's face sheet dated 03/31/2025 reflected Resident #1 was a [AGE] year-old male, with an admission date of 08/01/2023 and diagnoses of Dementia (memory loss), psychotic disturbance (a mental health condition characterized by a loss of touch with reality, leading to distorted perceptions, thoughts and behaviors), and was discharged on 03/17/2025. Review of Resident #1's MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected Resident #1 had a BIMS score of 07 indicating severe cognitive impairment, was independent in transition from sitting to standing position and walking. Review of Resident #1's care plan dated 02/15/2025 reflected Resident #1 displays inappropriate behavior of a sexual manner towards females at times. He has also asked other female residents to go back to his room with him . Monitor resident in activities as needed . Remove other residents from harm and sexual advances as needed . Remove resident from public areas if behavior is demonstrated. 2. Review of Resident #22's face sheet dated 04/02/2025 reflected she was an [AGE] year-old female, with an admission date of 01/20/2022 and diagnoses of Dementia (memory loss), psychotic disturbance (a mental health condition characterized by a loss of touch with reality, leading to distorted perceptions, thoughts and behaviors). Review of Resident #22's MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected Resident #22 had a BIMS score of 02 indicating severe cognitive impairment, was dependent in chair to bed transfers. Review of Resident #22's care plan dated 01/24/2022 reflected resident #22 had a diagnosis of Dementia, 09/19/2022 reflected resident #22 was unable to perform ADL functions independently. 3. Review of Resident #52's face sheet dated 04/02/2025 reflected she was a [AGE] year-old female, with an admission date of 05/31/2024 and diagnoses of encephalopathy (brain disfunction leading to symptoms such as altered mental status, memory loss), Cognitive communication deficit (impaired cognitive process). Review of Resident #52's MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected Resident #52 had a BIMS score of 10 indicating moderate cognitive impairment and she required moderate assistance with chair to bed transfers. Review of Resident #52's care plan dated 01/28/2025 reflected she was taking psychotropic medications for depression and anxiety, had a diagnosis of dementia/Alzheimer's and was at risk for increased confusion. Review of Resident #22's progress note dated 02/21/2025 at 09:36 AM reflected LVN M heard Resident #22 yell No, do not touch me. LVN M observed Resident #1 inappropriately touching Resident #22 and asking her to kiss Resident #1. Review of Resident #52's progress note dated 02/21/2025 at 01:34 PM reflected LVN E observed Resident # 1 grab the hand of Resident #52 and said, come to my room, then attempted to bend over and kiss Resident #52. Record review of the provider investigation report reflected the Administrator completed the investigation on 03/04/2025, notified HHSC, ombudsman, medical director, police department, psych services, responsible parties of Residents #1, #22 and #52, Resident #1's medications were reviewed by the medical director, Resident #22 and Resident #52 were assessed and no emotional distress was noted, staff interviews were conducted, and Resident safe surveys were completed. Record review of the in-service training revealed 63 employees, including LVN E and LVN M, received in service on the topic Reporting abuse neglect and exploitation on 02/25/2025. Record review of the in-service training revealed 92 employees received in-service on the topic ANE reporting response on 03/31/2025. Review of Resident #1's progress note dated 03/04/2025 at 02:53 PM revealed social services had a care plan meeting with Resident #1's family member to address Resident #1's behavior issues and appropriate discharge plan, revealed a 30-day discharge notice was issued to Resident #1's family member. Review of the Q 15-minute check list revealed Resident #1 was checked every 15 minutes from 02/25/25 till 03/17/25. Record review of the physician order dated 02/26/2025 reflected Resident #1 received a new standing order for Prozac 20 mg, once a day, to address his behavior issues. Review of the Quality Assurance Committee sign in sheet revealed the facility had the committee meeting on 04/01/2025 to address the identified issue of staff did not report potential ANE to the administrator immediately. Record review of Resident #1's progress note revealed he had displayed inappropriate behaviors towards females prior to February 2025. An observation and interview with Resident #22 in the facility TV room on 03/31/2025 at 03:59 PM revealed she was sitting in her wheelchair and watching TV. Resident #22 did not remember the alleged incident which happened on 02/21/2025. Resident #22 felt safe at the facility, she was not afraid of any residents or employees. An observation and interview with Resident #52 in her room on 03/31/2025 at 04:15 PM revealed she was sitting in her wheelchair watching TV. Resident #52 stated on an unknown date Resident #1 approached her while she was sitting in her wheelchair in the 500 hallway and told her to go to Resident #1's room, Resident #1 grabbed Resident #52's hands and put her hand in Resident #1's private area. Resident #52 stated she told Resident #1 to stop, and an unknown nurse came and separated both. Resident # 52 stated this was the first such incident, she was not injured, she was not afraid of any residents, and she felt safe. Resident #52 stated Resident #1 did not stay at the same hall and he stayed in 600 hall, she did not have any similar experience from Resident #1 anymore. She stated later ADON H and the Administrator came and spoke to her and assured they were addressing the concern, and she would be safe. Interview with the Administrator on 03/31/2025 at 4:32 PM revealed she had worked at the facility for 3 years and she was the abuse coordinator. She stated she expected all the employees to report to her any suspicion of abuse immediately, all the employees had her contact information available, and all the employees were given in-service training on a regular basis on abuse/neglect. The Administrator stated two female residents, Residents #22 and #52 were inappropriately touched by Resident #1 on 02/21/2025. The Administrator said she first learned about the incident involving Resident # 52 from LVN E on 02/25/2025. As part of the investigation of that incident, she spoke with LVN M on the same day and learned about another incident involving Resident #1 inappropriately touching Resident #22. The Administrator stated both female residents were assessed and they found no injuries, discoloration, pain, or emotional distress. The Administrator stated she educated LVN M on the importance of timely notification of instances where ANE could potentially have taken place. The Administrator stated she instructed staff to complete a 15-minute check on Resident #1 until further notice, reported the alleged incident to the police, and an officer came and spoke with residents. The Administrator stated the incidents were reported to the medical director, responsible parties of each resident who were involved and to the Ombudsman. Resident #1 was referred for psych services and he received new order for medication Prozac. Safe surveys were conducted and ensured no other residents were affected and the residents felt safe and comfortable at the facility. In-service training on ANE and notification was provided to all the employees. The Administrator stated she had a care plan meeting with Resident #1's family and Resident #1 was discharged from the facility. The Administrator stated both incidents involving Residents #22 and #52 were considered as abuse, and abuse was supposed to be reported to the state within 2 hours. She stated she expected the employees to report to her the abuse incident immediately rather than waiting until 02/25/2025. She stated those were the only two incidents involving Resident #1 inappropriately behaving with residents. Interview with LVN E on 03/31/2025 at 05:10 PM revealed she observed the inappropriate behavior of Resident #1 towards Resident #52 on 02/21/2025 when Resident #52 told her about the incident. She stated she did not consider that incident as abuse since Resident #1was attempting to touch Resident #52. She stated she documented the incident in the nurses note on the same day. She stated she sent an email on 02/25/2025 to the Administrator/abuse coordinator notifying her of the alleged incident. She stated she was expected to report any suspected abuse immediately to the abuse coordinator. She stated she was not aware of any sexually inappropriate behavior by Resident #1. She stated she had received in-services on abuse regularly. She stated once she learned about the incident, she separated both residents, redirected Resident #1, and made sure Resident #52 was safe and comfortable. She stated there were several types of abuse such a physical, sexual, verbal, emotional. She stated she would also report abuse to the physician and family of the residents involved. Interview with LVN M on 04/01/2025 at 09:30 AM revealed she had worked at the facility for over two years, and she worked on the 600 hall. She stated abuse was hitting or speaking to a resident inappropriately, and there were several types of abuse such as physical, sexual, emotional. She stated she received in-service training on abuse and the most recent one was in February. She stated she would notify the DON and the Administrator/the abuse coordinator immediately of any suspected abuse/neglect. She stated not immediately reporting abuse can lead to continuation of the abusive behavior towards more residents. She stated if she observed a resident was abused, she would immediately intervene and separate them, redirect the aggressor, and make sure the victim was safe. She stated there would be interventions in place to make sure the aggressor was not repeating the behavior, he/she would be always monitored. She stated she would also report the incident to the physician and family. LVN M stated on 02/21/2025, she was working on the 600 hall nurses' station when she heard Resident #22, who was sitting in her wheelchair on the hallway, yelling don't touch me to Resident #1. She stated she saw Resident #1 touching the side of Resident #22's breast, holding, and pulling her arm, asking her to come to his room. LVN M stated she immediately separated both, took Resident #22 to her room and Resident #1 to his room, educated Resident #1 about inappropriate behaviors and boundaries. She stated she made sure Resident #1 stayed in his room, and monitored him frequently. She stated she did not report this incident to the Abuse Coordinator/the Administrator, but she reported this incident to ADON H, soon after the incident. She stated that was a suspected abuse incident and she was supposed to report it immediately to the abuse coordinator. She stated she had reported this incident she witnessed to the Administrator on 02/25/2025 when the Administrator approached her to ask about a similar incident. An interview with ADON H on 04/01/2025 at 01:34 PM revealed he had worked at the facility for 15 years and he was the supervisor for 400, 500 and 700 halls. He stated there were several types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual, verbal, and the most recent in-service he received on abuse was yesterday. He stated Resident #1 was staying in 600 hall, and one of the nurses had made a complaint about Resident #1 inappropriately talking but they did not have any abuse incidents involving other residents. He stated he learned from the Administrator on 02/25/2025 about Resident #1 holding the hand of a female resident. He stated he was not told by any LVN about this incident. He said he received in-service on abuse and reporting abuse. He stated if an employee witnessed abuse/suspected abuse, his expectation was the employee should immediately separate the residents and made sure the residents were safe, right away call the abuse coordinator on her phone, and notify her, the physician, and family. He stated all the employees had the abuse coordinator's phone number and it was important to report the abuse to the state and have interventions in place to stop similar incidents from happening. He stated the incidents involving Resident #1 inappropriately touching Resident #22 and #52 were considered as suspected abuse and it had to be reported to the abuse coordinator immediately. Interview with CNA N on 04/02/2025 at 02:37 PM revealed she had worked at the facility for 11 years; she worked on 500 hall. She stated Resident #1 once inappropriately touched her and she reported this to the Administrator. She stated she was not aware of any other incidents where Resident #1 behaved inappropriately with female residents, other than to Resident #52 sometime in February 2025. She said she received in-service on abuse regarding this incident. She stated Resident #1 never went to other resident's rooms. She stated there were several types of abuse such as physical, sexual, verbal, financial, and she would immediately report any suspected abuse to the abuse coordinator and make sure the residents involved were safe. Observation and Interview with Resident #22 on 04/16/2025 at 11:36 AM revealed she was sitting in her wheelchair and watching TV in the common area. She appeared clean and stated she did not know Resident #1. she stated she never had any experience of inappropriate touch/behavior towards her by anybody. She stated she had no concerns about abuse. Observation and interview with Resident #52 in the dining room on 04/16/2025 at 11:49 AM revealed she was sitting in her wheelchair, ready to have her lunch. Resident #52 stated there was only one incident of an inappropriate behavior since she came to the facility, that was regarding Resident #1 touching her and asking her to come to his room. Resident #52 stated she was not aware of any similar incidents involving Resident #1, she was not afraid of any resident or employees at the facility, and she felt safe. She stated Resident #1 held her hand, asked to go to his room, then moved her hand towards his groin area, she suddenly realized his intention and moved her hand, raised her hand, and got the attention of a nurse. She stated the nurse suddenly separated Resident #1 and took her to her room. Interview with the Administrator on 04/16/2025 at 01:48 PM revealed once she learned about the sexually inappropriate behavior by Resident #1, she interviewed Resident #22 and #52, asked about the inappropriate behavior by Resident #1. The Administrator stated Resident #22 was confused and she did not remember anything about the incident. Resident #52 told the Administrator Resident #1 came to her, grabbed her hand and asked her to go to his room. Resident #52 said no, and the nurse intervened at this point and separated both residents, redirected Resident #1. The Administrator stated Resident #52 never told her about Resident #1 putting Resident #52's hand in Resident #1's groin area. The Administrator stated she was not aware of any previous sexually inappropriate incidents by Resident #1 towards other residents. She stated she had not put any interventions in place from 02/21/2025 till 02/25/2025 regarding Resident #1's behavior but LVN M monitored Resident #1 frequently. She stated once she learned about the incident on 02/25/2025, interventions were in put in place such as: notified medical director, family, 15-minute check on Resident #1, psychiatric services referral, investigated the incident and made sure there were no other similar incidents, provided in service on abuse reporting and reeducated LVN E and LVN M, discharged Resident #1 from the facility on 03/17/2025. She stated she had given verbal waning to LVN E and LVN M for not notifying the abuse coordinator immediately about the abuse incidents which happened on 02/21/2025. Interview with RN S on 04/17/2025 at 12:29 PM revealed there were several types of abuse such as physical, verbal, sexual. She stated inappropriate touch was an example of sexual abuse, and she would immediately report it to the abuse coordinator. She stated not reporting immediately would lead to more abuse incidents. She stated she received in service on abuse twice a month. She stated the only incident she knew was Resident #1 inappropriately touched staff and she did not know of any other incidents. Interview with LVN I on 04/17/2025 at 12:50 PM revealed she was working as a nurse at the facility for 2 years. She stated abuse was in different forms such as verbal, physical, emotional and it could happen between resident to resident or employee to resident. She stated an inappropriate touch was example for sexual abuse, she would immediately report to the Administrator of any abuse because delaying would lead to the abuse to continue. She stated she knew Resident #1 and heard from other staff that he inappropriately touched staff and residents. She stated she was not aware of any similar incidents; she received in service on abuse every two weeks. Interview with ADON H on 04/17/2025 at 2:17 PM revealed there were several types of abuse such as mental, physical, sexual and an example for sexual abuse was inappropriate touch. He stated if he knew about an abuse incident, he made sure the resident was safe, immediately reported to the abuse coordinator/the Administrator because it was a reportable incident to the state. He stated not notifying the abuse coordinator about abuse immediately would put resident at risk for repeated abuse incidents. He stated he received in service every two weeks, most recent one was last week, and there were no incidents of abuse at that time. He stated he learned about Resident #1's inappropriate behavior towards Resident #22 and #52 from the Administrator. Interview with CNA Q on 04/17/25 at 02:33 PM revealed she was working on the 300 hall and abuse was of several types such as sexual, emotional, physical, verbal. An example for sexual abuse was unnecessary touch of body parts, which she would let the Administrator know immediately. She stated not reporting the abuse would lead to repeat such incidents. She stated she received in services on abuse every two weeks. She stated she had one inappropriate touch incident from Resident #1, and she had reported that incident to the abuse coordinator. She stated she was not aware of any abuse incidents at that time. Interview with CNA P on 04/17/25 at 03:13 PM revealed she was working at the facility for a year. She stated abuse had several forms such as physical, verbal, sexual and inappropriate touch was sexual abuse. She stated she would immediately report to the Administrator about any abuse incident and not notifying abuse would put more residents at risk and it affected resident safety. She stated the most recent in-service on abuse was a week ago, she was not familiar with Resident #1, and she was not aware of any such abuse incidents in the facility. Interview with CNA O on 04/17/25 at 03:22 revealed she was working at the facility for 12 years. She stated abuse was of several types such as verbal, physical, sexual, neglect. She stated hitting, sexual touch were examples of abuse. She stated she received in service on abuse a week ago, she would immediately notify the Administrator of aby suspected abuse, not notifying would lead to more abuse. She stated she heard about Resident #1's sexually inappropriate behavior towards others but she had not experienced it, and she was not aware of any other such abuse incidents. Interview with RN K on 04/17/25 at 03:27 PM revealed abuse was of various types such as physical, verbal, sexual, mental. She stated inappropriate touch and comments were examples of sexual abuse. She stated she had received in-services on abuse every two weeks and she received the most recent one last week. She stated she would immediately notify the abuse coordinator whenever she learned about abuse, the risk for not notifying the Administrator about abuse would lead to continue the abuse towards more residents. She stated she was not aware of any abuse incidents at the facility. She stated she was not familiar with Resident #1; she learned from other staff about his inappropriate behavior towards females.
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

Report Alleged Abuse (Tag F0609)

Someone could have died · This affected multiple residents

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

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure all alleged violations involving abuse and neglect were reported immediately, but not later than 2 hours after the allegations were made, if the events that cause the allegation involve abuse, to the Administrator of the facility and the State Survey Agency for two (Residents #22 and #52) of 24 residents reviewed for abuse and neglect. LVN E and LVN M failed to immediately report the sexual abuse incidents involving Residents #22 and #52 to the Administrator. LVN M observed an incident of suspected sexual abuse involving Resident #1 and Resident #22 on 02/21/2025 at 09:36 AM and LVN E observed another incident of suspected sexual abuse involving Resident #1 and Resident #52 on 02/21/2025 at 01:34 PM. The administrator learned about these incidents on 02/25/2025 and she self-reported the allegation of sexual abuse to the state agency on 02/25/2025 at 04:00 PM. A past noncompliance IJ was identified on 04/17/2025, and the IJ template was provided to the facility on [DATE] at 01:45 PM. The noncompliance began on 02/21/2025 and ended on 02/25/2025. The facility had corrected the noncompliance before the Incident investigation began on 03/31/2025. This failure could place residents at risk of abuse and neglect. Findings included: 1. Review of Resident #1's face sheet dated 03/31/2025 reflected Resident #1 was a [AGE] year-old male, with an admission date of 08/01/2023 and diagnoses of Dementia (memory loss), psychotic disturbance (a mental health condition characterized by a loss of touch with reality, leading to distorted perceptions, thoughts and behaviors), and was discharged on 03/17/2025. Review of Resident #1's MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected Resident #1 had a BIMS score of 07 indicating severe cognitive impairment, was independent in transition from sitting to standing position and walking. Review of Resident #1's care plan dated 02/15/2025 reflected Resident #1 displays inappropriate behavior of a sexual manner towards females at times. He has also asked other female residents to go back to his room with him . Monitor resident in activities as needed . Remove other residents from harm and sexual advances as needed . Remove resident from public areas if behavior is demonstrated. 2. Review of Resident #22's face sheet dated 04/02/2025 reflected she was an [AGE] year-old female, with an admission date of 01/20/2022 and diagnoses of Dementia (memory loss), psychotic disturbance (a mental health condition characterized by a loss of touch with reality, leading to distorted perceptions, thoughts and behaviors). Review of Resident #22's MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected Resident #22 had a BIMS score of 02 indicating severe cognitive impairment, was dependent in chair to bed transfers. Review of Resident #22's care plan dated 01/24/2022 reflected resident #22 had a diagnosis of Dementia, 09/19/2022 reflected resident #22 was unable to perform ADL functions independently. 3. Review of Resident #52's face sheet dated 04/02/2025 reflected she was a [AGE] year-old female, with an admission date of 05/31/2024 and diagnoses of encephalopathy (brain disfunction leading to symptoms such as altered mental status, memory loss), Cognitive communication deficit (impaired cognitive process). Review of Resident #52's MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected Resident #52 had a BIMS score of 10 indicating moderate cognitive impairment and she required moderate assistance with chair to bed transfers. Review of Resident #52's care plan dated 01/28/2025 reflected she was taking psychotropic medications for depression and anxiety, had a diagnosis of dementia/Alzheimer's and was at risk for increased confusion. Review of Resident #22's progress note dated 02/21/2025 at 09:36 AM reflected LVN M heard Resident #22 yell No, do not touch me. LVN M observed Resident #1 inappropriately touching Resident #22 and asking her to kiss Resident #1. Review of Resident #52's progress note dated 02/21/2025 at 01:34 PM reflected LVN E observed Resident # 1 grab the hand of Resident #52 and said, come to my room, then attempted to bend over and kiss Resident #52. Record review of the provider investigation report reflected the Administrator completed the investigation on 03/04/2025, notified HHSC, ombudsman, medical director, police department, psych services, responsible parties of Residents #1, #22 and #52, Resident #1's medications were reviewed by the medical director, Resident #22 and Resident #52 were assessed and no emotional distress was noted, staff interviews were conducted, and Resident safe surveys were completed. Record review of the in-service training revealed 63 employees, including LVN E and LVN M, received in service on the topic Reporting abuse neglect and exploitation on 02/25/2025. Record review of the in-service training revealed 92 employees received in-service on the topic ANE reporting response on 03/31/2025. Review of Resident #1's progress note dated 03/04/2025 at 02:53 PM revealed social services had a care plan meeting with Resident #1's family member to address Resident #1's behavior issues and appropriate discharge plan, revealed a 30-day discharge notice was issued to Resident #1's family member . Review of the Q 15-minute check list revealed Resident #1 was checked every 15 minutes from 02/25/25 till 03/17/25. Record review of the physician order dated 02/26/2025 reflected Resident #1 received a new standing order for Prozac 20 mg, once a day, to address his behavior issues. Review of the Quality Assurance Committee sign in sheet revealed the facility had the committee meeting on 04/01/2025 to address the identified issue of staff did not report potential ANE to the administrator immediately. Record review of Resident #1's progress note revealed he had displayed inappropriate behaviors towards females prior to February 2025. An observation and interview with Resident #22 in the facility TV room on 03/31/2025 at 03:59 PM revealed she was sitting in her wheelchair and watching TV. Resident #22 did not remember the alleged incident which happened on 02/21/2025. Resident #22 felt safe at the facility, she was not afraid of any residents or employees. An observation and interview with Resident #52 in her room on 03/31/2025 at 04:15 PM revealed she was sitting in her wheelchair watching TV. Resident #52 stated on an unknown date Resident #1 approached her while she was sitting in her wheelchair in the 500 hallway and told her to go to Resident #1's room, Resident #1 grabbed Resident #52's hands and put her hand in Resident #1's private area. Resident #52 stated she told Resident #1 to stop, and an unknown nurse came and separated both. Resident # 52 stated this was the first such incident, she was not injured, she was not afraid of any residents, and she felt safe. Resident #52 stated Resident #1 did not stay at the same hall and he stayed in 600 hall, she did not have any similar experience from Resident #1 anymore. She stated later ADON H and the Administrator came and spoke to her and assured they were addressing the concern, and she would be safe. Interview with the Administrator on 03/31/2025 at 4:32 PM revealed she had worked at the facility for 3 years and she was the abuse coordinator. She stated she expected all the employees to report to her any suspicion of abuse immediately, all the employees had her contact information available, and all the employees were given in-service training on a regular basis on abuse/neglect. The Administrator stated two female residents, Residents #22 and #52 were inappropriately touched by Resident #1 on 02/21/2025. The Administrator said she first learned about the incident involving Resident # 52 from LVN E on 02/25/2025. As part of the investigation of that incident, she spoke with LVN M on the same day and learned about another incident involving Resident #1 inappropriately touching Resident #22. The Administrator stated both female residents were assessed and they found no injuries, discoloration, pain, or emotional distress. The Administrator stated she educated LVN M on the importance of timely notification of instances where ANE could potentially have taken place. The Administrator stated she instructed staff to complete a 15-minute check on Resident #1 until further notice, reported the alleged incident to the police, and an officer came and spoke with residents. The Administrator stated the incidents were reported to the medical director, responsible parties of each resident who were involved and to the Ombudsman. Resident #1 was referred for psych services and he received new order for medication Prozac. Safe surveys were conducted and ensured no other residents were affected and the residents felt safe and comfortable at the facility. In-service training on ANE and notification was provided to all the employees. The Administrator stated she had a care plan meeting with Resident #1's family and Resident #1 was discharged from the facility. The Administrator stated both incidents involving Residents #22 and #52 were considered as abuse, and abuse was supposed to be reported to the state within 2 hours. She stated she expected the employees to report to her the abuse incident immediately rather than waiting until 02/25/2025. She stated those were the only two incidents involving Resident #1 inappropriately behaving with residents. Interview with LVN E on 03/31/2025 at 05:10 PM revealed she observed the inappropriate behavior of Resident #1 towards Resident #52 on 02/21/2025 when Resident #52 told her about the incident. She stated she did not consider that incident as abuse since Resident #1was attempting to touch Resident #52. She stated she documented the incident in the nurses note on the same day. She stated she sent an email on 02/25/2025 to the Administrator/abuse coordinator notifying her of the alleged incident. She stated she was expected to report any suspected abuse immediately to the abuse coordinator. She stated she was not aware of any sexually inappropriate behavior by Resident #1. She stated she had received in-services on abuse regularly. She stated once she learned about the incident, she separated both residents, redirected Resident #1, and made sure Resident #52 was safe and comfortable. She stated there were several types of abuse such a physical, sexual, verbal, emotional. She stated she would also report abuse to the physician and family of the residents involved. Interview with LVN M on 04/01/2025 at 09:30 AM revealed she had worked at the facility for over two years, and she worked on the 600 hall. She stated abuse was hitting or speaking to a resident inappropriately, and there were several types of abuse such as physical, sexual, emotional. She stated she received in-service training on abuse and the most recent one was in February. She stated she would notify the DON and the Administrator/the abuse coordinator immediately of any suspected abuse/neglect. She stated not immediately reporting abuse can lead to continuation of the abusive behavior towards more residents. She stated if she observed a resident was abused, she would immediately intervene and separate them, redirect the aggressor, and make sure the victim was safe. She stated there would be interventions in place to make sure the aggressor was not repeating the behavior, he/she would be always monitored. She stated she would also report the incident to the physician and family. LVN M stated on 02/21/2025, she was working on the 600 hall nurses' station when she heard Resident #22, who was sitting in her wheelchair on the hallway, yelling don't touch me to Resident #1. She stated she saw Resident #1 touching the side of Resident #22's breast, holding, and pulling her arm, asking her to come to his room. LVN M stated she immediately separated both, took Resident #22 to her room and Resident #1 to his room, educated Resident #1 about inappropriate behaviors and boundaries. She stated she made sure Resident #1 stayed in his room, and monitored him frequently. She stated she did not report this incident to the Abuse Coordinator/the Administrator, but she reported this incident to ADON H, soon after the incident. She stated that was a suspected abuse incident and she was supposed to report it immediately to the abuse coordinator. She stated she had reported this incident she witnessed to the Administrator on 02/25/2025 when the Administrator approached her to ask about a similar incident. An interview with ADON H on 04/01/2025 at 01:34 PM revealed he had worked at the facility for 15 years and he was the supervisor for 400, 500 and 700 halls. He stated there were several types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual, verbal, and the most recent in-service he received on abuse was yesterday. He stated Resident #1 was staying in 600 hall, and one of the nurses had made a complaint about Resident #1 inappropriately talking but they did not have any abuse incidents involving other residents. He stated he learned from the Administrator on 02/25/2025 about Resident #1 holding the hand of a female resident. He stated he was not told by any LVN about this incident. He said he received in-service on abuse and reporting abuse. He stated if an employee witnessed abuse/suspected abuse, his expectation was the employee should immediately separate the residents and made sure the residents were safe, right away call the abuse coordinator on her phone, and notify her, the physician, and family. He stated all the employees had the abuse coordinator's phone number and it was important to report the abuse to the state and have interventions in place to stop similar incidents from happening. He stated the incidents involving Resident #1 inappropriately touching Resident #22 and #52 were considered as suspected abuse and it had to be reported to the abuse coordinator immediately. Interview with CNA N on 04/02/2025 at 02:37 PM revealed she had worked at the facility for 11 years; she worked on 500 hall. She stated Resident #1 once inappropriately touched her and she reported this to the Administrator. She stated she was not aware of any other incidents where Resident #1 behaved inappropriately with female residents, other than to Resident #52 sometime in February 2025. She said she received in-service on abuse regarding this incident. She stated Resident #1 never went to other resident's rooms. She stated there were several types of abuse such as physical, sexual, verbal, financial, and she would immediately report any suspected abuse to the abuse coordinator and make sure the residents involved were safe. Observation and Interview with Resident #22 on 04/16/2025 at 11:36 AM revealed she was sitting in her wheelchair and watching TV in the common area. She appeared clean and stated she did not know Resident #1. she stated she never had any experience of inappropriate touch/behavior towards her by anybody. She stated she had no concerns about abuse. Observation and interview with Resident #52 in the dining room on 04/16/2025 at 11:49 AM revealed she was sitting in her wheelchair, ready to have her lunch. Resident #52 stated there was only one incident of an inappropriate behavior since she came to the facility, that was regarding Resident #1 touching her and asking her to come to his room. Resident #52 stated she was not aware of any similar incidents involving Resident #1, she was not afraid of any resident or employees at the facility, and she felt safe. She stated Resident #1 held her hand, asked to go to his room, then moved her hand towards his groin area, she suddenly realized his intention and moved her hand, raised her hand, and got the attention of a nurse. She stated the nurse suddenly separated Resident #1 and took her to her room. Interview with the Administrator on 04/16/2025 at 01:48 PM revealed once she learned about the sexually inappropriate behavior by Resident #1, she interviewed Resident #22 and #52, asked about the inappropriate behavior by Resident #1. The Administrator stated Resident #22 was confused and she did not remember anything about the incident. Resident #52 told the Administrator Resident #1 came to her, grabbed her hand and asked her to go to his room. Resident #52 said no, and the nurse intervened at this point and separated both residents, redirected Resident #1. The Administrator stated Resident #52 never told her about Resident #1 putting Resident #52's hand in Resident #1's groin area. The Administrator stated she was not aware of any previous sexually inappropriate incidents by Resident #1 towards other residents. She stated she had not put any interventions in place from 02/21/2025 till 02/25/2025 regarding Resident #1's behavior but LVN M monitored Resident #1 frequently. She stated once she learned about the incident on 02/25/2025, interventions were in put in place such as: notified medical director, family, 15-minute check on Resident #1, psychiatric services referral, investigated the incident and made sure there were no other similar incidents, provided in service on abuse reporting and reeducated LVN E and LVN M, discharged Resident #1 from the facility on 03/17/2025. She stated she had given verbal waning to LVN E and LVN M for not notifying the abuse coordinator immediately about the abuse incidents which happened on 02/21/2025. Interview with RN S on 04/17/2025 at 12:29 PM revealed there were several types of abuse such as physical, verbal, sexual. She stated inappropriate touch was an example of sexual abuse, and she would immediately report it to the abuse coordinator. She stated not reporting immediately would lead to more abuse incidents. She stated she received in service on abuse twice a month. She stated the only incident she knew was Resident #1 inappropriately touched staff and she did not know of any other incidents. Interview with LVN I on 04/17/2025 at 12:50 PM revealed she was working as a nurse at the facility for 2 years. She stated abuse was in different forms such as verbal, physical, emotional and it could happen between resident to resident or employee to resident. She stated an inappropriate touch was example for sexual abuse, she would immediately report to the Administrator of any abuse because delaying would lead to the abuse to continue. She stated she knew Resident #1 and heard from other staff that he inappropriately touched staff and residents. She stated she was not aware of any similar incidents; she received in service on abuse every two weeks. Interview with ADON H on 04/17/2025 at 2:17 PM revealed there were several types of abuse such as mental, physical, sexual and an example for sexual abuse was inappropriate touch. He stated if he knew about an abuse incident, he made sure the resident was safe, immediately reported to the abuse coordinator/the Administrator because it was a reportable incident to the state. He stated not notifying the abuse coordinator about abuse immediately would put resident at risk for repeated abuse incidents. He stated he received in service every two weeks, most recent one was last week, and there were no incidents of abuse at that time. He stated he learned about Resident #1's inappropriate behavior towards Resident #22 and #52 from the Administrator. Interview with CNA Q on 04/17/25 at 02:33 PM revealed she was working on the 300 hall and abuse was of several types such as sexual, emotional, physical, verbal. An example for sexual abuse was unnecessary touch of body parts, which she would let the Administrator know immediately. She stated not reporting the abuse would lead to repeat such incidents. She stated she received in services on abuse every two weeks. She stated she had one inappropriate touch incident from Resident #1, and she had reported that incident to the abuse coordinator. She stated she was not aware of any abuse incidents at that time. Interview with CNA P on 04/17/25 at 03:13 PM revealed she was working at the facility for a year. She stated abuse had several forms such as physical, verbal, sexual and inappropriate touch was sexual abuse. She stated she would immediately report to the Administrator about any abuse incident and not notifying abuse would put more residents at risk and it affected resident safety. She stated the most recent in-service on abuse was a week ago, she was not familiar with Resident #1, and she was not aware of any such abuse incidents in the facility. Interview with CNA O on 04/17/25 at 03:22 revealed she was working at the facility for 12 years. She stated abuse was of several types such as verbal, physical, sexual, neglect. She stated hitting, sexual touch were examples of abuse. She stated she received in service on abuse a week ago, she would immediately notify the Administrator of aby suspected abuse, not notifying would lead to more abuse. She stated she heard about Resident #1's sexually inappropriate behavior towards others but she had not experienced it, and she was not aware of any other such abuse incidents. Interview with RN K on 04/17/25 at 03:27 PM revealed abuse was of various types such as physical, verbal, sexual, mental. She stated inappropriate touch and comments were examples of sexual abuse. She stated she had received in-services on abuse every two weeks and she received the most recent one last week. She stated she would immediately notify the abuse coordinator whenever she learned about abuse, the risk for not notifying the Administrator about abuse would lead to continue the abuse towards more residents. She stated she was not aware of any abuse incidents at the facility. She stated she was not familiar with Resident #1; she learned from other staff about his inappropriate behavior towards females. Review of the facility undated abuse policy titled Prohibition of abuse, neglect, and exploitation standards of practice revealed The Facility will ensure a safe environment for residents by prohibiting ANE. The Facility establishes and implements mechanisms for reporting, investigating, and protecting residents from actual or potential harm. The Facility has designated a person or persons responsible for coordinating and monitoring the ANE prohibition program. This person is the Administrator. Definition: HHSC rules define abuse as: The negligent or willful infliction of injury, unreasonable confinement, intimidation, or punishment with resulting physical or emotional harm or pain to a resident; or sexual abuse, including involuntary or nonconsensual sexual conduct that would constitute an offense under Penal Code §21.08 (indecent exposure) or Penal Code Chapter 22 (assaultive offenses), sexual harassment, sexual coercion, or sexual assault. Sexual abuse: Is non-consensual sexual contact of any type with a resident, including, but not limited to, sexual harassment, sexual coercion, or sexual assault. REPORTING:1. Any employee who becomes aware of an allegation of abuse, neglect, or misappropriation of resident property, shall report the incident to the abuse coordinator, Administrator immediately. 2.Any supervisor of an employee or any employee without a supervisor present at the time of the allegation will report the allegation directly to the Administrator immediately. 3. Failure to do so will result in disciplinary action, up to and including termination. 4.The Facility will report allegations to the state agency in accordance with state law.
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

Incontinence Care (Tag F0690)

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 was incontinent of bladder rece...

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 was incontinent of bladder received appropriate treatment and services to prevent urinary tract infections for 1 (Resident #32) of 1 resident reviewed for catheter care. 1. The facility failed to ensure CNA C and CNA D maintained the foley catheter drainage bag below Resident #32's bladder during a mechanical lift transfer. This failure placed residents at risk for the development and/or worsening of urinary tract infections and dislodgement of the foley catheter. Findings included: Record review of Resident #32's MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected a [AGE] year-old male initially admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. His diagnoses included coronary artery disease, obstructive uropathy (disorder of the urinary tract due to obstructed urinary flow), and hypertension (elevated blood pressure). He had a BIMS score of 04/15 which indicated severe cognitive impairment, required extensive to total assistance with toileting and personal hygiene and was always incontinent of bowel and had a foley catheter. Record review of Resident #32's care plan started date 01/29/25 reflected, Problem. Resident has Foley Catheter and is at risk for increased urinary tract infection. Goal. Foley will remain patent (not kinked) with no signs and symptoms of UTI. approach Keep tubing and foley bag below the bladder . Review of Resident#32's Order Summary report dated 03/12/25, reflected, Foley: Catheter drainage to gravity drainage Observation on 04/01/25 at 11:22 AM revealed CNA C and CNA D entered Resident #32's room to get the resident up for the day. CNA C unhooked the catheter bag from the bed rail and placed it on Resident #32's lap, above the resident's bladder. Urine was observed flowing back toward the resident's bladder. The staff then positioned him over his wheelchair and lowered him into his chair and placed the catheter bag under his wheelchair. In an interview with CNA C on 04/01/25 at 1:12 PM, he stated he was not sure where the catheter bag should have been positioned during the transfer. He stated he was thinking since the catheter bag was on Resident#32's lap, it was below his bladder. He stated having it above the bladder could cause blockage and then he stated the urine could run backwards, and cause development of infection to the resident. In an interview with CNA D on 04/01/25 at 1:22 PM she stated placing Resident#32 foley catheter drainage bag in Residdent#32 lap, was below his bladder . She stated she was trained to always keep the resident's foley catheter below the resident's bladder. She stated failing to do this could cause the urine to back up and might cause an infection. In an interview with the DON on 04/02/25 at 10:27 AM, she stated the facility policy is to keep the foley catheter drainage bag below the resident's bladder all the time. She stated if the CNAs placed the drainage bag on the resident's lap in the sitting position in the sling, during the transfer, for her the drainage bag was below the bladder. She further stated not keeping the foley catheter bag below the residents' bladder, placed them at risk of a urinary tract infection and cross contamination. Record review of the CNA's proficiency check off for residents' peri-care, revealed: CNA C's proficiency check off for peri-care revealed he was proficient in care as of 03/05/25. CNA D's proficiency check off for peri-care revealed she was proficient in care as of 03/07/25. Review of the facility's policy revised 08/2022, and titled, Catheter Care, Urinary reflected Purpose . to prevent urinary catheter-associated complication, including urinary tract infection .To reduce irritation .Maintaining Unobstructed Urine Flow .3. Position the drainage bag lower than the bladder at all times to prevent urine from flowing back into the urinary bladder.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Pharmacy Services (Tag F0755)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

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

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services to ensure the accurate acquiring, receiving, dispensing, and administering of medications for 1 (Nursing Medication cart hall 500 ) of 4 medication carts reviewed for pharmacy services. The facility failed to ensure prompt identification of potential diversion of controlled medications when LVN B did not report a damaged blister pack of Lorazepam 0.5 mg (controlled medication). This failure could place residents at risk of not having their medication available due to possible drug diversion and at risk of not receiving the intended therapeutic benefit of the medication. Findings included: Record review of Resident#5's Quarterly MDS assessment, dated 01/26/25, reflected she was an [AGE] year-old female with admission date of 11/30/23. Resident#5's BIMs score was 6/15 which indicated severe cognition impairment. Her diagnoses included diabetes mellitus (elevated blood sugar), dementia (diseases that affect memory, thinking, and the ability to perform daily activities), hypertension (elevated blood pressure). Record review of Resident#5's Physician order summary report dated March 3, 2025, reflected Lorazepam-Schedule IV tablet; 0.5 mg; amt: 0.5 tab= 0.25 mg; oral once a day-PRN with a start date 03/06/25. An observation on 03/31/25 at 2:06 PM of medication carts revealed the blister pack in medication Cart for Hall 500, for Resident#5's Lorazepam 0.5 mg (controlled medication) had 2 blisters pills area seal broken , taped on the back, and there was pills still in the blisters. Review of the controlled medication count sheet dated 03/31/25 for Resident#5's lorazepam 0.5 mg reflected that the count was accurate when compared to the medications in the drawer. In an interview on 03/31/25 at 2:06 PM LVN B stated she was unaware when the blister pack seal became broken. She stated that the seals are easily torn when they are handled every shift to be counted. She stated the medication was supposed to be discarded if opened to prevent potential diversion of controlled medications. In an interview on 04/01/25 at 11:14 AM, the DON revealed she expected if a blister pack medication seal is broken; the pill should be discarded. The DON stated it would not be acceptable to keep a pill in a blister pack that was opened. The DON stated the risk to residents would be development of infection, and drug diversion. The DON stated charge nurses were responsible to check, every day, the carts for medications with broken seals during the count with the relieving nurses. Review of the facility's Medication Labeling and Storage policy, dated 2001, indicated . 3. If the facility has .deteriorated medications or biologicals, the dispensing pharmacy is contacted for instructions regarding returning or destroying these items.
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 ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain an Infection Prevention and Control Program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 2 of 6 residents (Resident #32 and Resident #222) observed for infection control. The facility failed to ensure CNA C and CNA D used the required PPE for Resident#32 who was on enhanced barrier precautions due to his foley catheter, and wound , while performing a mechanical lift transfer on 04/01/25. The facility failed to ensure CNA C and CNA D used the required PPE for Resident#222 who was on enhanced barrier precautions due to his foley catheter, and wound, while performing a two person assist transfer on 04/02/25. These failures could place the residents at risk of cross-contamination and lapses in infection control. Findings included: 1- Resident #32 Record review of Resident #32's MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected a [AGE] year-old male initially admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. His diagnoses included coronary artery disease, obstructive uropathy (disorder of the urinary tract due to obstructed urinary flow), and hypertension (elevated blood pressure). He had a BIMS score of 04/15 which indicated severe cognitive impairment, required extensive to total assistance with toileting and personal hygiene and was always incontinent of bowel and had a foley catheter. Further review revealed skin conditions: Resident#32 had one state 3 pressure sore, that was present on admission. Record review of Resident #32's care plan started date 01/29/25 reflected, Problem. Requires enhanced barrier precautions. Goal. Reduce potential for infection. Approach. Educate staff on EBP protocol. Maintain EBP supplies in room. In an observation on 04/01/25 at 11:20 AM there was no EBP signage in front of Resident#32's room, and no PPE supplies outside the room. There was an 8x11 paper on Resident#32's closet door with the reading ENHANCED BARRIER PRECAUTION. The closet was situated at the middle of the wall facing Resident #32's bed. In an observation on 04/01/25 at 11:22 AM CNA C and CNA D entered Resident #32's room with the mechanical lift to provide a mechanical lift transfer. Both staff washed their hands and put on gloves, but no gown. Both staff maneuvered the lift around Resident #32's bed and hooked the sling to the lift. CNA C unhooked the catheter bag from the bed frame and placed it on Resident#32's lap. The staff lifted the resident up with the catheter bag and transferred him from the bed to the wheelchair. CNA C then took the urinary drainage bag and placed it on the wheelchair frame. Both CNAs adjusted Resident#32 in his wheelchair. CNA D washed her hands in the bathroom and took the mechanical lift and left the room. CNA C took Resident#32 to the bathroom and proceeded to make Resident#32's bed. In an interview with CNA C on 04/01/25 at 1:12 PM he stated residents who had foley catheters were under enhanced barrier precautions. CNA C stated, he received training on EBP, and did not know that resident transfer was a form of high contact with the resident, that requires to put on gown. He stated the risk would be spreading germs between residents and staff. In an interview with CNA D on 04/01/25 at 1:22 PM she stated, she received training on EBP, and she knew that she was supposed to put on a gown during resident transfer. She stated, she did not put on the gown, because when she entered the room, Resident#32 was ready for transfer with the sling under him. She stated the risk to the resident was development of infection. 2- Resident #222 Record review of Resident #222's admission MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected a [AGE] year-old male initially admitted to the facility on [DATE]. His diagnoses included non-traumatic brain dysfunction, obstructive uropathy (disorder of the urinary tract due to obstructed urinary flow), Wound infection, Parkinson's (progressive neurological disorder), malnutrition. He had a BIMS score of 9 which indicated moderate cognitive impairment. He required extensive to total assistance with toileting and was always incontinent of bowel and had a foley catheter. Resident #222 MDS reflected he had one stage 2 pressure ulcer. Record review of Resident #222's care plan started date 01/29/25, updated on 4/2/25 reflected the following, Problem: [Resident #222] Requires enhanced barrier precautions. Goal: Reduce the potential for infection. Approach: Educate staff on EBP protocol, Maintain PPE supplies in room, Place pink magnet on door frame. Record review of Resident #222's Physician Order dated 3/26/25 reflected, Enhanced Barrier precaution, every shift, day, evening. In an observation on 04/02/25 at 11:20 AM there was no EBP signage in front of Resident#222's room, and no PPE supplies outside the room. There was an 8x11 paper on Resident#222's closet door with the reading ENHANCED BARRIER PRECAUTION. There was a rectangular pink magnet placed on the door outside of Resident #222's room. In an observation on 04/02/25 at 9:43 AM CNA C and CNA D entered Resident #222's room. Both staff washed their hands and donned gloves, but did not wear the gown. CNA C tied the gait belt around Resident #222's waist. The two CNAs helped Resident #222 transfer from the bed to the wheelchair using the gait belt. After the transfer was completed, they readjusted Resident #222's position in the wheelchair and CNA C took off the gait belt. CNA C and CNA D then proceeded to remove gloves, performed hand hygiene, and exited the resident room. In an interview with CNA C and CNA D on 04/02/25 at 09:52 AM, CNA C stated residents who had foley catheters had enhanced barrier precautions. They stated the pink magnet outside the resident door signifies that resident is on EBP. They stated as CNAs they had received training on EBP, and it did not indicate wearing gowns while transferring a resident on EBP since it was not a high contact activity. They stated they performed hand hygiene, donned gloves, and mask. Both CNAs stated because the transfer involves close contact with the resident with attaching and removing the gait belt as well as providing support during the actual transfer, the risk of not donning appropriate PPE during EBP could cause increased infection and possibility of spreading germs between residents and staff. In an interview with the DON on 04/02/25 at 10:27 AM, she stated she had been working in the facility for about a month. The DON stated per the facility policy resident's transfer was not a form of high contact activity with the resident in EBP. She further stated staff were not required to wear gowns for the resident transfer. She stated the risk of not wearing appropriate PPE was potential spread of infection. Record review of in-service documents revealed the facility did in service on EBP for staff on 11/29/24. The in-service topic covered: How Do I know if EBP needs to be used? EBP needs to be donned (put on) prior to beginning any high contact resident care activity on residents with chronic wounds and/or indwelling medical devices. What is not considered a high contact resident care activity? Delivering or picking up a meal tray. Passing ice water. Taking meal orders for tray ticket. Delivering supplies or other items to the resident rooms. Placing requested items within resident reach. Any task that does not require close contact with resident. Record review of the facility's policy, Enhanced Barrier Precautions, with revision date August 2022, reflected, Enhanced barrier precautions (EBPs) are utilized to prevent the spread of transmission of multidrug-resistant organisms .EBPs employ targeted gown and gloves use during high contact resident care activities .3. Examples of high contact care activities requiring the use of gown and gloves for EBPs including a. dressing; b. Bathing/showering; d. changing linens; e. changing briefs or assisting with toileting; f. device care or use (central line, urinary catheter .etc ) and g. wound care.9. staff are trained prior to caring for residents on EBP. 10. Signs are posted on the door or wall outside the resident room indicating the type of precautions and PPE required. Record Review of US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention website Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) about Enhanced Barrier Precautions in Nursing Homes | LTCFs | CDC dated June 28, 2024 reflected the following, Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) about Enhanced Barrier Precautions in Nursing Homes .2. Enhanced Barrier Precautions expand the use of gown and gloves beyond anticipated blood and body fluid exposures. They focus on use of gown and gloves during high-contact resident care activities that have been demonstrated to result in transfer of MDROs to hands and clothing of healthcare personnel, even if blood and body fluid exposure is not anticipated. Enhanced Barrier Precautions are recommended for residents known to be colonized or infected with a MDRO as well as those at increased risk of MDRO acquisition (e.g., residents with wounds or indwelling medical devices). Standard Precautions still apply while using Enhanced Barrier Precautions. For example, if splashes and sprays are anticipated during the high-contact care activity, face protection should be used in addition to the gown and gloves . Record Review of updated guidance from CMS Center for Clinical Standards and Quality/Quality, Safety & Oversight Group Ref: QSO-24-08-NH dated march 20,2024 reflected, . EBP are used in conjunction with standard precautions and expand the use of PPE to donning of gown and gloves during high-contact resident care activities that provide opportunities for transfer of MDROs to staff hands and clothing .For residents for whom EBP are indicated, EBP is employed when performing the following high-contact resident care activities: o Transferring
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

MDS Data Transmission (Tag F0640)

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 ensure a discharge MDS was electronically completed and transmitted...

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 a discharge MDS was electronically completed and transmitted to the CMS System within 14 days after completion for one (Resident #16) of one resident reviewed for discharge assessments. The facility failed to complete and transmit Resident #16's discharge MDS assessment within 14 days of completion. This failure could place the residents at risk of having incomplete records. Findings include: Review of Resident #16's face sheet, dated 04/02/25, reflected Resident #16 was an [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] and discharged from the facility on 12/05/2024. Review of Resident #16's MDS assessments on 04/02/25 revealed Resident #16 did not have a discharge MDS assessment completed. This MDS record was identified as greater than 120 days late on the resident assessment facility task. An interview on 04/02/25 at 09:41 AM with MDS LVN E revealed Resident #16 was discharged from the facility on 12/05/2024. LVN E stated that she was responsible for completing all MDS assessments. She stated she completed the MDS Discharge assessment on 12/9/24; however, the MDS assessment did not have an RN signature and was not transmitted to CMS. She stated she was aware that MDS assessments needed to be completed in 7 days after resident discharge and transmitted to CMS within 14 days of MDS assessment completion. Failure to complete and transmit MDS assessment in a stipulated time will lead to inaccurate resident census. MDS LVN E stated she will complete and transmit Resident #16's MDS assessment after the interview was completed. In an interview on 04/02/25 at 10:24 AM the DON stated that she was the DON in the facility for the last three weeks. She stated the Facility MDS Nurse was responsible for completing all MDS assessments in a timely manner and it was her expectation that all the MDS assessments were completed and transmitted to CMS within the stipulated time frame. She stated that failure to do so will lead to CMS not being aware if the resident was still residing in the facility. She added as a DON of the facility, she ensured that she signed on all MDS assessments that needed to be transmitted to CMS on a daily basis since she started the DON role of the facility. Review of facility's policy titled Resident Assessment revised on January 12, 2020 reflected, . It is the Standard of Care at this facility to conduct, initially and periodically, a comprehensive, accurate assessment of each resident's functional capacity utilizing the Minimum Data Set (MDS) according to the guidelines set forth in the Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) manual .Comprehensive assessments will be completed not less often than once every 12 months (366 days), within 14 calendar days after admission, or within 14 days of a significant change determination . Tracking records and OBRA assessments will be transmitted electronically, in a CMS specified format, within 14 days of the assessment completion. MDS transmission Validation Reports will be saved electronically.
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Comprehensive Care Plan (Tag F0656)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

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

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each Resident, consistent with Resident rights, that include measurable objectives and time frames to meet Residents' mental and psychosocial needs for 1 (Resident #32) of 4 residents reviewed for care plans. The facility did not develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan to address Resident # 32's pressure ulcers. This failure could place residents at risk of not having a plan developed to address care needs. Findings include: Record review of Resident #32's MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #32 was a [AGE] year-old male initially admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. Relevant diagnoses included Anemia (Lower amount of healthy red blood cells), Hypertension (High blood pressure), Heart Failure, Hyperlipidemia (high lipid levels ) and Respiratory failure (condition in which lungs are unable to perform their primary function: moving oxygen into the bloodstream and removing carbon dioxide). It also revealed Resident#32 had one Stage 3 pressure ulcer (stage 3 pressure ulcer is a localized area of skin damage that develops when prolonged pressure is applied to the body involving full thickness skin loss, exposing subcutaneous fat) that was present upon admission/entry or reentry. Review of Resident #32's Comprehensive Care Plan, last reviewed 1/29/2025, reflected there was no care plan that addressed Resident #32's pressure ulcer. Review of Resident #32's Physician order dated 3/27/2025 reflected, Coccyx area (tailbone)wound. Clean with saline, pat dry . once a day. Review of Resident #32's Physician order dated 3/20/2025 reflected, Resident Air loss mattress. Interview with LVN G on 04/02/25 at 09:28 AM revealed that Resident #32 had a stage 3 pressure ulcer on his coccyx. She stated that there were wound care orders for Resident #32 to be performed daily. She stated that Resident #32's pressure ulcer should be care planned, but she was not able to find a care plan on Resident #32's electronic health record. She stated the risk of not care planning was lack of communication of possible treatments or approaches for the mentioned care area and failure to provide personalized care to the resident. Interview with MDS LVN E on 04/02/25 at 09:41 AM revealed ADONs and herself were responsible for care planning chronic conditions for the residents. She stated that Resident #32 had a pressure ulcer when he admitted back to the facility from the hospital in March 2025. She stated Resident #32 had pressure ulcer listed on his MDS and wound treatment on physician orders and should have been care planned for it. She also stated the risk for not care planning was potential to miss out on patient centered care and possible worsening of pressure ulcers. Interview with the DON on 04/02/25 at 10:19 AM revealed Nurses, MDS coordinator and ADONs were responsible for care planning and her expectation was that resident care needs needed to be care planned accurately. She stated that care plans paint the story of the resident and is a blueprint for resident care. She stated that there was no great risk for not care planning the pressure ulcer since Resident #32 had wound orders and the nurses would know to take care of it and it would not be missed. Interview with ADON A on 04/02/25 at 11:21 AM revealed that the DON, ADONs and MDS LVN were responsible for care planning. She stated that Resident #32 had a pressure ulcer that needed to be care planned upon his readmission. She stated not care planning can result in not providing adequate, resident centered care to the residents. Record review of facility policy titled, Care planning -Interdisciplinary team revised March 2022, reflected Comprehensive, patient centered care plans are based on resident assessment and developed by the inter disciplinary team.
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0760 (Tag F0760)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

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

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 all residents were free of significant medication errors for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #38) reviewed for pharmacy. The facility failed to ensure the medication Lisinopril tablet 2.5 mg, twice a day was given to Resident #38 on 03/29/2025, 03/30/2025 and 03/31/2025. This failure could place residents at risk of medical complications and not receiving the therapeutic effects of their medications. Findings included: Record review of Resident #38's face sheet dated 04/01/2025 revealed he was an [AGE] year-old male with an admission date of 03/10/2025 with diagnoses of hypertension (high blood pressure) and heart failure. Record review of Resident #38's MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed he had a BIMS score of 09 indicating moderate cognitive impairment. Resident #38 needed moderate assistance with chair to bed and toilet transfers. Record review of Resident #38's care plan dated 03/13/2025 revealed he had a history of CHF and is at risk for SOB, chest pain, increased edema (swelling due to fluid buildup in the body) and fluctuations in blood pressure and a diagnosis of hypertension. Record review of Resident #38's order summary dated 04/01/2025 revealed he had a standing order for Lisinopril (medication for lowering blood pressure) 2.5 mg tablet twice a day: 8 AM and 8 PM every day, starting 03/10/2025. Review revealed no physician orders to hold the medication if the blood pressure was outside of certain parameters. Record review of Resident #38's MAR dated 04/01/2025 for Lisinopril 2.5 mg revealed this medication was not administered on 03/29/2025, 03/30/2025 and 03/31/2025 to Resident #38 due to the drug item not available and awaiting pharmacy delivery. The Blood Pressure reading on 03/29/2025 at 8:00 AM was 136/69 and 8:00 PM was 136/63. There was no blood pressure documented for 03/30/2025. On 03/31/2025 the blood pressure for 08:00 AM was 160/71 and 8:00 PM was 148/63. An observation and Interview with Resident #38 on 03/31/2025 at 11:46 AM in his room revealed he was sitting in his wheelchair; oxygen was in use. Resident #38 appeared in clean clothes and he presented no signs and symptoms of pain, discomfort. Resident #38 stated he had a diagnosis of high blood pressure, and he did not receive his medication Lisinopril on 03/30/2025, he could not remember if he received Lisinopril that day morning or the previous days. Resident #38 stated a nurse told him that the medication was not available at the facility. Resident #38 stated he had no negative effects related to high blood pressure at the time of the interview. An interview with the Administrator on 04/01/2025 at 01: 04 PM revealed she had worked at the facility for 3 years. She stated she expected all the residents to receive their medications as per the order from the physician and not getting medications can lead to health issues. She stated she expected all the nurses to make sure the medications were administered to the residents they were responsible for and to notify the supervisor of any concerns they had. She stated the DON was responsible to make sure the nurses were trained, doing their job, and were administering the medications to the residents as per the physician's order. She sated she was not aware that Resident #38 was not getting blood pressure medication lisinopril for 3 days. An interview with RN ADON on 04/01/2025 at 01:34 PM revealed he was the supervisor for Resident #38's hall. He stated he had worked at the facility for 15 years. He stated he expected all the residents to receive their medications as per the physician's order and all the nurses were responsible to give the medications as per the order. He stated he expected the nurses who provided medications to contact the pharmacy and reorder the medications at least 72 hours before the medication ran out. He stated if there was a problem in getting the medications in a timely manner or were no medications available, he expected the nurse to contact the pharmacy to find out the reason, notify the supervisor and physician so that the physician can order another medication or advise what to do. He stated he was not aware that Resident #38 did not receive his Lisinopril for 3 days. He stated Resident #38 had a diagnosis of hypertension and not receiving this medication can lead to high blood pressure, affect his kidney and all organ systems negatively, it can lead to a stroke and even death. He stated he expected the nurses to report to the supervisor if there was a problem in getting a medication from the pharmacy and the medication not being available was not an acceptable excuse not to give the medication to Resident #38. He stated all the nurses were given regular in-service training on medication administration and knowing what to do when a medication was not available was considered as a basic nursing knowledge. He stated he was ultimately responsible to make sure all the residents in his hall received their medications as per the physician's order. An interview with RN L on 04/01/2025 at 02:41 PM revealed she had worked at the facility since 2017 and she provided care to Resident #38. She stated Resident #38's Lisinopril was available today but he was not given his Lisinopril medication for the morning because his blood pressure was low. She stated if a medication was not available, she would contact the pharmacy. She said if there was a problem in getting the medication timely, she would immediately notify the physician so that the physician can order another medication or give advice as what to do next. She stated Resident # 38 was diagnosed with high blood pressure and not getting medication can affect the resident negatively, and can lead to stroke. She stated Resident #38 required vitals checked at least once a during the shift. She stated the nurse who was working on Resident #38's hall was responsible to make sure there was enough medicine and if not to call the pharmacy/physician and notify the ADON/supervisor. She stated she did not remember when the last time she received an in service on medication administration was, but she learned the basics about medication administration from the nursing school. An interview with LVN I on 04/01/2025 at 02:56 PM revealed she had worked at the facility for 6 years and she provided care to Resident # 38. She stated she worked the 6 PM to 10 PM shift on 03/29/2025, and she noticed there was no medication Lisinopril available. She said she notified the resident, but she did not contact the pharmacy, the physician, or her supervisor about it. She sated it was not an acceptable excuse not to give a resident their medication because it was not available. She said a medication had to be reordered by contacting the pharmacy when the nurse learns that there were only 7 pills left. She stated if a medication was not available, she was expected to contact the pharmacy, notify the physician and her supervisor. She stated there were no Lisinopril tablets available at the facility for emergency purpose on 03/29/2025. She stated not getting Lisinopril can cause a resident to have high blood pressure and stroke. She stated she received in service training on medication administration but did not remember when the last time she received it was. An interview with the DON on 04/02/2025 at 10:32 AM revealed she had worked at the facility for 4 weeks. She stated she was not aware that Resident #38 was not given his Lisinopril medication for 3 days. She stated she expected all the residents to receive their medications as per the order from the physician and the nurses were responsible to make sure the medication was given to the resident. She stated if a medication was not available, the nurse was expected to contact the pharmacy to reorder, notify the physician when there was no response from the pharmacy and get advice from the doctor as what to do next. She stated not getting blood pressure medication can lead to high blood pressure and stroke. She stated she was responsible to make sure the nurses were doing their job, giving all the medicines to the residents as per the physician's orders. She stated she expected the nurses to order the medications 7 days before the medications ran out. She stated since she started working at the facility, she had meetings with the nurses to train them on medication administration. An interview with RN K on 04/02/2025 at 11:35 AM revealed she had worked at the facility since October 2024, and she provided care to Resident #38 on 03/30/2025 during day shift. She stated Lisinopril was not available at the facility that day, and the resident did not receive that medication during her shift. She stated she contacted the pharmacy but did not get the medication, and she did not call the physician or anybody else at the facility. She stated not getting Lisinopril can cause the blood pressure to go up and can increase the risk for a stroke. She stated the nurse on duty was responsible to give all the medications to the residents as per the physician's order, reorder the medications by contacting the pharmacy, make follow up contacts with the pharmacy regarding reorders and notify the physician and supervisor if a medication was not available to administer. She stated there was no Lisinopril available at the facility for emergency purpose on 03/30/2025. An attempted telephone interview with LVN J on 04/02/2025 at 12:33 PM received no response, left a voice mail requesting a call back. A telephone interview with Resident #38's NP on 04/02/2025 at 02:22 PM revealed she was providing care to Resident #38. She stated she was not aware that Resident #38 did not receive medication Lisinopril for 3 days as per the physician's order, and nobody from the facility contacted her regarding the same. She stated not getting Lisinopril medication can cause high blood pressure and even stroke to Resident #38. She stated she expected the facility to notify her if a resident was going without a medication so that she could order another medication. Review of the facility policy titled Administering Medications dated April 2019 reflected Medications are administered in a safe and timely manner, and as prescribed. The director of nursing services supervises and directs all personnel who administer medications, . Medications are administered in accordance with prescriber orders, including any required time frame.
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

Food Safety (Tag F0812)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for the facili...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for the facility's only kitchen. The facility failed to ensure food items in the facility walk-in freezer were covered, labeled, and dated. These failures could affect residents who received their meals from the facility's only kitchen, by placing them at risk for food-borne illness, and food contamination. Findings included: Observation on 03/31/25 at 09:41 AM of the facility walk-in freezer revealed: 1. Frozen ground beef patties inside a cardboard box were not covered and not dated. 2. Frozen oatmeal raisin cookie dough inside a plastic bag in a cardboard box was left open. 3. Frozen meat that looked like Chicken breasts were out of their original packaging and were not dated or labeled. In an interview on 03/31/25 at 09:46 AM Assistant [NAME] F revealed everyone in the kitchen including cooks, dietary aides, and the dietary manager was responsible for covering, dating, and labeling food items in the kitchen. She stated all food items should be covered, labeled, and dated. She added they should add expiration dates and use by dates on opened food items so they can use the food items before expiry. She stated not covering, labeling, and dating food items could cause cross contamination and potentially cause illness in residents. In an interview on 04/01/25 at 01:26 PM, the Dietary Manager stated everyone including cooks and herself were responsible for covering, dating, and labeling all food items in the kitchen. She stated her expectation was all food items in the kitchen should be marked with received date once they arrive at the facility and used by date for leftovers and opened food items. She stated it was her expectation that all food items should be appropriately dated, covered, and labeled by the kitchen staff. She stated that they had the food delivery truck on 03/31/25 and the staff was probably in the process of rearranging items but that should not be an excuse for not covering, labeling, or dating food items in the kitchen. She stated the risk of not dating, labeling, covering food items was cross contamination resulting in food borne illness. She added as the dietary manager, she was responsible for providing in-service regarding dating, covering and labeling food items appropriately. Review of facility's policy titled Food receiving and Storage revised December 2008 reflected, Foods shall be received and stored in a manner that complies with safe food handling practices .7. All foods stored in the refrigerator or freezer will be covered, labeled, and dated (use by date) . Review of the Food and Drug Administration Food Code, dated 2022, reflected, .3-302.12 Food Storage Containers, Identified with Common Name of Food. Except for containers holding food that can be readily and unmistakably recognized such as dry pasta, working containers holding food or food ingredients that are removed from their original packages for use in the food establishment, such as cooking oils, flour, herbs, potato flakes, salt, spices, and sugar shall be identified with the common name of the food 3-305.11 Food Storage.(B) .refrigerated, ready-to eat time/temperature control for safety food prepared and packaged by a food processing plant shall be clearly marked, at the time the original container is opened in a food establishment and if the food is held for more than 24 hours, to indicate the date or day by which the food shall be consumed on the premises, sold, or discarded, based on the temperature and time combinations specified in (A) of this section and: (1) The day the original container is opened in the food establishment shall be counted as Day 1; and (2) The day or date marked by the food establishment may not exceed a manufacturer's use-by date if the manufacturer determined the use-by date based on food safety
Feb 2024 6 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

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

Respiratory Care (Tag F0695)

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 needed respiratory care was provi...

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 needed respiratory care was provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan and the residents' goals and preferences for 1 of 3 Residents (Resident #13) reviewed for respiratory care. The facility failed to ensure Resident #13's nasal cannula tubing was labeled or dated. This failure could place residents at risk of respiratory infections. The finding were: Record review of Resident #13's Annual MDS assessment, dated 1/14/2024, reflected Resident #13 was an [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #13's relevant diagnoses included Stroke, Chronic Obstructive pulmonary disease (lung disease that block airflow and make it difficult to breathe), Diabetes mellitus (high blood sugar levels) and Hyperlipidemia (high levels of lipid in blood). Resident #13 was on oxygen therapy. Record review of Resident #13's comprehensive care plan, dated 1/15/2024, reflected Resident #13 was on oxygen therapy for episodes of Shortness of Breath and was at risk for respiratory distress or failure and the resident had oxygen at 1-4 Liter per minute via nasal cannula and apply oxygen per order, encourage the resident to take slow and deep breaths. Record review of Resident #13 Physician order, dated 1/11/2024, reflected continuous oxygen at 1 - 4 Liter per minute via nasal cannula every shift, day or evening. Record review of Resident #13 Physician order, dated 1/14/2024, reflected change oxygen tubing and humidifier bottle weekly (when in use) once a day on Sunday or as needed on night shift. Observation on 02/27/24 at 11:11 AM revealed Resident #13 was on oxygen therapy and the nasal cannula tubing was not labeled or dated. In an interview with RN J on 02/27/2024 at 11:39 AM revealed all oxygen delivery equipment which included oxygen tubing and humidifier bottle should be dated and labeled. She reported oxygen nasal cannula tubing was to be changed on the night shift every Sunday and nurses were responsible for changing and dating the tubing. She stated not dating and labeling nasal cannula tubing could lead to infection control issues. She also stated she would change the nasal cannula tubing immediately. In an interview with the DON on 2/28/24 at 3:07 PM revealed it was her expectation to label and date all oxygen equipment. She stated it was done by Night shift nurses on a weekly basis. The risk of not dating nasal cannula tubing could lead to lapses in infection control and it was nursing protocol to date all medical equipment a resident used. Record review of the facility's policy for oxygen administration, revised October 2010, reflected Verify that there is a physician's order for this procedure. Review the physician's order or facility protocol for oxygen administration.
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0561 (Tag F0561)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure residents had the right to and the facility promoted and facilitated resident self-determination trough support of resid...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure residents had the right to and the facility promoted and facilitated resident self-determination trough support of resident choice for 4 of 24 residents reviewed for resident rights. The facility failed to ensure residents were informed and provided the right to eat in the dining room. This deficient practice could place residents at risk of having their rights violated, poor self-esteem and socialization and a poor quality of life. Findings include: Interview with CNA K on 02/27/2024 at 11:45 AM revealed all residents ate in their rooms for dinner and were not taken to the dining room. CNA K stated she wasn't sure why and some residents requested to eat in the dining room in the past but she wasn't sure which residents. CNA K stated she would be willing to take the residents to the dining room if the facility chose to serve dinner in the dining room. Interview with RN J on 02/27/2024 at 12:55 PM revealed she was assigned to lunch today and residents often ate in the dining room for lunch. RN J stated she worked the 6 AM-6 PM shift and would be assigned to dinner on some days. RN J stated she had not seen any resident go to the dining room for dinner service for a long time, at least more than a year. RN J was not sure if residents were given a choice to go to the dining room for dinner rather than receive a room tray. Interview with [NAME] K on 02/28/2024 at 8:54 AM revealed he worked in the facility for 9 years. [NAME] K stated there was no dinning service in the dining hall and all trays would be pre-plated and pre-portioned in the kitchen and then sent to resident rooms on carts. [NAME] K was not able to answer how long there had been no dining service for evening meals in the facility. In a confidential group, interview revealed the dining room wasn't open in the evenings or on Saturdays due to facility not having enough staff. Four people stated they would like to dine in the dining room or have the option to. Interview with the Dietary Manager on 02/28/2024 at 11:30 AM revealed he worked in the facility for about 3 weeks and had not seen any resident served dinner in the dining room. The Dietary Manager stated he questioned it to himself, about why the residents were not served in the dining room for dinner. The Dietary Manager stated he spoke with the DON about it and the DON stated the dining room was supposed to be open to all three meals, but was dependent on nurses, CNA's and residents. Interview with the DON and Administrator on 02/28/2024 at 11:55 AM revealed the Dietary Manager had not spoken with them about serving meals in the dining room for dinner service. The DON stated the dining room was always open. The DON could not say how long residents were not eating in the dining room for dinner service. The DON was not able to tell if any residents submitted a grievance about the dinner dining service. The DON stated it was the resident's right to choose where they wanted to eat. The Administrator stated they would revisit how many residents were willing to eat in the dining room and re-educate nursing staff to check with residents. The Administrator stated they took resident rights very seriously and would ensure the residents had freedom to choose where they would like their meals to be served. Interview with the Activities Director on 02/28/2024 at 1:19 PM revealed she heard from residents the facility wasn't using the dining room for dinner service. The Activities Director stated when she heard concerns in Resident Council or if a resident went to her with a concern, then she would let whoever's department that was the subject of the concern know. The Activities Director stated she expected the department the concern applied to, to follow up with the resident. The Activities Director stated sometimes she would let staff know verbally during their morning meetings or when passing in the hall about resident concerns. The Activities Director stated she didn't follow up with residents unless it was a concern regarding her department. The Activities Director stated she communicated the resident's concern of the facility not having the dining room open for dinner service. The Activities Director stated some residents preferred to eat dinner in the dining room. The Activities Director wasn't sure why dinner service did not take place in the dining room and stated she brought the concern to the attention of the Administrator and Dietary Manager. Interview on 02/28/2024 at 4:39 PM with CNA O revealed she thought residents weren't eating in the dining room due to the last wave of COVID in the community, residents wanted to be in their room because they didn't want to get sick. CNA O stated she didn't have to ask some residents if they wanted to eat in the dining room because they usually stayed in their room. Observation on 02/28/2024 revealed one resident sitting in dining room with RN J and another resident sitting at a table with her family member. Interview on 02/28/2024 at 5:08 PM with the resident in the dining room revealed she had been in the facility for about a week and a half. The resident and her family member stated the dining room was usually not opened for dinner, and it was their first time eating in the dining room. Resident stated she enjoyed eating in the dining room for breakfast and lunch to socialize with others. Resident stated they asked about dining in the dining room for dinner but was told the dining room wasn't for dinner. Resident stated she could not recall who told her that the dining room wasn't used for dinner or if they were given a reason why. Resident stated she wasn't sure why the dining room was open for dinner today and was surprised that it was open today. Record review of the facility's, undated, policy titled Resident Rights reflected a resident has a right to participate in activities inside and outside the facility.
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

Grievances (Tag F0585)

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 ensure residents had the right to and the facility made prompt efforts to res...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on, interview and record review the facility ensure residents had the right to and the facility made prompt efforts to resolve grievances the resident may for 3 of 24 residents (Residents #18, #32, #50) reviewed for resident rights. The facility failed to ensure residents received responses to grievances and concerns. This deficient practice could place residents at risk of having their rights violated, not receive responses to their grievance, a decreased of self-worth and a decline in quality of life. Findings include: 1. Record review of Resident #18's Comprehensive MDS, dated [DATE], reflected a [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #18 had diagnoses which included unspecified Dementia, Coronary Artery Disease, Hypertension, Hyperlipidemia and Diabetes Mellitus. Resident #18 had a BIMS score of 10, which indicated moderate cognitive impairment. 2. Record review of Resident #32's Quarterly MDS, dated [DATE], reflected an [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #32 had a BIMS score of 15, which indicated no cognitive impairment. Record review of Resident #32's Continuity of Care Document, dated 03/04/2024, reflected diagnoses which included sepsis (blood poisoning), acute kidney failure, hyperlipidemia (high level of fats in blood), and muscle weakness. 3. Record review of Resident #50's Comprehensive MDS, dated [DATE], reflected an [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. Resident #50 had diagnoses which included unspecified atrial fibrillation (irregular or rapid heart rhythm), hypertension and Gastroesophageal Reflux disease or ulcer. Resident #50 had a BIMS score of 15, which indicated no cognitive impairment. Record review of the facility's grievance log, dated February 2024, reflected one grievance, dated 02/22/24, with the name of Resident Council and the name of person investigating was the DON. Record review of the facility's grievance log, dated December 2023, reflected one grievance, dated 01/02/23, with the name of resident Resident Council and the name of person investigating was the Administrator. Record review of the grievance log, dated November 2023, reflected one grievance, dated 11/20/23, written by a family member of resident, with the Administrator listed as investigating. Record review of the grievance log reflected no grievances for January 2024, September 2023, and October 2023. Record review of the Resident Council meeting minutes for 02/01/2024 reflected residents requested to speak with the DON. In a document titled Response to Resident Council dated 02/01/2024 from the Administrator reflected the DON would come talk with residents regarding their questions and residents could fill out a [NAME] or speak to DON at any time. Resident council meeting minutes, dated 01/02/2024, reflected for complaints Residents said they have noticed a change in food with a new dietary manager, not bad just different. Record review of the Resident council meeting minutes reflected a document titled Response to Resident Council, dated 01/02/2024 which stated the facility hired a new dietary manager. Record review of Resident Council meeting minutes, dated 12/05/2023, reflected no complaints. In a confidential group interview revealed residents were not aware of how to file a grievance and stated they were not contacted regarding grievances and would not know if their concern was resolved or not. Confidential group interview revealed the Activities Director attended the Resident Council meetings and would write down some concerns, but the residents didn't hear back about the concern. Resident's concerns included resident rights, choices, and customer service. Interview with the Activities Director on 02/28/2024 at 1:19 PM revealed residents did not typically file grievances because they preferred to handle the grievance verbally. The Activities Director stated when she heard concerns in Resident Council regarding a different department other than hers, she would let that department that was the subject of the concern know. The Activities Director stated she expected that department to follow up with the resident. The Activities Director stated sometimes she would let staff know verbally during their morning meetings or when passing in the hall about resident concerns. The Activities Director stated she didn't follow up with residents unless it was a concern regarding her department. The Activities Director stated some examples of concerns she communicated for residents included lack of linen, aides wearing ear buds when on shift, roommate conflict, or the facility not having the dining room open for dinner service. Interview on 02/29/2024 at 10:34 AM with Resident #50 revealed responses to resident concerns did not occur. Resident #50 was asked how a resident knows that the concern had been addressed and Resident #50 stated well, you don't- and quite frankly it usually isn't. Resident #50 stated she would go to ADON I or the Activities Director with her concerns such as aides having an attitude and being rude to her. Resident #50 stated ADON I or the Activities Director response was to verbally tell Resident #50 staff were having a bad day or were joking. Resident #50 stated she was not informed verbally or in writing about any resolution to concerns she had voiced on behalf of herself or other residents. Interview on 02/29/2024 at 10:40 AM with Resident #32, the Resident Council President, revealed residents did not know if concerns were addressed. Resident #32 stated residents would know if a concern was address if they saw a change happen but other than that, they would not know. Resident #32 stated she was not informed verbally or in writing about any resolution to concerns she voiced on behalf of herself or other residents. Interview with ADON I on 02/29/2024 at 10:45 AM revealed she worked at the facility less than a year and the residents had a lot of complaints when she first started working at the facility. ADON I stated most of the concerns were addressed. ADON I stated residents would tell her their concerns verbally. ADON I stated if a resident had a more serious issue, then the resident would fill out a [NAME] form which would step up the attention to the DON or the Administrator. ADON I stated she would also let the DON know verbally, either through morning meetings or by directly speaking to the DON. When asked how residents knew if their issue was resolved, ADON I stated most of the time the resident went to her directly and they would work it out. ADON I stated sometimes residents would forget they had a concern or issue. ADON I stated sometimes a resident would come back to her and tell her they were just having a manic phase. Interview with the DON on 02/29/2024 at 1:00 PM revealed residents preferred to verbally share concerns and the DON would speak with them directly regarding their concern. Interview with the Administrator on 02/29/2024 at 1:08 PM revealed the facility called grievances Mulligans. The Administrator stated their Grievance Log also contained a Compliment Log which they called Hole in One. The Administrator stated they had many more compliments than grievances and residents did not typically fill out grievances. The Administrator stated if it was a serious complaint, she would fill out a grievance on behalf of the resident and most grievances were minor and were handled verbally. The Administrator stated she wasn't sure why residents didn't fill out the grievances. The Administrator stated residents would know if their grievance were followed up on because she would meet with them directly regarding their concern. Record review of facility's, undated, policy titled Resident Rights, reflected residents had the right to complain about care or treatment and receive a prompt response to resolve the complaint without fear of reprisal or discrimination.
CONCERN (E)

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

Incontinence Care (Tag F0690)

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 a resident who was incontinent of bladder receiv...

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 was incontinent of bladder received appropriate treatment and services to prevent urinary tract infections and a resident who was incontinent of bowel received appropriate treatment and services to restore as much normal bowel function as possible for three of four residents (Residents #20, #8 and #38) reviewed for incontinence and foley catheter care. 1. CNA N failed to provide adequate perineal care for Resident #20, after an incontinent episode, when she failed to ensure all fecal matter was removed from the resident's perineal area. 2. CNA E failed to provide adequate perineal care for Resident #8, after an incontinent episode, when she failed to ensure all fecal matter was removed from the resident's perineal area and failed to clean the residents' buttocks from front to back. 3. The facility failed to ensure Resident #38's catheter bag did not have contact with the floor. These failures could place residents at risk for the development and/or worsening of urinary tract infections and skin breakdown. Findings include: 1. Record review of Resident #20's quarterly MDS assessment, dated 01/25/24, reflected a [AGE] year-old female with an admission date of 09/23/20. Resident #20 was severely cognitively impaired with a score of 0, which indicated she was unable to complete the brief interview for mental status. Resident #20 required extensive assistance with all ADLs. The resident was always incontinent of bladder and bowel. The resident's active diagnoses included non-Alzheimer's dementia and Parkinson's disease (disorder of the central nervous system that affects movement). Record review of Resident #20's care plan, initiated on 09/30/22, reflected .Resident experiences bladder and bowel incontinence .Interventions included .apply moisture barrier to skin .report any signs of skin breakdown An observation on 02/27/24 at 01:00 p.m. revealed CNA N and CNA K entered Resident #20's room to transfer her to the bed and perform incontinence care. Both staff washed their hands and put on gloves. CNA N gathered wipes and a clean brief. Both staff attached the mechanical lift sling to the lift and transferred the resident to her bed. CNA N unfastened the resident's brief which revealed she was incontinent of urine and bowel. CNA N took a peri-wipe and wiped down each side of the resident's groin and then wiped down the center of the resident's labia which revealed fecal matter on the peri-wipe. CNA N only wiped the labia area once, and all fecal matter was not removed. CNA N then rolled the resident over on her side, removed her gloves and re-gloved without performing hand hygiene. CNA N continued to wipe the resident's anal area and buttocks from back to front to remove the fecal matter. CNA N reached into the dresser drawer to obtain barrier cream and applied barrier cream while wearing soiled gloves. CNA N changed her gloves without performing hand hygiene and placed a clean brief under the resident. CNA N rolled the resident back on her back with assistance from CNA K, adjusted the resident's gown and bed linens. Both CNAs removed their gloves. CNA N washed her hands and CNA K walked down the hallway to the dirty linen room to dispose of the linen and trash and then washed her hands. In an interview on 02/27/24 at 01:15 p.m., CNA N stated by not cleaning the resident properly it placed her at risk of skin breakdown and urinary tract infections. She stated she should have wiped the resident with a clean peri-wipe until the wipes were clean, otherwise the resident could still have bowel movement in her vaginal area. Record review of CNA N's competency checks reflected she had been skills checked on proper perineal care on 01/30/24. 2. Record review of Resident #8's quarterly MDS assessment, dated 12/07/23, reflected a [AGE] year-old female with an admission date of 05/10/19. Resident #8 had BIMs of 1, which indicated she was severely cognitively impaired. Resident #8 required extensive assistance with all ADLs. The resident was always incontinent of bladder and bowel. The resident's active diagnoses included Alzheimer's disease. Record review of Resident #8's care plan, initiated on 07/21/23, reflected .Resident has potential for Urinary tract infections related to history of urinary tract infections .Interventions included .If resident is incontinent, provide peri care as soon as possible after incontinent episode per facility policy being sure to cleanse well and cleanse from front to back An observation on 02/28/24 at 12:55 p.m. revealed CNA E and CNA F entered Resident #8's room to transfer her from her Geri chair to the bed and performed incontinence care. Both CNAs washed their hands and put on gloves. Both staff hooked the lift sling to the mechanical lift and transferred the resident to her bed. Both staff removed the resident's pants and unfastened her brief which revealed she was incontinent of urine. CNA E took a separate peri-wipe and wiped down each side of the resident's groin and one time down the middle of her labia without checking to see if the wipe was clean. CNA E rolled the resident over on her side pushed the wet brief and wipes used to clean her front under the resident. CNA E removed her gloves and stated she forgot her hand sanitizer and put on clean gloves. CNA E then wiped the resident's anal area from front to back which revealed a small smear of fecal matter. CNA E did not wipe the resident's buttocks or upper thighs before she placed a clean brief under the resident. CNA E changed her gloves but did not perform hand hygiene and applied barrier cream to the residents' buttocks and then rolled her onto her back and applied barrier cream to the residents' groin area. Both staff fastened the resident's brief and adjusted her linens. Both staff then removed their gloves and washed their hands. In an interview on 02/28/24 at 01:10 PM, CNA E stated she knew she was supposed to perform hand hygiene after each glove change but had forgot her hand sanitizer. She stated she should have washed her hands. She stated when they did incontinent care, they were supposed to wipe the entire buttocks and top of the thighs to make sure the residents were clean. She stated she should also make sure there was no fecal matter in the resident's vaginal area. She stated not doing it correctly placed the resident at risk of infections and skin breakdown. Interview with the DON on 02/28/24 at 02:10 p.m. revealed when incontinent care was provided staff were to clean from front to back, cleaning the peri area then moving toward the buttocks. She said they needed to wipe the area with a clean peri-wipe until all fecal matter and urine was removed. She stated by not providing accurate incontinent care it placed residents at risk for urinary tract infections, skin breakdown and overall poor hygiene. Record review of CNA E's competency checks reflected she had been skills checked for proper perineal care on 10/30/23. 3. Record review of Resident #38's Annual MDS assessment, dated 12/18/2023, reflected an [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #38 had diagnoses which included: neurogenic bladder (urinary conditions in patients who lack bladder control related to brain or nerve problem), Cerebrovascular accident (brain damage from interruption of blood supply), hypertension (high blood pressure), hyperlipidemia (high levels of lipids in blood) and non-Alzheimer's dementia. She was always incontinent of bowel and had a Foley catheter. Record review of Resident #38 active Physician order reflected Foley Catheter care every shift with soap and water, with a start date of 09/09/22. Record review of Resident #38's comprehensive care plan, dated 12/19/2023, reflected Resident #38 had a foley catheter and was at risk for increased urinary tract infections. Goal: Foley will remain patent with no signs and symptoms of UTI. Approach: Catheter Care per orders. An observation on 02/27/24 at 10:57 a.m. revealed Resident #38 lying in the bed and the foley catheter bag was in contact with the floor. Interview with CNA K on 02/27/24 at 11:20 a.m. revealed the catheter bag should always hang on the side of the bed. She stated the CNA or nurses were responsible for emptying the bag. She was assigned to the resident but did not empty the bag this morning since it was already empty. She did not see the catheter bag on the floor until the time of this interview. She stated if the catheter bag was on the floor it could lead to increased risk of infections. Interview with RN J on 02/27/2024 at 11:40 a.m. revealed the catheter bag should never touch the floor because of increased risk of infection. She stated she was assigned to the resident and did not see the catheter bag on the floor until the time of this interview. She stated the nurses were responsible for changing the catheter bag and CNAs or Nurses could empty the catheter bag. In an interview with the DON on 2/28/24 at 3:07 p.m. revealed her expectation was the catheter bag should always be off the ground and below the resident's bladder, per nursing standards. She stated the risk for having a catheter bag in contact with the floor was increased risk for infections. Record review of the facility's policy titled, Perineal Care, dated February 2018, reflected .Wash and dry hands thoroughly .put on gloves .For a female resident .Wash perineal area, wiping from front to back .Separate labia and wash area downward from front to back .Continue to wash the perineum area from inside outward to the thighs. Rinse perineum thoroughly in same direction, using fresh water and clean washcloth .Gently dry perineum .Wash the rectal area thoroughly wiping from the base of the labia towards and extending over the buttocks .Rinse and dry thoroughly .Remove gloves .Wash and dry your hands Record review of the facility's policy titled, Catheter Care, Urinary, dated August 2022, reflected .Infection Control .Be sure the catheter tubing and drainage bag are kept off the floor
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

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 d...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for six (Resident #11, Resident #113, Resident #42, Resident #114, Resident #20, and Resident # 8) of ten residents observed for infection control. 1. LVN A failed to decontaminate the glucometer which was used to obtain a fingerstick blood sugar on Resident #11 when she failed to allow the glucometer that was sanitized with a germicidal wipe to air dry before returning the glucometer to the medication cart. 2. LVN A failed to prevent cross contamination of Resident #11's insulin and a bottle of test strips, used to obtain glucose levels, when she carried both items into Resident #11's room. 3. LVN D failed to prevent cross contamination of a bottle of test strips, used to obtain glucose levels, when she carried the bottle into Resident #113's room and opened the bottle to retrieve a test strip while wearing soiled gloves. 4. LVN C failed to sanitize the blood pressure cuff between uses on Resident #42. 5. LVN B failed to prevent cross contamination of Resident # 114's medication when she spilled two of his medication onto the medication cart and picked them up with her bare hands and placed them back with the remainder of his medications. LVN B failed to sanitize the blood pressure cuff, pulse oximeter and thermometer after use on resident #114. 6. CNA N failed to perform hand hygiene during incontinence care for Resident #20. 7. CNA K failed to ensure soiled linens were placed in a plastic bag before placing them on boxes in Resident #20's room and failed to perform hand hygiene prior to leaving the resident's room. 8. CNA E failed to perform hand hygiene during incontinence care for Resident # 8. Theses failure could place residents at risk for infection and cross contamination. Findings include: 1. Record review of Resident #11's, undated, face sheet reflected an [AGE] year-old female with an admission date of 02/22/24. Resident #11 had a diagnosis which included Type 2 diabetes. An observation on 02/27/24 at 11:25 a.m. revealed LVN A at the medication cart preparing to perform Resident #11's finger stick blood sugar. LVN A removed the glucometer from the medication cart, lancet, a bottle of test strips from the top of the medication cart and Resident #11's box of insulin, a syringe and needle and performed hand hygiene and donned gloves. LVN A entered the resident's room and placed the items on Resident #11's bedside table without cleaning the table or placing the items on a barrier. LVN A opened the bottle of test strips and placed a test strip into the glucometer and pricked Resident #11's finger and obtained a blood sample. LVN A placed the glucometer with the blood sample back onto the resident's bedside table, removed her gloves and returned to the computer to check the amount of insulin the resident would require. LVN A performed hand hygiene and put on gloves and re-entered the resident's room. LVN A picked up the insulin box and removed the vial of insulin and drew up the required amount of insulin and placed the bottle of insulin on the bedside table and administered the insulin to the resident. LVN A placed the insulin back in the insulin box, wearing soiled gloves, picked up the glucometer and placed it in a plastic cup and placed the bottle of test strips in the cup with the dirty glucometer and returned to the medication cart. LVN A disposed of the syringe, needle, lancet and test strips and placed the bottle of bottle of test strips in a basket with lancets and supplies without sanitizing it. LVN A opened the medication cart and put the resident's box of insulin back in the medication cart with other resident's boxes of insulin. LVN A pulled out a germicidal wipe with a 3-minute kill time (the time needed to kill all bacteria) and wiped down the glucometer. LVN A immediately placed the glucometer back in the medication cart without letting the glucometer air dry. In an interview with LVN A on 02/27/24 at 11:40 a.m., she stated she was not sure how long the contact time was for the germicidal wipe she used to clean the glucometer. LVN A reviewed the contact time on the EPA approved germicidal wipe and determined it was for 3 minutes. She stated by not letting the glucometer air dry there was the potential for cross contamination and could potentially expose residents to blood borne pathogens. LVN A stated any disposable supplies carried into the resident's room were considered contaminated. She stated she should not have taken the bottle of test strips or the insulin into the room. She stated she was thinking of all the things she might need to complete the process, but then realized she had cross contaminated several of the items. She stated by doing this it created a risk of infections and the spread of germs to other residents. 2. Record review of Resident #113's, undated, face sheet reflected an [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #113's had a diagnosis which included Type 2 diabetes. An observation on 02/27/24 at 11:45 a.m. revealed LVN D at the medication cart preparing to obtain a fingerstick blood sugar on Resident #113. LVN D gathered a glucometer, lancet, alcohol wipes and a bottle of test strips. LVN D performed hand hygiene and put on gloves. LVN D carried in the bottle of test strips into the room with the other items and placed them on the resident's bedside table without cleaning the table or placing the items on a barrier. LVN D pricked the resident finger to obtain a blood sample then opened the bottle of test strips while wearing the same gloves and placed a test strip into the glucometer to obtain the blood sugar reading. LVN D removed her gloves and returned to the medication cart with the glucometer and the bottle of test strips and placed the bottle of test strips in a basket with other supplies on top of her medications cart and laid the glucometer on a paper towel. LVN D then checked the computer to determine the amount of insulin needed. LVN D then retrieved a germicidal wipe and wiped down the glucometer and placed it back on the same paper towel and then wiped down the bottle of test strips and placed them back in the basket of supplies. LVN D then performed hand hygiene, retrieved the insulin, drew up the amount required and administered the insulin to the resident. In an interview with LVN D on 02/27/24 at 11:50 a.m., she stated she was supposed to perform hand hygiene after glove removal before the procedure and after the procedure. She stated by taking in the bottle of test strips into the room it had the potential for cross contamination. She stated she should have a clean field for supplies and for the glucometer after she had cleaned it. She stated placing the bottle of test strips in with the other supplies before she sanitized it could cross contaminate the supplies. 3. Record review of Resident #42's, undated, face sheet reflected an [AGE] year-old female with an admission date of 10/14/22. Resident #42 had a diagnosis which included Crohn's disease (inflammatory bowel disease). During a medication pass observation and interview on 02/28/24 at 07:10 a.m. revealed LVN C left Resident #31's room with a wrist blood pressure cuff in her hand. LVN C placed the wrist cuff on top of the medication cart and stated she was going to the next hall for medication pass. LVN C performed hand hygiene and put on gloves and entered Resident #42's room and obtained her blood pressure with the un-sanitized blood pressure cuff. LVN C returned to the medication cart and placed the un-sanitized blood pressure cuff on top of the medication cart. LVN C removed her gloves and performed hand hygiene and proceeded to pull the resident's a.m. medication. In an interview with LVN C on 02/28/24 at 07:40 a.m., she stated she was supposed to sanitize the blood pressure cuff after each resident, and she failed to do that. LVN C then opened the medication cart to retrieve the germicidal wipes and could not locate any wipes. She stated someone took the wipes off her cart and she would get more wipes and sanitize the blood pressure cuff before the next resident. She stated failure to sanitize the blood pressure cuff placed residents at risk for the spread of germs. 4. Record review of Resident #114's, undated, face sheet reflected an [AGE] year-old-male with an admission date of 02/26/24. Resident #114 had diagnoses which included specified injury of right quadricep muscle (group of four muscles that cover the front and sides of the thigh) and fracture of right patella (kneecap). During a medication pass observation on 02/28/24 at 07:50 a.m. revealed LVN B at the medication cart. LVN B obtained a blood pressure cuff, pulse oximeter and electronic thermometer and entered Resident #114's room to obtain his vital signs. LVN B placed the pulse oximeter on the resident's finger and placed the blood pressure machine on the resident's bed and wrapped his arm with the blood pressure cuff and took his blood pressure reading. LVN B then scanned his forehead with the thermometer and removed the pulse oximeter and returned to the medication cart and placed the thermometer and pulse oximeter back inside the medication cart and the blood pressure machine on top of the cart without sanitizing any of the items. LVN B then sanitized her hands and started pulling the residents medications. LVN B had two pills in a plastic cup when she accidently knocked the cup over spilling the 2 pills on top of the medication cart. LVN B picked up the pills with her bare hands and placed them back in the mediation cup and continued pulling the remainder of Resident #114's a.m. medications. LVN B then entered Resident #114's and administered his medications. In an interview on 02/28/24 at 08:00 a.m. with LVN B, she stated she should have used a glove to pick up the pills. She then stated she should have discarded the pills since the surface of the medication cart was considered dirty and the medication was considered contaminated. She stated the equipment was supposed to be sanitized after each use and by putting the unclean items back in the cart she posed the risk of cross contamination. In an interview with the DON on 06/14/22 at 2:25 p.m., she stated staff needed to make sure all equipment, blood pressure cuffs, pulse oximeters, thermometers and glucometers were cleaned with appropriate germicidal wipes between resident use especially glucometers. She stated the glucometers had to remain visibly wet for the appropriate contact time for the glucometer to be considered sanitized. She stated they should always let them air dry and should not place them back into the cart until they were dry. She stated this failure placed residents at risk of the spread of germs and cross contamination. She stated staff should not carry in the resident's whole vial of insulin or the whole bottle of test strips since test strips were for multiple resident use. She stated the staff should only carry in the supplies needed to complete the blood sugar, and then return to the cart to obtain the needed insulin. She stated staff were to always perform hand hygiene during medication pass, before and after glove removal. She stated if a medication was dropped or spilled it should be discarded since it would be considered contaminated. She stated these failures placed residents at risk of cross contamination and the spread of infection. Record review of the facility's polity titled, Cleaning and Disinfecting Non-critical Resident-Care Items, dated June 2011, reflected .The following categories are used to distinguish the levels of sterilization/disinfection necessary for times used in resident care . non-critical items are those that come in contact with intact skin but not mucous membranes. Such items include .blood pressure cuffs .Reusable items are cleaned and disinfected or sterilized between residents .Intermediate and low-level disinfectants for non-critical items include .Sodium hypochlorite (germicidal wipes) Record review of the facility's policy titled, Obtaining a Fingerstick Glucose Level, dated October 2011, reflected, .Always ensure that blood glucose meters intended for reuse are cleaned and disinfected between resident uses . obtain a blood sample by using a sterile lancet .Discard disposable supplies in the designated containers .Clean and disinfect reusable equipment between uses according to the manufacturer's instructions and current infection control standards of practice Review of CDC guidelines, obtained on 03/04/24, reflected https://www.cdc.gov/cliac/docs/addenda/cliac0313/07B_CLIAC_2013March_Glucose_Monitoring.pdf, reflected, .The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has become increasingly concerned about the risks for transmitting hepatitis B virus (HBV) and other infectious diseases during assisted blood glucose ( blood sugar) monitoring and insulin administration .Unsafe practices during assisted monitoring of blood glucose and insulin administration that have contributed to transmission of HBV or have put person at risk for infection include .Failing to change gloves and perform hand hygiene between fingerstick procedures .A simple rule for safe care .Blood glucose Meters .disinfected after every use .General .unused supplies and medications should be maintained in clean areas separate from used supplies and equipment .Do not carry supplies and medications in pockets .Hand hygiene .Perform hand hygiene immediately after removal of gloves and before touching other medical supplies intended for use on other person's 5. Record review of Resident #20's quarterly MDS assessment, dated 01/25/24, reflected a [AGE] year-old female with an admission date of 09/23/20. Resident #20 was severely cognitively impaired with a score of 0, which indicated she was unable to complete a brief interview for mental status. Resident #20 required extensive assistance with all ADLs. The resident was always incontinent of bladder and bowel. The resident's active diagnoses included non-Alzheimer's dementia and Parkinson's disease (disorder of the central nervous system that affects movement). An observation on 02/27/24 at 01:00 p.m. revealed CNA N and CNA K entered Resident #20's room to transfer her to bed and perform incontinence care. Both staff washed their hands and put on gloves. Both staff attached the mechanical lift sling to the lift and transferred the resident to her bed. Both staff rolled the resident from side to side to remove the sling and draw sheet. CNA K placed the sling and draw sheet on top of a box of supplies in the corner of the resident's room without placing them in a plastic bag. CNA N unfastened the resident's brief which revealed she was incontinent of urine and bowel. CNA N took a peri-wipe and wiped down each side of the resident's groin and then wiped down the center of the resident's labia which revealed fecal matter on the peri-wipe. CNA N only wiped the labia area once, and did not remove all the fecal matter. CNA N rolled the resident over on her side, removed her gloves and re-gloved without performing hand hygiene. CNA N continued to wipe the resident's anal area and buttocks from front to back to remove the fecal matter. CNA N reached into the dresser drawer to obtain barrier cream and applied barrier cream while wearing the soiled gloves. CNA N changed her gloves without performing hand hygiene and placed a clean brief under the resident. CNA N then rolled the resident back on her back with assistance from CNA K, adjusted the resident's gown and bed linens. Both CNAs removed their gloves. CNA N washed her hands and CNA K walked down the hallway to the dirty linen room to dispose of the linen and trash and then washed her hands. In an interview on 02/27/24 at 01:15 p.m., CNA N stated by not cleaning the resident properly it placed her at risk of skin breakdown and urinary tract infections. She stated she should have wiped the resident with a clean peri-wipe until the wipes were clean, otherwise the resident could still have bowel movement in her vaginal area. In an interview with CNA K on 02/27/21 at 1:20 p.m., she stated they were supposed to place all soiled linens in a plastic bag and not lay them on any surface without placing them in a bag. She stated she was supposed to perform hand hygiene before she left the resident's room. She stated failing to do this could spread infections. Record review of CNA N's competency checks reflected she had been skills checked on proper perineal care on 03/23/23, which included performing hand hygiene. Record review of CNA K's competency checks reflected she had been skills checked on proper perineal care on 07/24/23, which included performing hand hygiene. 6. Record review of Resident #8's quarterly MDS assessment, dated 12/07/23, reflected a [AGE] year-old female with an admission date of 05/10/19. Resident #8 had a BIMs of 1, which indicated she was severely cognitively impaired. Resident #8 required extensive assistance with all ADLs. The resident was always incontinent of bladder and bowel. The resident's active diagnoses included Alzheimer's disease. An observation on 02/28/24 at 12:55 p.m. revealed CNA E and CNA F entered Resident #8's room to transfer the resident from her Geri chair to the bed and perform incontinence care. Both CNAs washed their hands and put on gloves. Both staff hooked the lift sling to the mechanical lift and transferred the resident to her bed. Both staff removed the resident's pants and unfastened her brief which revealed she was incontinent of urine. CNA E took a separate peri-wipe and wiped down each side of the resident's groin and one time down the middle of her labia without checking to see if the wipe was clean. CNA E rolled the resident over on her side and pushed the wet brief and wipes used to clean her front under the resident. CNA E removed her gloves and stated she had forgot her hand sanitizer and put on clean gloves. CNA E wiped the resident's anal area from front to back which revealed a small smear of fecal matter. CNA E did not wipe the resident's buttocks or upper thighs before she placed a clean brief under the resident. CNA E changed her gloves but did not perform hand hygiene and applied barrier cream to the residents' buttocks and rolled her onto her back and applied barrier cream to the residents' groin area. Both staff fastened the resident's brief and adjusted her linens. Both staff removed their gloves and washed their hands. In an interview on 02/28/24 at 01:10 PM, CNA E stated she knew she was supposed to perform hand hygiene after each glove change but had forgot her hand sanitizer. She stated she should have washed her hands. She stated when they did incontinent care, they were supposed to wipe the entire buttocks and top of the thighs to make sure the residents were clean. She stated she should also make sure there was no fecal matter in the resident's vaginal area. She stated not doing it correctly placed the resident at risk of infections and skin breakdown. Interview with the DON on 02/28/24 at 02:10 p.m. revealed when providing incontinent care staff were to clean from front to back, cleaning the peri area then moving toward the buttocks. She said they needed to wipe the area with a clean peri-wipe until all fecal matter and urine was removed. She stated by not providing accurate incontinent care it placed residents at risk for urinary tract infections, skin breakdown and overall poor hygiene. Record review of CNA E's competency checks reflected she had been skills checked for proper perineal care on 12/27/22, which included performing hand hygiene. Record review of the facility's policy titled, Perineal Care, dated February 2018, reflected, .Wash and dry hands thoroughly .put on gloves .For a female resident .Wash perineal area .Gently dry perineum .Wash the rectal area .Rinse and dry thoroughly .Remove gloves .Wash and dry your hands Record review of the facility's policy titled, Handwashing/Hand Hygiene dated August 2019, reflected, The facility considers hand hygiene the primary means to prevent the spread of infection .Wash hands with soap (antimicrobial or non-antimicrobial) and water when hands are visibly soiled .Use an alcohol-based hand rub .for the following situations .before and after direct contact with residents Before handling medications .before donning gloves .Before moving from a contaminated body site to a clean body site during resident care .After contact with a resident's intact skin .after contact with blood or bodily fluids After contact with objects (medical equipment) in the immediate vicinity of the resident .after removing gloves
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 service safety for the facility's...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for the facility's only kitchen. 1. The facility failed to date food stored in the walk-in refrigerator. 2. The facility failed to date food stored in the walk-in freezer . 3. The facility failed to cover and date food in the dry storage. 4. The facility failed to sanitize the food thermometer while measuring entrée temperatures. These failures could place residents who at risk for food-borne illness and food contamination. Findings included: Observation in facility's kitchen on 02/27/24 at 09:51 AM revealed hard boiled eggs in the walk-in refrigerator were not dated. Observation in facility's kitchen on 02/27/24 at 09:53 AM revealed a bag of frozen mixed vegetables in the walk-in freezer was not dated. Observation in facility's kitchen on 02/27/24 at 09:56 AM revealed a packet of Taco shells was left opened, uncovered, and undated in a box. Observation in facility kitchen on 02/28/2024 at 11:15 AM revealed [NAME] L did not use sanitizer wipes to clean the food thermometer while measuring food temperatures between 2 food entrees on the steam table. [NAME] L checked the temperature of the chicken entrée, looked for the alcohol-based sanitizing wipes and then asked the Dietary Manager to bring some wipes since she was out of it. While waiting for the wipes, [NAME] A proceeded to wipe the food thermometer with a paper towel and inserted the thermometer into beef patties. With State Surveyor intervention, [NAME] L then cleaned the thermometer with a sanitizing wipe before proceeding to measure the temperature for other entrees on the steam table. In an interview with [NAME] L on 02/28/24 at 8:54 AM revealed she worked in the facility for 9 years. She stated all food items in the kitchen needed to be dated and labeled; so food items could be used based on their dates. She also stated usually the cooks who received the food items were responsible for dating and labeling food items. She stated she had not worked the previous day and hence she did not know who had left the taco shells opened, undated and uncovered in the dry storage. She revealed if she were to find any food items that were not dated or covered appropriately, she would throw away the item and inform the Dietary Manager. She stated the risk of not dating food items or covering food items could lead to food borne illness. In an interview with [NAME] L on 2/28/2024 at 11:20 AM, she stated that she knew the food thermometer needed to be wiped off with a sterile alcohol pad to prevent cross contamination. However, because she ran out of the wipes, she did not want to wait and decided to use the paper towel instead. She stated it was her mistake to use it. She also stated cross contamination of foods could ultimately lead to food borne illness. In an interview with the Dietary Manager on 02/28/24 at 11:35 AM revealed he was new to the facility and started working in the facility 3 weeks ago. He revealed all food items needed to be dated, labeled, and covered appropriately. He stated frozen veggies were delivered 2 weeks ago and should have been dated. He stated taco shells were used on 2/26/24 for a meal and the cook must have forgotten to cover and date it. He revealed cooks were responsible for dating all food items, as well as covering them. The standard practice in the kitchen was to wipe the food thermometer with an alcohol-based sanitizing wipe between entrees while measuring temperatures. He stated his expectation was all food items should be label, dated and always covered and he would provide an in-service to the kitchen staff regarding safe food handling and proper temperature measurement techniques. He revealed the risk for not dating or covering food items and failure to use sanitizing wipes for wiping down the food thermometer could lead to food contamination and food borne illness. Record review of the facility's Refrigerator and Freezers policy, revised December 2019, reflected .all foods should be appropriately dated to ensure proper rotation by expiration dates .Expiation dates on unopened food will be observed and 'use by' dates indicated once food is opened. Record review of the Food and Drug Administration Food Code, dated 2022, reflected, .3-302.12 Food Storage Containers, Identified with Common Name of Food. Except for containers holding food that can be readily and unmistakably recognized such as dry pasta, working containers holding food or food ingredients that are removed from their original packages for use in the food establishment, such as cooking oils, flour, herbs, potato flakes, salt, spices, and sugar shall be identified with the common name of the food 3-305.11 Food Storage.(B) .refrigerated, ready-to eat time/temperature control for safety food prepared and packaged by a food processing plant shall be clearly marked, at the time the original container is opened in a food establishment and if the food is held for more than 24 hours, to indicate the date or day by which the food shall be consumed on the premises, sold, or discarded, based on the temperature and time combinations specified in (A) of this section and: (1) The day the original container is opened in the food establishment shall be counted as Day 1; and (2) The day or date marked by the food establishment may not exceed a manufacturer's use-by date if the manufacturer determined the use-by date based on food safety Record review of the Food and Drug Administration Food Code, dated 2022, reflected, .4-302.12 Food Temperature Measuring Devices (vi) Temperature measuring device probes must be sanitized to prevent contaminating products when internal temperatures are measured.
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?"
  • "What safeguards are in place to prevent abuse and neglect?"
  • "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
  • "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"

Our Honest Assessment

Strengths
  • • 31% turnover. Below Texas's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
Concerns
  • • Multiple safety concerns identified: Federal abuse finding, 3 life-threatening violation(s). Review inspection reports carefully.
  • • 16 deficiencies on record, including 3 critical (life-threatening) violations. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
  • • $22,205 in fines. Higher than 94% of Texas facilities, suggesting repeated compliance issues.
  • • Grade F (22/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
Bottom line: This facility has a substantiated abuse finding. Extreme caution advised. Explore alternatives.

About This Facility

What is Prestonwood Rehabilitation & Nursing Center Inc's CMS Rating?

CMS assigns PRESTONWOOD REHABILITATION & NURSING CENTER INC an overall rating of 4 out of 5 stars, which is considered above average nationally. Within Texas, this rating places the facility higher than 99% of the state's 100 nursing homes. This rating reflects solid performance across the metrics CMS uses to evaluate nursing home quality.

How is Prestonwood Rehabilitation & Nursing Center Inc Staffed?

CMS rates PRESTONWOOD REHABILITATION & NURSING CENTER INC's staffing level at 5 out of 5 stars, which is much above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 31%, compared to the Texas average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.

What Have Inspectors Found at Prestonwood Rehabilitation & Nursing Center Inc?

State health inspectors documented 16 deficiencies at PRESTONWOOD REHABILITATION & NURSING CENTER INC during 2024 to 2025. These included: 3 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death) and 13 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 Prestonwood Rehabilitation & Nursing Center Inc?

PRESTONWOOD REHABILITATION & NURSING CENTER INC is owned by a government entity. Government-operated facilities are typically run by state, county, or municipal agencies. The facility operates independently rather than as part of a larger chain. With 132 certified beds and approximately 62 residents (about 47% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in PLANO, Texas.

How Does Prestonwood Rehabilitation & Nursing Center Inc Compare to Other Texas Nursing Homes?

Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Texas, PRESTONWOOD REHABILITATION & NURSING CENTER INC's overall rating (4 stars) is above the state average of 2.8, staff turnover (31%) is significantly lower than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (2 stars) is below the national benchmark.

What Should Families Ask When Visiting Prestonwood Rehabilitation & Nursing Center Inc?

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?" "What safeguards and monitoring systems are in place to protect residents from abuse or neglect?" "Can I visit during a mealtime to observe dining assistance and food quality?" "How do you handle medical emergencies, and what is your hospital transfer rate?" These questions are particularly relevant given the facility's Immediate Jeopardy citations and the substantiated abuse finding on record.

Is Prestonwood Rehabilitation & Nursing Center Inc Safe?

Based on CMS inspection data, PRESTONWOOD REHABILITATION & NURSING CENTER INC has documented safety concerns. The facility has 1 substantiated abuse finding (meaning confirmed case of resident harm by staff or other residents). Inspectors have issued 3 Immediate Jeopardy citations (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death). The facility has a 4-star overall rating and ranks #1 of 100 nursing homes in Texas. Families considering this facility should ask detailed questions about what corrective actions have been taken since these incidents.

Do Nurses at Prestonwood Rehabilitation & Nursing Center Inc Stick Around?

PRESTONWOOD REHABILITATION & NURSING CENTER INC has a staff turnover rate of 31%, which is about average for Texas nursing homes (state average: 46%). Moderate turnover is common in nursing homes, but families should still ask about staff tenure and how the facility maintains care continuity when employees leave.

Was Prestonwood Rehabilitation & Nursing Center Inc Ever Fined?

PRESTONWOOD REHABILITATION & NURSING CENTER INC has been fined $22,205 across 1 penalty action. This is below the Texas average of $33,301. 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 Prestonwood Rehabilitation & Nursing Center Inc on Any Federal Watch List?

PRESTONWOOD REHABILITATION & NURSING CENTER INC 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.