RIDGECREST RETIREMENT AND HEALTHCARE COMMUNITY

1900 W STATE HWY 6, WACO, TX 76712 (254) 776-9681
For profit - Limited Liability company 90 Beds DYNASTY HEALTHCARE GROUP Data: November 2025 1 Immediate Jeopardy citation
Trust Grade
28/100
#822 of 1168 in TX
Last Inspection: June 2025

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

Overview

Ridgecrest Retirement and Healthcare Community has received a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns about the quality of care provided. With a state ranking of #822 out of 1168 facilities in Texas, this places them in the bottom half of all nursing homes in the state, and #6 out of 17 in McLennan County means only five local options are better. The facility's performance is worsening, with issues increasing from 10 in 2024 to 14 in 2025. Staffing ratings are a concern, given the high turnover rate of 65%, which exceeds the Texas average of 50%, but they do have good RN coverage, with more than 99% of Texas facilities providing less. Specific incidents of concern include a critical failure to ensure a resident received necessary supervision while taking medication, leading to a suicide attempt, and multiple food safety violations in the kitchen, highlighting serious issues that could affect resident health.

Trust Score
F
28/100
In Texas
#822/1168
Bottom 30%
Safety Record
High Risk
Review needed
Inspections
Getting Worse
10 → 14 violations
Staff Stability
⚠ Watch
65% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
Penalties
✓ Good
$31,315 in fines. Lower than most Texas facilities. Relatively clean record.
Skilled Nurses
✓ Good
Each resident gets 54 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than average for Texas. RNs are trained to catch health problems early.
Violations
⚠ Watch
28 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
★★☆☆☆
2.0
Overall Rating
★★☆☆☆
2.0
Staff Levels
★★★★☆
4.0
Care Quality
★★☆☆☆
2.0
Inspection Score
Stable
2024: 10 issues
2025: 14 issues

The Good

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

Facility shows strength in quality measures, fire safety.

The Bad

2-Star Overall Rating

Below Texas average (2.8)

Below average - review inspection findings carefully

Staff Turnover: 65%

19pts above Texas avg (46%)

Frequent staff changes - ask about care continuity

Federal Fines: $31,315

Below median ($33,413)

Moderate penalties - review what triggered them

Chain: DYNASTY HEALTHCARE GROUP

Part of a multi-facility chain

Ask about local staffing decisions and management

Staff turnover is elevated (65%)

17 points above Texas average of 48%

The Ugly 28 deficiencies on record

1 life-threatening
Jun 2025 13 deficiencies 1 IJ (1 affecting multiple)
CRITICAL (K) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation

Quality of Care (Tag F0684)

Someone could have died · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record the facility failed to ensure that residents receive treatment and care in accordance with profess...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record the facility failed to ensure that residents receive treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' choices for 1 of 9 Residents (Resident #53) reviewed for quality of care. The facility failed to provide needed care or services by failing to communicate to staff Resident #53's need for supervision while taking medications as stated in his Psych NP note dated 04/22/25, remain in room and ask to open mouth to check to see he swallowed his medication. This resulted in Resident #53 being able to pocket 21 pills that he planned to use to commit suicide and caused him to be sent to a psychiatric hospital on [DATE]. This failure resulted in an identification of an Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) on 06/12/25 at 07:09 PM and an IJ template was given. While the IJ was removed on 06/15/25 the facility remained out of compliance at a severity of no actual harm with a potential for more than minimal harm, that was not immediate jeopardy at a scope of isolated, due to the facility's need to evaluate the effectiveness of the corrective systems. This deficient practice could place residents at risk for hospitalization and death. The findings included: Review of Resident #53's Face Sheet dated 06/12/25 reflected a [AGE] year old male admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included Schizophrenia (mental health condition that affects how people think, feel, behave and can result in hallucinations, delusions, disorganized thinking and behavior), cognitive communication deficit (condition that affects how individuals think, remember, and communicate), other specified depressive episodes (condition that can include persistent sadness or low mood, fatigue or loss of energy, irritability, and thoughts of death or suicide), unspecified dementia (group of symptoms affecting memory, thinking, and social abilities), and anxiety disorder (characterized by fear or worry that is both intense and excessive). The Face Sheet reflected Resident #53 was discharged on 06/09/25 to a psychiatric hospital. Review of Resident #53's Annual MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected a BIMS score of 15 indicating his cognition intact. Section D Mood reflected a resident mood interview that revealed over the last two weeks have you been bothered by any of the following problems? and reflected little interest or pleasure in doing things was marked yes for symptom presence and 2-6 days (several days) for frequency. Feeling down, depressed, or hopeless was also marked as a symptom present and 2-6 days (several days) for frequency. Section I of the MDS assessment reflected Resident #53 was marked for having a diagnosis of Anxiety Disorder, Depression, and Schizophrenia. Section N of the MDS assessment reflected Resident #53 was taking an antipsychotic, antianxiety, and antidepressant. Review of resident #53's care plan last revised 06/11/25 reflected a focus on risk for complications, injury, infection, and ineffective protection related to resisting care and refusal of medications with interventions that included refer to psychology/psychiatry as needed. A focus for I am receiving antidepressant medication with interventions that included, monitor/document/report adverse reactions to antidepressant therapy: suicidal thoughts. A focus was seen for , I am currently receiving anti-anxiety medication related to anxiety disorder with interventions that included, monitor/document/report any adverse reactions to anti-anxiety therapy: depression, impaired thinking and judgement, impulsive behavior and a focus for I am currently receiving psychotropic medications related to Schizophrenia with interventions that included administer psychotropic medications as ordered by physician, monitor/document/report adverse reactions to psychotropic medications: depression, suicidal ideations, social isolation and behavior symptoms not usual to the person. Review of Resident #53's Psych NP progress note dated 04/22/25 reflected, resident seen today for psychiatric visit for Schizophrenia, anxiety, dementia with behavioral disturbance .review report received from staff. Reports patient is pocketing his medication and not taking it, plan in place now, staff remain in room and ask patient to open his mouth to check and see he swallowed his medications. Review of Resident #53's physician's orders reflected an order dated 05/22/25 Make sure resident takes his medications before leaving the room. Every shift monitoring of taking medication **Make sure resident swallows his medications before leaving his room. Review of Resident #53's progress note revealed a progress note dated 06/09/25 entered by the SW that reflected, SW was sitting with resident when he stated he wasn't feeling well. SW asked resident to elaborate- he stated can I be honest with you? SW stated of course. Resident began telling this writer that he wanted to kill himself. He stated he has hoarded his medications in his locked bedside table and planned to take all at once and overdose. SW proceeded to inform ADM and DON about the situation. ADM and DON stated resident needed to be sent out and be on a 1:1 until he was sent out. SW gave resident two options to be sent to emergency room or psychiatric hospital. Resident agreed to go to psychiatric hospital to stabilize. SW called psychiatric hospital inpatient and received authorization for resident to admit to an inpatient stay. SW then collected all medications from bedroom and handed them over to DON. SW stayed 1:1 with resident, listening to music, coloring, until psychiatric hospital was ready to admit him. At 03:15 PM resident boarded onto facility van voluntarily with staff to transport to psychiatric hospital. IDT aware, PASRR aware. SW was with resident from 01:50 PM to 03:15 PM. Review of an email to the surveyor dated 06/12/25 at 01:30 PM from the DON identifying Resident #53's hoarded medications confiscated on 06/09/25, email reflected: After reviewing the picture and auditing his medications, I was able to determine that the cup of meds appeared to have: (8) Depakote (anticonvulsant), (2) gabapentin (anticonvulsant), (2) zenpep (pancreatic/digestive enzyme), (1) ½ tab [NAME] (opiate antagonist), (2) metoprolol (beta blocker), (4) fluoxetine (antidepressant), (1)Loratadine (antihistamine), (1)memantine (NMDA, N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor antagonist, used to treat symptoms of Alzheimer's disease). Review of the facility reported incidents for the month of June 2025 revealed there was no self-report to the state agency for the event concerning Resident #53 on 06/09/25. Review of the facility staff in-services for the month of June 2025 revealed there was no in-services for medication administration related to remaining with residents to ensure medication was swallowed. In an interview and observation on 06/12/25 at 02:56 PM with the DON, she stated Resident #53 was feeling different and there were reports of behavior/mood changes during a care conference that occurred on 05/21/25. She stated to her knowledge that was why the order was placed in the system on 05/22/25 to make sure staff were watching Resident #53 take his medications . She stated that to her knowledge they did not know Resident #53 was having behavior changes or required supervision with med administration prior to the 05/21/25 care conference. The DON was observed reviewing Resident #53's chart and stated the last uploaded Psych NP visit in the system was for the month of March 2025. In an interview and observation on 06/12/25 at 03:47 PM the MR/FD entered the DON's office and in an interview with both staff MR/FD stated the Psych NP notes from visits were provided one of two ways, by being left at the nurse's station or sent via fax. The MR/FD stated that if the notes arrived via fax machine, they came to the attention of the ADON, and she was to review the notes and update the resident's chart as needed. The MR/FD stated that the ADON would just know that if there was a Psych NP visit, notes should be on the fax by the next day. The MR/FD stated there was only one fax machine that was used by everyone and there was the potential for communication issues if pages slipped out, or the machine could skip a page and notes would go missing. At this time the MR/FD provided the surveyor with copies of the Psych NP notes for Resident #53's visits dated 04/22/25 and 05/19/25 that she stated were not yet scanned into Resident #53's medical record . The visit for 04/22/25 reflected, Reports patient is pocketing his medication and not taking it, plan in place now, staff remain in room and ask patient to open his mouth to check and see he swallowed his medications. At this time the DON stated she was not aware of the Psych NP visit notes for 04/22/25 or 05/19/25 and was not sure how they were missed because it was before she took the position of DON. The DON stated that if notes came in via fax, they were not able to verify who saw the notes since it's a fax used by the whole facility. The DON stated there's the potential for missed communication because pages of notes or orders could go missing or end up somewhere else without being reviewed by nursing. In an interview on 06/12/25 at 04:24 PM with the Psych NP, he stated that he first became aware of Resident #53 pocketing medication during his visit on 04/22/25 and was notified by the ADON. He stated he was told on that day that there was already a system in place to ensure staff were supervising Resident #53 and ensuring he swallowed his medication before leaving the room due to reports of pocketing medications. He stated he did not review the resident's EMR that day to confirm that the orders were in place and took the ADON at her word. The Psych NP stated that it was his expectation that there was an order in place and staff were implementing supervision of Resident #53's medication administration since 04/22/25 and he stated that he also followed up on it with ADON on 05/19/25 and was told it was still in place . The Psych NP stated that based on the 21 medications Resident #53 had hoarded there was concern for a negative outcome. He stated, Anyone on its own would not have been a concern but all together would have had the potential for a negative outcome. In an interview on 06/12/25 at 05:19 PM with the ADON, she stated she put the order in for supervision of Resident #53's medication administration as soon as she was made aware of the resident pocketing his medications. She stated she could not say why the order was not implemented in April 2025 and said, It was always known to monitor him. She stated the Psych NP notes were either faxed into the facility or left at the nurse's station. She stated the facility's way of communication was through orders so that everyone is on board and knows what to do. In an interview on 06/13/25 at 01:30 PM with the ADM, he stated when the incident was reported to him on 06/09/25 of Resident #53 pocketing medication in order to commit suicide he did not believe it was a reportable incident. He stated the SW remained with Resident #53 until he was transferred out to a psychiatric hospital after he admitted to suicidal ideation and was found to have pocketed medications. The ADM stated that failure to report an incident to HHSC could result in the potential for residents to not get services they needed. He stated it was his expectation that the DON and ADON reviewed provider notes such as psychiatric NP notes and orders. He stated to his knowledge they came in through the fax and were distributed to nursing staff by either the receptionist, himself, or whoever saw it on the shared facility fax. The ADM stated 06/09/25 was the first time he became aware of Resident #53 pocketing medications. He stated it was his expectation that provider notes and recommendations were used to provide the best care possible. He stated failure to follow provider recommendations have the potential to result in residents not getting services or the potential for them to harm themselves. Review of the undated Administering Oral Medications policy reflected: The purpose of this procedure is to provide guidelines for the safe administration of oral medications. Steps in the procedure: Remain with the resident until all medications have been taken. The Administrator was notified on 06/12/25 at 07:09 PM that an IJ had been identified and an IJ template was provided. The following POR was approved on 06/13/25 at 04:01 PM and reflected the following: Re: Plan of Removal of Immediate Jeopardy The following is a plan of removal, which was immediately implemented, to remedy the Immediate Jeopardy which was imposed on 6/12/2025 at 7:09 pm. On 6/12/2025 the surveyor provided an Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) template notification that the Regulatory Services has determined that the condition at the facility constitutes an immediate jeopardy to resident health and safety. The notification of Immediate Jeopardy states as follows: Facility failed to provide needed care or services by failing to communicate to staff Resident #1's [Resident #53] need for supervision while taking meds as stated in psych notes 04/22/2025 to remain in room and ask to open mouth to check to see he swallowed his medication. As set forth by F684 - The facility must ensure that residents receive treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' choices. All items listed will be completed by 5:00 PM on 6/13/2025 with continued follow-up for scheduled staff. 1. Resident #1 [Resident #53] is currently in psychiatric hospital. 2. Findings were relayed to the Medical Director on 6/12/2025 7:30 PM by the DON via phone call. No new orders were received at this time. 3. Emotional Distress Assessment was completed on all 60 residents in the building at this time with no emotional distress observed. This was conducted by the charge nurses on each station and completed by 6/13/2025 at 6:00 AM and documented in each resident's clinical record. 4. Resident #1's [Resident#53] Care Plan was updated by the VP of Clinical regarding the monitoring and remaining in room to ensure resident takes all medications and does not pocket them on 6/12/2025 at 7:30 PM. All nursing staff were in-serviced including PRN, agency staff and all newly hired staff prior to their shift by the DON. Staff are to remain in resident's room to ensure medications are swallowed and not pocketed. Oral cavity to be assessed post administration of medications. 5. On 5/6/2025 at 7:30 PM the DON began medication administration competency check offs on all licensed staff and medication aides. This will be completed before the employees scheduled shift. It will include the 5 rights of medication administration and will also include staying with the resident until medications are ingested. 6. A 100% facility sweep was completed on 6/12/2025 at 7:45 PM by the Administrator and DON with no other loose medications being identified in the building. 7. All psychiatric notes will be e-faxed directly to the administrator and DON for review and implementation of any orders and uploaded into the medical record. 8. Administrator /DON initiated staff in-service for ALL RNs, LVNs and CMAs on Administering Oral Medications, ALL CNAs in-serviced on monitoring for loose medications and notifying the charge nurse immediately if found, ALL staff in-serviced on Abuse and Neglect. DON trained by VP of Clinical Services prior to start of in-service on 6/12/2025. If staff are unable to attend any of the in-services, they will be required to complete them before starting their assigned shift to include PRN staff, agency staff and any new hires. The Administrator/DON will monitor to ensure all in-servicing completed. The POR was monitored from 06/13/25 through 06/15/25 in the following ways : 06/13/25 In an interview and record review 06/13/25 at 05:25 the ADM provided an email confirmation for review from the company IT team letting them know an eFax setup was completed. In an interview with the ADM he stated the eFax that was set up would allow all incoming faxes to be sent in an electronic format to the ADM, DON, and ADON so that they could ensure all provider notes and orders would be reviewed. The ADM and MR/FD stated that verbal confirmation was received from the Psych NP on 06/13/25 that all notes and orders would now be sent to the eFax that was set up. 06/15/25 Resident #53 remains in the Psychiatric hospital. The facility's Medical director was notified on 6/12/25 at 07:30 PM by the DON via phone of Immediate Jeopardy. Uploaded text verification reviewed by the surveyor. Record review revealed emotional distress assessments were completed on all 60 Residents on 6/13/25 documented within the progress notes of the electronic medical record. The progress note reflected: Note Text: Upon assessment this shift, resident states that she is not having any type of emotional distress. Denies any fear and that she feels safe. Surveyor verified this through record review of 5 resident chart audits. Record review of Resident #53's Care Plan was done and revealed it was updated which reflected: Medication Administration Date Initiated: 06/12/2025 Nursing - Monitor/document/report PRN any risk for harm to self: suicidal plan, past attempt at suicide, risky actions (stockpiling pills, saying goodbye to family, giving away to CNA possessions or writing a note), intentionally harmed or tried to harm self, refusing to eat or drink, refusing med or therapies, sense of hopelessness or helplessness, impaired judgment, or safety awareness. The DON began medication administration competency check offs on all licensed staff and medication aides. This will be completed before the employees scheduled shift. It will include the 5 rights of medication administration and will also include staying with the resident until medications are ingested. Surveyor verification was completed for 12 of 21 nurses and medication assistants. 100% Facility sweep for loose medications was completed on 06/12/2025 verified by the DON and ADM this was verified by surveyor through interview and written statement. An eFax system was set up by the facility on June 13, 2025, to ensure all faxes with pertinent information such as physician order and visit notes are sent and reviewed by the department heads. Verified with ADM email conformation on June 13,2025. IT team contract. Training was given to the nursing staff by the ADM and DON 06/13/25-06/15/25. The staff verbalized that they had received instruction to ensure that all medications were taken. Do Not allow residents to self-administer medication. Do not leave medication at the resident's bedside. If a resident was seen not taking medication, pocketing medications, spitting out medications it must be reported to the charge nurse and DON immediately. Staff were instructed if they find medications in a cup or otherwise that have not been administered, they are to notify the charge nurse immediately. All residents were to be supervised while taking their medications and leaving medications at the bedside is never allowed. The nurses and MAs were to verify medication had been swallowed by oral assessment. Staff also verbalized they had been trained on abuse and neglect. They were able to give examples of abuse such as hitting a resident, neglecting to change resident clothes, and allowing residents to fall by not using proper equipment. Staff were able to identify the ADM as the abuse coordinator and stated all abuse is reported immediately to the abuse coordinator. Interviews reflected below. The DON's training was given by the VP of Clinical Services on 6/12/2025. The Training included policy and procedures for oral medication administrations and abuse investigating and reporting in-service record review completed for verification of the document. Interviews were completed with 3 LVNs, 1 RN, 9 CNAs, 2 MA, 1 housekeeper, 1 dietary staff and included 6-night shift and 9-day shift nursing staff. The interviews revealed the following: Interview on 6/15/25 5:45 AM with LVN BB night shift charge nurse revealed she did have an observation competency evaluation on medication pass, ensuring the right dose and resident's medication. She stated she was specifically told to ensure residents were swallowing their medications, ensure no medications were left in room, do not leave any medication cups in the room, do not allow residents to self-administer medications. She stated she had been trained on abuse and neglect to report to the ADM immediately. She gave an example of abuse as staff yelling at a resident or treating them badly. She stated she would protect the resident and report to the ADM immediately. Interview on 6/15/25 05:55 AM CNA CC stated she had been CNA here for 3 years-night shift. The aide stated she had been trained on abuse and neglect. She stated take all allegations seriously report immediately to the abuse coordinator. She stated the abuse coordinator was the ADM. She stated she had been instructed on to make sure if any medications were found in residents' rooms to report to the nurse. She stated medications were not supposed to be in residents' rooms. Interview on 6/15/25 06:15 AM with CNA DD-night shift, she said she was in-serviced regularly on abuse and neglect. She stated an example of abuse is yelling at a resident and she has never witnessed abuse in this facility. She stated if she suspected abuse, she would call and report it to the ADM who is the Abuse Coordinator. She stated medications were not supposed to be in residents' rooms. She stated if medications were found in the room she is supposed to report it to the charge nurse immediately. Interview on 6/15/25 06:24 AM with CNA EE-nightshift, she stated she had been trained on abuse and neglect, and if she were to see abuse protect the resident and report to the ADM. She stated if she were to see medications sitting around on bed side table in residents' she was instructed to remove medications and report to nurse immediately. Interview on 6/15/25 06:30 AM with CNA FF -night shift, she stated if she were to see loose pills in a residents' room, she would remove the medications and take them to the charge nurse. She stated she had been trained on abuse, example yelling at a resident. She stated the ADM was the abuse coordinator. Day shift Interview on 6/15/25 06:42 AM with RN GG -day shift, he stated he had been instructed to make sure residents take all medication prior to leaving the room. He stated he was instructed to not allow residents to self-administer medications. He stated he had been observed performing a medication pass by the DON. He stated he had been trained on abuse and neglect by the ADM. He stated the ADM is the abuse coordinator. He stated an example of abuse was neglecting to change a resident. He stated if he were to see abuse, he would protect the resident and report it immediately. Interview on 6/15/25 06:55 AM with LVN HH -agency nurse, she stated she had been observed performing a medication pass by the DON. She stated she had been in-serviced on medication administration including review of resident rights, staying with residents to make sure they are not pocketing medications. She stated she was instructed do not leave room until all medications are taken. She stated she was instructed to perform and oral check to ensure residents swallowed their medications. She stated she had been in-serviced on abuse and neglect. She stated abuse and neglect should be reported immediately to ADM and DON. Interview on 6/15/25 07:05 AM with MA II - day shift, she stated she had been trained to ensure residents swallowed medications, and to talk to the resident and make sure their mouth is clear, she had been checked off on medication pass, and did complete a medication pass with the DON she stated she reviewed resident rights, medications storage, types of medications routes. She stated she had been trained on abuse, and said an example was yelling at a resident. She gave an example of abuse such as hitting a resident. She stated the ADM was the abuse coordinator. Interview on 6/15/25 07:15 AM MA JJ -day shift, she stated she had been trained to ensure residents swallowing medications, that she is to speak to residents and make sure their mouth is clear. She said she has been checked off on medication pass, did complete a medication pass with the DON she reviewed resident rights, medications storage, types of medications routes. She stated she had been trained on abuse, example yelling at a resident. She gave an example of abuse such as slapping a resident. She stated the ADM is the abuse coordinator. Interview on 6/15/25 07:25 CNA KK -day shift, she stated if she were to see loose pills in a resident's room, she would remove the medications and take them to the charge nurse. She stated she had been trained on abuse; an example was yelling at a resident. She gave an example of abuse such as leaving a resident in dirty clothing. She stated the ADM is the abuse coordinator. Interview on 6/15/25 07:35 AM CNA LL-day shift, she stated if she were to see loose pills in a resident's room, she would remove the medications and take them to the charge nurse. She stated medications were not to be in residents' rooms. She stated she had been trained on abuse, and an example would be yelling at a resident. She stated the ADM was the abuse coordinator. She stated an example of abuse would be pushing a resident. Interview on 6/15/25 07:45 AM with CNA MM -day shift, she stated if she were to see loose pills in a resident's room, she would remove the medications and take them to the charge nurse. She stated medications were not to be in residents' rooms. She stated she had been trained on abuse and provided the example yelling at a resident. She stated the ADM was the abuse coordinator. She stated an example of abuse would be yelling at a resident. Interview on 6/15/25 07:55 AM with CNA NN - day shift - She stated if she were to see loose pills in a residents' room, she would remove the medications and take them to the charge nurse if there were any loose in the resident room. She stated medications were not to be in residents' rooms unattended. She stated she had been trained on abuse, example yelling at a resident. She stated the ADM is the abuse coordinator. She stated an example of abuse would be pushing a resident. Interview on 6/15/25 08:05AM with MA OO - She stated if she were to see loose pills in a residents' room, she would remove the medications and report them to the charge nurse immediately. She stated medications were not to be left behind in residents' rooms. She stated she had been trained on abuse. She stated the ADM is the abuse coordinator. She stated an example of abuse would be hitting a resident. Interview on 6/15/25 08:15 AM interview with HK PP, he stated if he were to see loose pills in a residents' room, he would remove the medications and report them to the charge nurse. He stated medications were not to be left in residents' rooms. He stated he had been trained on abuse, example yelling at a resident. He stated the ADM is the abuse coordinator. He stated an example of abuse would be not using appropriate transferring equipment for a resident causing a fall. Interview on 6/15/25 08:25 AM interview with DA QQ, she stated examples of abuse were threating a resident, not meeting their needs, pulling on a resident. She stated she would report abuse to the ADM, he is the abuse Coordinator. She stated if she were to see any pills on a tray or lying around, she would report to the charge nurse immediately. She stated residents were not allowed to have medications in their rooms. The failures detailed above resulted in an identification of an Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) on 06/12/2025 at 07:09 PM and an IJ template was given. While the IJ was removed on 06/15/25 the facility remained out of compliance at a severity of no actual harm with a potential for more than minimal harm, that was not immediate jeopardy at a scope of isolated, due to the facility's need to evaluate the effectiveness of the corrective systems.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Report Alleged Abuse (Tag F0609)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

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

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure that all alleged violations involving abuse, neglect are reported immediately, but not later than 24 hours if the events that cause the allegation do not involve abuse and do not result in serious bodily injury, to the State Survey Agency in accordance with State law through established procedures for 1 of 9 residents (Resident #53) reviewed for abuse and neglect, in that: The facility did not report an incident concerning Resident #53 when on 06/09/25 Resident #53 told the SW he was planning to commit suicide and was found to have hoarded 21 pills of his medication administration to do so. This deficient practice could place residents at risk of not having incident and accidents reported or investigated. Findings included: Review of Resident #53's Face Sheet dated 06/12/25 reflected a [AGE] year old male admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis that included Schizophrenia (mental health condition that affects how people think, feel, behave and can result in hallucinations, delusions, disorganized thinking and behavior), cognitive communication deficit (condition that affects how individuals think, remember, and communicate), other specified depressive episodes (condition that can include persistent sadness or low mood, fatigue or loss of energy, irritability, and thoughts of death or suicide), unspecified dementia (group of symptoms affecting memory, thinking, and social abilities), and anxiety disorder (characterized by fear or worry that is both intense and excessive). The Face Sheet reflected Resident #53 was discharged on 06/09/25 to a psychiatric hospital. Review of Resident #53's Annual MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected a BIMS score of 15 indicating cognition intact. Section D Mood reflected a resident mood interview that revealed over the last two weeks have you been bothered by any of the following problems? and showed little interest or pleasure in doing things was marked yes for symptom presence and 2-6 days (several days) for frequency. Feeling down, depressed, or hopeless was also marked as a symptom present and 2-6 days (several days) for frequency. Section I of the MDS assessment reflected Resident #53 was marked for having a diagnosis of Anxiety Disorder, Depression, and Schizophrenia. Section N of the MDS assessment reflected Resident #53 was taking an antipsychotic, antianxiety, and antidepressant. Review of resident #53's care plan last revised 06/11/25 reflected a focus on: I am currently receiving anti-anxiety medication related to anxiety disorder. I am currently receiving psychotropic medications related to Schizophrenia. Review of Resident #53's physician's orders reflected an order dated 05/22/25 Make sure resident takes his medications before leaving the room. Every shift monitoring of taking medication **Make sure resident swallows his medications before leaving his room. Review of Resident #53's progress note revealed a progress note dated 06/09/25 entered by SW that stated, SW was sitting with resident when he stated he wasn't feeling well. SW asked resident to elaborate- he stated can I be honest with you? SW stated of course. Resident began telling this writer that he wanted to kill himself. He stated he has hoarded his medications in his locked bedside table and planned to take all at once and overdose. SW proceeded to inform ADM and DON about the situation. ADM and DON stated resident needed to be sent out and be on a 1:1 until he was sent out. SW gave resident two options to be sent to emergency room or psychiatric hospital. Resident agreed to go to psychiatric hospital to stabilize. SW called psychiatric hospital inpatient and received authorization for resident to admit to an inpatient stay. SW then collected all medications from bedroom and handed them over to DON. SW stayed 1:1 with resident, listening to music, coloring, until psychiatric hospital was ready to admit him. At 03:15 PM resident boarded onto facility van voluntarily with staff to transport to psychiatric hospital. IDT aware, PASRR aware. SW was with resident from 01:50 PM to 03:15 PM. Review of the facility reported incidents on 06/12/25 for the month of June 2025 revealed there was no self-report for the event concerning Resident #53 on 06/09/25 was reported internally or observed in TULIP to state agency. In an interview on 06/12/25 at 02:56 PM with the DON she stated she was just now working on an internal incident report for Resident #53 so that it could be kept on file and referred to when needed. She stated to her knowledge this was not an incident reported to HHSC. She stated she would consider this an emergency situation. The DON stated if Resident #53 would have gone through with his plan and consumed all the medication he had pocketed, it would be enough to cause a change in condition and the potential for harm. In an interview on 06/13/25 at 01:30 PM with the ADM he stated he was responsible for reporting incidents and that at the time of the incident he did not believe it needed to be reported to HHSC which is why he didn't report it. He stated Resident #53 had not consumed the medication and there was no harm at the time, so he did not believe it met the conditions to be a reportable incident. The ADM stated that based on the findings on 06/09/25 when Resident #53 wanted to commit suicide and was found to have 21 pills he believed it was important to send the resident out for evaluation and stated he made sure Resident #53 made a visit to either the ER or a psychiatric hospital due to the suicidal ideations which is why he was immediately sent out the same day. He stated a potential negative outcome of not reporting incidents is the potential for residents to not get the services they need. In an interview on 06/13/25 at 05:05 PM with the SW, she stated Resident #53 made the suicidal ideation report to her and showed her the pills he had been hoarding in order to fulfill his plan on 06/09/25. She stated the day after the incident on 06/10/25 she asked the ADM if this would be reported to HHS and was told he did not think it needed to be reported. Review of the undated Accidents and Incidents Investigation and Reporting policy reflected: All accidents or incidents involving residents, employees, visitors, vendors, etc. occurring on our premises shall be reviewed and investigated. The Nurse Supervisor/Charge Nurse and/or the department director or supervisor shall promptly initiate an investigation of the accident or incident and notify the Administrator immediately for allegations of abuse, neglect, misappropriation, and exploitation. The Nurse Supervisor/Charge Nurse and/or the department director shall complete an Incident/Accident report. The Administrator and Director of Nursing shall review the Incident/Accident report form for each occurrence and follow-up with the appropriate interventions. A policy was requested from the ADM on 06/13/25 at 02:50 PM, he stated there was no other reporting policy that specified the reporting requirements for different incidents.
CONCERN (D)

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

Assessment Accuracy (Tag F0641)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record review the facility failed to ensure the resident assessment accurately reflected the resident's ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record review the facility failed to ensure the resident assessment accurately reflected the resident's status for 2 (Resident #119, and Resident #168) of 12 residents reviewed for accuracy of assessments. The facility failed on 6/11/2025 to ensure Resident's #119 and #168's comprehensive MDS assessments accurately reflected their healthcare status and needs. This deficient practice could have placed the resident at risk for inadequate care due to incomplete assessments. Findings included: Record review of Resident #119's face sheet dated 06/12/25 reflected Resident #119 was an [AGE] year-old female with an admission date of 05/20/25. Resident #119's diagnoses encephalopathy (a group of conditions that cause brain dysfunction. Brain dysfunction can appear as confusion, memory loss, personality changes and/or coma in the most severe form), congestive heart failure (a serious condition that occurs when the heart can't pump enough blood to meet the body's needs), hypothyroidism (a disorder of the endocrine system in which the thyroid gland does not produce enough thyroid hormones), and muscle weakness (commonly due to lack of exercise, ageing, muscle injury or pregnancy). Record review of Resident #119's admission MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected Resident #119's MDS was not completed. Record review of Resident 119s assessment titled Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) Evaluation reflected Resident had a BIMS score of 15 indicating Resident #119 was cognitively intact. Record review of Resident #119's care plan dated 05/29/25 and revised 05/31/25 reflected Focus: At risk of infection due to picking at her wounds with her nails. She has a burn area on her upper medial abdomen that she picks at frequently. Goal: Resident will not have any complications related to wound healing during the review period. Interventions included: Assess area frequently for signs or symptoms of worsening skin integrity. Record review of Resident #119's clinical physician orders dated 06/12/25 reflected an order for Wound Care : Right dorsal foot (top of the foot)- cleanse area with wound cleanser, pat dry, apply medi-honey (wound gel) to wound, cover with bordered gauze then wrap with kerlix every day shift. Review of Resident #168's undated face sheet reflected Resident #168 was a [AGE] year-old-male with diagnoses including unspecified dementia, epilepsy (recurrent seizures), polyneuropathy (damage to multiple peripheral nerves causing pain, weakness, and sensory loss), spondylosis (degenerative changes in the spine), and osteoporosis (weak and brittle bones). Review of Resident #168's admission MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected a [AGE] year-old male who admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident #168's comprehensive MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected the only section that had been completed was Section F (Preferences for Customary Routine and Activities) and signed and completed by the facility's AD on 05/29/2025. In an interview on 06/12/25 at 12:18 PM with LVN D who stated that he began working remotely for the facility 2 weeks ago. He stated that for his first day or two he met with staff in the building. He stated that most of the assessments, (pain, depression, BIMS) are conducted by the facility staff. He stated that he takes all those assessments and puts the information into the MDS assessment. He stated that majority of the questions have been answered for him, but he did have to dig through some records (such as skin integrity), to find out what date it was done. LVN D stated that he was not responsible for ensuring the timeliness of assessments, it was the VPR. In an interview on 06/12/25 at 12:41 PM with the VPR who stated that he had been in his position since the beginning of 2025 and that he had been submitting MDS assessments off and on for a couple months for the facility. He stated that he was responsible for submitting those within their required timeframes. He was aware of the late MDS's, and it was due to the MDS position at the facility not being filled. He stated that not submitting the assessments on time may lead to negative outcomes by not identifying the care residents needed. He stated he had 2 people working remotely to help assemble the MDS assessments. He stated they got constant communication from the ADON/DON/ADM to accurately assemble the MDS. VPR stated that the remote workers look at documents in the clinical profile to ensure accuracy, but that most of the needed assessments are conducted onsite by the facility staff and left for the MDS team to assemble and put in the assessment. Review of the facility's undated Electronic Transmission of the MDS policy reflected: All MDS assessments (e.g., admission, annual, significant change, quarterly review, etc.) and discharge and reentry records will be completed and electronically encoded into our facility's MDS information system and transmitted to CMS' QIES Assessment Submission and Processing (ASAP) system in accordance with current OBRA regulations governing the transmission of MDS data. MDS electronic submissions shall be conducted in accordance with current OBRA regulations governing the transmission of such data.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0655 (Tag F0655)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview, and record review the facility failed to develop and implement a baseline care plan within 48 hours from adm...

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 baseline care plan within 48 hours from admission for 1 of 5 resident (Resident #120) reviewed for care plans. The facility failed to ensure Resident #120 had a Baseline Care Plan that was due within 48 hours of admission to reflect the person-centered needs of Resident #120. This failure could place residents at risk of getting insufficient care and having personal needs not met and could result in diminished physical and psychosocial well-being. Findings include: Review of Resident #120's face sheet dated 06/12/25 reflected that he was a [AGE] year-old male admitted [DATE] with diagnoses of displaced fracture of anterior wall of right acetabulum(medial boundary of hip socket) (a serious injury often requiring surgery), muscle weakness (commonly due to lack of exercise, ageing, muscle injury or pregnancy), cognitive communication deficit (a communication problem caused by underlying cognitive impairments rather than a primary language or speech deficit), hypertension (a long-term medical condition in which the blood pressure in the arteries is persistently elevated), and emphysema (a long-term lung condition that causes shortness of breath). Review of Resident #120's 05/15/25 admission MDS reflected his BIMS score was 13, which indicated Resident #120 was cognitively intact. Review of Resident #120's assessments reflected a Baseline Care Plan dated on 05/21/25, initiated at admission. Review of the resident's records reflected that the Baseline Care Plan was due by 05/17/25, which was 4 days after Resident # 120's admission date. In an interview on 06/12/25 at 10:28 AM, the DON stated the SW was responsible for opening the baseline care plan and getting it going. She stated she may add some things to the baseline care plan later as needed but the social worker was ultimately responsible. She stated staff that were responsible for completing baseline care plans had been trained on completing the baseline care plans accurately and within the required time frame. She stated she was not aware that Resident #120's baseline care plan had not been completed within the 48 hour time frame. She stated if a baseline care plan was not completed within the 48 hour period, there could be goals missed for the new resident and it could have potentially affected their care. In an interview on 06/12/25 at 12:24 PM, the SW stated she completed the baseline care plans in addition to the rest of the IDT. She stated the nurses should have opened the baseline care plans but she was the one that usually did. She stated she was aware that the baseline care plan should have been completed within 48 hours. She stated she was not aware the baseline care plan for Resident #120 was not completed within the 48 hour timeframe. She stated she had been out of the facility on vacation until 05/21/25 and she opened and completed the baseline care plan for Resident #120 on the day she returned. She stated Resident #120's baseline care plan should have been completed within 48 hours of his admission. She stated if a resident's baseline care plan was not completed within the required time frame, the facility would have been out of regulation and staff would not have known the resident's correct assessment results. She stated she did not think the baseline care plan not being completed within 48 hours would have affected the resident's care. In an interview on 06/12/25 at 01:37 PM, the ADM stated at this time it was the SW's responsibility to complete the baseline care plans within 48 hours, but it also was a group effort shared with the DON and nurses. He stated typically the MDS nurse would have been responsible for completing the baseline care plans, but they did not have a MDS nurse in that position at that time. He stated he asked the SW every morning in their stand up meeting if the 48 hour care plans were completed for the required residents and that was part of his stand up meeting checklist. He stated all staff that were responsible for completing the baseline care plans had been trained on completing the baseline care plans within the required time frame. He stated he was not aware that Resident #120's baseline care plan had not been completed within the 48 hour time frame. He stated if a baseline care plan was not completed within the 48 hour time frame, the staff could not reflect on the baseline care plan and the resident may not have gotten what they needed. Record Review of the facility policy titled, Care Plans - Baseline and dated December 2016, reflected: Policy Statement: A baseline plan of care to meet the resident's immediate needs shall be developed for each resident within forty-eight (48) hours of admission. Policy Interpretation and Implementation: 1. To assure that the resident's immediate care needs are met and maintained, a baseline care plan will be developed within forty-eight (48) hours of the resident's admission .
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0676 (Tag F0676)

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 was given the appropriate treatment ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure a resident was given the appropriate treatment and services to maintain or improve his or her ability to carry out the activities of daily living for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #19) reviewed for ADL activities. The facility failed on 6/11/2025 to provide therapy services to maintain or improve Resident #19's communication ability by not evaluating her communication deficit for intervention or improvements. This failure could place residents at risk of ADL decline, frustration, and decreased socialization. Findings included: Review of Resident #19's comprehensive MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected a [AGE] year-old female who admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included stroke (when blood supply to part of the brain is suddenly reduced, leading to brain cell death and/or permanent damage), high blood pressure, diabetes mellitus (chronic disease where the body does not produce enough insulin), non-Alzheimer's dementia, hemiplegia (paralysis) affecting right nondominant side. In Section V- Care Area Assessment (CAA) Summary, it was indicated that a care area and care planning decision was triggered for communication and ADL Functional/Rehabilitation Potential, and a CAA WS was completed on 6/1/2025. Resident # 19's BIMS score was a 15, indicating she was cognitively intact. Review of Resident #19's comprehensive care plan dated 05/13/2025 reflected the care plan had not been completed and only indicated that she had a behavior problem of refusing care and bathing, and that she took anxiety medication. Review of Resident #19's CAA WS dated 6/1/2025 reflected the following: -Triggering conditions-Impaired ability to make self-understood through verbal and non-verbal expression of ideas/wants as indicated by: ability to express ideas and wants, consider both verbal and non-verbal expression, resident was indicated as sometimes understood. -Characteristics of the communication impairment (from clinical record): expressive communication, difficulty putting sentences together, problem describing objects and events. -Care Plan Considerations, if care planning for this problem, what is the overall objective? Maintain current level of functioning, minimize risks. Review of Resident #19's physician's orders, dated 04/30/2025, reflected the following standing (a written protocol that allows the healthcare team to perform specific clinical tasks without needing a physician's order) orders: PT, OT, ST may eval and treat as indicated. PT, OT, ST to eval & treat as indicated. Rehab potential In an observation and interview on 06/10/25 at 3:02 PM with Resident #19 who was in her room revealed a communication board on her bedside table. When asked if the communication board helped the resident communicate her needs/wants with facility staff she said sometimes. It was observed that the resident had a difficult time getting the words out that she was trying to say, she took long pauses, looked around, used finger motions such as to draw numbers, and ultimately used a pen and paper to write to communicate some things to the state surveyor. At one point she began to cry and exclaimed that she wished staff would stay longer to hear what she was trying to tell them, because they will leave while she is trying to find the right words. The resident stated that made her feel sad and angry when staff would walk out instead of taking the time to listen to her. She stated that no one had offered her rehab services, but she would like help with her speech and with the healing of her right leg after a fall that happened before she moved into the facility. In an interview on 06/11/25 at 3:42 PM with the SLP who stated that she had not conducted any therapy screenings, evaluations, or assessments on Resident #19. She had only conducted the BIMS and depression questionnaire. She stated that she had not done a screening because the facility's process was to only screen a resident if therapy was notified by nursing that a resident had a decline or showed a need for therapy. She stated she had not been informed by any of the nursing staff that Resident #19 had a communication board and she stated she would verify if the resident admitted with the board. If a decline was to be reported by nursing staff the therapy department would do a screening to determine if a more in-depth evaluation was needed, then they would run a verification of benefits to see if the resident's payor source had benefits to cover therapy services, if there were no benefits the facility could ask for a facility authorization which is where the facility ultimately covers the cost of therapy services. In an interview on 06/11/25 at 5:07 PM with the DOR who stated she would check to see if Resident #19 admitted with the communication board. She stated that the process for screening a resident for therapy would be to screen all short-term (skilled) residents for therapy needs, but for LTC residents they typically do not evaluate unless they get a referral from nursing that there has been a decline. The residents quarterly MDS's would trigger an initial therapy evaluation if a decline had been documented. The DOR would then run a verification of benefits to see if a resident had benefits for therapy, but if they came back with no benefits available, the facility would request a facility authorization, which is where the facility could essentially pay for the services until the resident gets another payor source or the therapy is no longer needed. In a telephone interview on 06/12/25 at 10:23 AM with Resident #19's FM who stated that Resident #19 had been paralyzed on her right side for about 13 years after having a stroke. The FM stated that Resident #19's mind works well, but her speech was difficult to understand especially when she got tired or agitated. The FM stated that Resident #19 had a fall back in February 2025, prior to that fall the resident was able to get around with the use of a walker, the broken leg made it to where she could not walk at all because the leg could no longer bear weight. The FM stated that the resident chose to let her leg heal naturally with assistance of a brace and that she wears it consistently, and she still attended doctor's visits about her leg. The FM stated that during the healing process, the resident was well confined to a wheelchair or her bed but was adjusting well. The FM stated they thought the resident could benefit from speech therapy, and that the socialization aspect would be great for the resident. The FM stated that approximately 3-4 years ago the resident took ST independently. The FM also stated that Resident #19's Medicaid was in limbo, because prior to admitting to the facility she was using community Medicaid, and they were switching her to NF Medicaid. In a follow-up interview on 06/12/25 at 10:47 AM with the SLP who stated that Resident #19 admitted with the communication board and that nursing should have told her the resident admitted with a communication board so the SLP would have been able to conduct a screening. She would have liked to screen her earlier in her stay to determine if she was appropriate for a further in-depth speech evaluation, and then ask the DOR if the resident qualified for therapy based on her payor source. She stated she has in the past educated nursing staff on how to use a communication board with previous residents who had them. She stated that she went to the resident and conducted an initial therapy screening on 6/12/25 and that from her screening the SLP determined the resident could benefit from a higher tech, augmentative alternative communication device. The resident could receive training on how to use the device and communicate her needs more efficiently and reduce her frustration. She stated that she could try to get a company out to the facility to teach the resident how to use the device. A negative impact could be further decline in function, limiting independence and daily tasks, not being able to express her pain, higher risk for hospital readmission, falls and injury, emotional distress, and social isolation. She stated it was also determined from the screening that Resident #19 could benefit from PT to address a contracture in her right leg to relieve pain. Furthermore, the SLP stated that Resident #19 could benefit from OT services but Resident #19 declined wanting to participate in OT. In an interview on 06/12/25 at 11:03 AM with the ADM who stated that nursing staff should have made therapy aware of the communication board that Resident #19 had, and then therapy should have started their verification processes and screenings. He stated that if therapy was given the proper communication from nursing and had done their screen and assessed that the resident could benefit from therapy services, and that resident does not have a payor source with therapy benefits, the ADM could sign an authorization form to begin services, until other payment arrangements could be made. He stated that if nursing didn't notice a decline in the resident, they may not have said anything to therapy. The ADM stated that it was possible therapy should have already looked at Resident #19. In an interview on 06/12/25 at 9:30 AM with LVN A who stated that she was not sure if Resident #19 admitted with the communication board or if it was given to her by the SLP. LVN A stated that she had not told therapy Resident #19 could benefit from therapy because she thought the communication board was already a part of therapy services. When asked how she knew what care to provide to Resident #19 based on an incomplete care plan, she stated she had to go assess the resident herself to get a better picture of who she was and what she needed. She stated that Resident #19 was cognitively intact, and could communicate, but when she tried to hold conversations, she took a long time to get her words out, and they (staff) would have to tend to other residents, and they should have told Resident #19 they would return after providing care to others and follow through with that promise. Review of the facility's undated Resident Rights policy reflected, Employees shall treat all residents with kindness, respect, and dignity. Federal and state laws guarantee certain basic rights to all residents of this facility. These rights include the resident's right to: a. A dignified existence; b. Be treated with respect, kindness, and dignity
CONCERN (D)

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

Unnecessary Medications (Tag F0759)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure that the medication error rate was not five per...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure that the medication error rate was not five percent or greater. The facility had a medication error rate of 6.45%, based on 2 errors out of 31 opportunities, which involved 2 of 2 residents (Residents #60 and Resident #168) observed during medication administration for medication errors. The facility failed to ensure Resident #60's physician's ordered medication Hydralazine was available for administration on 06/11/2025 at 10:00 am during medication pass. The MA failed to check Resident #168's blood pressure prior to the administration of his Metoprolol (a medication used to lower blood pressure) on 06/11/2025 at 9:45am during medication pass observation. This failure could place residents at risk of low blood pressure, dizziness, risk of falling and hospitalizations. The findings included: 1.) Review of Resident #60's face sheet reflected a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with the following diagnoses diverticulitis of the intestines (inflammation of the intestine), unspecified mood disorder, anxiety, and high blood pressure. Review of Resident #60's admission MDS dated [DATE] reflected she was assessed to have a BIMS score of 15 indicating she was cognitively intact. Review of Resident #60's comprehensive care plan reflected a problem dated 04/01/2025 and revised on 06/02/2025 The resident had a mood problem related to bipolar disorder and psychosis disorder. Interventions included Administer medications as ordered. Monitor/document for side effects and effectiveness. Review of Resident #60's consolidated physician orders dated 06/11/2025 reflected an order for hydralazine HCI 25mg by mouth two times daily for elevated anxiety. Review of Resident #60's June 2025 MAR reflected entries for hydralazine 25mg tablets twice daily. Review of the documentation on the MAR for the 06/11/2025 reflected a 9 was documented indicating from the facility's chart code other/ see nurses notes. Review of nurses' notes reflected medication not available. Observation on 06/11/2025 at 10:00 AM, revealed the MA prepared 12 medications for Resident #60's medication for administration. The medications for administration did not include her physician ordered hydralazine. In an interview on 06/11/2025 at 10:15 AM, the MA stated she was not sure why resident #60 did not have her hydralazine available. She stated the medication was ordered yesterday. She stated the medication aides generally reorder medications when there was a 4-to-5-day supply available. She stated she notified the charge nurse the medication was unavailable. She stated the resident could have had discomfort from not receiving her medication for her anxiety. In an interview on 06/11/25 at 01:58 PM LVN A stated the MA had not notified her that Resident #60 was out of her hydralazine. She stated she would have expected the MA to report to the charge nurse if a medication was not available. She stated she could have checked the emergency kit and pulled the medication from it if it were in there. She stated she was not sure if that specific medication was in the emergency medication kit. She stated if it were not in the kit she would have reported to the DON and called the pharmacy to get it delivered stat. She stated Resident #60 could have had increased anxiety, itching, elevated blood pressure from not receiving her medications. 2.) Review of Resident #168's face sheet reflected a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the following diagnoses Dementia (memory loss), epilepsy (seizures), polyneuropathy (nerve pain) and age-related osteoporosis (a thinning of the bone making it brittle). Review of Resident #168's consolidated physician orders dated 06/11/2025 reflected an order for Metoprolol Tartrate 25mg 1 tablet by mouth in the morning hold medication is systolic blood pressure is less than 110 or diastolic blood pressure is less than 60 or heart rate less than 55 beats per minute. Review of Resident #168's June 2025 medication administration record reflected entries for Metoprolol Tartrate 25mg 1 tablet by mouth in the morning with instructions to hold medication is systolic blood pressure is less than 110 or diastolic blood pressure is less than 60 or heart rate less than 55 beats per minute. There were no documented blood pressure checks prior to the administration of medication from June 1, 2025, thru June 11, 2025. In an Observation and interview on 06/11/2025 at 9:45 AM, revealed the MA prepared 10 medications for Resident #168's medication for administration. The medications for administration included her physician ordered Metoprolol Tartrate 25mg. The MA went into room to administer medications when this surveyor stopped her to question if blood pressure should have been checked. The MA stated there were no areas to document a blood pressure within the medication administration record, so she assumed she did not have to take a blood pressure prior to administration of medications. She stated the risk to the residents for not checking a blood pressure prior to administering medications that could affect the blood pressure could have been the residents blood pressure could become very low causing dizziness or causing the resident to pass out. The MA then checked residents blood pressure and it was 139/81 with a pulse of 61. Resident #168 stated he was feeling fine, and the MA administered medications as ordered. In an interview on 06/11/25 at 1:58 PM LVN A stated the MA had reported to her that Resident #168 needed an order in the computer for documentation of parameters for blood pressure. She stated she had called the doctor and he had the nurse to check all blood pressure medication orders for parameters. She stated if a resident were to receive a medication that could lower the blood pressure without the blood pressure being checked prior to administration it could have causeed harm to the resident such as dizziness, have falls, and altered mental status. In an interview on 06/12/25 at 01:01 PM, the DON stated her expectation was that the MA's notify the nurses immediately if a medication was not available. She stated the nurse could have called the doctor and had him call it into our local pharmacy for pick up to ensure the medication was available for Resident #60. She stated negative effects for not having medications available could have been low blood pressure, too high of a blood pressure, change in condition, or anxiety. The DON stated it was her expectation is that if there was a discrepancy in medication directions the MA should notify the nurse and the order should be corrected. There were several employees responsible for checking those orders and ensuring the orders are correct on admission. The blood pressure parameters were on the original order but was not entered in the computer by the admitting nurse. She stated DON would be taking responsibility for checking orders for all new admissions from now on. She stated negative effects for administering blood pressure medications without proper monitoring of the blood pressure could have included a low heart rate, and ineffective medication. Record review of facility undated policy titled Pharmacy Services reflected: The facility shall accurately and safely provide or obtain pharmaceutical services, including the provision of routine and emergency medications and biologicals, and the services of a licensed consultant pharmacist. Policy Interpretation and Implementation: Pharmaceutical services consists of: Residents have sufficient supply of their prescribed medications and receive medications (routine, emergency or as needed) in a timely manner. Nursing staff communicate prescriber orders to the pharmacy and are responsible for contacting the pharmacy if a resident's medication is not available for administration. Record review of facility undated policy titled Administering Oral Medications reflected: Verify that there is a physician's medication order for this procedure. Perform any pre-administration assessments.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0825 (Tag F0825)

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 specialized rehabilitative services such as bu...

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 specialized rehabilitative services such as but not limited to physical therapy, speech-language pathology, occupational therapy, respiratory therapy, and rehabilitative services for mental illness and intellectual disability of services of a lesser intensity, for one of six residents (Resident #19) reviewed for specialized rehabilitative services, in that: The facility failed on 6/11/2025 to ensure Resident #19 received a PT/OT/ST evaluation and treat as indicated upon admission as ordered in her admission clinical records dated 4/30/2025. This failure could place residents at risk of decline or decrease in their physical capabilities and emotional distress. Findings included: Review of Resident #19's comprehensive MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected a [AGE] year-old female who admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included stroke (when blood supply to part of the brain is suddenly reduced, leading to brain cell death and/or permanent damage), high blood pressure, diabetes mellitus (chronic disease where the body does not produce enough insulin), non-Alzheimer's dementia, hemiplegia (paralysis) affecting right nondominant side. In Section V- Care Area Assessment (CAA) Summary, it was indicated that a care area and care planning decision was triggered for communication and ADL Functional/Rehabilitation Potential, and a CAA WS was completed on 6/1/2025. Her BIMS score was a 15, indicating she was cognitively intact. Review of Resident #19's comprehensive care plan dated 05/13/2025 reflected the care plan had not been completed and only indicated that she had a behavior problem of refusing care and bathing, and that she took anxiety medication. Review of Resident #19's CAA WS dated 6/1/2025 reflected the following: '-Triggering conditions-Impaired ability to make self-understood through verbal and non-verbal expression of ideas/wants as indicated by: ability to express ideas and wants, consider both verbal and non-verbal expression, resident was indicated as sometimes understood. -Characteristics of the communication impairment (from clinical record): expressive communication, difficulty putting sentences together, problem describing objects and events. -Care Plan Considerations, if care planning for this problem, what is the overall objective? Maintain current level of functioning, minimize risks.' Review of Resident #19's physician's orders, dated 04/30/2025, reflected the following standing (a written protocol that allows the healthcare team to perform specific clinical tasks without needing a physician's order) orders: PT, OT, ST may eval and treat as indicated. PT, OT, ST to eval & treat as indicated. Rehab potential Review of Resident #19's therapy screening form dated 6/12/25 reflected under occupational therapy the following: Would benefit from OT services however is requesting ST/PT services @ this time per patient. Under physical therapy: Would benefit from PT services to address contracture in R LE t o relieve pain, staff report no decline in function upon admission to present. Under speech therapy: Per patient no swallowing or choking, no pain with swallowing. Would benefit from ST services to address deficits with expressive aphasia. Could benefit from a higher tech augmentative alternative communication device. Has communication board. Requires extended time to process information and time to respond. In an observation and interview on 06/10/25 at 3:02 PM with Resident #19 located in her room revealed a communication board on her bedside table. When asked if the communication board helped the resident communicate her needs/wants with facility staff she said sometimes. It was observed that the resident had a difficult time getting the words out that she was trying to say, she took long pauses, looked around, used finger motions such as to draw numbers, and ultimately used a pen and paper to write to communicate some things to the state surveyor. At one point she began to cry and exclaimed that she wished staff would stay longer to hear what she was trying to tell them, because they will leave while she was trying to find the right words. The resident stated that made her feel sad and angry when staff would walk out instead of taking the time to listen to her. She stated that no one had offered her rehab services, but she would like help with her speech and with the healing of her right leg after a fall that happened before she moved into the facility. In an interview on 06/11/25 at 3:42 PM with the SLP who stated that she had not conducted any therapy screenings, evaluations, or assessments on Resident #19. She had only conducted the BIMS and depression questionnaire. She stated that she had not done a screening because the facility's process was to only screen a resident if therapy was notified by nursing that a resident had a decline or showed a need for therapy. She stated she had not been informed by any of the nursing staff that Resident #19 had a communication board and she stated she would verify if the resident admitted with the board. If a decline was to be reported by nursing staff the therapy department would do a screening to determine if a more in-depth evaluation was needed, then they would run a verification of benefits to see if the resident's payor source had benefits to cover therapy services, if there were no benefits the facility could ask for a facility authorization which is where the facility ultimately covers the cost of therapy services. In an interview on 06/11/25 at 5:07 PM with the DOR who stated she would check to see if Resident #19 admitted with the communication board. She stated that the process for screening a resident for therapy would be to screen all short-term (skilled) residents for therapy needs, but for LTC residents they typically do not evaluate unless they get a referral from nursing that there has been a decline. The residents quarterly MDS's would trigger an initial therapy evaluation if a decline had been documented. The DOR would then run a verification of benefits to see if a resident had benefits for therapy, but if they came back with no benefits available, the facility would request a facility authorization, which is where the facility could essentially pay for the services until the resident gets another payor source or the therapy is no longer needed. In a telephone interview on 06/12/25 at 10:23 AM with Resident #19's FM who stated that Resident #19 had been paralyzed on her right side for about 13 years after having a stroke. The FM stated that Resident #19's mind works well, but her speech was difficult to understand especially when she got tired or agitated. The FM stated that Resident #19 had a fall back in February 2025, prior to that fall the resident was able to get around with the use of a walker, the broken leg made it to where she could not walk at all because the leg could no longer bear weight. The FM stated that the resident chose to let her leg heal naturally with assistance of a brace and that she wears it consistently, and she still attended doctor's visits about her leg. The FM stated that during the healing process, the resident was well confined to a wheelchair or her bed but was adjusting well. The FM stated they thought the resident could benefit from speech therapy, and that the socialization aspect would be great for the resident. The FM stated that approximately 3-4 years ago the resident took ST independently. The FM also stated that Resident #19's Medicaid was in limbo, because prior to admitting to the facility she was using community Medicaid, and they were switching her to NF Medicaid. In a follow-up interview on 06/12/25 at 10:47 AM with the SLP who stated that Resident #19 admitted with the communication board and that nursing should have told her the resident admitted with a communication board so the SLP would have been able to conduct a screening. She would have liked to screen her earlier in her stay to determine if she was appropriate for a further in-depth speech evaluation, and then ask the DOR if the resident qualified for therapy based on her payor source. She stated she has in the past educated nursing staff on how to use a communication board with previous residents who had them. She stated that she went to the resident and conducted an initial therapy screening on 6/12/25 and that from her screening the SLP determined the resident could benefit from a higher tech, augmentative alternative communication device. The resident could receive training on how to use the device and communicate her needs more efficiently and reduce her frustration. She stated that she could try to get a company out to the facility to teach the resident how to use the device. A negative impact could be further decline in function, limiting independence and daily tasks, not being able to express her pain, higher risk for hospital readmission, falls and injury, emotional distress, and social isolation. She stated it was also determined from the screening that Resident #19 could benefit from PT to address a contracture in her right leg to relieve pain. Furthermore, the SLP stated that Resident #19 could benefit from OT services but Resident #19 declined wanting to participate in OT. In an interview on 06/12/25 at 10:57 AM with the BOM who stated that Resident #19 admitted with no payor source and that she (BOM) submitted the NF Medicaid application on 6/4/2025 because she stated the residents must reside in the facility for 30 days prior to applying for Medicaid. During those 30 days, if the resident admits without a payor source, the facility treats them as if they are already approved for Medicaid, meaning that all therapies could get started if the resident has a medical need for it. In an interview on 06/12/25 at 11:03 AM with the ADM who stated that nursing staff should have made therapy aware of the communication board that Resident #19 had, and then therapy should have started their verification processes and screenings. He stated that if therapy was given the proper communication from nursing and had done their screen and assessed that the resident could benefit from therapy services, and that resident does not have a payor source with therapy benefits, the ADM could sign an authorization form to begin services, until other payment arrangements could be made. He stated that if nursing didn't notice a decline in the resident, they may not have said anything to therapy. The ADM stated that it was possible therapy should have already looked at Resident #19. In an interview on 06/12/25 at 9:30 AM with LVN A who stated that she was not sure if Resident #19 admitted with the communication board or if it was given to her by the SLP. She stated that she (LVN A) had not told therapy Resident #19 could benefit from therapy because she thought the communication board was already a part of therapy services. When asked how she knew what care to provide to Resident #19 based on an incomplete care plan, she stated she had to go assess the resident herself to get a better picture of who she was and what she needed. She stated that Resident #19 was cognitively intact, and could communicate, but when she tried to hold conversations, she took a long time to get her words out, and they (staff) would have to tend to other residents, and they should have told Resident #19 they would return after providing care to others and follow through with that promise. Review of the facility's undated Therapy Insurance Verification Process policy reflected, Therapy screens all admits and readmits. Review of the facility's undated rehab Screening Policy reflected, New admits and any patient/resident identified by the interdisciplinary team, as requiring a rehabilitation screen will have the screening initiated by Physical, Occupational Therapist or assistant or a Speech Language Pathologist within 48 hours of notification of the request or admit. A patient/resident is referred for rehabilitation screen in response to any of the following: The comprehensive facility nursing assessment, completed upon admission, quarterly and PRN. i. If any triggers are noted in the following areas and if decline has been noted from the previous assessment 4. Modes of expression 5. Making self-understood 7. Communication devices
CONCERN (D)

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

Infection Control (Tag F0880)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

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

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain an infection and prevention control program that included, at a minimum, a system for preventing and controlling infections for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for wound care (Resident #119). LVN B failed to wash or sanitize her hands while going from a dirty to clean surface while performing wound care on 06/11/25 at 9:46 AM for Resident #119. This deficient practice placed residents at risk for cross contamination and the spread of infection. Findings included: Record review of Resident #119's face sheet dated 06/12/25 reflected Resident #119 was an [AGE] year-old female with an admission date of 05/20/25. Resident #119's diagnoses included encephalopathy (a group of conditions that cause brain dysfunction. Brain dysfunction can appear as confusion, memory loss, personality changes and/or coma in the most severe form), congestive heart failure (a serious condition that occurs when the heart can't pump enough blood to meet the body's needs), hypothyroidism (a disorder of the endocrine system in which the thyroid gland does not produce enough thyroid hormones), and muscle weakness (commonly due to lack of exercise, ageing, muscle injury or pregnancy). Record review of the admission MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected Resident #119's MDS was not completed. Record review of Resident #119's assessment titled Brief Interview For Mental Status (BIMS) Evaluation reflected the resident had a BIMS score of 15 indicating Resident #119 was cognitively intact. Record review of Resident #119's care plan dated 05/29/25 and revised 05/31/25 reflected Focus: At risk of infection due to picking at her wounds with her nails. She has a burn area on her upper medial (midline) abdomen that she picks at frequently. Goal: Resident will not have any complications related to wound healing during the review period. Interventions included: Assess area frequently for signs or symptoms of worsening skin integrity. Record review of Resident #119's clinical physician's orders dated 06/12/25 reflected an order for Wound Care : Right [NAME] (upper side or back)l foot - cleanse area with wound cleanser, pat dry, apply medi-honey to wound, cover with bordered gauze then wrap with kerlix (gauze wrap) every day shift. In an observation on 06/11/25 at 09:46 AM, reveled LVN B performed wound care for Resident #119. LVN B gathered her supplies, entered the resident's room, and informed the resident what she was going to do. LVN B removed Resident #119's soiled dressing and cleansed Resident #119's wound to the top of right foot. LVN B removed her gloves and applied new gloves without washing or sanitizing her hands. LVN B applied a clean dressing to the resident's wound. LVN B disposed of the trash and made sure Resident #119 was comfortable and left the room. In an interview on 06/11/25 at 09:55 AM, LVN B stated she had been in-serviced on wound care, handwashing, and infection control. She stated she typically would have washed her hands during wound care when changing her gloves if she had to leave the room to get something, but not when she stayed in the room the entire time. She stated she washed her hands when going from a dirty to clean surface and she had been in-serviced on that. She stated if hands were not washed when going from a dirty to clean surface, it could have caused and increased risk of infection. In an interview on 06/12/25 at 10:28 AM, the DON stated all staff had been trained on infection control and handwashing and the nurses had all been trained on wound care. She stated staff should have always washed or sanitized her hands when going from a dirty to clean surface, even when they changed their gloves when going from a dirty to clean surface. She stated if staff had not washed or sanitized their hands when going from a dirty to clean surface it could potentially have caused an infection. In an interview on 06/12/25 at 01:37 PM, the ADM stated all staff had been trained on infection control and handwashing and he was not sure about all of the nurses, but he knew the DON and WCN had been trained on wound care. He stated it was his expectation that all staff washed or sanitized their hands when they went from a dirty to a clean surface. He stated if staff had not washed or sanitized their hands when going from a dirty to clean surface, it could have possibly caused and infection control issue. Record review of the undated Handwashing/Hand Hygiene policy, reflected the following: Policy Statement: This facility considers hand hygiene the primary means to prevent the spread of infections. Policy Interpretation and Implementation: 1. All personnel shall follow the handwashing/hand hygiene procedures to help prevent the spread of infection. 5. Use an alcohol-based hand rub containing at least 62% alcohol; or, alternatively, soap and water for the following situations: b. Before and after direct contact with residents; d. Before performing any non-surgical invasive procedures; g. Before handling clean or soiled dressings, gauze pads, etc.; h. Before moving from a contaminated body site to a clean body site during resident care; i. After contact with a resident's intact skin: j. After contact with blood or bodily fluids; k. After handling used dressings, contaminated equipment, etc.; l. After removing gloves; Applying and Removing Gloves: 1. Perform hand hygiene before applying non-sterile gloves. 2. When applying, remove one glove from the dispensing box at a time, touching only the top of the cuff. 3. When removing gloves, pinch the glove at the wrist and peel away from the hand, turning the glove inside out. 4. Hold the removed glove in the gloved hand and remove the other glove by rolling it down the hand and folding it into the first glove. 5. Perform hand hygiene. Record review of the undated Infection Prevention and Control Program policy reflected the following: Policy Statement: An infection prevention and control program (IPCP) is established and maintained to provide a safe, sanitary and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections. Policy Interpretation and Implementation: 11. Prevention of Infection: a. Important facets of infection prevention include: (3) educating staff and ensuring that they adhere to proper techniques and procedures .
CONCERN (D)

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

Smoking Policies (Tag F0926)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to follow their own established smoking policy for 1 (...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to follow their own established smoking policy for 1 (Residents #63) of 2 residents reviewed for smoking. The facility failed on 6/11/2025 to ensure that Residents #63 did not keep their personal cigarette lighters in their room per facility policy. This failure could place residents at risk of an unsafe smoking environment and injury. Findings included: Review of the facility's undated Smoking Residents list provided by the facility, identified Resident #63 as a smoker. Review of Resident #63's comprehensive MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected a [AGE] year-old female who admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included cancer, high blood pressure, kidney failure, malnutrition, depression (sadness), white matter disease (damage to the white matter of the brain), and vitamin D deficiency. Resident #63's BIMS score was a 15, indicating she was cognitively intact. Review of Resident #63's care plan was attempted on 06/10/25 but there was no comprehensive care plan started for Resident #63. Review of Resident #63's safe smoking assessment dated [DATE] revealed she was safe to smoke without supervision. In an interview and observation on 06/12/25 at 8:57 AM of Resident #63 located in her room revealed that she last smoked 1 cigarette on 06/11/25. She stated that she was able to light her own cigarettes, but that staff go outside with her during the designated smoke breaks. When asked where she keeps her cigarettes and lighter she pointed to her nightstand beside her bed and stated she kept them in there. The resident opened her bedside drawer, and the state surveyor observed the residents' lighter and 1 pack of cigarettes. The resident stated that she would not smoke inside because her roommate has oxygen and that the facility had gone over the smoking rules with her before, and they told her that smoking was not allowed inside the building. In an interview on 06/12/25 at 9:30 AM with LVN A who stated that residents' smoking material stay behind the nurse's station, and she was able to produce the cigarettes and lighter from another resident who was identified as a smoker but was only able to produce a pack of Resident #63's cigarettes, and she stated she was unsure where the lighter was. She stated that residents were not allowed to keep their lighters in their rooms, but that all smoking materials were supposed to be turned into the nurse's station. She stated that they do not log the turning in of smoking materials after smoke breaks, and that the CNA's are usually the responsible staff members who assist residents with their smoke breaks. In an interview on 06/12/25 at 9:28 AM with the DON who stated that residents' smoking materials (lighters and cigarettes) are kept at the nurse's stations. She stated that residents should not keep cigarettes and lighters in their rooms. A negative outcome of residents keeping their smoking materials could have been residents smoking when they were not supposed to and could have caused a fire. Review of the facility's policy Smoking Policy-Residents dated July 2017 revealed, This facility shall establish and maintain safe resident smoking practices. Prior to, and upon admission, residents shall be informed of the facility smoking policy, including designated smoking areas, and the extent to which the facility can accommodate their smoking or non-smoking preferences. Cigarettes, e-cigarettes, pipes, tobacco, and other smoking articles.
CONCERN (E)

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

Comprehensive Assessments (Tag F0636)

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 complete a comprehensive assessment within 14 calendar days after a...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to complete a comprehensive assessment within 14 calendar days after admission as required for 3 (Resident #19, Resident #63, and Resident #168) of 5 residents records reviewed for comprehensive assessment accuracy and timing. The facility failed on 6/11/2025 to complete Resident #19, Resident #63, and Resident #168's comprehensive MDS assessments within 14 days following their admissions to the facility. This deficient practice could result in newly admitted residents not receiving the proper care required to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being. Findings included: Review of Resident #19's comprehensive MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected a [AGE] year-old female who admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included stroke (when blood supply to part of the brain is suddenly reduced, leading to brain cell death and/or permanent damage), high blood pressure, diabetes mellitus (chronic disease where the body does not produce enough insulin), non-Alzheimer's dementia, hemiplegia (paralysis) affecting right nondominant side. Her BIMS score was a 15, indicating she was cognitively intact. The MDS sections A, B, C, D, E, GG, H, I, J, M, N, O, P, and Q were not completed until 06/01/2025 and the MDS was signed as completed on 06/02/2025. Review of Resident #19's comprehensive care plan dated 05/13/2025 reflected the care plan had not been completed and only indicated that she had a behavior problem of refusing care and bathing, and that she took anxiety medication. Review of Resident #63's comprehensive MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected a [AGE] year-old-female who admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included cancer, high blood pressure, kidney failure, malnutrition, depression (sadness), white matter disease (damage to the white matter of the brain), and vitamin D deficiency. Her BIMS score was a 15, indicating she was cognitively intact. The MDS sections B, C, E, and Q were not signed as completed until 5/28/2025 and the MDS was signed as completed on 05/28/2025. Review of Resident #63's care plan was attempted on 06/10/25 however there was no comprehensive care plan started for Resident #63. Review of Resident #168's undated face sheet reflected Resident #168 was a [AGE] year-old-male with diagnoses including unspecified dementia, epilepsy (recurrent seizures), polyneuropathy (damage to multiple peripheral nerves causing pain, weakness, and sensory loss), spondylosis (degenerative changes in the spine), and osteoporosis (weak and brittle bones). Review of Resident #168's admission MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected a [AGE] year-old male who admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident #168's comprehensive MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected the only section that had been completed was Section F (Preferences for Customary Routine and Activities) and signed and completed by the facility's AD on 05/29/2025. In an interview on 06/12/25 at 10:28 AM with the DON who stated that when the MDS assessments were done, they triggered the care plans which needed to be completed. She stated the care plans were done as a group effort. She stated the social worker was responsible for opening the baseline care plan. She stated she may add some things to the baseline care plan later as needed but the social worker was ultimately responsible for those. She stated that all staff who were responsible for the MDS assessments, care plans, and baseline care plans were trained on completing them accurately and within the required time frame . She stated if an MDS assessment was not completed correctly, it may have caused the staff to not know how to properly care for the resident or the staff may not know the residents' preferences. She stated if the care plan was not completed correctly, it could have limited some of the communication for providing care to the residents. DON stated if a baseline care plan was not completed within the 48-hour period, there could be goals missed for the new resident and it could have potentially affected their care. In an interview on 06/12/25 at 12:18 PM with LVN D who stated that he began working remotely for the facility 2 weeks ago. He stated that for his first day or two he met with staff in the building. He stated that most of the assessments, (pain, depression, BIMS) are conducted by the facility staff. He stated that he takes all those assessments and puts the information into the MDS assessment. He stated that majority of the questions have been answered for him, but he did have to dig through some records (such as skin integrity), to find out what date it was done. He stated that he was not responsible for ensuring the timeliness of assessments, it was the VPR. In an interview on 06/12/25 at 12:41 PM with the VPR who stated that he had been in his position since the beginning of 2025 and that he had been submitting MDS assessments off and on for a couple months for the facility. He stated that he was responsible for submitting those within their required timeframes. He was aware of the late MDS's, and it was due to the MDS position at the facility not being filled. He stated that not submitting the assessments on time may lead to negative outcomes by not identifying the care residents needed. He stated he had 2 people working remotely to help assemble the MDS assessments. He stated they got constant communication from the ADON/DON/ADM to accurately assemble the MDS. He stated that the remote workers look at documents in the clinical profile to ensure accuracy, but that most of the needed assessments are conducted onsite by the facility staff and left for the MDS team to assemble and put in the assessment. Review of the facility's undated Electronic Transmission of the MDS policy reflected: All MDS assessments (e.g., admission, annual, significant change, quarterly review, etc.) and discharge and reentry records will be completed and electronically encoded into our facility's MDS information system and transmitted to CMS' QIES Assessment Submission and Processing (ASAP) system in accordance with current OBRA regulations governing the transmission of MDS data. MDS electronic submissions shall be conducted in accordance with current OBRA regulations governing the transmission of such data.
CONCERN (E)

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 observation, interviews and record review the facility failed to develop a comprehensive person-centered care plan furn...

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 develop a comprehensive person-centered care plan furnishing services to attain, or maintain, the resident's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for 2 (Resident #19, Resident #63, and Resident #119) of 6 residents reviewed for comprehensive care plans. The facility failed on 6/11/2025 to develop and implement a comprehensive care plan for Resident #19 and Resident #63. The facility failed to care plan Resident #119's wound on her right foot. These failures place residents at risk of not receiving appropriate care and treatment. Findings included: In an observation and interview on 06/10/25 at 3:02 PM with Resident #19 who was in her room revealed a communication board on her bedside table. When asked if the communication board helped the resident communicate her needs/wants with facility staff she said sometimes. It was observed that the resident had a difficult time getting the words out that she was trying to say, she took long pauses, looked around, used finger motions such as to draw numbers, and ultimately used a pen and paper to write to communicate some things to the state surveyor. At one point she began to cry and exclaimed that she wished staff would stay longer to hear what she was trying to tell them, because they will leave while she is trying to find the right words. The resident stated that made her feel sad and angry when staff would walk out instead of taking the time to listen to her. She stated that no one had offered her rehab services, but she would like help with her speech and with the healing of her right leg after a fall that happened before she moved into the facility. Review of Resident #19's comprehensive MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected a [AGE] year-old female who admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included stroke (when blood supply to part of the brain is suddenly reduced, leading to brain cell death and/or permanent damage), high blood pressure, diabetes mellitus (chronic disease where the body does not produce enough insulin), non-Alzheimer's dementia, hemiplegia (paralysis) affecting right nondominant side. In Section V- Care Area Assessment (CAA) Summary, it was indicated that a care area and care planning decision was triggered for communication and ADL Functional/Rehabilitation Potential, and a CAA WS was completed on 6/1/2025. Resident 19's BIMS score was a 15, indicating she was cognitively intact. Review of Resident #19's comprehensive care plan dated 05/13/2025 reflected the care plan had not been completed and only indicated that she had a behavior problem of refusing care and bathing, and that she took anxiety medication. Review of Resident #63's comprehensive MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected a [AGE] year-old-female who admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included cancer, high blood pressure, kidney failure, malnutrition, depression (sadness), white matter disease (damage to the white matter of the brain), and vitamin D deficiency. Her BIMS score was a 15, indicating she was cognitively intact. Review of Resident #63's care plan was attempted on 06/10/25 however there was no comprehensive care plan started for Resident #63. Record review of Resident #119's face sheet dated 06/12/25 reflected Resident #119 was an [AGE] year-old female with an admission date of 05/20/25. Resident #119's diagnoses encephalopathy (a group of conditions that cause brain dysfunction. Brain dysfunction can appear as confusion, memory loss, personality changes and/or coma in the most severe form), congestive heart failure (a serious condition that occurs when the heart can't pump enough blood to meet the body's needs), hypothyroidism (a disorder of the endocrine system in which the thyroid gland does not produce enough thyroid hormones), and muscle weakness (commonly due to lack of exercise, ageing, muscle injury or pregnancy). Resident # 19's BIMS was a 15, indicating she was cognitively intact. Record review of resident's assessment titled Brief Interview For Mental Status (BIMS) Evaluation reflected Resident had a BIMS score of 15 indicating Resident #119 was cognitively intact. Record review of Resident #119's care plan initiated 05/22/25 reflected: Resident #119 was not care planned for having a wound present to the top of resident's right foot. Record review of Resident #119's care plan dated 05/29/25 and revised 05/31/25 reflected Focus: At risk of infection due to picking at her wounds with her nails. She has a burn area on her upper medial abdomen that she picks at frequently. Goal: Resident will not have any complications related to wound healing during the review period. Interventions included: Assess area frequently for signs or symptoms of worsening skin integrity. Record review of Resident #119's clinical physician orders dated 06/12/25 reflected an order for Wound Care: Right dorsal foot (top of foot)- cleanse area with wound cleanser, pat dry, apply medi-honey (wound gel) to wound, cover with bordered gauze then wrap with kerlix every day shift. In an interview on 06/10/2025 at 5:45 PM with the DON who stated that Resident #63 did not have a comprehensive care plan started. She stated that the facility's MDS RN had turned in their notice and did not finish it out, so care plans and MDS assessments were having to be done by herself and remote LVN's who work for the company. In an interview on 06/12/25 at 9:18 AM with CNA C she stated that she looked at new admission's care plans to know the backgrounds, behaviors, and needing to get a full picture of the residents she is to provide care for, and she will ask the RN if she has any questions. She stated if there was no care plan it made her job harder, but she would ask the RN about the resident. In an interview on 06/12/25 at 9:30 AM with LVN A who stated that she was not sure if Resident #19 admitted with the communication board or if it was given to her by the SLP. LVN A stated that she had not informed therapy about Resident #19 possibly benefiting from therapy because she thought the communication board was already a part of therapy services. She stated that if a residents' care plan was not complete, she would go assess the resident and then go to the SW to discuss what should be put in the care plan, she stated it hindered her job if there were no care plans in the system, and that the residents have a lot of memory deficits, so sometimes trying to get a fuller picture of who the resident was, could be difficult. In a follow-up interview on 06/12/25 at 10:28 AM with the DON who stated that when the MDS assessments were done, they triggered the care plans which needed to be completed. She stated the care plans were done as a group effort. She stated the social worker was responsible for opening the baseline care plan. She stated she may add some things to the baseline care plan later as needed but the social worker was ultimately responsible for those. She stated that all staff who were responsible for the MDS assessments, care plans, and baseline care plans were trained on completing them accurately and within the required time frame. She stated if an MDS assessment was not completed correctly, it may have caused the staff to not know how to properly care for the resident or the staff may not know the residents' preferences. She stated if the care plan was not completed correctly, it could have limited some of the communication for providing care to the residents. DON stated if a baseline care plan was not completed within the 48-hour period, there could be goals missed for the new resident and it could have potentially affected their care. Review of the facility's undated Care Plans, Comprehensive Person-Centered policy reflected: Policy Statement A comprehensive, person-centered care plan that includes measurable objectives and timetables to meet the resident's physical, psychosocial and functional needs is developed and implemented for each resident. Policy Interpretation and Implementation 1. The interdisciplinary team (IDT), in conjunction with the resident and his/her family or legal representative, develops and implements a comprehensive, person-centered care plan for each resident. 2. The comprehensive, person-centered care plan is developed within seven (7) days of the completion of the required MDS assessment (Admission, Annual or Significant Change in Status), and no more than 21 days after admission. 7. The comprehensive, person-centered care plan: a. includes measurable objectives and timeframes; b. describes the services that are to be furnished to attain or maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being, including: (1) services that would otherwise be provided for the above, but are not provided due to the resident exercising his or her rights, including the right to refuse treatment; (2) any specialized services to be provided as a result of PASRR recommendations; and (3) which professional services are responsible for each element of care; (4) Psychiatric diagnoses must include supporting documentation. 11. Assessments of residents are ongoing and care plans are revised as information about the residents and the residents' conditions change.
CONCERN (E)

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

Pharmacy Services (Tag F0755)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

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

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 which included procedures that assured the accurate acquiring, receiving, dispensing, and administering of all drugs and biologicals to meet the needs of resident for 2 of 3 residents (Resident #60 and Resident #168), and 1 of 2 medication rooms (Medication room [ROOM NUMBER]) reviewed for pharmacy services. 1. The MA failed to check Resident #168's blood pressure prior to the administration of his Metoprolol (a medication used to lower blood pressure) on 06/11/2025 at 9:45am during medication pass observation. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #60's physician's ordered medication Hydralazine was available for administration. 3. The facility failed to ensure 1 of 2 medication rooms observed (Medication room [ROOM NUMBER]) was free from expired drugs. This failure could place residents at risk of low blood pressure, dizziness, risk of falling and hospitalizations. Findings include: 1.) Review of Resident #168's face sheet reflected a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the following diagnoses Dementia (memory loss), epilepsy (seizures), polyneuropathy (nerve pain) and age-related osteoporosis (a thinning of the bone making it brittle). Review of Resident #168's consolidated physician's orders dated 06/11/2025 reflected an order for Metoprolol Tartrate 25mg 1 tablet by mouth in the morning hold medication is systolic blood pressure (top number) is less than 110 or diastolic blood pressure (bottom number) is less than 60 or heart rate less than 55 beats per minute. 2.) Review of Resident #168's June 2025 medication administration record reflected entries for Metoprolol Tartrate 25mg 1 tablet by mouth in the morning with instructions to hold medication is systolic blood pressure is less than 110 or diastolic blood pressure is less than 60 or heart rate less than 55 beats per minute. There were no documented blood pressure checks prior to the administration of medication from June 1, 2025, thru June 11, 2025. In an observation and interview on 06/11/2025 at 9:45 AM, revealed the MA prepared 10 medications for Resident #168's medication for administration. The medications for administration included his physician's ordered Metoprolol Tartrate 25mg. The MA went into the room to administer medications when the surveyor stopped her to question if the blood pressure should have been checked. The MA stated there were no areas to document a blood pressure within the medication administration record, so she assumed she did not have to take a blood pressure prior to administration of medications. She stated the risk to the residents for not checking a blood pressure prior to administering medications that could affect the blood pressure could have been the resident's blood pressure could become very low causing dizziness or causing the resident to pass out. The MA then checked the resident's blood pressure and it was 139/81 with a pulse of 61. Resident #168 stated he was feeling fine, and the MA administered medications as ordered. 3.) Review of Resident #60's face sheet reflected a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with the following diagnoses diverticulitis of the intestines (inflammation of the intestine), unspecified mood disorder, anxiety, and high blood pressure. Review of Resident #60's admission MDS dated [DATE] reflected she was assessed to have a BIMS score of 15 indicating she was cognitively intact. Review of Resident #60's comprehensive care plan reflected a problem dated 04/01/2025 and revised on 06/02/2025 The resident had a mood problem related to bipolar disorder and psychosis disorder. Interventions included Administer medications as ordered. Monitor/document for side effects and effectiveness. Review of Resident #60's consolidated physician's orders dated 06/11/2025 reflected an order for hydralazine HCI 25mg by mouth two times daily for elevated anxiety. Review of Resident #60's June 2025 MAR reflected entries for hydralazine 25mg tablets twice daily. Review of the documentation on the MAR for the 06/11/2025 reflected a 9 was documented indicating from the facility's chart code other/ see nurses notes. Review of Resident # 60's nurses' notes reflected medication not available. Observation on 06/11/2025 at 10:00 AM, revealed the MA prepared 12 medications for Resident #60's medication for administration. The medications for administration did not include her physician's ordered hydralazine. In an interview on 06/11/2025 at 10:15 AM, the MA stated she was not sure why Resident #60 had not had her hydralazine available. She stated the medication was ordered yesterday (06/10/25). She stated the medication aides generally reordered medications when there was a 4-to-5-day supply available. She stated she notified the charge nurse the medication was unavailable. She stated the resident could have had discomfort from not receiving her medication for her anxiety. In an interview on 06/11/25 at 01:58 PM LVN A stated the MA had not notified her that Resident #60 was out of her hydralazine. She stated she would expect the MA to report to the charge nurse if a medication was not available. She stated she could have checked the emergency kit and pulled the medication from it if it were in there. She stated she was not sure if that specific medication was in the emergency medication kit. She stated if it were not in the kit she would have reported to DON and called the pharmacy to get it delivered stat. She stated Resident #60 could have had increased anxiety, itching, elevated blood pressure from not receiving her medications. In an interview on 06/11/25 at 1:58 PM LVN A stated the MA had reported to her that Resident #168 needed an order in the computer for documentation of parameters for blood pressure. She stated she did call the doctor and he had the nurse to check all blood pressure medication orders for parameters. She stated if a resident were to receive a medication that could lower the blood pressure without the blood pressure being checked prior to administration it could cause harm to the resident such as dizziness, have falls, and altered mental status. In an interview on 06/11/25 at 1:01 PM the DON stated it was her expectation is that if there was a discrepancy in medication directions the MA should have notified the nurse, and the order should have been corrected. There were several employees who were responsible for checking those orders and ensuring the orders were correct on admission. The blood pressure parameters were on the original order but was not entered in the computer by the admitting nurse. She stated the DON would be taking responsibility for checking orders for all new admissions from now on. She stated negative effects for administering blood pressure medications without proper monitoring of the blood pressure could have included a low heart rate, and ineffective medication. In an observation on 06/11/25 at 02:11 PM of station 2 stock medication storage room [ROOM NUMBER] there were two (2) bottles of melatonin (a sleep aide) 1mg 60 tablets that expired in March 2025 and 3 bottles of folic acid (an essential b vitamin) 800mcg 60 tabs that expired in January 2025. Located in the refrigerator were acetaminophen (a pain reliever) 650mg 5 suppositories that expired January 04, 2025. In an interview on 06/11/25 at 02:15 PM LVN A stated she really was not sure when the medications were checked for expiration dates in the medication supply room. She stated the nurses monitored for incoming insulin syringes dates and labels, only when they were received. She stated the medication aides were trained to keep the supply room clean and stocked. She stated negative effects for the residents for receiving expired and outdated medications could have been subtherapeutic effects of the medication or adverse reactions. In an interview on 06/12/25 at 01:01 PM the DON stated her expectation was the MAs notify the nurses immediately if a medication was not available. She stated the nurse could have called the doctor and had him call it into our local pharmacy for pick up to ensure the medication was available for Resident #60. She stated negative effects for not having medications available could have been low blood pressure, to high of a blood pressure, change in condition and anxiety. The DON stated medication aides and nurses should have checked med rooms daily for expired medications. She stated there was no designated person responsible for checking the medications in the stock medication room for expiration dates. She stated negative effects for administering expired drugs could have included or potentially caused ineffective medications, or illness. Record review of facility undated policy titled Pharmacy Services reflected: The facility shall accurately and safely provide or obtain pharmaceutical services, including the provision of routine and emergency medications and biologicals, and the services of a licensed consultant pharmacist. Policy Interpretation and Implementation: Pharmaceutical services consists of: Residents have sufficient supply of their prescribed medications and receive medications (routine, emergency or as needed) in a timely manner. Nursing staff communicate prescriber orders to the pharmacy and are responsible for contacting the pharmacy if a resident's medication is not available for administration. Medications acquired or dispensed in this facility are FDA approved for use by the residents and meet the requirements established by the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act. Medications are received, labeled, stored, administered, and disposed of according to all applicable state and federal laws and consistent with standards of practice. Record review of facility undated policy titled Administering Oral Medications reflected: Verify that there is a physician's medication order for this procedure. Perform any pre-administration assessments.
MINOR (C)

Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact

Deficiency F0577 (Tag F0577)

Minor procedural issue · This affected most or all residents

Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were aware of where to locate the State Agency (SA) survey inspection results such as (surveys, certificatio...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were aware of where to locate the State Agency (SA) survey inspection results such as (surveys, certifications, and complaint/incident investigations) and post in a place readily accessible to residents, family members, and legal representatives of residents for 1 of 1 facility in that: The facility failed on 06/11/2025 to make a survey binder that was readily available and easily identified to all residents or the public that included survey results for viewing. This failure placed residents at risk of not being able to fully exercise their rights and at risk of not being aware of the facility's past deficiencies. Findings included: In an observation on 06/11/25 at 2:25PM of the facility's front door area, the receptionist desk, and the area near the administrative offices revealed there was no evidence of a survey results binder or notice of where to locate the binder. In a confidential interview on 06/11/2025 beginning at 2:00pm, eleven residents stated they did not know where or how to access survey results in the facility and multiple residents stated they would like to know what the previous survey and investigation results were. They all stated they had never seen a binder labeled with that information near the front door or receptionist desk. In an observation and interview on 06/11/25 at 2:32 PM with the ADM who when asked where the state survey results binder was located, the ADM stated it was in his office, and he brought it out to the state surveyors. He stated that he kept it in his office. The ADM stated that a negative outcome of residents and the public not being able to see the results of the facility's surveys and investigations would be that they were not able to see what kind of care the facility provided. In a follow up interview on 06/11/25 at 4:47PM with the ADM who stated that the survey binder was now sitting atop a shelf near the receptionist desk, and it did not have to be requested for resident or visitor observation. This was verified through surveyor observation on 06/11/25 at 5:15PM. Review of the facility's Survey Results, Examination of policy dated last revised April 2007, reflected : A copy of the most recent standard survey, including any subsequent extended surveys, follow-up revisits reports, etc., along with state approved plans of correction of noted deficiencies, is maintained in a 3-ring binder located in an area frequented by most residents, such as the main lobby or resident activity room.
Apr 2025 1 deficiency
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Deficiency F0657 (Tag F0657)

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 review and revise the person-centered, comprehensive c...

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 review and revise the person-centered, comprehensive care plan for 3 of 12 residents (Residents #10, #11 and #12) reviewed for comprehensive care plans. 1. The facility failed to ensure a care plan was developed to address Resident #10's falls on 4/19/2025 and 4/25/2025. 2. The facility failed to ensure a care plan was developed to address fall interventions for Resident #11 after falls on 3/18/2025, 3/24/2025, and 3/28/2025. 3. The facility failed to ensure a care plan was developed to address fall interventions for Resident #12 after falls on 3/13/2025 and two falls on 3/30/2025 . This deficient practice could place residents at risk for not receiving proper care and services due to inaccurate care plans. Findings included: 1. Record review of Resident #10's face sheet, dated 4/30/2025, reflected a [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #10 had diagnoses which included: Pneumonia (infection of the lungs), metabolic encephalopathy (brain dysfunction caused by systemic illness or conditions that disrupt the body's chemical balances), Hypertension , chronic pain, heart disease, anxiety disorder , muscle weakness, unsteadiness on feet, lack of coordination and COPD (Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease - inflammation of the airways in the lungs which leads to reduce oxygen intake.) Record review of Resident #10 's MDS assessment, dated 4/12/2025, reflected a BIMs of 10, which indicated mild cognitive impairment. Record review of Resident #10'care plan reflected the document was blank and had no problems or interventions listed. 2. Record review of Resident #11's face sheet, dated 4/30/2025, reflected a [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #11 had diagnoses which included: Huntington's disease , unsteadiness on feed, history of falling, muscle weakness, difficulty in walking, and abnormalities of gait and mobility. Record review of Resident #11's MDS assessment, dated 2/2/2025, reflected a BIMs of 11, which indicated mild cognitive impairment. Record review of Resident #11's current care plan reflected a problem Risk for falls related to unsteady gait due to Huntington's Disease with a revision date 8/26/2024 . 3. Record review of Resident #12's face sheet, dated 4/30/2025, reflected an [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #12 had diagnoses which included: Hypertension (high blood pressure), Heart Disease, Anxiety disorder , Alzheimer's disease (a progressive disease that destroys memory and other mental functions) , muscle weakness, chronic pain, arthritis (inflammation of the joints), and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease - COPD - (inflammation of the airways in the lungs which leads to reduce oxygen intake). Record review of Resident #12's quarterly MDS assessment, dated 2/14/2025, reflected the resident had a short- and long-term memory problem and A BIMs assessment could not be completed. Record review of Resident #12's current care plan reflected a problem I have had an actual fall with a revision date of 11/14/2024 . During an interview on 4/30/2025 at 4:20 PM, the MDS Coordinator stated the responsibility for updating care plans was a conglomeration between nursing and MDS. He stated falls were discussed in the morning meeting and once nursing decided what the interventions would be for a resident, he would go in and update the care plan. He was shown the care plans for Residents #10, #11 and #12 and noted Resident #10's care plan was blank and Residents #11 and #12 had not been updated since last year (2024 ) even though all 3 residents had falls in the last 30 days. He stated, I can't update the care plans until interventions are reviewed through investigation. He also stated he was the only MDS person for the facility and was not able to keep up with updating all the care plans adding they are on my list, but I just couldn't get to them. He stated he let the DON know he was not able to keep the care plans updated, but nothing had changed. He stated potential problems with not having care plans updated were staff would not know what interventions were in place and this could cause a resident fall again, they could break a vertebra in their spine, break a hip, crack their head - there was an opportunity for serious injury. During an interview on 4/30/2024 at 4:42 PM, the ADON stated the MDS coordinator was responsible for updating care plans. She stated they had morning meetings and discussed accidents/incidents and the care plans should be updated after that and anytime throughout the day. She stated it was her expectations that falls would be reviewed and come up with an intervention plan and MDS would update care plans. She stated potential concerns with care plans not being updated was lack of communication with staff on the residents; plan of care, and could expose residents to repeated falls, with a risk for serious injury, which included fractures and brain bleeds which could require hospitalizations. During an interview on 4/30/2025 at 4:49 PM, the ADM stated he was not aware care plans were not being updated. He stated falls were discussed in the morning meeting and the MDS Coordinator was responsible for updating care plans. He stated if care plans were not updated, then the staff would not know about the fall interventions put in place. This could affect the residents - if staff didn't know they could have another fall, could potentially be injured which included skin tears, fracture, any kind of injury. He stated his expectation was care plans would be updated after falls . Record review of the facility's incident report, dated 4/29/2025, (for the last 30 days of data) reflected the following: Resident #10 had unwitnessed falls on 4/19/2025 and 4/25/2025. Resident #11 had unwitnessed falls on 3/18/2025, 3/24/2025 and 3/28/2025. Resident #12 had unwitnessed falls on 3/13/2025, and two falls on 3/30/2025. A record review of the facility's, undated, Care Plans, Comprehensive Person-Centered policy, reflected A comprehensive, person-centered care plan that includes measurable objectives and timetables to meet the resident's physical, psychosocial and functional needs is developed and implemented for each resident. Policy Interpretation and Implementation 1. The interdisciplinary Team (IDT) in conjunction with the resident and his/her family or legal representative, develops and implements a comprehensive, person-centered care plan for each resident . 7. The Comprehensive, person-centered care plan: a. Includes measurable objective and time frames; b. Describe the services that are to be furnished to attain or maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being, including: 1. services that would otherwise be provided for the above, but are not provided due to the resident exercising his or her rights, including the right to refuse treatment. 2. any specialized services to be provided as a result of PASARR recommendations; and 3. which professional services are responsible for each element of care; c. Include the resident's stated goals upon admission and desired outcomes; d. builds on the resident's strengths; and e. reflects currently recognized standards of practice for problem areas and conditions 10. When possible, interventions address the underlying source(s) of the problem area (s), not just symptoms or triggers. 11. Assessments of residents are ongoing and care plans are revised as information about the residents and the residents' condition change.
Dec 2024 4 deficiencies
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Deficiency F0558 (Tag F0558)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure residents received services in the facility...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure residents received services in the facility with reasonable accommodations of each resident's needs for 1 of 5 residents (Residents #1) reviewed for resident rights in that: The facility failed to ensure Residents #1's call light was within reach on 12/13/24. This failure could affect residents who needed assistance with activities of daily living and could result in needs not being met. Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's admission record dated 12/17/24 documented a [AGE] year-old male admitted on [DATE]. Resident #1 had diagnoses which included: quadriplegia (serve medical condition characterized by the partial or total loss of function in all four limbs and the torso), lack of coordination (not being able to move your body smoothly and precisely, often resulting in clumsiness, stumbling, or jerky movement), essential primary hypertension (occurs when you have abnormally high blood pressure that's not the result of a medical condition), cognitive communication deficit (having trouble communicating effectively due to problems with thinking skills like memory, attention, or reasoning), and polyneuropathy (a condition that occurs when multiple peripheral nerves in the body malfunction at the same time). Record review of Resident #1's Quarterly MDS assessment, dated 10/21/24, revealed the resident had a BIMS score of 15 indicating the resident was cognitively intact. The MDS also revealed Resident #1 was dependent in the areas of eating, oral hygiene, toileting hygiene, shower/bathe self, upper body dressing, lower body dressing, putting on /taking off footwear and personal hygiene. Record review of Resident #1's care plan, dated 12/20/24, revealed Resident #1 was care planned for falls related to weakness with bilateral knee contractures and decreased torso control and potential side effects to medications and had an intervention of: Keep call light within reach. Observation on 12/13/24 at 11:35 a.m., revealed Resident #1's call light was behind his bed on the floor and out of his reach. During an interview on 12/13/24 at 11:35 a.m., Resident #1 stated his call light is never in reach . Resident #1 stated staff leave his door open so he can yell for assistance. During an interview on 12/17/24 at 10:45 a.m., CNA A stated CNAs should make rounds at least every two hours or as needed. CNA A stated that CNAs should be looking to see if a resident needs assistance, ensuring call lights were within reach, and making sure all residents were comfortable. CNA A stated if a resident's call light was not within reach, then the resident could fall attempting to reach it or the resident would not receive assistance. During an interview on 12/17/24 at 2:10 p.m., the DON stated the purpose of a call light is for resident to alert staff they have needs. The DON stated that all staff that enter the residents' rooms are responsible for ensuring the residents call light is within reach. The DON stated that if a resident's call light was not within reach, then the residents' needs may not be met. An interview on 12/17/24 at 2:45 p.m., the ADM stated the purpose of call light is for the residents to alert staff they need assistance. The ADM stated its everyone's responsibility to ensure call lights are always within reach. The ADM stated that if a call light was not within reach, then a resident desired need would not be met. The ADM stated that he expects for call lights to be always within reach and answered timely. Review of the facility's Routine Resident Checks & Call Lights policy, revised July 2013, reflected, Policy Statement: Staff shall make routine resident checks to help maintain resident safety and well-being. Policy Interpretation and Implementation 1. To ensure the safety and well-being of our residents, nursing staff shall make routine resident check on each unit at least every two hours. 6. Call lights should be within arms reach while the resident is present.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Deficiency F0583 (Tag F0583)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the residents' right to privacy during personal...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the residents' right to privacy during personal care for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #3) reviewed for privacy in that: The facility failed to ensure CNA C provided respect and dignity by drawing the privacy curtain during peri care for Resident #3. The findings include: Record review of Resident #3's face sheet dated 12/13/24 revealed a [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her diagnoses were, Pulmonary disease (Lung disease), Major depressive disorder, Shortness of breath, Muscle wasting and atrophy, Need for assistance with personal care, Cognitive communication deficit, Limitation of activities due to disability and Abnormalities of gait and mobility. Record review on 12/13/24 of Resident #3's quarterly MDS assessment, dated 09/20/24 revealed a BIMS of 03 indicating severe cognitive impairment. Record review on 12/13/24 of Resident #3's care plan dated 01/14/24 reflected resident had ADL self-care performance deficit r/t Dementia, Impaired balance, Impaired mobility, and weakness. She required one staff to assist extensively with personal hygiene and oral care. During an observation on 12/13/24 at 12:10pm CNA C provided peri care to Resident#3 in her room while her FM was present. Investigator during his visit to Resident #3 knocked at the door and heard CNA C calling out Resident Care. Investigator stated he was an RN and asking permission to enter the room so that he could observe the peri care. When he opened the door CNA C was at the final stage of peri care and the care was fully visible as Resident #3's privacy curtain was not drawn. As the CNA C had not closed the privacy curtain, Resident #3 and the peri care would have been fully visible to anyone who entered the room or to anyone in the hallway when the door was opened at that time. During further observation it was revealed Resident #3 was sharing the room with another resident and that resident was not in the room at that time. The FM stated the other resident went out for having lunch and would return any time after having the lunch. During an interview on 12/13/24 at 12:55pm CNA C stated she started working at the facility 5 days ago however had experience as CNA for many years. She stated she should have closed the privacy curtain of Resident #1. By not closing the curtain, the privacy and dignity of Resident #1 were compromised as anyone opened the door to the room could see the peri care and naked body of Resident #3. During an interview on 12/13/24 at 5:30pm the DON stated it was mandatory to respect and maintain privacy and dignity of residents during nursing care that includes peri care by closing the door and windows and drawing privacy curtains. She stated the privacy curtain of Resident #3 should have been closed completely by CNA C before commencing the peri care. She said the trainings were ongoing process and resident rights was one of them. DON stated the facility ensured all the new hires gone through skill checks. Every nursing staff also had to complete an annual evaluation to ensure their nursing skills and knowledge including competency in respecting resident's rights. During the review of facility's undated policy Privacy, reflected: Each resident shall be cared for in a manner that promotes and enhances quality of life, dignity, respect, and individuality . Staff shall promote, maintain, and protect resident privacy during assistance with personal care and during treatment procedures.
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

Comprehensive Care Plan (Tag F0656)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure residents received services in the facility...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure residents received services in the facility with reasonable accommodations of each resident's needs for 1 of 5 residents (Residents #1) reviewed for resident rights in that: The facility failed to ensure Residents #1's care plan reflected his current food diet. This failure could affect residents who needed assistance with activities of daily living and could result in needs not being met. Findings included: Record review of Resident #1 's admission record dated 12/17/24 documented a [AGE] year-old male admitted on [DATE]. Resident #1 had diagnoses which included: quadriplegia (serve medical condition characterized by the partial or total loss of function in all four limbs and the torso), lack of coordination (not being able to move your body smoothly and precisely, often resulting in clumsiness, stumbling, or jerky movement), essential primary hypertension (occurs when you have abnormally high blood pressure that's not the result of a medical condition), cognitive communication deficit (having trouble communicating effectively due to problems with thinking skills like memory, attention, or reasoning), and polyneuropathy (a condition that occurs when multiple peripheral nerves in the body malfunction at the same time). Record review of Resident #1's Quarterly MDS assessment, dated 10/21/24, revealed the resident had a BIMS score of 15 indicating the resident was cognitively intact. The MDS also revealed Resident #1 was dependent in the areas of eating, oral hygiene, toileting hygiene, shower/bathe self, upper body dressing, lower body dressing, putting on /taking off footwear and personal hygiene. Record review of Resident #1's physician orders, dated 12/17/24, Resident #1 has an order for regular texture, thin liquids consistency for diet regular solids/large protein portion with meal with an order date of 07/24/24. Record review of Resident #1's care plan, dated 12/17/24, revealed Resident #1 was care planned for mechanical soft/ground meat texture with thin liquids. During an interview on 12/17/24 at 11:35 a.m., Resident #1 stated he ate regular texture food. Resident #1 stated that his diet was changed during the summer months but could not recall an actual date. During an interview on 12/17/24 at 10:45 a.m., MDS coordinator stated a care plan was to help staff identify needs to assist the residents. The MDS coordinator stated that Resident #1's current diet was Regular texture, Thin Liquids consistency. The MDS coordinator stated the potential negative outcome could been Resident #1 would have received the wrong texture diet. The MDS Coordinator stated that moving forward his expectations were that all resident's care plans would reflect the most updated and accurate information. During an interview on 12/17/24 at 2:10 p.m., the DON stated a care plan was formulated to reflect the specific needs of every resident. The DON stated Resident #1 could have received the wrong diet texture due to his care plan not reflecting his most up to date diet. The DON stated moving forward she expected for any changes regarding residents to be discussed at the morning meeting and the care plan be updated immediately. An interview on 12/17/24 at 2:45 p.m., the ADM stated a care plan should show an accurate picture for staff to follow to provide care for the resident. The ADM stated Resident #1 could have received the wrong textured food due to his care plan being inaccurate. The ADM stated it was the MDS coordinators responsibility for ensuring that the information on a resident care plan is up to date and accurate. The ADM stated his expectation were that all resident care plans reflected the most accurate and up to date information to provide the highest quality of care. Review of the facility's Care Plans, Comprehensive Person Centered policy, revised December 2016, reflected, Policy Statement: A comprehensive, person-centered care plan that includes measurable objectives and timetables to meet the resident's physical, psychosocial and functional needs is developed and implemented for each resident. Policy Interpretation and Implementation 1. The interdisciplinary Team (IDT), in conjunction with the resident and his/her family or legal representative, develops and implements a comprehensive, person-centered care plan for each resident. 3. The IDT includes: a. The attending physician; b. A registered nurse who has responsibility for the resident; c. A nurse aide who has responsibility for the resident; d. A member of the food and nutrition services staff; e. The resident and the resident's legal representative (to the extent practicable); and f. Other appropriate staff or professional as determined by the resident's needs or as requested by the resident. 13. Assessments of residents are ongoing and care plans are revised as information about the resident and the residents' condition change.
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

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 that residents who needed respiratory care wer...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that residents who needed respiratory care were provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice, for 1 of 4 residents (Residents #2) reviewed for quality of care in that: The facility failed to ensure Resident #2's oxygen mask and tubing, that were observed on 12/13/24 at 3:30pm, were not bagged for sanitation when not in use. This failure could affect residents who received oxygen therapy, by place them at risk for respiratory infections. The findings included: Record review of Resident #2's face sheet on 12/13/24 revealed an [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her diagnoses were Hypertension, Type 2 diabetes, , Seasonal Allergy , Atrial fibrillation (irregular and rapid heartbeat) , Major depressive disorder and COPD. Record review on 12/13/24 of Resident #2's quarterly MDS assessment, dated 10/83/24 revealed a BIMS of 11 indicating her cognition was moderately impaired. Record review on 12/13/24 of Resident #2's care plan dated 11/03/24 indicated that she had COPD and relevant intervention was providing O2 via nasal prongs at 4.5L continuously and might titrate up to 10L/m PRN for comfort. Observation and interview on 12/13/24 at 3:30pm of Resident #2 revealed an oxygen mask sitting on the side table exposed to the environment as they were not stored in the protective bag provided. CNA B who witnessed the oxygen masks stated they were supposed to be stored in a protective bag whenever not in use. She then put it in the protective bag and stated she did not know who kept it unprotected like that. She stated protecting the mask from exposed to the environment was necessary to avoid infections especially respiratory infections. During an interview on 12/13/24 at 5:30pm the DON stated all staff supposed to be compliant with the facility policy for using oxygen cannula and nebulizers . She stated the oxygen masks were to be cleaned and safely stored in the protective bags provided . She stated due to this deficiency there was a potential for respiratory infectious diseases. Record review of the facility's policies revealed there was no policy stating safe storage of oxygen cannulas and facemasks in protective bags when not in use. Record review of facilities undated policy Infection prevention and control program reflected : An infection prevention and control program (IPCP) is established and maintained to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections. 1. The infection prevention and control program is developed to address the facility-specific infection control needs and requirements . Th program is reviewed annually and updated as necessary. 2. The program is based on accepted national infection prevention and control standards.
Sept 2024 1 deficiency
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Pressure Ulcer Prevention (Tag F0686)

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 residents with pressure ulcers received necessary treatment ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents with pressure ulcers received necessary treatment and services, consistent with professional standards of practice, to promote wound healing, prevent infection and prevent new pressure ulcers from developing for one (Resident #1) of four residents reviewed for pressure injuries. The facility failed to ensure all wound care treatments were completed and documented during the month of August 2024 for Resident #1. This deficient practice could place residents at risk of improper wound management and deterioration in existing pressure injuries. Findings included: Review of Resident #1's face sheet revealed a male who was admitted on [DATE], discharged on 09/09/24, and his own RP. Review of Resident #1's medical diagnoses revealed he had diagnoses including cognitive communication deficit, type 2 diabetes mellitus without complications, bed confinement status, unspecified disorder of the skin and subcutaneous tissue, sepsis unspecified organism (a serious condition in which the body responds improperly to an infection). Review of Resident #1's comprehensive MDS assessment dated [DATE], revealed Resident #1 had an 11 BIMS score, which indicated he had moderate cognitive impairment. Resident #1 also was at risk of developing pressure ulcers/injuries and had one unhealed Stage 2 pressure ulcer. Resident #1 required substantial/maximal assistance with bed mobility. Review of Resident #1's care plan, dated 07/12/24, revealed the following care areas: *Resident #1 was being treated for pressure ulcers. An intervention indicated LVNs and RNs were required to implement included treatments as ordered. *Resident #1 also had the potential for skin integrity and was at high risk for pressure ulcers. An intervention indicated staff were required to implement included providing skin care per facility guidelines and PRN. Review of Resident #1's order summary report revealed Resident #1 had a verbal order started on 08/12/24 to have staff conduct a dressing change to his coccyx area with Aquacel or Wound dressing Silver biq two times a day. Review of Resident #1's treatment administration record for August 2024 revealed staff were required to complete a dressing change to Resident #1's coccyx area with Aquacel or Wound dressing silver biq two times a day starting on 08/12/24 at 8:00 p.m. and ending on 08/27/24 at 11:28 a.m. There were no documented entries from 08/12/24 at 8:00 p.m. through 08/14/24 at 8:00 p.m. Additionally, there were no documented entries for 8:00 p.m. on 08/15/24, 08/17/24 through 08/22/24. Moreover, there were no documented entries for 08/20/24 at 8:00 a.m. Review of Resident #1's progress notes from 08/12/24 through 08/26/24 revealed there was no documentation that indicated the order for wound care was followed . Review of Resident #1's progress note dated 08/27/24 at 12:25 p.m. written by (staff ID) indicated, Dressing change to coccyx area with Aquacel or Wound dressing Silver biq two times a day order changed per wound doctor. During an interview on 09/11/24 at 9:00 a.m., the DON stated LVNs and RNs documented wound care performed in residents' electronic health records. The DON stated LVNs and RNs performed wound care on residents according to orders. During an interview on 09/11/24 at 9:44 a.m., LVN A stated she cleaned residents' wounds and applied dressings according to residents' orders. LVN A stated she documented in residents' Treatment Administration Records when she completed providing wound care according to orders. During an interview on 09/11/24 at 10:23 a.m., RN B stated he received training on performing wound care. RN B stated he cleaned residents' wounds and applied ointments according to residents' orders. RN B stated he documented in residents' Treatment Administration Records when he completed providing wound care according to orders. Attempted to contact the WCD on 09/11/24 at 11:31 a.m. and at 12:59 p.m. A voicemail and call back number were left on both attempts. The WCD did not return the calls. Attempted to contact the WCND o 09/11/24 at 11:33 a.m. A voicemail and call back number were left. The WCND did not return the call. Review of the facility's Wound Care policy and procedure, undated, revealed staff were required to, .11. Apply treatments as indicated per MD order. Staff were also required to record the following information in residents' medical record, 1. The date and time the wound care was given. 6. The signature and title of the person recording the data.
May 2024 5 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

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

Resident Rights (Tag F0550)

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 treat each resident with respect and dignity and care i...

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 treat each resident with respect and dignity and care in a manner and in an environment that promotes maintenance or enhancement of his or her quality of life for 1 of 60 (Resident #1) residents reviewed for dignity The facility failed to allow Resident #1 to assist with her daily showers. The facility failed to put undergarments on Resident #1 after changing. The facility failed to place clean linens on Resident #1's bed. This failure could place Resident#1 at risk for decreased quality of life, loss of dignity, self-worth and disrespected. Findings include: Review of Resident # 1's Face sheet dated 05/01/2024 revealed a [AGE] year-old female admitted on [DATE] with diagnosis that include Unspecified Osteoarthritis Unspecified Site (A progressive, degenerative joint disease, the most common form of arthritis, especially in older persons), Age-Related Osteoporosis without Current pathologic Fracture (A condition of reduced bone mass, with decreased cortical thickness and a decrease in the number and size of the trabeculae of cancellous bone (but normal chemical composition), resulting in increased fracture incidence), Cognitive Communication deficit (Acquired cognitive-communication deficits may occur after a stroke, tumor, brain injury, progressive degenerative brain disorder, or other neurological damage), Other Abnormalities of gait and Mobility (a change to your walking pattern. Everyone's natural walking style is unique), Unspecified Dementia (dementia without a specific diagnosis). Review of Resident # 1 Quarterly MDS dated [DATE] revealed a BIMS score of 10 (8-12 suggest moderate cognitive impairment). Review of Resident #1 Care Plan dated 9/19/2024 revealed Resident #1 require limited assistance by x 1 staff with bathing/showering and as necessary. Interview with Resident #1 on 12/10/2023 at 12:10 PM revealed she was not allowed to bathe herself and because of it she denied taking showers. She stated she could shower herself and staff members made her take a shower even when she didn't want to. She stated they had gotten a lot better now and they assisted her if need be. Interview on 5/01/24 at 01: 17 PM Resident #1's family member revealed she had a concern regarding her Resident #1's care. On Easter Sunday March 31st, 2024. at approximately 3pm she arrived at the facility to find Resident #1 soiled in bed naked. She did not have a pad under her either to absorb the urine. She noticed the laundry was not done; which she said had to have been multiple days of staff not assisting responsible party to the bathroom since she knows responsible party will only use 2-4 squares of toilet paper when she goes. She stated the concerns had been brought to the attention of staff, but no formal grievance was filed. Interview with the DON on 5/1/2024 at12:20 PM revealed the DON stated the staff allow residents to do as much as they can. The CNA's standby the resident in case they lose their balance. DON state she advised Resident #1 responsible party she cannot bath herself and she needs assistance. The DON stated if Resident #1 refused to shower, staff are to encouraged her, but if she refuses, staff is to advise the nurse and it is documented. The DON stated it is her right to refuse to take a shower. But if it affects other resident because she has not taken one, staff will encourage Resident #1; if she still refuses have the family intervene. The DON stated she expects staff to take care of the residents, treat them right, and report any changes to the charge nurse if there are any problems with the residents. The DON stated if there aren't any clean sheets to make the bed, what needed or should have been done was staff should have gone into laundry and washed sheets. The DON stated there are always and if there is an empty bed, they can get the sheets off that bed. The DON stated the laundry cart is always full. The DON denied receiving a call or a text message from the Resident #1's responsible party. She stated housekeeping comes by daily. She stated one housekeeper cleaned the room and the other housekeeper cleans the bathroom. And if she sees the room is dirty housekeeping will come as needed. Interview with the CNA B on 5/1/2024 at 12:32PM revealed the CNA B stated the residents have the right to if they can assist with their ADL's. He stated if a resident refuses to take a shower he is to report it to the nurse, but residents usually don't refuse. If they refuse the whole week, staff will call the family and have them intervene. He stated staff check and change residents every 2 hours but if they are a heavy wetter, those residents are checked more often. The CNA B stated there is never a time there were not any sheets to make the bed and no resident should be lying in urine or under the covers unclothed. The CNA B stated he will get the resident out of the bed and make the bed. He stated, if need be, he will go down to laundry and wash and dry some sheets. He stated they usually have a lot of clean linen available. Observation of Resident #1 responsible party revealed captured by her responsible party revealed resident #1 bed was saturated with urine. Record review of the facility's Privacy and Resident Rights statement with an unknown date reflected: Resident/Patient Privacy include: 1. Residents shall be treated with dignity and respect. 2. Residents shall be groomed as they wish to be groomed. 3. Residents shall be encouraged and dressed in their own clothes. Resident/Patient Rights include: Employees shall treat all residents with kindness, respect, and dignity.
CONCERN (D)

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

Comprehensive Care Plan (Tag F0656)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

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

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 develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, consistent with the resident rights, that included measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs that were identified in the comprehensive assessment for 2 of 6 residents (Residents #44 & #163) reviewed for comprehensive care plans. Resident #44's care plan incorrectly documented the resident as having an indwelling catheter. The facility failed to ensure Resident #163's comprehensive care plan addressed Resident #163's full code advance directive. This deficient practice could place residents at risk for not receiving proper care and services due to inaccurate care plans. Findings include: A record review of Resident #44's face sheet reflected an [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #44's diagnosis included muscle weakness (lack of physical or muscle strength), chronic kidney disease stage 2 (a condition in which the kidneys are damaged and cannot filter blood as well as they should), cognitive communication deficit (difficulty paying attention to a conversation, staying on topic, and remembering information), essential primary hypertension (abnormally high blood pressure that's not the result of a medical condition), and polyneuropathy (when multiple peripheral nerves become damaged). A record review of Resident #44's Quarterly MDS assessment, dated 03/02/2024, reflected the resident had a BIMS score of 99, which indicated the patient interview was not successful. Resident #44's Quarterly MDS reflected Resident #44 had an indwelling catheter. A record review of Resident #44's care plan, dated 04/24/2024, reflected Resident #44 was care planned for an indwelling foley catheter. Resident #44's care plan was revised on 03/24/2024 to reflect his indwelling foley catheter. A record review of Resident #44's care plan, dated 04/24/2024, reflected no physician's order for an indwelling foley catheter. An interview and observation on 04/30/24 at 3:25pm with Resident #44, Resident #44 stated that he had not had a catheter in a long time and did not remember when it was removed. Resident #44 did not have a catheter bag attached to his person. A record review of Resident #163's face sheet reflected a [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #163's diagnoses included end stage renal disease (last stage of long-term chronic kidney disease), muscle wasting and atrophy (the decrease in size and wasting of muscle tissue), weakness (lack of physical or muscle strength), cognitive communication deficit (difficulty paying attention to a conversation, staying on topic, and remembering information), Hypokalemia (lower than normal potassium level in your bloodstream), Hypomagnesemia (an electrolyte disorder in which there is a high level of magnesium in the blood), and major depressive disorder (mood disorder that causes a persistent feeling of sadness and loss of interest). A record review of Resident #163's admission MDS assessment, dated 12/11/2023, reflected Resident #163 had a BIMS score of 14, which indicated the resident was cognitively intact. A record review of Resident #163's physician orders, dated 04/30/2024, reflected Resident #163 had an active order for a full code advance directive with an order revision date of 12/14/2023. A record review of Resident #163's care plan, dated 01/19/2024, did not reflect Resident #163's advance directive. An interview with the MDS Coordinator on 05/01/24 at 12:55pm, the MDS Coordinator stated that she was responsible for completing the care plan assessment accurately. The MDS Coordinator stated a resident's advance directive should have been reflected on the care plan. The MDS Coordinator stated if a resident did not have a catheter, then that should not have been care planned. The MDS Coordinator stated if a resident's care plan was inaccurate the resident would not receive the appropriate care or services they may need. An interview with the DON on 05/01/24 at 1:30pm, the DON stated that all residents advance directives should be care planned. The DON stated if an advance directive was not care planned then that would cause confusion regarding the resident's advance directive. The DON stated if a resident did not have a catheter, then that should not be reflect on the resident's care plan. The DON stated the MDS Coordinator was responsible for complete the care plans accurately. The DON stated if the care plan was not accurate then residents may not receive the appropriate care. The DON stated that she was not aware that any residents care plans were completed incorrectly. A record review of the facility's Care Plans, Comprehensive Person-Centered policy, not dated, reflected A comprehensive, person-centered care plan that includes measurable objectives and timetables to meet the resident's physical, psychosocial and functional needs is developed and implemented for each resident. Policy Interpretation and Implementation 1. The interdisciplinary Team (IDT) in conjunction with the resident and his/her family or legal representative, develops and implements a comprehensive, person-centered care plan for each resident. 8. The Comprehensive, person-centered care plan will: a. Include measurable objective and time frames; b. Describe the services that are to be furnished to attain or maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being. c. Describe services that would otherwise be provided for the above, but are not provided due to the resident exercising his or her rights, including the right to refuse treatment; d. Describe any specialized services to be provided as a result of PASARR recommendation; e. Include the resident's stated goals upon admission and desired outcome; f. Include the resident's stated preference and potential for future discharge, including his or her desire to return to the community and any referrals made to local agencies or other entities to support such a desire; g. Incorporate identified problems areas;
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0558 (Tag F0558)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews the facility failed to ensure residents received services in the facility ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews the facility failed to ensure residents received services in the facility with reasonable accommodations of resident's needs and preferences except when to do so would endanger the health and safety of the resident or other residents for 2 of 20 residents (Resident #26 and Resident #49) reviewed for resident rights; in that: The facility failed to ensure Resident #26 and Resident #49's call lights were within reach. This failure could place residents at risk of needs not being met. Findings included: Record review of Resident #26's admission record, dated 04/30/24, reflected a [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #26 had diagnoses which included: type 2 diabetes mellitus (a chronic condition that affects the way the body processes the blood sugar), dysphagia (difficulty swallowing), acute kidney failure (condition in which the kidneys suddenly cannot filter waste from the blood), and hemiplegia (paralysis of one side of the body). Record review of Resident #26's quarterly MDS assessment, dated 03/21/24, reflected Resident #26 had a BIMS score of 09, which indicated the resident was moderately cognitively impaired. The MDS reflected resident had active diagnoses of bed confinement status. Record review of Resident #26's care plan, initiated 03/22/24, reflected Resident #26 was care planned for an ADL self-care performance deficit r/t balance, Limited Mobility, Limited ROM, Musculoskeletal impairment with a goal of maintain current level of function through the review date. and had an intervention of resident is totally dependent on x 2 staff for repositioning and turning in bed as necessary and encourage the resident to use bell to call for assistance. In an observation on 04/29/24 at 11:44 AM, observed Resident #26's call light was out of the resident's reach. Resident #26's call light was lying on the floor on the left side of the bed. The resident was lying in bed. Resident #26 demonstrated that he could not reach the call light. In an interview on 04/29/24 at 11:45 AM with Resident #26, he stated things were fine and staff treated him well. He stated he could not always get to his call light. He stated he was right-handed, and he could only move his left hand a little bit, and the call light was normally placed on the left side of the bed. He stated he could not reach his call light at that time. He stated if he could not get to his call light he would yell for help or watch for a nurse or aide to go by and yell for them. He stated staff sometimes got to him in a timely manner and sometimes they did not. He stated he has no other concerns at this time. In an observation on 04/29/24 at 12:15 PM revealed Resident #26's call light was on the floor on the left side of the resident's bed and out of Resident #26's reach. Record review of Resident #49's admission record, dated 04/30/24, reflected a [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #49 had diagnoses which included: paranoid schizophrenia (a mental disorder characterized by reoccurring episodes of psychosis that are correlated with a general misperception of reality), Parkinson's disease (neurodegenerative disease of mainly the central nervous system that affects both the motor system and non-motor systems), atherosclerotic heart disease (damage or disease in the heart's major blood vessels which is usually caused by the buildup of plaque), and anxiety (an emotion which is characterized by an unpleasant state if inner turmoil and includes feelings of dread over anticipated events). Record review of Resident #49's quarterly MDS assessment, dated 03/08/24, reflected Resident #49 had a BIMS score of 08, which indicated the resident was moderately cognitively impaired. The MDS reflected the resident had muscle weakness, lack of coordination, and difficulty in walking. Record review of Resident #49's care plan, initiated 12/06/21, reflected Resident #49 was care planned for an ADL self-care performance deficit r/t Parkinson's disease with a goal of maintain current level of function with ADL's through the review date. and had an intervention of encourage the resident to use bell to call for assistance. In an observation on 04/29/24 at 11:53 AM, observed Resident #49's call light out of the resident's reach. Resident #49's call light was laying on floor on the left side of the bed. The resident was lying in bed. Resident #49 demonstrated that he could not reach the call light. In an interview on 04/29/24 at 11:54 AM with Resident #49, he stated things were all good and staff treated him well. He stated he called his family member or pushed a button when he needed help. He stated he could not reach his call light at that time, and he did not know what he would do if he needed help and could not get to his call light, but he would probably go look for somebody or yell out for them. In an observation on 04/29/24 at 12:17 PM revealed Resident #49's call light was on the floor on the left side of the resident's bed and out of Resident #49's reach. In an interview on 04/29/2024 at 12:49 PM with CNA A, she stated she had worked in the facility for about 2 months. She stated she had been in-serviced on abuse, neglect, and misappropriation and call lights. She stated the call light in Resident #26's room was not in reach at that time, and it would normally have been clipped onto his gown. She stated she had been trained on keeping call lights in reach. She stated she did her rounds every 2 hours. She stated if a call light was not in reach a lot of bad things could happen such as a fall, or a resident having to wait to call for help, a resident being sick or vomiting, or the resident may not be able to breathe. She stated Resident #49's call light was not in reach either at that time and his would normally be on his pillow or pad because the resident continuously got up and down. In an interview on 04/29/2024 at 1:41 PM with RN A, she stated she had worked in the facility for about 2 weeks. She stated she had been in-serviced on abuse, neglect, and misappropriation and call lights. She stated if a resident's call light was out of reach it could lead to an injury or a fall and the resident may have felt like no one cared about them. In an interview on 04/29/2024 at 1:58 PM with MA A, he stated he had worked in the facility for about 11 years. He stated he had been in-serviced regularly on abuse, neglect, and misappropriation and call lights. He stated if a resident did not have their call light in reach it could have caused a resident to try to get up by themselves and the resident could have fallen and hurt themselves. In an interview on 05/01/2024 at 12:29 PM with the DON, she stated she was in-servicing staff regularly on abuse, neglect, and misappropriation and call lights. She stated staff had been trained on making sure residents' call lights were always in reach. She stated residents' call lights should be always in reach. She stated if a resident's call light was out of reach the resident could possibly harm themselves. Record review of the facility's in-service which included title of call lights dated 03/17/24 revealed staff had been in-serviced regarding call lights. A policy for call lights was requested on 05/01/24 at 9:00 AM but not received.
CONCERN (E)

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

Assessment Accuracy (Tag F0641)

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 assessments accurately reflected the resident's ...

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 assessments accurately reflected the resident's status for 3 of 8 residents (Residents #17, #28 & # 44) reviewed for resident assessments. The facility failed to ensure Resident #17's two most recent MDS's reflected that Resident #17 received dialysis services. Resident #44's quarterly MDS incorrectly documented the resident as having an indwelling catheter. Resident #28's admission and Significant Change MDS's incorrectly documented the resident received dialysis services. This deficient practice could place residents at-risk for inadequate care due to inaccurate assessments. Findings include: A record review of Resident #17's face sheet dated 04/30/24 reflected a [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #17's diagnosis included hypertensive chronic kidney disease with stage 5 chronic kidney disease or end stage renal failure (high blood pressure makes it more likely that your kidney disease will get worse and you will have heart problems), end stage renal disease (when chronic kidney disease reaches an advanced state with the gradual loss of kidney function), dependence on renal dialysis (regime which treats but does not cure and sustains life but does not heal), and type 2 diabetes (a long term condition in which the body has trouble controlling blood sugar and using it for energy. A record review of Resident #17's Annual Comprehensive MDS assessment, dated 11/16/23, reflected the resident had a BIMS score of 12, which indicated cognition was moderately impaired. Resident #17's Quarterly MDS reflected Resident #17 had an active diagnosis of renal insufficiency, renal failure, or end stage renal disease (ESRD) and that resident did not receive dialysis services. A record review of Resident #17's Quarterly MDS assessment, dated 02/16/24, reflected the resident had a BIMS score of 12, which indicated cognition was moderately impaired. Resident #17's Quarterly MDS reflected Resident #17 had an active diagnosis of renal insufficiency, renal failure, or end stage renal disease (ESRD) and that resident did not receive dialysis services. A record review of Resident #17's care plan, dated 01/08/2024, reflected Resident #17 was care planned for requiring dialysis hemodialysis/peritoneal r/t renal failure. In an interview on 04/30/24 at 09:29 AM Resident #17 communicated by shaking his head yes or no. Resident #17 also had a communication board to assist in communication. Resident #17 shook his head yes when asked if he was doing well and if staff treated him well. Resident #17 shook his head yes when asked if he received dialysis services and if he got to dialysis and back to the facility without problems. Resident #17 shook his head no when asked if he had any issues or concerns with dialysis or if he had any other concerns. A record review of Resident #28's face sheet reflected a [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #28's diagnosis included other seizures (uncontrolled burst of electrical activity between brain cells that cause temporary abnormalities in muscle tone or movements), muscle wasting and atrophy (the decrease in size and wasting of muscle tissue), weakness (lack of physical or muscle strength), and cognitive communication deficit (difficulty paying attention to a conversation, staying on topic, and remembering information) A record review of Resident #28s admission MDS assessment, dated 12/22/2023, reflected the resident had a BIMS score of 09, which indicated moderately impaired. Resident #28's admission MDS reflected Resident #28 received hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis. A record review of Resident #28's Significant Change MDS assessment, dated 02/21/2023, reflected the resident had a BIMS score of 09, which indicated moderately impaired. Resident #28's Significant Change MDS reflected Resident #28 received hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis. A record review of Resident #28's care plan, dated 04/19/2024, reflected Resident #28 was not receiving dialysis services. An interview with Resident #28 on 04/30/24 at 2:45pm, Resident #28 stated she did not receive dialysis. An interview with the Hospice Provider Representative on 04/30/24 at 2:55pm, the Hospice Provider Representative stated that Resident #28 did not receive dialysis services. A record review of Resident #44's face sheet reflected an [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #44's diagnosis included muscle weakness (lack of physical or muscle strength), chronic kidney disease stage 2 (a condition in which the kidneys are damaged and cannot filter blood as well as they should), cognitive communication deficit (difficulty paying attention to a conversation, staying on topic, and remembering information), essential primary hypertension (abnormally high blood pressure that's not the result of a medical condition), and polyneuropathy (when multiple peripheral nerves become damaged). A record review of Resident #44's Quarterly MDS assessment, dated 03/02/2024, reflected the resident had a BIMS score of 99, which indicated the patient interview was not successful. Resident #44's Quarterly MDS reflected Resident #44 had an indwelling catheter. A record review of Resident #44's care plan, dated 04/24/2024, reflected Resident #44 was care planned for an indwelling foley catheter. Resident #44's care plan was revised on 03/24/2024 to reflect his indwelling foley catheter. A record review of Resident #44's care plan, dated 04/24/2024, reflected no physician order for an indwelling foley catheter. An interview and observation on 04/30/24 at 3:25pm with Resident #44, Resident #44 stated that he has not had a catheter in a long time but did not remember when it was removed. Resident #44 did not have a catheter bag attached to his person. An interview with the MDS Coordinator on 05/01/24 at 12:55pm, the MDS Coordinator stated that she was responsible for completing the MDS assessment accurately. The MDS Coordinator stated if a resident was receiving dialysis, then the MDS would reflect dialysis services but if a resident was not receiving dialysis, then the MDS should not reflect dialysis services. The MDS Coordinator stated if a resident's MDS was inaccurate the resident would not receive the appropriate care or services they may need. An interview with the MDS Coordinator on 05/01/24 at 12:55pm, the MDS Coordinator stated that she was responsible for completing the MDS assessment accurately. The MDS Coordinator stated if a resident was receiving dialysis, then the MDS would reflect dialysis services but if a resident was not receiving dialysis, then the MDS should not reflect dialysis services. The MDS Coordinator stated if a resident's MDS was inaccurate the resident would not receive the appropriate care or services they may need. An interview with the DON on 05/01/24 at 1:30pm, the DON stated that Resident #28 did not receive dialysis services and that Resident #44 did not have an indwelling catheter. The DON stated that Resident #17 received dialysis services. The DON stated the MDS nurse was responsible for complete the MDS accurately. The DON stated if the MDS was not accurate then residents may not receive the appropriate care. The DON also stated that if a MDS was done incorrectly, it could cause staff to not know how to care for the resident correctly. The DON stated she was not aware that any residents MDS's were completed incorrectly. A record review of the facility's Electronic Transmission of the MDS, not dated, reflected Policy Statement All MDS assessments (e.g., admission, annual, significant change, quarterly review, etc.0 and discharge and reentry records are completed and electronically encoded into our facility's MDS information system and transmitted to CMS' QIES Assessment Submission and Processing (ASAP) system in accordance with the current OBRA regulations governing the transmission and MDS data. Policy Interpretation and Implementation 1. All staff members responsible for completion of the MDS receive training on the assessment, data entry, and transmission processes, in accordance with the MDS RAI instruction Manual, before being permitted to use the MDS information system. A copy of the MDS RAI instruction Manual is maintained by the Resident Assessment Coordinator. 5. The MDS Coordinator is responsible for ensuring that appropriate edits are made prior to transmitting MDS data and that feedback and validation reports from each transmission are maintained for historical purposes and for tracking.
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 food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety in 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed fo...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety in 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed for kitchen and food sanitation. 1. The facility failed to label and date all food items located in the reach in refrigerator and reach in freezer. 2. The facility failed to ensure all items stored in the reach in refrigerator and reach in freezers were sealed ensuring food contents were not exposed to air. 3. The facility failed to ensure dietary staff practiced proper hand hygiene and glove use. 4. The facility failed to ensure the blender and utensils were sanitized during food preparation. 5. The facility failed to dispose of expired items in dry storage. These failures could place residents at risk for food contamination and foodborne illness. Findings Included: During the initial tour of the kitchen on 04/29/24 at 10:04 AM the following was observed: 1. The reach in refrigerator contained sliced deli ham in a plastic bag that was torn open and exposed to air; singles cheddar cheese sandwich slices were in a separate plastic bag that was torn open and exposed to air; and grape jelly was in a plastic container with a green lid that was not properly sealed and exposed to air. 2. The reach in freezer contained 4 separate plastic bags containing frozen chicken patties, sweet potato fries, regular fries, and hash browns. Each bag was torn open exposing the contents to air and were not labeled with neither the received nor opened date. 3. In a separate reach in refrigerator there was a plastic container of banana pudding dated 04/25 (it was not identified on the label if that was the prepared or use by date), and the container was not properly sealed exposing the contents to air. 4. The dry storage room contained a bottle of browning and seasoning sauce with an expiration date of 04/27/24. In an interview with the DM on 04/29/24 at 10:28 AM she said it was her expectation that all items were dated to include the preparation date or the date it was received, the date opened, and the use by date. The DM stated that all food items stored in the refrigerator and freezer should be placed in zip seal bags; if using a container, it should have the appropriate fitting lid so that there is an airtight seal, so no food items are exposed to air. The DM stated that a potential negative outcome to having food exposed to air is it could cause the food to be contaminated which could lead to illnesses that she said could cause residents to end up in the hospital. The DM said that if food items are not labeled or dated, they would not have any way of knowing what the item is, when it arrived, or when it should be thrown out. She stated she expects that dietary staff to check once a week for expired items throughout the kitchen. She said there should be no negative outcome to expired items in the kitchen because expired items should never make it to a resident. In an observation on 04/30/24 at 09:30 AM in a kitchen follow up for pureed foods the following was observed: 1. The [NAME] was observed handling soiled dishes with gloves then moving straight to food preparation and touching chicken patties used to make the mechanical chicken for lunch without changing her gloves or washing her hands. 2. The [NAME] was observed reusing a soiled spatula that was at the bottom of the one compartment sink and blender that was only being rinsed with hot water in a one compartment sink with no soap or sanitizer during food preparation. 3. The [NAME] was observed touching the trash can with her gloves and retuning to the food preparation, preparing white gravy without changing her gloves or washing her hands. 4. The [NAME] was observed dropping a scoop used for food thickener in the one compartment sink along with other soiled dishes and then pulling it out to reuse the soiled scoop after only rinsing it in hot water with no soap or sanitizer. 5. The [NAME] was observed not sanitizing the thermometer probe before each use when checking the food temperatures. In an interview on 04/30/24 at 11:10 AM with the [NAME] she said she was supposed to wash her hands and change her gloves after touching anything that contaminates them. She stated that failing to change her gloves or wash her hands could lead to cross contamination or bacteria being passed to food. The [NAME] said that the blender and utensils were supposed to be washed with soap and water and sanitized in the three-compartment sink. She stated she was nervous and forgot to sanitize the blender and utensils or wash her hands/change her gloves. She said a potential negative outcome to residents in failing to sanitize the equipment or utensils is food particles left behind can mix causing cross contamination or leading to allergens. The [NAME] stated she was supposed to clean the thermometer probe with hot water, and she believed that was an appropriate way of cleaning the probe. She stated that there are not any alcohol wipes available to clean the thermometer probe in between uses. The [NAME] clarified that hot water alone was not an appropriate way to clean and sanitize the spatula or other equipment/utensils in the one compartment sink; she said it can lead to bacterial growth, allergic reactions, and cross contamination by failing to wash and sanitize equipment and utensils. In an interview on 04/30/24 at 11:10 AM with the DM she said it was her expectation that dietary staff washed their hands and changed their gloves after touching trash, after cooking and/or serving, or after touching the dishwasher or anything that could contaminate the hands or gloves. She stated that a negative outcome to not changing gloves or washing hands would be cross contamination, staff could pass germs that could make the residents sick. The DM stated that it was her expectation that the blender be sanitized in between uses as well as any utensils. She stated that dietary staff are to wash all utensils and equipment such as the blender in the three-compartment sink with soap and water, rinse, and sanitize. The DM said that the thermometer probe should have been sanitized prior to using it on food and in between food items and alcohol wipes are to be used to sanitize the probe. She stated dietary staff were made aware that alcohol wipes are in the filing cabinet of the kitchen office and that is what is to be used to sanitize the probe. The DM stated failure to follow sanitation policy and practices would lead to cross contamination, and the residents potentially becoming ill. In an interview on 05/01/24 at 01:15 PM with the DON (who was also being used in place of the Administrator per corporate) she stated that all kitchen items should have been dated with the open date as well as the use by date which should be a day or two after the prepared date depending on what it is. The DON stated that all items in the refrigerator and freezer should be properly sealed in either zip seal bags or an appropriate airtight container in order to prevent contamination. She said all expired items should be discarded and that it was her expectation that dietary staff check daily to ensure there are no expired items. The DON said that the blender used in food preparation must be sanitized after each use and in between each pureed item. She stated rinsing it in hot water was not sufficient and that she expected dietary staff to use soap and water and sanitizer. The DON said that the thermometer probe should be cleaned after each use and that dietary staff should be washing their hands and changing their gloves regularly and especially after they become contaminated. The DON said that a potential negative outcome to not following sanitation guidelines such as washing hands/ changing gloves, washing, and sanitizing the blender/utensils/thermometer probe could lead to cross contamination which would make the residents sick. Review of the undated facility Food Preparation and Service policy reflected: Food and nutrition services employees prepare and serve food in a manner that complies with safe food handling practices. Appropriate measures are used to prevent cross contamination. These include: - Cleaning and sanitizing work surfaces and food contact equipment between uses, following food code guidelines. Food preparation staff adhere to proper hygiene and sanitary practices to prevent the spread of foodborne illnesses. Handwashing sinks are located near food preparation and clean dish areas and are separate from ware washing sinks. Food thermometers used to check food temperatures are clean, sanitized, and calibrated for accuracy. Bare hand contact with food is prohibited. Gloves are worn when handling food directly and changed between tasks. Disposable gloves are single use items and are discarded after each use. Review of the undated facility Food Receiving and Storage policy reflected: Food shall be received and stored in a manner that complies with safe food handling practices. Dietary staff, or other designated staff, will always maintain clean food storage areas. All foods stored in the refrigerator or freezer will be covered, labeled, and dated (use by date). Review of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Code (2022) revealed, PACKAGED FOOD shall be labeled as specified in LAW, including 21 CFR 101 FOOD Labeling, 9 CFR 317 Labeling, Marking Devices, and Containers, and 9 CFR 381 Subpart N Labeling and Containers, and as specified under § 3-202.18.
Oct 2023 1 deficiency
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Free from Abuse/Neglect (Tag F0600)

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 the resident had the right to be free from abuse...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure the resident had the right to be free from abuse, neglect, misappropriation of resident property, and exploitation, which included but was not limited to freedom from corporal punishment, involuntary seclusion and any physical or chemical restraint not required to treat the resident's medical symptoms for one of one (Resident #1) resident reviewed for abuse and neglect. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 was properly assessed by a nurse when she was found sitting in the floor of her room and when she fell backwards. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 was not verbally or physically abused by CNAs . 3. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's requests for assistance were not ignored. 4. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 was safely transferred to her bed. 5. The facility failed to ensure when Resident #1 said she was in pain, the CNAs responded by getting a nurse to assess her. 6. The facility failed to ensure CNAs treated Resident #1 with dignity when moving her in her a manner that exposed her breast and by not making sure her door was closed when she was not fully dressed. These failures could place residents at risk of injury, fear, depression, intimidation, and a diminished quality of life due to physical and verbal abuse. Findings include: Record review of Resident #1's face sheet reflected a [AGE] year-old-female . Resident #1 had diagnoses which included Alzheimer's disease, mild, intellectual disabilities, delusional disorders, and anxiety disorder. Record review of Resident #1's Quarterly MDS , dated 08/03/23, reflected the following: Hearing and speech - Resident #1 usually understood verbal content but missed some part/intent of message but comprehended most conversation. Cognitive Pattens - Resident #1 had a BIMS of 5, which suggested severe cognitive impairment. Functional Status regarding bed mobility and how the resident moved to and from lying position, turned side to side, and positioned body while in bed. Resident #1 required extensive assistance, Resident #1 was involved in activity, staff provided weight-bearing support and one-person physical assist. Mobility Devices - Resident #1 used a wheelchair. Record review of Resident #1's Care Plan, focus dated 03/29/23, reflected she had impaired cognitive function/dementia or impaired thought. Care plan goal, dated 03/29/23, reflected Resident #1 would attempt to make routine daily decisions with cues/supervision. Care plan intervention, dated 03/29/23, reflected when communicating with Resident #1, staff would identify themselves at each interaction and face her when speaking and make eye contact with Resident #1. Staff would reduce any distractions- close door. Resident #1 understood consistent, simple, directive sentences and staff were to provide Resident #1 with the necessary cues and to stop and return if Resident #1 was agitated. Staff were to provide cues, reorient and supervise Resident #1 as needed. Staff were to encourage Resident #1 to make routine and daily decisions and coach through the process when decisions were not forthcoming and used task segmentation to support short term memory deficits and break tasks into one step at a time. Record review of Resident #1's Care Plan, focus dated 03/20/23, reflected Resident #1 was at risk for falls. Care plan goal, dated 03/29/23, was Resident #1 would have decreased risk for serious injury or hospitalization as a result of falling, through the next assessment review period. Care plan intervention, dated 03/29/23, was to keep environment clear of unnecessary objects. Record review of Resident #1's Care Plan, focus dated 04/20/23 , reflected Resident #1 was on hospice due to a terminal diagnosis of Alzheimer's Disease and was at a risk for decline in mental, physical condition. Care plan goal, dated 04/20/23, reflected all of Resident #1's needs would be met with dignity and respect over the next 90 days. Care plan intervention, dated 04/20/23, reflected staff to assess resident for verbal and non-verbal signs and symptoms of pain and implement appropriate interventions and notify MD and hospice if interventions were not effective, staff were to encourage and allow resident to verbalize her needs and concerns, staff were to use active listening and address needs and concerns as able. Observation of video A , undated, revealed Resident #1 seated on her bed with her legs on the right side of the bed. Resident #1's bed was closest to the door. Resident #1 was dressed in a shirt, no pants, and an adult brief. The door to Resident #1's room was completely open, and another unknown resident was in a wheelchair directly outside and directly facing the open door of Resident#1's room. CNA A stood in front of Resident #1. Resident #1 held the elongated side of a blue rectangular fall mat and CNA A was holding the shorter side of the rectangular fall mat closest to the resident. Resident #1 attempted to pull the floor mat towards her, and CNA A held the floor matt and attempted to take it away from Resident #1. CNA A said, [Resident #1] let it go in a loud voice. CNA A made a gesture with her right arm in an upwards movement toward the direction of Resident #1's chest and Resident #1's hold on the floor mat was broken. Resident #1 fell backwards diagonally onto the bed. Resident #1 struggled to pull herself up in her bed using the bed rail Resident #1 said several times, I don't need this and other unintelligible statements expressed in an agitated manner. CNA said nothing else to Resident #1, used the bottom of her foot to straighten Resident #1's floor mat, exited the room, and turned the unknown resident's wheelchair away from his view into Resident #1's room and pushed him down the hallway. Resident #1 continued to repeat, I don't need this while CNA walked away. Observation of video B, undated, revealed Resident #1 in her room on the floor with her back to the door and wearing a two-piece pajama set. CNA A stood at Resident #1's feet, CNA B stood at Resident #1's head, and CNA C stood at Resident #1's left side. All CNAs were bent over Resident #1 about to lift Resident #1. One of the CNA's (it was unclear which CNA) said, stop that [Resident #1's]. CNA A placed her hands under Resident #1's knees. CNA B placed her hands under Resident #1's arms, and CNA C initially placed her left hand under Resident's left knee but moved it to Resident's left arm where CNA C's right hand was on the upper portion of Resident's left arm. CNA C lifted Resident #1 up pulling Resident #1's left arm. Resident #1 was lifted awkwardly to her bed and placed on her bed in a diagonal position toward the end of her bed. During the move, Resident's pajama top was pulled upward to expose her left breast. When the CNAs put Resident #1 on the bed Resident #1 said, two times, oh, my arm! All three CNAs stepped away from Resident #1's bed and look down at the Resident #1. No CNA asked about her arm. The resident asked, someone pull me up [in the bed]. CNA A stated, you know how to pull yourself up in that bed now. Resident #1 rolled to her left side and used her right arm to grab the headboard and pulled herself up in the bed. The video ended with CNA C pulling up the resident's blanket that was at the end of Resident #1's bed. Observation of video C, undated, revealed the resident seated on the floor of her room at the door with her back towards the camera and her right arm extended outside the door. CNA A was in the room when the resident was initially on the floor. CNA B approached resident's room and took the hand of Resident #1's extended arm then released Resident #1's hand and resident fell on her back into her room onto the floor. A sound was heard from the audio as the resident hit the floor and it appeared either her head or her back might have it the bottom railing of a bedside table. No CNA remarked when Resident #1 fell backwards. The resident was restless and continued to make contact with the bottom railing of the bedside table with her head and shoulder. The bedside table was not moved away from the resident. CNA C stepped over the resident and went to straighten the resident's bed. CNA A made the statement, she ain't even fallen and now she want to just lay there. CNA A and CNA C, who walked in after CNA B, told resident to, get up. Beside telling Resident #1 to get up none of the CNAs spoke to Resident #1. The video ended with the CNA A pulling her arm to get her to a seated position. Observation of video D, undated, reflected Resident #1 seated on her bed. CNA A stood at the foot of Resident #1's bed with a cell phone to her ear. CNA A told Resident #1, okay, lay down. Resident #1 began to lay down in the bed and CNA A, with her cell phone to her ear walked to the door to leave Resident #1's room. Resident #1 said, wait, no come here I ain't got [unintelligible] I need you to, I can't and Resident #1 gestures to the end of her bed where her sheet and blankets were in a pile. CNA said, [unintelligible] you know how to put that cover on you [unintelligible] and walked out of the room with her cell phone held in place to her ear with her shoulder. Resident #1 said, I can't, come on and help me CNA A had left the room. Interview with CNA A on 10/12/23 at 12:04 PM regarding video C who revealed Resident #1 was crawling out on the floor and she and CNA B and CNA picked up Resident #1 and put her in the bed. CNA A said she was not sure if Resident #1 fell because Resident #1 normally just slides off the bed. CNA A revealed Resident #1 would, put herself on the floor and crawl out to the hallway. CNA A revealed she did not know if Resident #1 hit her head. CNA A revealed if a resident fell, the staff were supposed to report to the nurse. CNA A said Resident #1 was care planned for falls, but CNA A did not know the meaning of a care planned. CNA A revealed she did know the residents had the right to fall, and she thought everyone should be assessed after a fall. She revealed residents should be assessed after a fall because you couldn't always tell if a resident was injured. She said they called for a nurse, but she did not know if the nurse came to access Resident #1 because she left, her shift was over . Interview with CNA C on 10/12/23 at 12:15 PM regarding video C revealed Resident #1 had, gotten on the floor and she and the other CNAs picked up Resident #1 and put her back in the bed, then left the room and let the nurse know she had gotten onto the floor. CNA C revealed she did not know what the nurse did after. CNA C revealed when they told Resident #1 to sit up that caused her to fall backwards, but CNA C couldn't tell if Resident #1 hit her head or not. CNA C revealed that if Resident #1 did hit her head it was when Resident #1 flopped back. CNA C revealed she was trained in abuse, neglect, and exploitation and it was the facility policy to assess a resident if a resident was on the floor. Interview with the ADON on 10/12/23 at 1:42 PM regarding video C, revealed the CNAs provided, poor customer service in the way the spoke with Resident #1 and poor care as well. The ADON revealed it was not a good scene and they just let her lay there. The ADON revealed in video C, it appeared the CNA was holding Resident #1's hand and just let go and this possibility, caused Resident #1 to fall. The ADON said staff should never walk over a resident who was on the floor. The ADON revealed when CNA A said, she ain't even fallen and now she want to just lay there that was not an appropriate thing to say . The ADON stated the language used was teasing. The ADON said the resident should have been consoled, the CNAs should have made sure Resident #1 was comfortable, and the CNAs should have made sure the environment was safe and clear of hazards. The ADON further revealed if a resident was found on the floor, staff should always get a nurse to assess the resident before the resident was moved. The ADON revealed when a resident was found on the floor a nurse should be called to check the resident's vitals, check the resident for injuries, and see if the resident was bleeding or in pain. While waiting for the nurse to come to assess the resident the staff who found the resident should get the resident comfortable. the ADON stated if her loved one was treated in this manner she would be very upset . Interview with the DON on 10/12/23 at 3:16 PM who revealed when a staff member found a resident on the floor staff needed to get a nurse to assess the resident and the nurse decided what to do, depending on what was found in their assessment. The DON revealed staff should not put the resident back in bed without a nurse assessment. The DON revealed the CNAs or staff needed to make sure the environment was safe. When referencing video C, a CNA should have moved the bedside table environment and it was clear none of the CNAs in video C cleared the area. The DON revealed, when video C was discussed, she would have been concerned about further injury to Resident #1 because of where Resident #1's head and upper body were in reference to the bedside table. The CNAs responsibility was to try and keep the resident calm and comfortable and not anxious. The DON revealed Resident #1 was restless and the CNAs did not pay attention to the resident at all. Interview with the ADM on 10/13/23 at 11:20 AM revealed, after video C was viewed , the CNAs care was, below minimum expectations and did not show compassion, there was no urgency to care for the resident and the care provided was unacceptable. The ADM said the CNAs, failed to provide a service by not getting a nurse to assess Resident #1 before they transferred the resident to her bed . Record review of the facility Disciplinary/Counseling Report, dated 10/10/23, reflected CNA A was suspended pending investigation. Record review of the facility Disciplinary/Counseling Report, dated 10/11/23, reflected CNA B was suspended pending investigation. Record review of the Disciplinary/Counseling Report, dated 10/11/2 reflected CNA C was suspended pending investigation. Record review of the facility's, undated, policy titled Falls Clinical Protocol Assessment and Recognition, reflected after a fall, the resident will be assessed for unsteadiness, weakness, decline, contributing factors etc . Record review of the facility in-service dated 10/10/23 revealed in the event a resident is observed on the floor or on a floor mat this is a change of plane and is considered a fall, licensed nurse must assess resident prior to moving resident. Record review of the signed statement from CNA A's personnel file, dated 10/26/22. reflected CNA A was given a copy of the facility policy against abuse, neglect and mistreatment of residents which indicated she understood there was no tolerance for poor customer service and/or abuse and she understood her employment was subject to termination for poor customer service and/or abuse. Record review of the signed statement from CNA B's personnel file, undated, reflected CNA B was given a copy of the facility policy against abuse, neglect and mistreatment of residents which indicated she understood there was no tolerance for poor customer service and/or abuse and she understood her employment was subject to termination for poor customer service and/or abuse. Record review of the signed statement from CNA C's personnel file, dated 05/25/23, reflected CNA C was given a copy of the facility policy against abuse, neglect and mistreatment of residents which indicated she understood there was no tolerance for poor customer service and/or abuse and she understood her employment was subject to termination for poor customer service and/or abuse. Record review of the signed, undated, statement from CNA A's personnel file, reflected CNA A pledged to follow the guiding principles of the facility to ensure she performed her job duties at the highest level at all times so the facility could provide outstanding customer service to all residents that were entrusted to the facility. Customer service was the single most important thing the facility did. The facility had an obligation to all those they served to be friendly, helpful, and treat everyone with dignity and respect. Record review of the signed, undated, statement from CNA B's personnel file, reflected CNA A pledged to follow the guiding principles of the facility to ensure that she performed her job duties at the highest level at all times so the facility could provide outstanding customer service to all residents that were entrusted to the facility. Customer service was the single most important thing the facility did. The facility had an obligation to all those they served to be friendly, helpful, and treat everyone with dignity and respect. Record review of the signed, undated, statement from CNA C's personnel file, reflected CNA A pledged to follow the guiding principles of the facility to ensure she performed her job duties at the highest level at all times so the facility could provide outstanding customer service to all residents that were entrusted to the facility. Customer service was the single most important thing the facility did. The facility had an obligation to all those they served to be friendly, helpful, and treat everyone with dignity and respect. Record review of training from CNA A's orientation in her personnel file, dated 10/26/22, reflected she was trained that examples of verbal abuse included the use of profane language, sarcasm, swearing, name calling, and teasing and she is an advocate for all the residents in the facility to prevent any abuse or neglect. Record review of training from CNA A's orientation in her personnel file, date unknown, reflected she was trained that examples of verbal abuse included the use of profane language, sarcasm, swearing, name calling, and teasing and she is an advocate for all the residents in the facility to prevent any abuse or neglect. Record review of training from CNA C's orientation in her personnel file, date unknown, reflected she was trained that examples of verbal abuse included the use of profane language, sarcasm, swearing, name calling, and teasing and she is an advocate for all the residents in the facility to prevent any abuse or neglect. Record review of the facility's, undated, customer service basics, reflected when customers asked for something, when possible, do it immediately and if you can't do it immediately, let them know when you will do it and then do what you said you would do.
Mar 2023 2 deficiencies
CONCERN (E)

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

Food Safety (Tag F0812)

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 store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordan...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety in the facility's only kitchen. 1.The facility failed to ensure food items in refrigerators, freezer and dry storage room were labeled and stored in accordance with the professional standards for food service. 2. The facility failed to discard items stored in refrigerator, freezers or dry storage that were not properly labeled or past the 'best by', consume by or expiration dates. 3. The facility failed to ensure the ice machine vent/grate and outer surface was free from dust. 4. The facility failed to have Dietary staff wash hands or change gloves when they touched other surfaces while handling food or upon re-entering the kitchen. These failures could place residents at risk for food-borne illness and cross contamination. Findings Included: Observations of Reach-in Refrigerator #2 on 03/06/23 at 09:21 AM revealed the following: -Left side door, bottom of the refrigerator: 1 large zip top bag with thawed chicken in a shallow metal pan, there was no label of item description, no pulled date, no consume by date. -1 full size sheet pan with thawing pork chops covered with loose fitting plastic wrap, dated 03/06/23, sitting on six stacked rectangle white boxes of raw bacon; the pan over-hanged the side of the boxes that drippings could drip onto the thawed chicken beneath it. -Center door: 1 large zip top bag of celery dated 3 6 (03/06/23), unsecured closed, no consume by or discard date. -Right door: 120 (10 bags with 12 each) defrosted/thawed waffles [out of box], dated 03/03/23 (on first stack), there was no label of item description, no consume by or discard date. -1 large zip top bag with cooked cheese omelettes, dated 03/06/23, there was no label of item description, no consume by or discard date. -2 extra-large bags of thawed scrambled egg mix, dated 03/06/23, there was no label of item description. Observation of the Kitchen on 03/06/23 at 08:57 AM revealed the following: - Ice Machine: inside the ice chest there was a long white plastic guard (stretched the length of the internal ice chest) in front of the ice chute; it had brown and light pink areas/smudges/smears/spots in various places on the guard. -Ice Machine: plastic vent, located on the right side of the machine, the vent slats had dust on them. - Handwashing sink #1's garbage receptacle: the garbage bag was not properly placed in receptacle; it was hanging down in the back. -Prep Table (between the stove and the reach-in Refrigerators) at 09:33AM: On the bottom of the prep. Table, 50 lbs. bag of onions in an extra-large plastic container, previously opened, there was a metal tablespoon with a thick dark orange colored substance on it. -1 extra-large cardboard box of approximately 6 -10 heads of cabbage, no date reflected. The cabbages were dried out and had browned ends to most of the leaves covering the heads of cabbage, there was no consume by date or discard date. -On the floor, slightly under the prep table was a slice of tomato, a wilted, shriveled dark leaf from a green leafy vegetable and a piece of skin (peel) from a yellow onion. -On the floor, under the prep. sink (next to the prep table) was a sliced off top of a fresh yellow onion. -On a large rolling Baker's Rack at 09:55 AM: On the 4th- 9th, row down from top, 5 sheet pans of baked chocolate chip and sugar cookies, uncovered; there was no label of item description, no open/pulled date, no consume by, or discard date. Observations of Reach-in Refrigerator#1 on 03/06/23 at 09:02 AM revealed the following: - Left side door: 1 large clear plastic bag for lettuce, previously opened and tied closed in a knot that had come undone. There was no label of item description, no open date, no received by date, and no consume by or discard date. -1 medium clear plastic container with green lid, dated 03/02/23, labeled tomatoes'; it had sliced tomatoes and lettuces leaves, there was no consume by or discard date reflected. -Center door: 10 small white foam bowls with lids labeled fish, dated 03/01/23, contained a thick yellow substance (yellow mustard consistency), there was no consume by or discard date. -1 small white foam bowl with lid, labeled fish, dated 03/01/23; the lid was not closed on the left side, there was no consume by or discard date. -1 small white foam bowl with lid, contained salad with croutons, there was no label of item description, no open/pulled date, and no consume by or discard date. -2-16.9 oz clear plastic bottles of water, no label of personal use or kitchen use, no pulled date and no discard date. -1 large zip top bag with six premade chicken salad sandwiches, dated 03/03/23, there was no consume by or discard date reflected. - 1 large zip top bag with two pimento cheese sandwiches, dated 03/03/23, there was no consume by or discard date reflected. -1-5 lbs. white plastic tub with lid of low-fat cottage cheese with manufacturer expiration date of 02/18/23, there was no received by date. -1- 5 lbs. white plastic tub with lid of low-fat cottage cheese, previously opened on 02/11/23, manufacturer expiration date of 02/18/23. -1-5.5 oz aluminum can of low sodium special blend tomato juice (for drinking), there was no received by date, no consume by, or discard date. -1-approximately 8 oz. plastic bottle of lactose free fat free milk with no received by date, no consume by or manufacturer expiration date reflected. -1 large zip top bag with sliced provolone cheese dated 02/16/23, there was no consume by or discard date. Observations of Reach-in Freezer #1 on 03/06/23 at 09:39 AM revealed the following: -Left door: - 1 large zip top bag with breaded chicken fillets, dated 03/04/23, unsecured closed, there was no consume by or discard by date. -1 large zip top bag, dated 02/28/23, with previously opened 5 lbs. bag of breaded okra, there was no received by date, no consume by or discard by date. -1 large zip top bag, dated 02/05/23, with previously opened, tied closed, 40 oz. bag of breaded okra, unsecured closed; there was no received by date, no consume by or discard date. -1 large zip top bag, dated 03/05/23, labeled ck, with breaded chicken fillets; there was no consume by or discard date. -1 extra-large blue plastic bag tied closed with mixed vegetables, there was no label of item description, no received by date, no consume by, or discard date. -1 extra-large bag tied closed with frozen beef patties, dated 03/06/23, there was no label of item description, no received by date, no consume by, or discard date. -Right door: -1 medium zip top bag, dated 02/17, containing a small ham, dated 02/15, there was a medium amount of ice crystals in the bag and the ham was darker near where the ice crystals had collected, on the bottom of the ham. -at the bottom of the freezer was a frozen French fry. It remained in the same place during an observation on 03/08/23 at 01:15 PM. Observations of the Reach-in Freezer#2 on 03/06/23 at 09:50 AM, revealed the following: -1 large frozen slab of beef, dated 03/06/23, there was no label of item description. -2 previously opened, tied closed plastic bags of frozen Ranch dinner rolls, approximately 20 each; there was no label of item description, no consume by, or discard date. Observations of the Dry Storage room on 03/06/23 at 09:57 AM revealed the following: -Left side shelf: -1-1.34 oz box, previously opened oatmeal pies, there was no received by date, no opened date, no consume by or manufacturer expiration date. -1 large zip top bag of previously opened bag of shredded coconut, dated 08/17/22, there was no received by date, no consume by or discard date. -1-8 oz plastic bottle of dark brown thick liquid, there was no label of item description, no received by date, no open date, no consume by, or discard date. -Right side shelf: -1-1.36 oz. container with lid, containing Demi-[NAME] (a brown sauce used by itself or as base for other sauces), dated 08/29/22, no consume by date, manufacturer expiration/best by date 12/07/22. -1-16 oz bag of chicken flavor, dated 02/02/22, manufacturer expiration date 01/09/23. -5- 11.3 oz. bag of turkey gravy mix, there was no received by date. It was sitting outside of a box of similar items dated 02/02/22, with manufacturer best by date 12/19/22. Observations of the Kitchen on 03/08/23 at 10:50 AM revealed the following: -Handwashing sink #1 garbage receptacle garbage was full and had more than paper towels in it, foam/paper plates, gloves, were also noted. -At 11:00 AM: [NAME] C mask was noted to be beneath his nose. He pulled it up. It fell beneath his nose again while speaking with the surveyor, he was asked to pull it and pinch it at the nose to allow for a better fit. -At 11:10 AM: Lunch service was about to get started, [NAME] C's mask was once again under his nose, and he was talking to the staff about getting service underway. He started preparing plates and the mask slipped down beneath his mustache and top lip. -At 11:20 AM: Dietary Aides noted taking prepared plates of food to the dining room, with gloved hands, then coming back and grabbing another prepared plate to take back out to the dining room to give to a resident. The staff had on gloves but had to push the exit door outward to exit the kitchen and push the entrance door open to come into the kitchen and they were not changing gloves or washing hands upon re-entering the kitchen. (*Dietary Manager returned at 11:23 AM and observed a staff member push the entrance door with gloved hands to re-enter the kitchen then take another plate to go back into dining room without changing gloves or washing their hands.) -At 11:39 AM: Dietary Aide E stood on the line, next to [NAME] C and passed the plates [NAME] C fixes to the other Dietary Aides on the receiving side of the steam table, was noted with gloved hands touching her smart watch when it alarmed and not changing gloves. She then touched her clothes but did not change her gloves. In an interview on 03/08/23 at 11:00 AM with [NAME] C. He stated he had worked at the facility for 7 months and that he was in-charge when the Dietary Manager was not present. He stated an understanding of the purpose of the presence of the surveyor in the kitchen today. (The Dietary Manger was in a facility staff meeting). When [NAME] C was informed of an observation of a staff member not practicing hand hygiene in the kitchen, he stated that that could cause illness in the residents and make someone real sick. He was also asked about wearing one's mask incorrectly. He stated they wear their masks to protect the residents and need to have it pulled up over their mouth and nose. He stated they are not supposed to touch it and not wash their hands or put on new gloves. In an interview on 03/08/23 at 11:15 AM with [NAME] D. She stated she had worked at the facility for 15 years and along with cooking duties also does inventory on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays. She said, Dietary Manager gives me a sheet on of what is supposed to be in here then I try to add with my menu. The sheet is supposed to have everything we need for the kitchen. We get sheets every week. [NAME] D stated she submits her finished sheets to the Dietary Manger then he places the orders. He orders on Mondays, the orders go out on Tuesdays, the truck delivers on Wednesdays and Fridays. She also restocks and rotates inventory. She said, the reason for rotating stock was because items will expire. The harm is it could cause food poisoning, if used. In an interview on 03/08/23 at 11:25 AM with the Dietary Manager. He was informed of the observations made by the surveyor regarding hand hygiene. When asked the risk /harm of staff touching the doors going in and out of the kitchen with gloves or ungloves hands and not changing them or washing their hands. He stated maybe he could open the doors to the kitchen (to keep staff from touching the door going out and returning to kitchen from serving the ALF dining room). He stated hand hygiene was important to keep down the opportunities to introduce germs to the food being prepared and later served. He also stated they had just had an in-service on this prior to survey. In an interview and observation on 03/08/23 at 12:45 PM with Dietary Aide-D. She stated she had worked at the facility for one month and that hand hygiene was important to prevent making residents ill. When asked did she know why or understand why when we touch any surface other than food when working the line, gloves should be changed. She stated yes and nodded her head up and down. In an interview and observation on 03/08/23 at 12:50 PM with the Dietary Manager. He stated he had not seen the brownish and pink spots/smudges inside the ice machine, but he would get that cleaned up. As the walk through of the kitchen and interview continued, the Dietary Manager said, opened/leftover items are kept in the refrigerator for 3 days and prepackaged items are kept 7-10 days once they are opened. Canned goods with no expiration dates . I do not know; I would have to find that out. Canned goods with expiration dates, we go by the expiration dates, but other items once opened are kept 6-8 weeks. We go by expiration dates to discard food items. He stated items in the dry storage room, once opened are kept until expiration date. He asked if the French fry that was shown to him in freezer during the walk through was there on Monday. When asked about the staff member that walked into the kitchen and had the kitchen staff distracted trying to find out what she wanted, the Dietary Manager stated the staff member was a Housekeeper for the ALF side and non-dietary staff knows they are not to just walk in here. He also stated he was unsure why the housekeeper came inside the kitchen today to place her personal lunch order. He stated he understood how her repeated touching of her mask was an issue and she should not have been in the kitchen, especially doing the thing (repeated touching of her mask) he was just trying to remind his staff not to do because it puts the residents at risk for cross contamination. Review of facility's Shelf Life of Refrigerated Food List (provided by Dietary Manager) on 03/08/23: Meat & Seafood: Meat and Seafood: .Chicken or Turkey 1-2 days Ground Meats 1-2 days Lunch Meats 2 weeks unopened, 3-5 days opened .Dairy: Cheese, hard 6 months unopened, 3-4 weeks opened Cheese, soft 1 week .Leftovers: Meat or Poultry 3-4 days Salads 3-5 days . Review of the U.S. Public Health Service Food Code, dated 2017, reflected: 3-501.18 Ready-to-Eat, Time/Temperature Control for Safety Food, Disposition. (A) A food specified in 3-501.17(A) or (B) shall be discarded if it: (1) Exceeds the temperature and time combination specified in 3-501.17(A), except time that the product is frozen; P (2) Is in a container or package that does not bear a date or day; P or (3) Is inappropriately marked with a date or day that exceeds a temperature and time combination as specified in 3501.17(A). (D) A date marking system that meets the criteria stated in (A) and (B) of this section may include: (2) Marking the date or day of preparation, with a procedure to discard the food on or before the last date or day by which the food must be consumed on the premises, sold, or discarded as specified under (A) of this section; (3) Marking the date or day the original container is opened in a food establishment, with a procedure to discard the food on or before the last date or day by which the food must be consumed on the premises, sold, or discarded as specified under (B) of this section; or Review of the facility's Nutrition Services Policy & Procedures: Food Preparation and Service, not dated, reflected: Policy Statement: Food and nutrition services employees prepare and serve food in a manner that complies with safe food handling practices. Policy Interpretation and Implementation: Food Preparation Area 1. The food preparation area is large enough to meet the needs of the facility. 2. Equipment is arranged to facilitate food preparation, 3. Areas for cleaning dishes and utensils are located in a separate area from the food service line to assure that a sanitary environment is maintained. 4. Appropriate measures are used to prevent cross-contamination. These include: a. Storing raw meat separately and in drip-proof containers in a manner that prevents cross-contamination from other foods in the refrigerator; . d. Cleaning and sanitizing work surfaces and food-contact equipment between uses, following food code guidelines. 5. Food preparation staff adhere to proper hygiene and sanitary practices to prevent the spread of food-borne illness. Thawing Frozen Food .1. a. Thawing in the refrigerator in a drip-proof container; . 17. Food served once is not served again. 18. Residents are discouraged from saving anything from their meals for later consumption. Food Service/Distribution 4. All staff wash their hands before serving food to residents. Staff will also wash their hands after collecting soiled plates and food waste prior to handling food trays. 6. Bare hand contact with food is prohibited. Gloves are worn when handling food directly and changed between tasks. Disposable gloves are single-use items and are discarded after each use. Food Receiving and Storage Policy: Policy Statement: Foods shall be and stored in a manner that complies with safe food handling practices. Policy Interpretation and Implementation: 1. Dietary staff, or other designated staff, will maintain clean food storage areas at all times. 2. When food is delivered to the facility it will be inspected for safe transport and quality before being accepted. 7. Dry foods that are stored in bins will be removed from original packaging, labeled and dated (use by date). Such foods will be rotated using a first in-first out system. 8. All foods stored in the refrigerator or freezer will be covered, labeled and dated (use by date). 11. Wrappers of frozen foods must stay intact until thawing. 14. b. All foods belongings to residents must be labeled with the resident's name, the item and the use by date. d. Beverages must be dated when opened and discarded after twenty-four (24) hours. E. Other opened containers must be dated and sealed or covered during storage. Review of the U.S. Public Health Service Food Code, dated 2017, reflected: Section 2-301.14 FOOD EMPLOYEES shall clean their hands and exposed portions of their arms as specified under § 2-301.12 immediately before engaging in FOOD preparation including working with exposed FOOD, clean EQUIPMENT and UTENSILS, and unwrapped SINGLE-SERVICE and SINGLE-USE ARTICLESP and: (A) After touching bare human body parts other than clean hands and clean, exposed portions of arms; (B) After using the toilet room; (C) After caring for or handling SERVICE ANIMALS or aquatic animals as specified in ¶ 2-403.11(B); (D) Except as specified in ¶ 2-401.11(B), after coughing, sneezing, using a handkerchief or disposable tissue, using tobacco, eating, or drinking; (E) After handling soiled EQUIPMENT or UTENSILS; (F) During FOOD preparation, as often as necessary to remove soil and contamination and to prevent cross contamination when changing tasks; (G) When switching between working with raw FOOD and working with READY-TO-EAT FOOD; (H) Before donning gloves to initiate a task that involves working with FOOD; and (I) After engaging in other activities that contaminate the hands.
CONCERN (E)

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

Infection Control (Tag F0880)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program 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 designated to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable disease and infection for five (Residents #1, #12, #16, #36 and #70) of six residents reviewed for infection control. MA A failed to disinfect the blood pressure cuff in between blood pressure checks for Residents #1, #12, and #70. MA B failed to disinfect the blood pressure cuff in between blood pressure checks for Residents #16 and #36. This failure could place residents at-risk of cross contamination which could result in infections or illness. Findings included: Review on 03/07/23 of Resident #1's EHR revealed the resident was an [AGE] year-old male that was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Hypertension, (elevated blood pressure), Atherosclerotic Heart Disease, (lack of adequate blood supply to the heart), and congestive heart failure, (constriction of the airway and difficulty in breathing). Review of Resident #1's five-day MDS, dated [DATE], revealed a BIMS score of 12, indicating moderate impairment for decision making, his functional status indicated he needed one person assist only with his ADLs. Record review of Resident #1's physician orders dated 03/01/23 reflected, losartan potassium tablet; 50 mg, give 1 tablet by mouth one time a day for elevated blood pressure. Review of Resident #12's EHR revealed the resident was an [AGE] year-old female that was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnosis including essential Hypertension (elevated blood pressure), congestive heart failure (constriction of airway and difficulty in breathing), and atrial fibrillation (irregular beat of the heart). Review of Resident #12's quarterly MDS, dated [DATE] revealed a BIMs score of 99, indicating severe impairment for decision making, her functional status indicated she needed assist of two staff with her ADLs. Record review of Resident #12's physician orders dated 03/01/23 reflected, metoprolol tartrate tablet; 50 mg, give 1 tablet by mouth in the morning and the evening for elevated blood pressure. Review on 03/07/23 of Resident #16's EHR revealed the resident was an [AGE] year-old female that was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Hypertensive urgency, (an elevated very high blood pressure with no symptoms), and atrial fibrillation (irregular beat of the heart). Review of Resident #16's quarterly MDS, dated [DATE] revealed a BIMs score of 13, indicating she was cognitively intact for decision making, her functional status indicated she needed assist of one staff with her ADLs. Record review of Resident #16's physician orders dated 03/01/23 reflected, metoprolol succinate ER; tablet extended release 24-hour 25 mg give one tablet by mouth one time a day for elevated blood pressure. Review on 03/07/23 of Resident #36's EHR revealed the resident was a [AGE] year-old male that was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including essential Hypertension (elevated blood pressure). Review of Resident #36's quarterly MDS, dated [DATE] revealed a BIMs score of 12, indicating moderate impairment for decision making, his functional status indicated he needed assist of one staff with his activities of daily living. Record review of Resident #36's physician orders dated 03/01/23 reflected, lisinopril tablet; 10mg give one tablet by mouth in the morning for elevated blood pressure. Review on 03/07/23 of Resident #70's EHR revealed the resident was a [AGE] year-old male that was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including essential Hypertension (elevated blood pressure), and atrial fibrillation (irregular beat of the heart), paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (irregular beat of the heart), nonrheumatic aortic valve stenosis (clogging of the aortic valve not related to childhood disease process), and acute diastolic congestive heart failure (left sided heart failure). Review of Resident #70's quarterly MDS, dated [DATE] revealed a BIMs score of 15, indicating he was cognitively intact for decision making, his functional status indicated he needed assist of two staff with his activities of daily living. Record review of Resident #70's physician orders dated 03/01/23 reflected, lisinopril tablet; 10mg give one tablet by mouth one time a day for elevated blood pressure. Observation on 03/07/23 at 7:07 AM revealed MA A performing morning medication pass, during which time he checked the blood pressures on Resident #12. MA A failed to sanitize the blood pressure cuff before or after using it on Resident #12. Observation on 03/07/23 at 7:17 AM revealed MA A performing morning medication pass, during which time he checked the blood pressures on Resident #1. MA A failed to sanitize the blood pressure cuff before or after using it on Resident #1. Observation on 03/07/23 at 7:20 AM revealed MA A performing morning medication pass, during which time he checked the blood pressures on Resident #70. MA A failed to sanitize the blood pressure cuff before or after using it on Resident #70. Observation on 03/07/23 at 7:25 AM revealed MA B performing morning medication pass, during which time she checked the blood pressures on Resident #16. MA B failed to sanitize the blood pressure cuff before or after using it on Resident #16. Observation on 03/07/23 at 7:30 AM revealed MA B performing morning medication pass, during which time she checked the blood pressures on Resident #36. MA B failed to sanitize the blood pressure cuff before or after using it on Resident #36. Interview on 03/07/23 at 10:30 AM, MA B stated reusable equipment, like blood pressure cuffs, should be sanitized with wipes between each resident use to prevent transmitting an infection from one resident to another. She stated if she forgot to wipe the cuff it was because of the presence of the surveyor made her more nervous. And sometimes she just did not have time to sanitize between each resident. Interview on 03/07/23 at 11:15 AM, MA A stated reusable equipment, like blood pressure cuffs, should be sanitized with wipes between each resident use to prevent transmitting an infection from one resident to another. He stated if he forgot to wipe the cuff it was because of the presence of the surveyor made him more nervous. He stated that he knew he should have, and it was in his head to do it, but he just forgot. Interview on 03/07/23 at 2:15 PM with the DON she stated that her expectation was that staff would sanitize all reusable equipment between each resident use. She stated that not doing so placed residents at risk of cross contamination of infections from one resident to another. Interview on 03/07/23 at 7:15 AM with the Administrator he stated that his expectation was that staff would sanitize all reusable equipment between each resident use. He stated that not doing so placed residents at risk of cross contamination of infections from one resident to another. He felt the DON needed to be more aggressive with her training and her follow-up concerning infection control . Review of facility's Policies and Procedure titled: cleaning and disinfection of resident care items and equipment, undated, reflected the following: Resident Care equipment, including reusable items Will be cleaned and disinfected according to the . current recommendations .c non-critical reusable items are those that come in contact with initial skin but not mucus membranes . (1) non-critical resident-care items include Blood press cuffs . reusable items are cleaned and disinfected . between residents .
Jan 2023 1 deficiency
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Report Alleged Abuse (Tag F0609)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure an allegation of abuse was reported timely but not later than...

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 an allegation of abuse was reported timely but not later than 24 hours after the allegation was made for one of five residents (Resident #1) reviewed. The facility failed to timely report an allegation of resident abuse after the allegation was made to the State Agency. This failure could affect all residents by placing them at risk of abuse if the reportable allegations are not reported timely after it is discovered. Findings included: Review of Resident #1's undated face sheet reflected a [AGE] year-old female was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of depression(sadness), Alzheimer's Disease (memory loss), and depressive disorder (loss of interest in activities). Resident # 1 was discharged from the facility on 8-11-2022 to her home. Review of Resident #1's MDS dated [DATE] revealed Resident#1's BIMS Summary score was 15 indicating she was cognitively intact. Interview on 01-15-2023 at 12:30 PM, the Administrator stated he was not aware Resident #1 had allegations of abuse when she was at the facility from 03-23-2022 through 8-11-2022. The Administrator stated Resident # 1 was admitted to the facility for rehabilitation after having a stroke. Resident # 1 never mentioned any incident to the facility staff during her facility stay. The administrator stated on 12-27-2022, Resident #1 came to the facility to inform him what happened when she was at the facility. The Administrator stated Resident #1 did not report the issue when she was at the facility, but she felt guilty about it afterward. Resident #1 stated that a LVN was flirty with her throughout her placement, and she flirted back. Resident # 1 stated that when she was in a private room the LVN fondled her, and she enjoyed it. Resident #1 stated, she did not ask the LVN to touch her or give consent, but she did not resist. Resident #1 stated, the two of them continued to text and the LVN sent her an explicit photograph on one occasion. The administrator stated the LVN was the primary nurse for Resident #1 during her stay at the facility. The Administrator stated there were never any complaints about the LVN related to inappropriate touch or contact with facility residents or residents' families. The Administrator stated Resident #1 's conversation on 12-27-2022 was the first time she had made him or anyone in the facility aware of the situation with the LVN. The Administrator stated at the time he was made aware of the allegations on 12-27-2022, Resident #1 was no longer at the facility and the LVN was no longer employed with the facility. The Administrator stated the LVN's employment was terminated on 10-7-2022, for sending an inappropriate text message to facility staff. The Administrator stated he failed to report the allegation timely to State Agency. The administrator stated he started the investigation of Resident # 1's allegations on 12-27-2022 by speaking with residents at the facility and residents' families. The residents had no complaints about the LVN or had experienced any type of abuse or neglect. The investigation was ongoing as the staff was still being interviewed to conclude the investigation. Interview on 01-15-2023 at 1:00 PM, the LVN stated he never fondled or touched Resident # 1 inappropriately. The LVN stated he never had a relationship with Resident #1 and would never do anything like that. The LVN stated he no longer worked at the facility and was terminated due to a facility staff making an allegation of sexual harassment. The LVN stated the allegations were not true. The LVN stated Resident #1 came to his current job and brought gifts for him as his family. The LVN stated Resident #1 had been sending him crazy and off-the-wall text messages. The LVN stated that Resident # 1 told her that she had a dream about him. The LVN stated he stopped responding to Resident #1's text messages. The LNV stated that he had exchanged text messages with Resident #1 to help her with controlling her diabetes. The LVN does not know why Resident #1 would say that he touched her inappropriately. Interview on 01-15-2023 at 1:58 PM, Resident #1 stated that she did not report the incident when it occurred. Resident #1 stated she had been wrestling with what had happened and she was so glad to get so much attention from the LVN when she was at the facility. Resident #1 stated Her daughter or husband never visited her during the 5 months she was at the facility for rehabilitation. Resident #1 stated that she talked with the nurse on a personal level, and she gave him too much information personally about her relationship with her husband. Resident #1 stated her daughter does not know anything about the incident and she does not want her to know. Resident #1's daughter knows she is friends with the LVN, and Resident's 1 daughter gave clothes to the LVN's granddaughter. Resident #1 stated the LVN worked at another facility, and she had visited the facility to give the LVN gifts. Resident #1 stated she had a friend that volunteer at the facility where the LVN work, and she had been thinking about volunteering at the facility where the LVN work. Resident #1 stated that she felt safe around the LVN. Resident #1 stated she told her husband about the LVN fondling her and he did not get upset. Resident #1 stated her husband said to forget about it as that could ruin the LVN's life. Resident #1 stated she felt guilty and that was all her fault for what had happened. Resident #1 stated she allowed the LVN to fondle her breast and she liked it. Resident #1 stated that she had a personal relationship with the LVN. Resident #1 stated that she and LVN would text about her diabetes. Resident #1 stated the LVN was a really good nurse and the LVN listened to her. Resident #1 stated that the LVN gave her so much attention that she thought everything was okay. Resident #1 stated she did not write the dates the fondling incidents occurred while she was in the facility. Resident #1 stated sometime around Thanksgiving she sent the LVN a text to not contact her anymore. Resident #1 stated she deleted all the text messages between her and the LVN after she told the LVN that she and her husband are working things out. Resident #1 wanted to make sure this does not happen to any other residents. Review of facility investigation started on 12-27-2022. Review of the facility's abuse policy undated revealed all reports of resident abuse, neglect, exploitation, misappropriation of resident property, mistreatment, and/or injuries of unknown source(abuse) shall be promptly reported to local, state, and federal agencies (as defined by current regulations) and thoroughly investigated by facility management. Findings of abuse investigations will also be reported.
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Life-Threatening (Immediate Jeopardy)
J - Isolated K - Pattern L - Widespread
Actual Harm
G - Isolated H - Pattern I - Widespread
Potential for Harm
D - Isolated E - Pattern F - Widespread
No Harm (Minor)
A - Isolated B - Pattern C - Widespread

Questions to Ask on Your Visit

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

Our Honest Assessment

Strengths
  • • Licensed and certified facility. Meets minimum state requirements.
Concerns
  • • Multiple safety concerns identified: 1 life-threatening violation(s), $31,315 in fines. Review inspection reports carefully.
  • • 28 deficiencies on record, including 1 critical (life-threatening) violation. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
  • • $31,315 in fines. Higher than 94% of Texas facilities, suggesting repeated compliance issues.
  • • Grade F (28/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
Bottom line: Trust Score of 28/100 indicates significant concerns. Thoroughly evaluate alternatives.

About This Facility

What is Ridgecrest Retirement And Healthcare Community's CMS Rating?

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

How is Ridgecrest Retirement And Healthcare Community Staffed?

CMS rates RIDGECREST RETIREMENT AND HEALTHCARE COMMUNITY's staffing level at 2 out of 5 stars, which is below average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 65%, which is 19 percentage points above the Texas average of 46%. High turnover can affect care consistency as new staff learn residents' individual needs. RN turnover specifically is 67%, which is notably high. RNs provide skilled clinical oversight, so turnover in this role can affect medical care quality.

What Have Inspectors Found at Ridgecrest Retirement And Healthcare Community?

State health inspectors documented 28 deficiencies at RIDGECREST RETIREMENT AND HEALTHCARE COMMUNITY during 2023 to 2025. These included: 1 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death), 26 with potential for harm, and 1 minor or isolated issues. Immediate Jeopardy findings are rare and represent the most serious regulatory concerns. They require immediate corrective action.

Who Owns and Operates Ridgecrest Retirement And Healthcare Community?

RIDGECREST RETIREMENT AND HEALTHCARE COMMUNITY is owned by a for-profit company. For-profit facilities operate as businesses with obligations to shareholders or private owners. The facility is operated by DYNASTY HEALTHCARE GROUP, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 90 certified beds and approximately 66 residents (about 73% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in WACO, Texas.

How Does Ridgecrest Retirement And Healthcare Community Compare to Other Texas Nursing Homes?

Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Texas, RIDGECREST RETIREMENT AND HEALTHCARE COMMUNITY's overall rating (2 stars) is below the state average of 2.8, staff turnover (65%) is significantly higher than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (2 stars) is below the national benchmark.

What Should Families Ask When Visiting Ridgecrest Retirement And Healthcare Community?

Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "What changes have been made since the serious inspection findings, and how are you preventing similar issues?" "How do you ensure continuity of care given staff turnover, and what is your staff retention strategy?" "Can you walk me through typical staffing levels on day, evening, and night shifts?" "Can I visit during a mealtime to observe dining assistance and food quality?" These questions are particularly relevant given the facility's Immediate Jeopardy citations, the facility's high staff turnover rate, and the below-average staffing rating.

Is Ridgecrest Retirement And Healthcare Community Safe?

Based on CMS inspection data, RIDGECREST RETIREMENT AND HEALTHCARE COMMUNITY has documented safety concerns. Inspectors have issued 1 Immediate Jeopardy citation (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death). The facility has a 2-star overall rating and ranks #100 of 100 nursing homes in Texas. Families considering this facility should ask detailed questions about what corrective actions have been taken since these incidents.

Do Nurses at Ridgecrest Retirement And Healthcare Community Stick Around?

Staff turnover at RIDGECREST RETIREMENT AND HEALTHCARE COMMUNITY is high. At 65%, the facility is 19 percentage points above the Texas average of 46%. Registered Nurse turnover is particularly concerning at 67%. RNs handle complex medical decisions and coordinate care — frequent RN changes can directly impact care quality. High turnover means new staff may not know residents' individual needs, medications, or preferences. It can also be disorienting for residents, especially those with dementia who rely on familiar faces. Families should ask: What is causing the turnover? What retention programs are in place? How do you ensure care continuity during staff transitions?

Was Ridgecrest Retirement And Healthcare Community Ever Fined?

RIDGECREST RETIREMENT AND HEALTHCARE COMMUNITY has been fined $31,315 across 2 penalty actions. This is below the Texas average of $33,392. 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 Ridgecrest Retirement And Healthcare Community on Any Federal Watch List?

RIDGECREST RETIREMENT AND HEALTHCARE COMMUNITY 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.