Millard County Care and Rehabilitation

150 South White Sage Avenue, Delta, UT 84624 (435) 864-2944
Government - County 60 Beds Independent Data: November 2025
Trust Grade
38/100
#55 of 97 in UT
Last Inspection: February 2024

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

Overview

Millard County Care and Rehabilitation has received a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns about its operations and care quality. Ranking #55 out of 97 facilities in Utah places it in the bottom half, while being the only option in Millard County means families have no local alternatives. The facility is worsening, with issues increasing from 8 in 2022 to 19 in 2024, which is alarming. Staffing is a notable weakness, with an 86% turnover rate, far above the Utah average of 51%, indicating instability among caregivers. Recent inspections revealed serious lapses in care, including a resident not receiving proper treatment for pressure ulcers, highlighting potential neglect. Additionally, there was a failure to maintain infection control protocols, as a staff member who tested positive for COVID-19 continued to work, risking resident safety. While the facility scores well in quality measures with a 5/5 rating, the concerning health inspection score of 2/5 and high turnover suggest families should carefully consider these factors when making decisions.

Trust Score
F
38/100
In Utah
#55/97
Bottom 44%
Safety Record
Moderate
Needs review
Inspections
Getting Worse
8 → 19 violations
Staff Stability
⚠ Watch
86% turnover. Very high, 38 points above average. Constant new faces learning your loved one's needs.
Penalties
○ Average
$19,656 in fines. Higher than 62% of Utah facilities. Some compliance issues.
Skilled Nurses
✓ Good
Each resident gets 54 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than average for Utah. RNs are trained to catch health problems early.
Violations
⚠ Watch
31 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
★★★☆☆
3.0
Overall Rating
★★★☆☆
3.0
Staff Levels
★★★★★
5.0
Care Quality
★★☆☆☆
2.0
Inspection Score
Stable
2022: 8 issues
2024: 19 issues

The Good

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

Facility shows strength in quality measures, fire safety.

The Bad

3-Star Overall Rating

Near Utah average (3.3)

Meets federal standards, typical of most facilities

Staff Turnover: 86%

40pts above Utah avg (46%)

Frequent staff changes - ask about care continuity

Federal Fines: $19,656

Below median ($33,413)

Minor penalties assessed

Staff turnover is very high (86%)

38 points above Utah average of 48%

The Ugly 31 deficiencies on record

2 actual harm
Feb 2024 19 deficiencies 1 Harm
SERIOUS (G)

Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures

Pressure Ulcer Prevention (Tag F0686)

A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review it was determined, for 1 of 20 sampled residents, that based on the comprehens...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review it was determined, for 1 of 20 sampled residents, that based on the comprehensive assessment of a resident the facility did not provide care, consistent with professional standards of practice, to prevent pressure ulcers. In addition, a resident with pressure ulcers did not receive necessary treatment and services, consistent with professional standards of practice, to promote healing, prevent infection and prevent new ulcers from developing. Specifically, a resident had no treatment orders when a new pressure ulcer was identified. The same resident did not have wound measurements of her heel wound since November 2023 and December 2023 for two additional wounds. The heel wound increased in size and there was no re-assessment of the treatment orders. Resident identifier: 21. Findings include: Resident 21 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses which included Alzheimer's disease, moderate protein-calorie malnutrition, open wound left foot, major depressive disorder and cutaneous abscess of left lower limb. On 2/5/24 at 1:52 PM, an interview was conducted with resident 21. Resident 21 stated she thought she had sores on her body. Resident 21 stated she did not have pain from her sores. Resident 21 stated her sores were kept covered with dressings. On 2/5/24 at 4:10 PM, the facility provided the CMS-802 form. Resident 21 was listed to have a stage 2 and a stage 4 pressure ulcer. Resident 21's medical record was reviewed 2/5/24 through 2/7/24. A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed resident 21 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 7 which suggested severe cognitive impairment. The MDS further revealed resident 21 had 1 or more unhealed stage 1 or higher pressure ulcer, three stage 3 pressure ulcers and one stage 4 pressure ulcer. The MDS revealed skin and ulcer treatments were pressure reducing device for bed, turning/repositioning program, nutrition or hydration interventions to manage skin problems, pressure ulcer care, application of nonsurgical dressing other than to feet, applications of ointments/medications other than to feet, and application of dressing to feet. A care plan dated 1/19/21 and revised on 12/4/23 revealed, The resident has potential impairment to skin integrity of the peri area/buttocks r/t [related to] contact dermatitis d/t [due to] incontinence. Scratches & picks at her skin. Multiple wounds at various stages of healing. Stage 4 L heel with h/o [history of] Osteomyelitis. The goal was The resident will maintain or develop clean and intact skin by the review date. Interventions included the following: a. Antibiotics per Medical Doctor (MD) order was initiated on 6/1/23. b. Encourage good nutrition and hydration in order to promote healthier skin was initiated on 1/19/21 and revised on 3/17/21. c. Follow facility protocols for treatment of injury was initiated on 1/19/21 and revised on 3/17/21. d. Keep skin clean and dry. Use lotion on dry skin was initiated on 1/19/21 and revised on 3/17/21. e. The resident needs pressure relief pad to protect the skin while IN BED was initiated on 1/19/21 and revised on 3/17/21. f. The resident needs pressure relief pad to protect the skin while up IN CHAIR was initiated on 1/19/21 and revised on 3/17/21. g. Wound care per MD order was initiated on 5/13/21. A physician's order dated 6/25/21 revealed, left lateral calf Q3D [every 3 days] Clean skin with wound cleanser or normal saline and gauze. If open: Skin prep where drsg will cover. May use santyl on slough, or xenaderm, calcium alginate, Cover with Adhesive foam drsg. Change every 3-7 days, until healed. D/C [discontinue] when healed. one time a day every Mon [Monday], Wed [Wednesday], Fri [Friday]. Another physician's order dated 6/25/21 revealed, (right distal and lateral calf) Q3D Clean skin with wound cleanser or normal saline and gauze. If open: Skin prep where drsg will cover. May use santyl on slough, or xenaderm, calcium alginate, Cover with Adhesive foam drsg. Change every 3-7 days, until healed. D/C when healed. one time a day every Mon, Wed, Fri. A physician's order dated 6/25/21 revealed, Assess wound (right calf distal and medial)for: (A. Increased redness, B. Increased drainage, C. warm to the touch, D. Bleeding, E. Dressing intact, F. Draining thru dressing, G. Need to change the drsg, H. No Drainage, I. Increased pain, J. Notify physician, K. Notify family every shift). A physician's order dated 6/25/21 revealed, Assess wound left lateral calf for: (A. Increased redness, B. Increased drainage, C. warm to the touch, D. Bleeding, E. Dressing intact, F. Draining thru dressing, G. Need to change the drsg, H. No Drainage, I. Increased pain, J. Notify physician, K. Notify family every shift). A physician's order dated 1/15/24 revealed, Juven Oral Packet (Nutritional Supplements) Give 1 packet by mouth every morning and at bedtime related to MODERATE PROTEINCALORIE MALNUTRITION .; UNSPECIFIED OPEN WOUND, LEFT FOOT, SEQUELA. A physician's order dated 1/15/24 revealed, Premier Protein 11oz two times a day related to UNSPECIFIED PROTEINCALORIE MALNUTRITION. A physician's order dated 6/8/21 revealed, Med Pass 2.0 after meals (4OZ) for added nutrition. According to a hospital Discharge summary dated [DATE], resident 21 had pressure ulcers of bilateral lower extremities with an open wound to right foot and lower leg. A nursing progress note dated 9/9/23 at 4:34 PM, revealed .The wounds on both feet had saturated dressings on them. I removed the dressings, legs are extremely dry, scaly and a lot of dead skin. I washed her legs and patted them dry. I cleansed the wounds on the left shin and heel. The sore on the left shin measures 2.5 cm X 2.5cm in diameter. It is beefy red and good blood flow. I placed a poly memfoam pad and covered with a dressing. The left heel has improved, it measures 5.0cm (L) x 5.5cm (W); has beefy red wound bed and good blood flow. I placed a silver poly mem foam pad and covered with a heel dressing. The right foot, the 5th toe had a lot of drainage and the area on the bottom of food [sic]has several open areas. I cleansed it with wound cleanser, patted it dry. I put silver poly mem between 4th and 5th toe; applied poly mem around the base of the toe and bottom of foot and covered with a foam dressing and tape. Will have DON assess the foot and give us suggestions for wound treatment. Booties put on both feet. A nursing progress note dated 11/14/23 at 4:38 PM, revealed .Pillows for support, booties on both feet. She was medicated for pain with scheduled and PRN [as needed] pain medication with good effect. Her appetite has been fair today. She was given additional snacks and fluids. She drank the nutritional supplements. I changed the dressing on her left heel again today, cleansed with NS [normal saline] and patted dry, polymem foam applied to wound bed and foam dressing covering the wound. The wound measured 4.5cm [centimeter] (L) [length] x [by] 4.0cm (W)[width]. Minimal drainage noted. A nursing progress note dated 12/10/23 at 4:35 PM, revealed .Resident had personal care given and repositioned in bed. Pillows for support and booties on her feet. She has been assisted with her meals. Medicated for pain with scheduled and PRN pain medication with good effect. I changed the dressings on the R [right] foot. The two are ason [sic] the outer bottom of the foot are almost healed. I put a dressing on them for protection. The sore on the bottom of the R small toe was cleansed and patted dry. It measured approximately 2.0 cm(L) x 1.5 cm (w). I put a piece of polymem foam in the wound bed and covered it with a dressing. I changed the dressing on the left shin. The wound was cleansed with NS [normal saline] and patted dry. I put a small piece of poly mem foam and covered with a foam dressing. It measured 2.0 cm (L) X 2.0 cm (W). The left heel dressing was changed. I cleansed the area with NS and patted it dry, applied poly mem foam to the wound bed and covered it with a foam dressing. The wound is filling in from the outer perimeters. She had a medium loose BM this shift. Had 450cc output. A physician's visit dated 12/12/23, revealed resident 21 had chronic wounds on her legs. The physician documented, I am actually pretty surprised at home [sic] much improvement we have seen in the wounds. She had a very big gaping wound on her left heel that was infected months ago and that is actually close down quite a bit to where she just has about a 4 cm [centimeters] wound which is pretty crazy. I think care center is been doing a good job changing her dressing and monitoring her wounds as she has made some steady improvement. We will continue with these interventions hopefully get theses healed up all the way and then at that point preventions again to be the biggest key. A nursing skilled charting assessment dated [DATE], revealed resident did not weight bear, had decreased sensation, required assistance with bed mobility, and required assistance with eating. The assessment further revealed Resident is bed-ridden; requires all care done by staff. The Skin/Wound section revealed, Old hematomas on arms from scratching; lotion applied; Nystatin to abdominal fold. Wounds in various stages of healing on both legs; feet and dressing changed as per treatment orders. On 2/6/24 at 11:24 AM, an interview was conducted with the Director of Nursing (DON). The DON stated if a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) noticed a wound on a resident, the nurse was notified, and then the nurse would assess the wound and notify the physician to obtain orders to treat the wound. The DON stated resident 21 had wounds on the back of her legs and a wound on her left shin for about 3 to 4 years. The DON stated she had a pressure sore on her left heel and a wound under her right pinky toe. The DON stated the wound under the pinky toe was the size of the tip of a pen. The DON stated resident 21 was on hospice under wounds on her hips had healed. The DON stated she dressed resident 21's pinky toe wound on 2/3/24. The DON stated she used a foam dressing and it was to be changed weekly or when saturated. The DON stated that CNA reported to the nurse if a dressing was saturated. The DON stated there were no physician's orders for the pinky toe wound. The DON stated that nurses would call and ask her what dressings to use. The DON stated she Failed on documentation. The DON stated she did not have measurements on resident 21's wounds for a long time. On 2/6/24 at 1:23 PM, a follow-up interview was conducted with the DON. The DON stated there were no physician orders for the wound below the pinky toe. The DON stated she changed all of resident 21's dressings on Saturday night. The DON stated she did not know when resident 21's wound below the pinky toe opened. The DON stated she did not have a policy and procedure for wounds. On 2/6/24 at 1:29 PM, a phone interview was conducted with Physician 1's Medical Assistant (MA). The MA stated she talked to Physician 1 and Physician 1 stated he was not aware of a new wound on resident 21. The MA stated Physician 1 stated that he was aware that resident 21 had chronic wounds. The MA stated that staff usually texted Physician 1 regarding new skin issues and then Physician 1 provided treatment orders. On 2/6/24 at 1:43 PM, an interview was conducted with CNA 1. CNA 1 stated when a resident was bathed she looked at their skin. CNA 1 stated if there were skin issues, she reported to the nurse to have the nurse look at the resident. CNA 1 stated resident 21 had a left heel wound, left calf wound, and something on her right foot. CNA 1 stated resident 21 had her feet and legs in booties so they were floating and not touching the bed. CNA 1 stated resident 21 had a body pillow that they used to rotate her every 2 hours. CNA 1 stated resident 21 had an air mattress. An observation was made of resident 21's legs and feet with CNA 1. Resident 21 was observed in bed with a sheet over her feet and legs. CNA 1 removed the sheet and there were booties on each foot. There was a bandage on the left shin. CNA 1 lifted resident 21's left leg and there was a bandage on the left heel. CNA 1 lifted resident 21's right foot and there was a bandage on the bottom of the foot below the pinky toe. The bandages were dated 2/3/24. On 2/6/24 at 10:56 AM, an interview was conducted with Registered Nurse (RN) 1. RN 1 stated that the nurses changed wound dressings when the dressing was soiled or leaked through. RN 1 stated that the DON changed bandages when she did wound rounds. RN 1 stated that the DON completed measurements on wounds. On 2/7/24 at 8:00 AM, an interview was conducted with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) 1. LPN 1 stated that the DON had changed resident 21's wound dressings on Tuesday night 2/6/24. On 2/7/24 at 8:09 AM, an interview was conducted with the DON. The DON stated she changed resident 21's dressings on Tuesday night 2/6/24. The DON stated she measured the wounds because the measurements had not been done for a while. The DON stated she took pictures and talked to Physician 1 to obtain wound orders. The DON stated resident 21's wounds were healing and did not know when the pinky toe wound opened up. The DON stated she was going to be measuring wounds on Tuesdays so she changed the wound dressings orders to Tuesday and Friday. The DON stated that she had not been tracking measurements of wounds. The DON provided the measurements obtained on 2/6/24. The left heel measured at 8.5 cm (L) x 6.5 cm (W) x 0.1 cm depth (D). The left shin was 2.8 cm (L) x 2.5 cm (W) x 0.1 cm (D). The wound below the right pinky toe on the ball of foot was 0.4 cm (L) x 0.4 cm (W) x 0.1 cm (D). The note dated 12/10/23 was the last note of measurements. The left shin measurements were 2.0 cm (L) X 2.0 cm (W). The sore on the bottom of the R small toe measured approximately 2.0 cm(L) x 1.5 cm (w). The previous measurement for the left heel were dated 11/14/23. The measurements were 4.5cm (L) x 4.0cm (W). It should be noted the left heel increased in size with no changes to the wound dressing orders since 6/25/21. On 2/12/24 at 11:32 AM, a phone interview was conducted with the DON. The DON stated she was not aware that resident 21's heel wound was larger than the previous measurement in November 2023. The DON stated there were no changes to the treatment orders since June 2021 for the heel and shin wound. The DON did not provide information for why treatments were not changed or different treatments tried since June 2021. On 2/13/24 at 8:30 AM, a phone interview was conducted with the DON. The DON stated on the left heel wound she measured the picture and not the outline of the wound on 2/6/24. The DON stated the wound was actually 4.9 cm (L) by 5 cm (W). The DON confirmed the previous measurements were completed in November 2023 for the left heel wound.
CONCERN (D)

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

Notification of Changes (Tag F0580)

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 it was determined, for 1 of 20 sampled residents, that the facility did not no...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review it was determined, for 1 of 20 sampled residents, that the facility did not notify the resident's physician when there was a signigicant change in the resident's physical, mental or psychosical status or when there was a need to alter treatment significantly. Specifically, a resident developed a new wound and the physicain was not notified. In addition, the resident did not have physician's orders to treat the wound. Resident identifier: 21. Findings include: Resident 21 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses which included Alzheimer's disease, moderate protein-calorie malnutrition, open wound left foot, major depressive disorder and cutaneous abscess of left lower limb. On 2/5/24 at 1:52 PM, an interview was conducted with resident 21. Resident 21 stated she thought she had sores on her body. Resident 21 stated she did not have pain from her sores. Resident 21 stated her sores were kept covered with dressings. On 2/5/24 at 4:10 PM, the facility provided CMS-802 form. Resident 21 was listed to have a stage 2 and a stage 4 pressure ulcer. Resident 21's medical record was reviewed 2/5/24 through 2/7/24. A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed resident 21 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 7 which suggested severe cognitive impairment. The MDS further revealed resident 21 had 1 or more unhealed stage 1 or higher pressure ulcer, three stage 3 pressure ulcers and one stage 4 pressure ulcer. The MDS revealed skin and ulcer treatments were pressure reducing device for bed, turning/repositioning program, nutrition or hydration interventions to manage skin problems, pressure ulcer care, application of nonsurgical dressing other than to feet, applications of ointments/medications other than to feet, and application of dressing to feet. A care plan dated 1/19/21 and revised on 12/4/23 revealed, The resident has potential impairment to skin integrity of the peri area/buttocks r/t [related to] contact dermatitis d/t [due to] incontinence. Scratches & picks at her skin. Multiple wounds at various stages of healing. Stage 4 L heel with h/o [history of] Osteomyelitis. The goal was The resident will maintain or develop clean and intact skin by the review date. Interventions included the following: a. Antibiotics per Medical Doctor (MD) order was initiated on 6/1/23. b. Encourage good nutrition and hydration in order to promote healthier skin was initiated on 1/19/21 and revised on 3/17/21. c. Follow facility protocols for treatment of injury was initiated on 1/19/21 and revised on 3/17/21. d. Keep skin clean and dry. Use lotion on dry skin was initiated on 1/19/21 and revised on 3/17/21. e. The resident needs pressure relief pad to protect the skin while IN BED was initiated on 1/19/21 and revised on 3/17/21. f. The resident needs pressure relief pad to protect the skin while up IN CHAIR was initiated on 1/19/21 and revised on 3/17/21. g. Wound care per MD order was initiated on 5/13/21. A physician's order dated 6/25/21 revealed left lateral calf Q3D [every 3 days] Clean skin with wound cleanser or normal saline and gauze. If open: Skin prep where drsg will cover. May use santyl on slough, or xenaderm, calcium alginate, Cover with Adhesive foam drsg. Change every 3-7 days, until healed. D/C [discontinue] when healed. one time a day every Mon [Monday], Wed [Wednesday], Fri [Friday]. Another physician's order dated 6/25/21 revealed, (right distal and lateral calf) Q3D Clean skin with wound cleanser or normal saline and gauze. If open: Skin prep where drsg will cover. May use santyl on slough, or xenaderm, calcium alginate, Cover with Adhesive foam drsg. Change every 3-7 days, until healed. D/C when healed. one time a day every Mon, Wed, Fri. A physician's order dated 6/25/21 revealed, Assess wound (right calf distal and medial) for: (A. Increased redness, B. Increased drainage, C. warm to the touch, D. Bleeding, E. Dressing intact, F. Draining thru dressing, G. Need to change the drsg, H. No Drainage, I. Increased pain, J. Notify physician, K. Notify family every shift). A physician's order dated 6/25/21 revealed, Assess wound left lateral calf for: (A. Increased redness, B. Increased drainage, C. warm to the touch, D. Bleeding, E. Dressing intact, F. Draining thru dressing, G. Need to change the drsg, H. No Drainage, I. Increased pain, J. Notify physician, K. Notify family every shift). A physician's order dated 1/15/24 revealed, Juven Oral Packet (Nutritional Supplements) Give 1 packet by mouth every morning and at bedtime related to MODERATE PROTEINCALORIE MALNUTRITION .; UNSPECIFIED OPEN WOUND, LEFT FOOT, SEQUELA. A physician's order dated 1/15/24 revealed, Premier Protein 11oz two times a day related to UNSPECIFIED PROTEINCALORIE MALNUTRITION. A physician's order dated 6/8/21 revealed, Med Pass 2.0 after meals (4OZ) for added nutrition. According to a Discharge summary dated [DATE], resident 21 had pressure ulcers of bilateral lower extremities with an open wound to right foot and lower leg. A nursing progress note dated 9/9/23 at 4:34 PM, revealed .The wounds on both feet had saturated dressings on them. I removed the dressings, legs are extremely dry, scaly and a lot of dead skin. I washed her legs and patted them dry. I cleansed the wounds on the left shin and heel. The sore on the left shin measures 2.5 cm X 2.5cm in diameter. It is beefy red and good blood flow. I placed a poly memfoam pad and covered with a dressing. The left heel has improved, it measures 5.0cm (L) x 5.5cm (W); has beefy red wound bed and good blood flow. I placed a silver poly mem foam pad and covered with a heel dressing. The right foot, the 5th toe had a lot of drainage and the area on the bottom of food [sic]has several open areas. I cleansed it with wound cleanser, patted it dry. I put silver poly mem between 4th and 5th toe; applied poly mem around the base of the toe and bottom of foot and covered with a foam dressing and tape. Will have DON assess the foot and give us suggestions for wound treatment. Booties put on both feet. A nursing progress note dated 11/14/23 at 4:38 PM, revealed .Pillows for support, booties on both feet. She was medicated for pain with scheduled and PRN [as needed] pain medication with good effect. Her appetite has been fair today. She was given additional snacks and fluids. She drank the nutritional supplements. I changed the dressing on her left heel again today, cleansed with NS [normal saline] and patted dry, polymem foam applied to wound bed and foam dressing covering the wound. The wound measured 4.5cm [centimeter] (L) [length] x [by] 4.0cm (W)[width]. Minimal drainage noted. A nursing progress note dated 12/10/23 at 4:35 PM, revealed .Resident had personal care given and repositioned in bed. Pillows for support and booties on her feet. She has been assisted with her meals. Medicated for pain with scheduled and PRN pain medication with good effect. I changed the dressings on the R [right] foot. The two are ason [sic] the outer bottom of the foot are almost healed. I put a dressing on them for protection. The sore on the bottom of the R small toe was cleansed and patted dry. It measured approximately 2.0 cm(L) x 1.5 cm (w). I put a piece of polymem foam in the wound bed and covered it with a dressing. I changed the dressing on the left shin. The wound was cleansed with NS [normal saline] and patted dry. I put a small piece of poly mem foam and covered with a foam dressing. It measured 2.0 cm (L) X 2.0 cm (W). The left heel dressing was changed. I cleansed the area with NS and patted it dry, applied poly mem foam to the wound bed and covered it with a foam dressing. The wound is filling in from the outer perimeters. She had a medium loose BM this shift. Had 450cc output. A physician's visit dated 12/12/23, revealed resident had chronic wounds on her legs. The physician documented, I am actually pretty surprised at home [sic] much improvement we have seen in the wounds. She had a very big gaping wound on her left heel that was infected months ago and that is actually close down quite a bit to where she just has about a 4 cm [centimeters] wound which is pretty crazy. I think care center is been doing a good job changing her dressing and monitoring her wounds as she has made some steady improvement. We will continue with these interventions hopefully get theses healed up all the way and then at that point preventions again to be the biggest key. A nursing skilled charting assessment dated [DATE], revealed resident did not weight bear, had decreased sensation, required assistance with bed mobility, and required assistance with eating. The assessment further revealed Resident is bed-ridden; requires all care done by staff. The Skin/Wound section revealed, Old hematomas on arms from scratching; lotion applied; Nystatin to abdominal fold. Wounds in various stages of healing on both legs; feet and dressing changed as per treatment orders. On 2/6/24 at 11:24 AM, an interview was conducted with the Director of Nursing (DON). The DON stated skin evaluations were completed by a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) when they performed bathing. The DON stated if the CNA noticed a wound on a resident, the nurse was notified, and then the nurse would assess the wound and notify the physician to obtain orders to treat the wound. The DON stated resident 21 had wounds on the back of her legs and had a wound on her left shin for about 3 to 4 years. The DON stated she had a pressure sore on her left heel and a wound under her right pinky toe. The DON stated the wound under the pinky toe was the size of the tip of a pen. The DON stated she dressed resident 21's pinky toe wound on 2/3/24. The DON stated she used a foam dressing and it was to be changed weekly or when saturated. The DON stated that the CNA reported to the nurse if a dressing was saturated. The DON stated there were no physician's orders for the pinky toe wound. The DON stated that nurses would call and ask her what dressings to use. The DON stated she Failed on documentation. The DON stated she did not have measurements on resident 21's wounds for a long time. On 2/6/24 at 1:23 PM, a follow-up interview was conducted with the DON. The DON stated there were no physician's order for the wound below the pinky toe. The DON stated she changed all of resident 21's dressing on Saturday night. The DON stated she did not know when resident 21's wound below the pinky toe opened. The DON stated she did not have a policy and procedure for wounds. On 2/6/24 at 1:29 PM, a phone interview was conducted with Physician 1's Medical Assistant (MA). The MA stated she talked to Physician 1 and Physician 1 stated he was not aware of a new wound on resident 21. The MA stated Physician 1 stated that he was aware that resident 21 had chronic wounds. The MA stated that staff usually texted Physician 1 regarding new skin issues and then Physician 1 provided treatment orders. On 2/6/24 at 1:43 PM, an interview was conducted with CNA 1. CNA 1 stated when a resident was bathed she looked at their skin. CNA 1 stated if there were skin issues, she reported to the nurse to have the nurse look at the resident. CNA 1 stated resident 21 had a left heel wound, left calf wound, and something on her right foot. CNA 1 stated resident 21 had her feet and legs in booties so they were floating and not touching the bed. CNA 1 stated resident 21 had a body pillow that they used to rotate her every 2 hours. CNA 1 stated resident 21 had an air mattress. An observation was made of resident 21's legs and feet with CNA 1. Resident 21 was observed in bed with a sheet over her feet and legs. CNA 1 removed the sheet and there were booties on each foot. There was a bandage on the left shin. CNA 1 lifted resident 21's left leg and there was a bandage on the left heel. CNA 1 lifted resident 21's right foot and there was a bandage on the bottom of the foot below the pinky toe. The bandages were dated 2/3/24. On 2/6/24 at 10:56 AM, an interview was conducted with Registered Nurse (RN) 1. RN 1 stated that the nurses changed wound dressings when the dressing was soiled or leaked through. RN 1 stated that the DON changed bandages when she did wound rounds. RN 1 stated that the DON completed measurements on wounds. On 2/7/24 at 8:00 AM, an interview was conducted with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) 1. LPN 1 stated that the DON had changed resident 21's wound dressings on Tuesday night 2/6/24. On 2/7/24 at 8:09 AM, an interview was conducted with the DON. The DON stated she changed resident 21's dressings on Tuesday night 2/6/24. The DON stated she measured the wounds because the measurements had not been done for a while. The DON stated she took pictures and talked to Physician 1 to obtain wound orders. The DON stated resident 21's wounds were healing and did not know when the pinky toe wound opened up. The DON stated she was going to be measuring wounds on Tuesdays, so the dressing changes were changed to Tuesday and Friday, instead of Monday, Wednesday, Friday. The DON stated that she had not been tracking measurements of wounds. The DON provided the measurements obtained on 2/6/24. The left heel measured at 8.5 cm (L) x 6.5 cm (W) x 0.1 cm depth (D). The left shin was 2.8 cm (L) x 2.5 cm (W) x 0.1 cm (D). The wound below the right pinky toe on the ball of foot was 0.4 cm (L) x 0.4 cm (W) x 0.1 cm (D). The note dated 12/10/23 was the last note of measurements. The left shin measurements were 2.0 cm (L) X 2.0 cm (W). The sore on the bottom of the R small toe measured approximately 2.0 cm(L) x 1.5 cm (w). The previous measurement for the left heel were dated 11/14/23. The measurements were 4.5cm (L) x 4.0cm (W). It should be noted the left heel increased in size with no changes to the wound dressing orders since 6/25/21. On 2/12/24 at 11:32 AM, a phone interview was conducted with the DON. The DON stated she was not aware that resident 21's heel wound was larger than the previous measurement in November 2023. The DON stated there were no changes to the treatment orders since June 2021 for the heel and shin wound. The DON did not provide information for why treatments were not changed or different treatments tried since June 2021.
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 interview and record review it was determined, for 1 of 20 sampled residents, that the facility did not provide or obta...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review it was determined, for 1 of 20 sampled residents, that the facility did not provide or obtain routine dental services. Specifically, a resident stated her dentures did not fit and needed to be adjusted. Resident identifier: 34. Findings include: Resident 34 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included Hemiplegia and hemiparesis, subluxation of left shoulder, heart failure, insomnia, cerebral infarction due to unspecified occlusion or stenosis of cerebral artery, muscle weakness, and type 2 diabetes mellitus. On 2/5/24 at 2:51 PM, an interview was conducted with resident 34. Resident 34 stated she needed her dentures realigned. Resident 34 stated she was not sure if she had enough money. Resident 34 stated she was able to wear her top dentures and her food was cut up for her to be able to eat it. Resident 34's medical record was reviewed 2/5/24 through 2/7/24. An annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed no dental issues. The MDS revealed resident 34 had Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 which indicated cognition was intact. Nursing Progress notes revealed the following: a. On 10/17/23 at 4:29 PM, Resident asked me to cancel the dental appointment for her d/t [due to] her not feeling well. We will reschedule when she is feeling better. b. On 10/18/23 at 2:31 PM, [Resident 34] has a blister on her upper left gum from getting food caught between her gum and denture. She doesn't want anyone to see her w/o [without] her dentures, so she has been staying in her room and drinking soda and soups so that her gum can heal. On 2/7/24 at 9:26 AM, an interview was conducted with Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) 1. CNA 1 stated resident 34 had not heard her complain about her dentures for a while because she was taking them out at night. CNA 1 stated she thought resident 34's dentures fit. CNA 1 stated she complained of sores in her mouth a while ago because she was not willing to take her dentures out at night. CNA 1 stated resident 34 completed her own oral hygiene. On 2/7/24 at 9:28 AM, an interview was conducted with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) 1. LPN 1 stated she had not heard of any problems with her mouth or dentures. On 2/7/24 at 10:16 AM, an interview was conducted with the Director of Nursing (DON). The DON stated resident 34 did not have chewing or swallowing problems. The DON stated resident 34 had not been to the dentist and had not complained of dentures not fitting. The DON stated the MDS coordinator worked offsite. The DON stated resident 34 had dentures with no teeth and it should have been on the MDS that way.
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, for 1 of 20 sampled residents, it was determined the facility did not develop and implemen...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, for 1 of 20 sampled residents, it was determined the facility did not develop and implement a baseline care plan that included the instructions needed to provide effective and person centered care of the resident that met professional standards of quality care, and be developed within 48 hours of the resident's admission. Specifically, the resident's care plan was developed 5 days after the resident was admitted to the facility. Resident identifier: 19. Findings include: Resident 19 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included fracture of coccyx, muscle weakness, displaced fracture of left humerous, encephalopathy, chronic kidney disease, type 2 diabetes, major depressive disorder and dementia. Resident 19's medical records were reviewed between 2/5/23 and 2/7/23. A review of resident 19's careplan revealed focus areas initiated on 11/22/23 included: a. The resident had an ADL (activities of daily living) performance deficit r/t (related to) unsteadiness, dementia. Interventions included, BATHING/SHOWERING: The resident needs max assist of one staff; BED MOBILITY: The resident requires max assist with one staff to turn and reposition in bed; DRESSING: Allow sufficient time for dressing and undressing; EATING: The resident is able to feed self after setup help from staff; PERSONAL HYGIENE: The resident requires max assist with one staff with personal hygiene and ora care; TOILET USE: The resident requires mod (moderate) assist of one staff for toileting; TRANSFER: The resident requires limited assist with one staff. b. The resident had impaired cognitive function/dementia. Interventions included, Administer medications as ordered. Monitor/document for side effects and effectiveness; Communicate with the resident/family/caregivers regarding resident's capabilities and needs; COMMUNICATION: use the resident's preferred name. Identify yourself at each interaction. Face the resident when speaking and make eye contact. Reduce any distrations, turn off TV (television), radio, close the door, etc.; Cue, reorient, and supervise as needed; Keep the resident's routine consistent and try to provide consistent caregivers as much as possible in order to decrease confusion; Prefers to be called [name removed]. c. The resident had diabetes mellitus. Interventions included, Diabetes medications & insulin as ordered by doctor, Monitor/document for side effects and effectiveness; Fasting serum blood sugar as ordered by doctor; Refer to podiatrist/foot care nurse to monitor/document foot care needs and to cut long nails. d. The resident was at HIGH risk for falls r/t unsteady h/o (history of) falling at home resulting in fracture. Interventions included, Anticipate and meet the resident's needs; Be sure the resident's call light is within reach and encourage the resident to use it for assistance as needed. The resident needs prompt response to all requests for assistance; Follow facility fall protocol; PT (physical therapy) evaluate and treat as ordered or PRN; The resident needs a safe environment with even floors free from spills and/or clutter, adequate glare free light, a working and reachable call light, the bed in low position at night, Slide fails as ordered, handrails on walls, personal items within reach; The resident uses bed electronic alarm, ensure the device is in place as needed. e. The resident used psychotropic medications (Seroquel and zoloft) r/t dementia with depression. Interventions included, Administer PSYCHOTROPIC medications as ordered by physician, monitor for side effects and effectiveness Q-shift (every shift); Monitor/document/report PRN (as needed) any adverse reactions of PSYCHOTROPIC medications, unsteady gait, tardive dyskinesia, EPS (extrapyramidal side effects), frequent falls, refusal to eat, difficulty swallowing, dry mouth, depression, suicidal ideation, social isolation, blurred vision, diarrhea, fatigue, insomnia, loss of appetite, weight loss, muscle cramps, nausea, vomiting, behavioral symptoms not usual to the person; Monitor/record occurance of for target behavior symptoms, pacing, wandering, disrobing, inappropriate response to verbal communication, violence/aggression toward staff/others, etc. and document per facility protocol. f. The resident had acute pain r/t fracture coccyx. Interventions included, The resident's pain is alleviated/relieved by: rest & current meds; Administer analgesia as per orders. Give 1/2 hours before treatment or care; Anticipate the resident's need for pain relief and respond immediately to any complaint of pain; Evaluate the effectiveness of pain interventions. Review for compliance, alleviating of symptoms, dosing schedules and resident satisfaction with results, impact on functional ability and impact on cognition; Monitor and record pain characteristics: Quality, Severity, Anitomical location, onset, duration, Aggrivating factors, Relieving factors; Report to nurse any change in usual activity attendence patterns or refusal to attend activities related to s/sx (signs or symptoms) or c/o (complaints of) pain or discomfort; The resident is able to ask for medication, tell you how much pain is experienced, tell you what increases or alleviates pain. g. The resident had potential impairment of skin d/t (due to) incontinence, poor mobility, edema, DM (diabetes mellitus). Interventions included, Encourage good nutrition and hydration in order to promote healthier skin, follow facility protocol for treatment of injury, keep skin clean and dry, use lotion on dry skin. h. The resident had impaired visual function. Interventions included, Remind resident to wear glasses when reading. Ensure resident is wearing glasses which are clean, free from scratches and in good repair. Report any damage to nurse/family. [Note: Resident 19's care plan was created 3 days past the 48 hour requirement for baseline care plans] On 2/7/24 at 9:29 AM, an interview was conducted with Registered Nurse (RN) 1 who stated when a resident was admitted , there was a checklist that she followed to ensure all the important information was collected. RN 1 stated one of the items on the checklist triggered the baseline care plan. RN 1 stated the baseline care plan should be saved in the resident's medical record. On 2/7/24 at 8:29 AM, an interview was conducted with the Director of Nursing (DON) who stated care plans were created and updated by the MDS (Minimum Data Set) coordinator. The DON stated that the MDS coordinator tried to complete a baseline care plan as soon as the resident was admitted . The DON stated the baseline care plan should be initiated within 48 hours of the resident's admission.
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, it was determined that, for 5 of 20 sampled residents, the facility failed to...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review, it was determined that, for 5 of 20 sampled residents, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident that included measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs that are identified in the comprehensive assessment. Specifically, care plans were not updated when there was a change in the resident's condition and therefore were not reflective of the services required for the residents to attain or maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental and psychosocial well-being. Resident identifiers: 9, 14, 21, 22, and 34. Findings include: 1. Resident 9 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses which included mental disorder, polyosteoarthritis, type 2 diabetes mellitus, sensorineural hearing loss, paralytic syndrome, chronic pain, hypoxemia, lagophthalmos left eye, hallucinations, and malignant neoplasm of brain. On 2/5/24 at 12:15 PM, an observation was made of resident 9. Resident 9 was sitting at a table in the dining room. Resident 9 fed himself lunch from a divided plate of food, which consisted of three items of pureed food and a bowl of jello. Resident 9's medical record was reviewed from 2/5/24 through 2/7/24. The MDS (Minimum Date Set) Annual assessment dated [DATE] revealed resident 10 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 10, which indicated a cognitive status of moderately impaired. The MDS further revealed resident 9 did not have swallowing disorders, received a mechanically altered diet and therapeutic diet. The Care Area Assessment (CAA) section revealed nutrition was triggered from the MDS and would be care planned. A physician's order dated 1/27/22 at 12:35 AM, indicated, CCHO [controlled carbohydrate diet] diet, Regular texture, Regular consistency, Fortified Meals. The Care Plan dated 5/27/22 indicated, The resident has oral/dental health problems r/t [related to] had all of his teeth extracted, bone graft placed & posts for future dentures placed on 05/24/22. The goal was, The resident will be free of infection, pain or bleeding in the oral cavity by review date. Interventions included, Diet as Ordered. Consult with dietitian and change if chewing/swallowing problems are noted. Another intervention dated 5/24/22 and revised on 7/11/22 on pureed diet while mouth is healing. A Nutrition Risk Review dated 10/5/23, indicated, CCHO, reg (regular), reg prefers puree d/t (due to) mouth pain. A Risk Assessment for Eating and Swallowing problems dated 12/16/23 indicated, Does the resident have difficulty chewing, choking or coughing when eating? Pureed, was marked, Yes. A Multidisciplinary Care Conference document dated 12/22/23 at 1:29 PM, indicated that resident 9's current diet was, CCHO diet. Puree consistency. Divided plate. On 2/7/24 at 9:37 AM, an interview was conducted with Registered Nurse (RN) 1. RN 1 stated resident 9 had all of his teeth pulled but that he did not wear his dentures because of the pain they caused. RN 1 stated resident 9's family and dentist decided to keep resident on a pureed diet because the resident had tolerated it. RN 1 further stated resident 9 had been on a pureed diet for a long time and believed that was the physician's order. On 2/7/24 at 10:09 AM, an interview was conducted with the Dietary Manager (DM). The DM reviewed resident 9's meal ticket which indicated resident 9 was on a fortified, puree diet. The DM stated resident 9 had oral surgery and declined to use his dentures. The DM stated a mechanical soft diet was attempted but the resident requested to have a pureed diet. The DM stated there should have been an order for the change in diet. On 2/7/24 at 10:14 AM, an interview was conducted with the Director of Nursing (DON). The DON stated resident 9 had no teeth and he refused to wear his dentures. The DON further stated that he refused to eat a mechanical diet. The DON further stated that the diet served should match what the physician ordered and that if resident 9 was served a regular diet he could choke. On 2/7/24 at 12:40 PM, a follow-up interview was conducted with the DON. The DON stated that resident 9's care plan had not been updated since 5/27/22 and should have been updated. 2. Resident 14 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included malignant neoplasm of endocrine pancreas, type 2 diabetes, neoplasm related pain, anxiety disorder, nausea with vomiting, thrombocytopenia, and occlusion and stenosis of aortic artery. On 2/5/24 at 2:08 PM, an interview was conducted with resident 14 who stated that in the previous week, he was assisted by a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) out of the tub after bathing. Resident 14 stated that the CNA gathered up the wet towels and wash cloths and turned around to put them in the dirty linen container. As she did this, resident 14 stated he went to dry his legs and the towel he was standing on slipped out from under him and he fell back into the chair he had been sitting on. Resident 14 stated he had pain on his backside after falling back. Resident 14's medical records were reviewed between 2/5/24 and 2/7/24. An admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed that resident 14 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 11, indicating moderate cognitive impairment. The MDS further revealed resident 14 had a fall in the month prior to admission to the facility and no falls since admission. Resident 14's care plan was reviewed. On 2/1/24, a care area was initiated revealing, The resident has had an actual fall (2/1/24) with minor injury d/t [due to] poor balance, weakness. Goals included, The resident will resume usual activities without further incident through the review date. No interventions were listed to prevent additional falls. Resident progress notes revealed an incident note dated 2/1/24 at 10:35 AM. The note stated, Pt [patient] sitting in weight chair after getting out of tub. Pt drying off with towels. [CNA name removed] put a towel under pt's feet r/t [related to] weight chair and pt dripping with water. [CNA's name removed] states that she took the wet washcloths and towels over to the laundry hamper which were a few steps away from pt and heard the weight chair move. She turned around as pt was climbing out of weight chair and pt's feet slid out from under him while standing on towel. Pt fell backwards and hit his Lt [left] hip and Lt elbow on weight chair. Both pt and CNA state that pt did not hit his head. Pt able to stand, put pressure on Lt hip, and walk. Pt also able to bend and use Lt arm and elbow. Red marks noted to both Lt hip and Lt elbow. Pt assisted with getting dressed. VS [vital signs] taken. BP [blood pressure] 167/87, HR [heart rate] 89, RR [respirations] 20, Temp [temperature] 97.8* F [Fahrenheit], O2 sat [oxygen saturation] 97% RA [room air]. Nursing called [residents family member] and #1 contact, at 0900 (9:00 am) and let her know about fall, pt hitting Lt hip/elbow, and no injuries noted. [Director of nursing name removed] notified at 0904 [9:04 AM], also of pts fall and hit Lt elbow/hip, no other injuries. [Physician name removed] notified at 0918 [9:18 AM]. MD [Medical Doctor] notified of pt's fall, Pt hit Lt elbow/hip, able to stand, move, and ambulate all joints. No other injuries noted. No orders at this time. On 2/7/24 at 9:11 AM, an interview was conducted with RN 3. RN 3 stated that she did not update the resident's care plan. RN 3 stated after an incident report was completed, she thought it would be provided to the Minimum Data Set (MDS) coordinator, who reviewed the report and updated the resident's care plan. On 2/7/24 at 1:00 PM, an interview was conducted with the DON. The DON stated they tried to put a new intervention into the care plan every time a resident had a fall. The DON stated the nurses documented what happened in a progress note and an incident report, and the reports would go to the MDS coordinator who would update the care plan. The DON stated the intervention should be relevant to the resident and something they would be able to follow to avoid additional falls. 3. Resident 22 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included dementia with other behavioral disturbance, psychophysiologic insomnia, mood disorder with depressive features, and anxiety disorder. On 2/5/24 at 12:10 PM, an observation was made of resident 22 in the dining room for the lunch meal. Resident 22 received a pureed diet in a divided plate and a cup of jello. Resident 22 also had water and juice to drink with her meal. A Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) was sitting between resident 22 and another resident and was assisting resident 22. Resident 22 was unable to feed herself. Resident 22's medical record was reviewed between 2/5/24 and 2/7/24. A quarterly MDS dated [DATE] revealed that resident 22 received a mechanically altered diet. The MDS revealed resident 22 did not have a swallowing disorder. The MDS revealed resident 22 did not have a BIMS score. The MDS further revealed resident 22 had short and long-term memory problems. A physician's diet order dated 6/29/23 and revised on 1/11/24 revealed, Regular diet, mechanical soft texture, regular consistency. Resident 22's care plan included: a. The resident has an ADL (activities of daily living) self-care performance deficit r/t dementia, initiated on 2/9/2020 and revised on 6/12/23. The goal The resident will maintain the current level of function in ADL ability through the review date. Interventions included, EATING: The resident requires max assist by one staff to eat. b. The resident has a nutritional problem or a potential nutritional problem r/t dementia and refuses to let staff assist her to eat, initiated on 3/4/21 and revised on 6/15/22. The goal The resident will have gradual weight gain to within 10% of IBW [ideal body weight] for sex and height by review date. Interventions included, RD (registered dietitian) to evaluate and make diet change recommendations PRN (as needed). Initiated on 3/4/21; Provide nutrition supplements as ordered: Ensure, initiated 3/4/21. No information was located in resident 22's care plan indicating difficulty swallowing or the need for a pureed diet. [Note: It should be noted that the last update to the nutrition area of resident 22's care plan was on 6/15/22,] Resident 22's progress notes were reviewed and there was no documentation indicating a reason for a change in diet texture, or that resident 22's care needs had changed. Additionally, a progress note dated 12/12/23 revealed, Med Pass has been d/c'd (discontinued) per family request. An IDT (Interdisciplinary Team) care conference dated 12/9/23 revealed, resident intake is 76-100%, with resident 22's diet order documented as mechanical soft regular diet. On 2/7/24 at 9:23 AM, an interview was conducted with CNA 3. CNA 3 stated that CNA's could look at the resident's care plan to see what information was there to assist then with caring for the residents. CNA 3 stated that the DON and nursing staff kept the CNA's up to date with changes. Additionally, CNA 3 stated the MDS coordinator and resident advocate also let the staff know if there was a change in the resident's care. On 2/7/24 at 11:44 AM, an interview was conducted with RN 3. RN 3 stated resident 22 did not have difficulty chewing or swallowing food. RN 3 stated the aids in the dining room were complaining that it was taking too long for resident 22 to eat. RN 3 stated it was not like she would not have eaten, it's just a time factor and has been going on for weeks. 4.Resident 21 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses which included Alzheimer's disease, moderate protein-calorie malnutrition, open wound left foot, major depressive disorder and cutaneous abscess of left lower limb. On 2/5/24 at 1:52 PM, an interview was conducted with resident 21. Resident 21 stated she thought she had sores on her body. Resident 21 stated she did not have pain from her sores. Resident 21 stated her sores were kept covered with dressings. On 2/5/24 at 4:10 PM, the facility provided the CMS-802 form. Resident 21 was listed to have a stage 2 and a stage 4 pressure ulcer. Resident 21's medical record was reviewed 2/5/24 through 2/7/24. A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed resident 21 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 7 which suggested severe cognitive impairment. The MDS further revealed resident 21 had 1 or more unhealed stage 1 or higher pressure ulcer, three stage 3 pressure ulcers and one stage 4 pressure ulcer. The MDS revealed skin and ulcer treatments were pressure reducing device for bed, turning/repositioning program, nutrition or hydration interventions to manage skin problems, pressure ulcer care, application of nonsurgical dressing other than to feet, applications of ointments/medications other than to feet, and application of dressing to feet. A care plan dated 1/19/21 and revised on 12/4/23 revealed, The resident has potential impairment to skin integrity of the peri area/buttocks r/t [related to] contact dermatitis d/t [due to] incontinence. Scratches & picks at her skin. Multiple wounds at various stages of healing. Stage 4 L heel with h/o [history of] Osteomyelitis. The goal was The resident will maintain or develop clean and intact skin by the review date. Interventions included the following: a. Antibiotics per Medical Doctor (MD) order was initiated on 6/1/23. b. Encourage good nutrition and hydration in order to promote healthier skin was initiated on 1/19/21 and revised on 3/17/21. c. Follow facility protocols for treatment of injury was initiated on 1/19/21 and revised on 3/17/21. d. Keep skin clean and dry. Use lotion on dry skin was initiated on 1/19/21 and revised on 3/17/21. e. The resident needs pressure relief pad to protect the skin while IN BED was initiated on 1/19/21 and revised on 3/17/21. f. The resident needs pressure relief pad to protect the skin while up IN CHAIR was initiated on 1/19/21 and revised on 3/17/21. g. Wound care per MD order was initiated on 5/13/21. A physician's order dated 6/25/21 revealed, left lateral calf Q3D [every 3 days] Clean skin with wound cleanser or normal saline and gauze. If open: Skin prep where drsg will cover. May use santyl on slough, or xenaderm, calcium alginate, Cover with Adhesive foam drsg. Change every 3-7 days, until healed. D/C [discontinue] when healed. One time a day every Mon [Monday], Wed [Wednesday], Fri [Friday]. Another physician's order dated 6/25/21 revealed, (right distal and lateral calf) Q3D Clean skin with wound cleanser or normal saline and gauze. If open: Skin prep where drsg will cover. May use santyl on slough, or xenaderm, calcium alginate, Cover with Adhesive foam drsg. Change every 3-7 days, until healed. D/C when healed. one time a day every Mon, Wed, Fri. A physician's order dated 1/15/24 revealed, Premier Protein 11oz two times a day related to UNSPECIFIED PROTEINCALORIE MALNUTRITION. It should be noted this was not added to the care plan. A nursing progress note dated 9/9/23 at 4:34 PM, .The wounds on both feet had saturated dressings on them. I removed the dressings, legs are extremely dry, scaly and a lot of dead skin. I washed her legs and patted them dry. I cleansed the wounds on the left shin and heel. The sore on the left shin measures 2.5 cm X 2.5cm in diameter. It is beefy red and good blood flow. I placed a poly memfoam pad and covered with a dressing. The left heel has improved, it measures 5.0cm (L) x 5.5cm (W); has beefy red wound bed and good blood flow. I placed a silver poly mem foam pad and covered with a heel dressing. The right foot, the 5th toe had a lot of drainage and the area on the bottom of food [sic]has several open areas. I cleansed it with wound cleanser, patted it dry. I put silver poly mem between 4th and 5th toe; applied poly mem around the base of the toe and bottom of foot and covered with a foam dressing and tape. Will have DON assess the foot and give us suggestions for wound treatment. Booties put on both feet. It should be noted there was another wound documented in this note and was not addressed on the care plan. A nursing progress note dated 11/14/23 at 4:38 PM revealed, .Pillows for support, booties on both feet. She was medicated for pain with scheduled and PRN [as needed] pain medication with good effect. Her appetite has been fair today. She was given additional snacks and fluids. She drank the nutritional supplements. I changed the dressing on her left heel again today, cleansed with NS [normal saline] and patted dry, polymem foam applied to wound bed and foam dressing covering the wound. The wound measured 4.5cm [centimeter] (L) [length] x [by] 4.0cm (W)[width]. Minimal drainage noted. A nursing progress note dated 12/10/23 at 4:35 PM revealed, .Resident had personal care given and repositioned in bed. Pillows for support and booties on her feet. I changed the dressings on the R [right] foot. The two are ason [sic] the outer bottom of the foot are almost healed. I put a dressing on them for protection. The sore on the bottom of the R small toe was cleansed and patted dry. It measured approximately 2.0 cm(L) x 1.5 cm (w). I put a piece of polymem foam in the wound bed and covered it with a dressing. I changed the dressing on the left shin. The wound was cleansed with NS [normal saline] and patted dry. I put a small piece of poly mem foam and covered with a foam dressing. It measured 2.0 cm (L) X 2.0 cm (W). The left heel dressing was changed. I cleansed the area with NS and patted it dry, applied poly mem foam to the wound bed and covered it with a foam dressing. The wound is filling in from the outer perimeters. She had a medium loose BM this shift. Had 450cc output. A nursing skilled charting assessment dated [DATE] revealed resident did not weight bear, had decreased sensation, required assistance with bed mobility, and required assistance with eating. The assessment further revealed Resident is bed-ridden; requires all care done by staff. The Skin/Wound section revealed, Old hematomas on arms from scratching; lotion applied; Nystatin to abdominal fold. Wounds in various stages of healing on both legs; feet and dressing changed as per treatment orders. On 2/6/24 at 11:24 AM, an interview was conducted with the Director of Nursing (DON). The DON stated if a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) noticed a wound on a resident, the nurse was notified, and then the nurse would assess the wound and notify the physician to obtain orders to treat the wound. The DON stated resident 21 had wounds on the back of her legs and a wound on her left shin for about 3 to 4 years. The DON stated she had a pressure sore on her left heel and a wound under her right pinky toe. The DON stated the wound under the pinky toe was the size of the tip of a pen. The DON stated resident 21 was on hospice under wounds on her hips had healed. The DON stated she dressed resident 21's pinky toe wound on 2/3/24. The DON stated she used a foam dressing and it was to be changed weekly or when saturated. The DON stated that CNA reported to the nurse if a dressing was saturated. The DON stated there were no physician's orders for the pinky toe wound. The DON stated that nurses would call and ask her what dressings to use. The DON stated she Failed on documentation. The DON stated she did not have measurements on resident 21's wounds for a long time. On 2/6/24 at 1:23 PM, a follow-up interview was conducted with the DON. The DON stated there were no physician orders for the wound below the pinky toe. The DON stated she changed all of resident 21's dressing on Saturday night. The DON stated she did not know when resident 21's wound below the pinky toe opened. The DON stated she did not have a policy and procedure for wounds. On 2/6/24 at 1:29 PM, a phone interview was conducted with Physician 1's Medical Assistant (MA). The MA stated she talked to Physician 1 and Physician 1 stated he was not aware of a new wound on resident 21. The MA stated Physician 1 stated that he was aware that resident 21 had chronic wounds. The MA stated that staff usually texted Physician 1 regarding new skin issues and then Physician 1 provided treatment orders. On 2/7/24 at 8:09 AM, an interview was conducted with the DON. The DON stated she changed resident 21's dressings on Tuesday night 2/6/24. The DON stated she measured the wounds because the measurements had not been done for a while. The DON stated she took pictures and talked to Physician 1 to obtain wound orders on 2/6/24. The DON stated resident 21's wounds were healing and did not know when the pinky toe wound opened up. The DON stated she would be measuring wounds on Tuesdays and that the wound dressing change orders had been changed to Tuesday and Friday for that purpose. The DON stated that she had not been tracking measurements of wounds. The DON provided the measurements obtained on 2/6/24. The left heel measured at 8.5 cm (L) x 6.5 cm (W) x 0.1 cm depth (D). The left shin was 2.8 cm (L) x 2.5 cm (W) x 0.1 cm (D). The wound below the right pinky toe on the ball of foot was 0.4 cm (L) x 0.4 cm (W) x 0.1 cm (D). The note dated 12/10/23 was the last note of measurements. The left shin measurements were 2.0 cm (L) X 2.0 cm (W). The sore on the bottom of the R small toe measured approximately 2.0 cm(L) x 1.5 cm (w). The previous measurement for the left heel were dated 11/14/23. The measurements were 4.5cm (L) x 4.0cm (W). It should be noted the left heel increased in size with no changes to the wound dressing orders since 6/25/21. On 2/12/24 at 11:32 AM, a phone interview was conducted with the DON. The DON stated she was not aware that resident 21's heel wound was larger than the previous measurement in November 2023. The DON stated there were no changes to the treatment orders since June 2021 for the heel and shin wound. The DON did not provide information for why treatments were not changed or different treatments tried since June 2021. On 2/13/24 at 8:30 AM, a phone interview was conducted with the DON. The DON stated on the left heel wound she measured the picture and not the outline of the wound on 2/6/24. The DON stated the wound was actually 4.9 cm (L) by 5 cm (W). The DON confirmed the previous measurements were completed in November 2023 for the left heel wound. 5. Resident 34 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included Hemiplegia and hemiparesis, subluxation of left shoulder, heart failure, insomnia, cerebral infarction due to unspecified occlusion or stenosis of cerebral artery, muscle weakness, and type 2 diabetes mellitus. On 2/5/24 at 2:51 PM, an interview was conducted with resident 34. Resident 34 stated she needed her dentures realigned. Resident 34 stated she was not sure if she had enough money. Resident 34 stated she was able to wear her top dentures and had to have her food cut up for her to be able to eat it. Resident 34's medical record was reviewed 2/5/24 through 2/7/24. An annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed no dental issues. The MDS revealed resident 34 had Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 which indicated cognition was intact. The MDS revealed resident did not have a loss of natural teeth or tooth fragments (edentulous). Nursing Progress notes revealed the following: a. On 10/17/23 at 4:29 PM, Resident asked me to cancel the dental appointment for her d/t [due to] her not feeling well. We will reschedule when she is feeling better. b. On 10/18/23 at 2:31 PM, [Resident 34] has a blister on her upper left gum from getting food caught between her gum and denture. She doesn't want anyone to see her w/o [without] her dentures, so she has been staying in her room and drinking soda and soups so that her gum can heal. On 2/7/24 at 9:26 AM, an interview was conducted with Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) 1. CNA 1 stated resident 34 had not complained about her dentures for a while because she was taking them out at night. CNA 1 stated she thought resident 34's dentures fit. CNA 1 stated resident 34 complained of sores in her mouth a while ago because she was not willing to take her dentures out at night. CNA 1 stated resident 34 completed her own oral hygiene. On 2/7/24 at 9:28 AM, an interview was conducted with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) 1. LPN 1 stated she had not heard of any problems with her mouth or dentures. On 2/7/24 at 10:16 AM, an interview was conducted with the Director of Nursing (DON). The DON stated resident 34 did not have chewing or swallowing problems. The DON stated resident 34 had not been to the dentist and had not complained of her dentures not fitting. The DON stated the MDS coordinator worked offsite. The DON stated resident 34 had dentures with no teeth and it should have been on the MDS that way. On 2/7/24 at 8:28 AM, an interview was conducted with the Director of Nursing (DON). The DON stated that the MDS coordinator updated care plans, baseline care plans and comprehensive care plans. The DON stated staff tried to complete baseline care plans. The DON stated care plans were not updated.
CONCERN (D)

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

Quality of Care (Tag F0684)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review, for 2 of 20 sampled residents, the facility failed to ensure residents receiv...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review, for 2 of 20 sampled residents, the facility failed to ensure residents received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive assessment, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the resident's preferences. Specifically, a resident who had a change in her diet order was not assessed as having a change in condition, and a resident who developed pneumonia and the flu did not have his change in condition documented until it was necessary to send him to the hospital. Resident identifiers: 22 and 32. Findings include: 1. Resident 22 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included dementia with other behavioral disturbance, psychophysiologic insomnia, mood disorder with depressive features, and anxiety disorder. On 2/5/24 at 12:10 PM, an observation was made of resident 22 in the dining room for the lunch meal. Resident 22 received a pureed diet in a divided plate and a cup of jello. Resident 22 had water and juice to drink with her meal. A Certified Nursing Assistant [CNA] was sitting between resident 22 and another resident and was assisting resident 22. Resident 22 was not observed to feed herself. Resident 22's medical record was reviewed between 2/5/24 and 2/7/24. A quarterly MDS dated [DATE] revealed that resident 22 received a mechanically altered diet. The MDS revealed resident 22 did not have a swallowing disorder. The MDS revealed resident 22 did not have a BIMS score. The MDS further revealed resident 22 had short and long-term memory problems. A physician's diet order dated 6/29/23 and revised on 1/11/24 revealed, Regular diet, mechanical soft texture, regular consistency. A care plan initated on 3/4/21 revealed, The resident has nutritional problem or potential nutrition problem r/t Dementia & refuses to let staff assist her to eat. Goal The resident will have gradual weight gain to within 10% of IBW [Ideal body weight] for sex and height by review date. Interventions included: a. Invite the resident to activities that promote additional intake. b. Provide and serve supplements as ordered: Ensure. c. RD [Registered Dietitian] to evaluate and make diet change recommendations PRN [as needed]. [Note: The care plan did not included documentation that resident 22 had difficulty swallowing.] Progress notes were reviewed and there was no documentation regarding a change to resident 22's diet or eating patterns. A risk assessment for eating and swallowing problems dated 9/3/22 revealed, Does the resident have difficulty chewing, choking or coughing when eating? Answered: NO; Does the resident take 20-30 minutes to eat a meal? Answered: YES. A Quarterly Nutrition assessment dated [DATE] revealed the diet consistency order to be, Regular, mechanical soft, Regular indicating regular diet, mechanical soft texture, regular consistency. An IDT (Interdisciplinary Team) care conference progress note dated 12/9/23 revealed that resident 22's intake was 76-100% with a diet order of Regular, mechanical soft. On 2/6/24 at 2:11 PM, an interview was conducted with Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) 2. CNA 2 stated resident 22 needed extensive assistance with meals and had to be fed. CNA 2 stated resident 22 was receiving a puree diet, and that her diet order had recently changed. CNA 2 stated she did not know why resident 22 had a change in her diet order. On 2/6/24 at 2:17 PM, a follow-up interview was conducted with CNA 2. CNA 2 stated after inquiring, resident 22 was changed to a puree diet because of having difficulty swallowing. On 2/6/24 at 2:17 PM, an observation was made of resident 22's paper medical record. No order could be found for a puree diet. On 2/6/24 at 4:43 PM, an interview was conducted with the Director of Nursing (DON). The DON stated that on 2/3/24, she received a request from Registered Nurse (RN) 3 to trial resident 22 with a puree diet. The DON stated that resident 22 did well with a pureed diet and she thought RN 3 had written an order for the diet change. The DON stated she did not know if RN 3 spoke to the physician. On 2/7/24 at 10:49 AM, an observation was made of resident 22's paper medical record. A telephone order dated 2/3/24 was located for a puree diet and that resident 22 was having difficulty eating the mechanical soft diet. On 2/7/24 at 11:22 AM, an interview was conducted with RN 1. RN 1 stated anything out of the resident's normal behavior could be considered a change in condition. RN 1 stated it could be a change in behavior, or vital signs anything. RN 1 stated if she had concerns about a resident having a change in condition, she would notify the physician. RN 1 stated a resident's ability to chew or swallow would be a huge change in condition. RN 1 stated if there was a problem for one meal she would not consider it a problem, but would have to observe the resident over time. RN 1 stated she would contact the physician and document what was happening to back it up. RN 1 stated if a diet order needed to be changed, the nurse informed the kitchen staff. RN 1 stated sometimes it takes a couple of times telling the dietary staff to get the change made. RN 1 stated hopefully the resident's change in condition would get passed on in report. RN 1 stated every time the physician gave an order, it should be put into the residents medical record in a progress note, and also in the resident's physician orders. RN 1 stated if the order came as a telephone order, it would be written on a sheet at the nurses station, and then administration ensured the physician signed it. RN 1 stated the next shift might not be aware of an order change until it was put into the resident's electronic medical record and hard chart. On 2/7/24 at 11:44, an interview was conducted with RN 3. RN 3 stated resident 22 did not have any difficulty chewing or swallowing. RN 3 stated the CNA's in the dining room told her resident 22 was taking a long to eat. RN 3 stated the CNA's let her know about this on 2/3/24. RN 3 stated she asked the kitchen staff if resident 22 could have a trial of pureed food at the lunch meal. RN 3 stated it was not that resident 22 would not eat a mechanical soft diet, but it was a time factor for the CNA's and had been going on for weeks. RN 3 stated she should have documented in a progress note at the time. RN 3 stated she spoke to the DON about doing the trial of a puree diet, and texted the physician about making the change. RN 3 also stated she spoke with resident 22's family member after doing the trial to report that it was successful. RN 3 stated the resident's family member had asked about the appropriateness of a pureed diet a while ago but staff told her that resident 22 was eating ok. RN 3 stated none of the staff had informed her of their concern until 2/3/24. RN 3 stated she would not consider a change in a dietary order to be a change in condition, but a slow gradual and not very noticeable change. RN 3 stated she would inform other staff members by speaking with the CNA's and passing it on in report. RN 3 stated she should be charting concerns about a change in a resident's condition. RN 3 stated she communicated with the physician, through text message, about changing resident 22's diet order, and he texted back quickly. RN 3 stated she contacted the DON who approved the trial of the puree texture. RN 3 stated if a resident was taking longer to eat, having difficulty swallowing or losing weight, those things could possibly indicate a change in condition. RN 3 stated CNA's would write their observations on their daily report paper and pass the information on to the nurse. RN 3 stated she was not always good at charting, but she always made sure that she talked to everyone that was supposed to be notified. RN 3 stated she back-charted the information from the event on 2/3/24 on 2/6/24. It should be noted that resident 22's diet order was changed in the electronic medical record on 2/6/24. 2. Resident 32 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included type 2 diabetes, major depressive disorder, macular degeneration, dementia, anxiety disorder, insomnia, pneumonia, and influenza A with respiratory manifestations. Resident 32's medical record was reviewed between 2/5/24 and 2/7/24. Physician orders included: a. On 11/28/23, a physician's telephone order revealed, x-ray chest 2 views .CBC [complete blood count]/CMP [complete metabolic panel]/ CRP [C-reactive protein] .Oxygen 2 L [liters] .Ceftriaxone injection 1 G [gram] IM [intramuscularly] daily for 3 days .Azithromycin 500 mg [milligrams] daily for 3 days. Also written on the order, 1st noted 11/29/23 @ 1430 [2:30 PM]. a. On 11/29/23, cough drops mouth/throat lozenge; Give 1 dose by mouth every 1 hours as needed for cough Pt [patient] may have 1 cough drop Q [every] 1 hour PRN [as needed] for cough. b. On 11/29/23, Please obtain copy of lab results (look under micro) for x-ray test: (chest x-ray 2 views) taken on date (11/29/23). Fax results to [physician name removed]. d/c [discontinue] when obtained et [sic] placed in chart, every shift for 3 days. On 11/6/23 at 1:56 AM, a nursing progress note revealed, Resident has done well, he ate dinner then went to his room and watched football until he wanted to go to bed. On 11/17/23 at 3:56 AM, a nursing progress note revealed, Resident has done well this eve. He had dinner and then went to his room and watched TV [television] until 2100 [9:00 PM] when he went to bed. On 11/29/23 at 10:40 PM, a nursing progress note revealed, 17000-2100 [5:00 PM - 9:00 PM]: [Resident] refused to eat dinner and had some fluids. Day shift reported that he was weak and could not stand. [Resident] talked with staff and others and waited at desk for his N.O. [new order] meds [medications] for pneumonia: Azithromycin 500 mg 1 PO [by mouth] daily for 3 days and Ceftriaxone 1 G [gram] IM [intramuscular] daily for 3 days .[Resident] was offered fluids but he drank very little d/t [due to] his weakness .His family member [name removed] called concerned about his condition and left message to call her back. [Physician name removed] had just called saying that his kidney function was a little decreased and his inflammation levels were high but the x-ray that was done this afternoon did not go through yet. I called [family member] back and she inquired at what point we would send him to the ER [emergency room]. We discussed him having his meds and that we would keep O2 [oxygen] on and keep checking his condition and keep in touch. 2100 [9:00 PM]: He had to be assisted to bed via the lift and 2 aides and was very weak and unable to help. I notified [physician name removed] that his O2 would not go up above 90% without putting O2 mask on and at 4 L [liters] per mask on the concentrator. He [physician] said to send him to the ER. I had to get the [name of hospital removed] staff to bring a bed down for him to be transferred to ER- he left at 2145 [9:45 PM]. 0245 [2:45 AM] [name of hospital removed] staff called and left message that [resident's name removed] tested positive for influenza A and that they are keeping him for a few days. It should be noted that no progress notes prior to 11/29/23 were found that indicated resident 32 was not feeling well, or had a change in his vital signs. A physician progress noted dated 11/29/23 revealed resident 32 was seen for a diagnosis of Pneumonia. Physician notes revealed, Patient with acute onset shortness of breath decreased oxygen today. Patient reports congestion. Borderline low oxygen 88 on my examination though noted to be 86. Blood pressure was stable today. Ordered CBC CMP CRP and chest x-ray for further evaluation. COVID testing in the care center was negative. CBC was reassuring. Very mild hyponatremia. CRP was slightly x-ray showed signs concerning for early pneumonia. Patient was started on ceftriaxone azithromycin: Cough drops as needed. Given borderline low oxygen I will put him on 2 L in the meantime and hopeful that we are catching this early enough that he will improve. I called and talked with [family member name removed] about the findings and the plan and patient's presentation. He is okay with workup. Following up with the nursing staff at the care center patient was at the nursing desk still speaking full sentences stating that he has congestion but denies significant chest pain shortness of breath or difficulty breathing. Close follow-up with the patient will be arranged .UPDATE EVENING OF SAME DAY: This evening around 9:30 PM the nurse called me stating he required 4 L of oxygen to maintain saturations he was quite lethargic and less interactive. His oxygen saturation was reported at 90% on 4 L. Facemask. He refused to stand which is rare for him that he use a lift given a bed and he almost fell over. Given the worsening ox [oxygen] requirement in such a short period of time I did recommend evaluation emergency department. I called son and route to the care center to evaluate the patient. He was in agreement for further evaluation at the emergency department. However on evaluation patient looks quite calm. He was on 4 L but definitely not in as much distress as the nursing had reported. He could have just been feeling better with extra oxygen. His lungs sounded worse from this afternoon. More crackles but definitely calm. Nursing was very concerned as previous progression weakness and he is quite a large guy the cannot get him in and out of bed. Given this decreased ability to monitor patient worsening oxygen requirement we felt best to go to the emergency department for further evaluation. 4 L is near the max the hospital can provide locally and if he continues any more oxygen he may need to transfer. However I am hopeful to give antibiotics a bit more time he will start to improve and can either stay in the local hospital come back to the care center this evening. On 2/6/24 at 3:01 PM, an interview was conducted with RN 2. RN 2 state if there was a concern that a resident was experiencing a change in condition, she would check the resident's vital signs first, then report to the physician. RN 2 stated the physician would advise for need of additional steps. RN 2 stated all information related to a change in a resident's baseline should be documented in the resident's progress note.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0757 (Tag F0757)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review it was determined, for 1 of 20 sampled residents, that the facility did not ensure that eac...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review it was determined, for 1 of 20 sampled residents, that the facility did not ensure that each resident's drug regimen was free from unnecessary drugs. An unnecessary drug was any drug when used in excessive dose; or for excessive duration; or without adequate monitoring; or without adequate indication for its use; or in the presence of adverse consequences. Specifically, a resident's medications did not have a diagnoses. Resident identifier: 20. Findings included: Resident 20 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included atrial fibrillation, hypoxemia, pain in thoracic spine, unsteady on feet, wedge compression fracture, low back pain, pain in hip, heart failure, hypertension and osteoporosis. Resident 20's medical record was reviewed 2/5/24 through 2/7/24. Resident 20's physician's orders dated 3/24/2020 revealed Eliquis 2.5 milligrams (mg) twice daily for displaced intertrochanteric fracture of unspecified femur, sequela. A physician's order dated 3/25/2020 revealed Magnesium Gluconate 500 mg daily for (blank). On 2/7/24 at 12:12 PM, an interview was conducted with the Director of Nursing (DON). The DON stated the diagnosis for Eliquis should be for atrial fibrillation. The DON stated the Magnesium Gluconate needed a diagnosis. The DON stated medications needed diagnoses.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0773 (Tag F0773)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, for 1 of 20 sampled residents, the facility did not obtain laboratory services only when o...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, for 1 of 20 sampled residents, the facility did not obtain laboratory services only when ordered by a physician. Specifically, a resident had laboratory services completed without a physician's order. Resident identifier: 20. Findings include: Resident 20 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included atrial fibrillation, hypoxemia, pain in thoracic spine, unsteady on feet, wedge compression fracture, low back pain, pain in hip, heart failure, hypertension and osteoporosis. Resident 20's medical record was reviewed 2/5/24 through 2/7/24. Resident 20's last physician's orders for laboratory services was on 9/20/22 for a Comprehensive Metabolic Panel (CMP) with a diagnosis of protein malnutrition. Laboratory values in resident 20's medical record were the following: 1. 4/12/23: Urine analysis 2. 3/17/23: Urine analysis 3. 3/17/23: Urine Culture 4. 3/16/23 B-Type Natriuretic Peptide, Complete Blood Count (CBC) with Auto Diff, CMP, C-reactive protein (CRP), D Dimer, Troponin. On 2/7/24 at 12:44 PM, an interview was conducted with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) 1. LPN 1 stated laboratory values were drawn from the resident on Tuesdays. LPN 1 stated when a resident needed labs done, the physician called the nurse and ordered the labs. LPN 1 stated all labs should have a physician's order so that staff were aware of when to have the labs completed. LPN 1 was unable to find orders for the urine analyses and the other labs. On 2/7/24 at 12:12 PM, an interview was conducted with the Director of Nursing (DON). The DON stated labs needed to have a physician's order to obtain. The DON stated she did not know why there were no physician's orders for the labs that were completed.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0775 (Tag F0775)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review. it was determined for 1 of 20 sampled residents, that the facility did not file in the res...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review. it was determined for 1 of 20 sampled residents, that the facility did not file in the resident's clinical record laboratory (lab) reports that were dated and contained the name and address of testing laboratory. Specifically, the lab results for 3 urinary cultures and sensitivities were not obtained or filed in the resident's medical record. Resident identifier: 19. Findings include: Resident 19 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included fracture of coccyx, muscle weakness, displace fracture of left humerus, encephalopathy, chronic kidney disease, type 2 diabetes, major depressive disorder and dementia. Resident 19's medical records were reviewed between 2/5/23 and 2/7/23. On 12/6/23 at 4:45 PM, a nursing progress note revealed, .She has been c/o [complaining of] lower back and pelvic pain, burning on urination. Staff reported that her urine looks cloudy and there is possible the presence of blood in the urine .At 1230 [12:30 PM], I got a clean catch urine and sent it to [hospital name removed] lab for a UA [urinalysis] dipstick & microscopic; UA C&S [culture and sensitivity]. I notified [Physician name removed] about the urine being sent; her signs and symptoms . Lab results dated 12/6/23 were returned to the facility for the urinalysis performed on 12/6/23. On 12/23/23, a telephone order revealed, Send clean catch urine specimen for UA dipstick; Microscopic, UA C&S for N39.0 [UTI]; (2) Bactrim DS [double strength] 1 tab [tablet] PO [orally] BID [twice] x 5 days for N39.0. Lab results dated 12/21/23 were returned to the facility for the urinalysis performed on 12/21/23. On 1/19/24, a telephone order revealed, 1. Send urine for UA w/ [with] microscopic C&S for N39.0; 2. Start Bactrim DS 1 tab PO BID x 5 days for UTI. Lab results dated 1/19/24 were returned to the facility for the urinalysis performed on 1/19/24. Culture and Sensitivity test results could not be found in resident 19's medical record for 12/6/23, 12/23/23, or 1/191/24. On 2/6/24 at 3:19 PM, an interview was conducted with Registered Nurse (RN) 2. RN 2 stated resident 19 had a few UTIs. RN 2 stated physicians do not usually order an antibiotic until the results of the C&S had been returned. RN 2 stated resident 19 was having such strong behaviors and the physicain wanted to get her started on something. On 2/6/24 at 4:17 PM, an interview was conducted with the Director of Nursing (DON). The DON stated laboratory tests were sent over to the hospital. The DON stated the hospital sent results back when they were available. The DON stated it took 2 to 3 days for C &S results. The DON stated the nurses would remind her to check for the results by setting up alert charting. The DON stated once the results were back, the results were scanned into the resident's medical record and placed in the hard chart. The DON stated if the results do not come back within a few days, she would get on the computer and try to find the results in the hospital laboratory databse. On 2/6/24 at 6:00 PM, an interview was conducted with the Director of Nursing (DON) The DON provided copies of the C &S results from 12/6/23, 12/23/23, and 1/19/24. The DON stated she went to the hospital laboratory to obtain the results of the C &S reports.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0779 (Tag F0779)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, it was determined for 1 of 20 sampled residents, that the facility did not file in the res...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, it was determined for 1 of 20 sampled residents, that the facility did not file in the resident's clinical record the signed and dated reports of radiological and other diagnostic services. Specifically, a resident's chest x-ray result was not filed in the medical record. Resident identifier: 32. Findings include: Resident 32 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included type 2 diabetes, major depressive disorder, macular degeneration, dementia, anxiety disorder, insomnia, pneumonia, and influenza A with respiratory manifestations. Resident 32's medical records were reviewed from 2/5/24 to 2/7/24. A physician's progress noted dated 11/29/23 revealed, DX [diagnosis]: Pneumonia. Patient with acute onset shortness of breath decreased oxygen today. Patient reports congestion. Borderline low oxygen 88 on my examination though noted to be 86. Blood pressure was stable today. Ordered CBC [complete blood count] CMP [complete metabolic panel] CRP [C-reactive Protein] and a chest x-ray for further evaluation. COVID testing in the care center was negative. CBC was reassuring. Very mild hyponatremia. CRP was slightly x-ray showed signs concerning for early pneumonia. No documentation of resident 32's chest x-ray could be located in the medical record. On 2/7/24 at 12:07 PM, an interview was conducted with the Director of Nursing (DON). The DON stated residents were taken to the hospital if x-rays were needed. The DON stated she did not know why there were no x-ray results in resident 32's medical record.
CONCERN (D)

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

Dental Services (Tag F0791)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review it was determined, for 1 of 20 sampled residents, that the facility did not provide or obta...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review it was determined, for 1 of 20 sampled residents, that the facility did not provide or obtain routine dental services. Specifically, a resident stated her dentures did not fit and needed to be adjusted. Resident identifier: 34. Findings include: Resident 34 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included Hemiplegia and hemiparesis, subluxation of left shoulder, heart failure, insomnia, cerebral infarction due to unspecified occlusion or stenosis of cerebral artery, muscle weakness, and type 2 diabetes mellitus. On 2/5/24 at 2:51 PM, an interview was conducted with resident 34. Resident 34 stated she needed her dentures realigned. Resident 34 stated she was not sure if she had enough money. Resident 34 stated she was able to wear her top dentures and her food had to be cut up for her to be able to eat it. Resident 34's medical record was reviewed 2/5/24 through 2/7/24. An annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed no dental issues. The MDS revealed resident 34 had Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 which indicated cognition was intact. Nursing Progress notes revealed the following: a. On 10/17/23 at 4:29 PM, Resident asked me to cancel the dental appointment for her d/t [due to] her not feeling well. We will reschedule when she is feeling better. b. On 10/18/23 at 2:31 PM, [Resident 34] has a blister on her upper left gum from getting food caught between her gum and denture. She doesn't want anyone to see her w/o [without] her dentures, so she has been staying in her room and drinking soda and soups so that her gum can heal. On 2/6/24 at 2:51 PM, an interview was conducted with the Resident Advocate (RA). The RA stated the nurses scheduled dental appointments. On 2/7/24 at 9:26 AM, an interview was conducted with Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) 1. CNA 1 stated she had not heard her complain about her dentures for a while because she took them out at night. CNA 1 stated she thought resident 34's dentures fit. CNA 1 stated she complained of sores in her mouth awhile ago because she was not willing to take her dentures out at night. CNA 1 stated resident 34 completed her own oral hygiene. On 2/7/24 at 9:28 AM, an interview was conducted with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) 1. LPN 1 stated she had not heard of any problems with her mouth or dentures. LPN 1 stated resident 34 had a dentist appointment but was sick that day and did not go. LPN 1 stated resident 34 stated when she was ready, she would let staff know to reschedule it. LPN 1 stated the appointment was possibly in November 2023. On 2/7/24 at 10:16 AM, an interview was conducted with the Director of Nursing (DON). The DON stated resident 34 did not have any chewing or swallowing problems. The DON stated resident 34 had not been to the dentist and had not complained that her dentures did not fit.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0808 (Tag F0808)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. Resident 9 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses which included mental disorder, pol...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. Resident 9 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses which included mental disorder, polyosteoarthritis, type 2 diabetes mellitus, sensorineural hearing loss, paralytic syndrome, chronic pain, hypoxemia, lagophthalmos left eye, hallucinations, and malignant neoplasm of brain. On 2/5/24 at 12:15 PM, an observation was made of resident 9. Resident 9 was sitting at a table in the dining room. Resident 9 fed himself lunch from a divided plate of food, which consisted of three items of pureed food and a bowl of jello. Resident 9's medical record was reviewed from 2/5/24 through 2/7/24. The MDS (Minimum Date Set) Annual assessment dated [DATE] revealed resident 10 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 10, which indicated a cognitive status of moderately impaired. The MDS further revealed resident 9 did not have swallowing disorders, received a mechanically altered diet and therapeutic diet. The Care Area Assessment (CAA) section revealed nutrition was triggered from the MDS and would be care planned. A physician's order dated 1/27/22 at 12:35 AM, indicated, CCHO [controlled carbohydrate diet] diet, Regular texture, Regular consistency, Fortified Meals. The Care Plan dated 5/27/22 indicated, The resident has oral/dental health problems r/t had all of his teeth extracted, bone graft placed & posts for future dentures placed on 05/24/22. The goal was, The resident will be free of infection, pain or bleeding in the oral cavity by review date. Interventions included, Diet as Ordered. Consult with dietitian and change if chewing/swallowing problems are noted. An additional intervention included on 5/24/22 on pureed diet while mouth was healing. A Nutrition Risk Review dated 10/5/23, indicated, CCHO, reg [regular], reg prefers puree d/t [due to] mouth pain. A Risk Assessment for Eating and Swallowing problems dated 12/16/23 indicated, Does the resident have difficulty chewing, choking or coughing when eating? Pureed, was marked, Yes. A Multidisciplinary Care Conference document dated 12/22/23 at 1:29 PM, indicated that resident 9's current diet was, CCHO diet. Puree consistency. Divided plate. On 2/7/24 at 9:37 AM, an interview was conducted with RN 1. RN 1 stated resident 9 had all of his teeth pulled but that he did not wear his dentures because of the pain they caused. RN 1 stated resident 9's family and dentist decided to keep resident on a pureed diet because the resident had tolerated it. RN 1 further stated resident 9 had been on a pureed diet for a long time and believed that was the physician's order. On 2/7/24 at 10:09 AM, an interview was conducted with the Dietary Manager (DM). The DM reviewed resident 9's meal ticket which indicated resident was on a fortified, puree diet. The DM stated resident 9 had oral surgery and declined to use his dentures. The DM stated a mechanical soft diet was attempted but the resident requested to have a pureed diet. The DM stated there should have been a physician's order for the change in diet. On 2/7/24 at 10:14 AM, an interview was conducted with the DON. The DON stated resident 9 had no teeth and he refused to wear his dentures. The DON further stated that he refused to eat a mechanical diet. The DON further stated that the diet served should match what the physician ordered and that if resident 9 was served a regular diet he could choke. Based on observation, interview and record review, it was determined for 2 of 20 sampled resident, that the facility did not provide therapeutic diets as prescribed by the attending physician. Specifically, residents were provided puree diets when their prescribed diet was mechanical soft or regular. Resident identifiers: 9 and 22. Findings include: 1. Resident 22 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included dementia with other behavioral disturbance, psychophysiologic insomnia, mood disorder with depressive features, and anxiety disorder. On 2/5/24 at 12:10 PM, an observation was made of resident 22 in the dining room for the lunch meal. Resident 22 received a pureed diet in a divided plate and a cup of jello. Resident 22 had water and juice to drink with her meal. A Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) was sitting between resident 22 and another resident and was assisting resident 22. Resident 22 was unable to feed herself. Resident 22's medical record was reviewed between 2/5/24 and 2/7/24. A quarterly MDS dated [DATE] revealed that resident 22 received a mechanically altered diet. The MDS revealed resident 22 did not have a swallowing disorder. The MDS revealed resident 22 did not have a BIMS score. The MDS further revealed resident 22 had short and long-term memory problems. A physician's diet order dated 6/29/23 and revised on 1/11/24 revealed, Regular diet, mechanical soft texture, regular consistency. Resident 22's care plan included, The resident has an ADL [activities of daily living] self-care performance deficit r/t [related to] dementia, initiated on 2/9/2020 and revised on 6/12/23. The goal The resident will maintain current level of function in ADL ability through the review date. The intervention stated, EATING: The resident requires max assist by one staff to eat. A risk assessment for eating and swallowing problems dated 9/3/22 revealed, Does the resident have difficulty chewing, choking or coughing when eating? Answered: NO; Does the resident take 20-30 minutes to eat a meal? Answered: YES. A Quarterly Nutrition assessment dated [DATE] revealed the diet consistency order to be, Regular, mechanical soft, Regular indicating regular diet, mechanical soft texture, regular consistency. An IDT (Interdisciplinary Team) care conference progress note dated 12/9/23 revealed that resident 22's intake was 76-100%, diet order was Regular, mechanical soft. On 2/6/24 at 2:11 PM, an interview was conducted with Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) 2. CNA 2 stated resident 22 needed extensive assistance with meals and had to be fed. CNA 2 stated resident 22 was receiving a puree diet, and that her diet order had recently changed. CNA 2 stated she did not know why resident 22 had a change in her diet order. On 2/6/24 at 2:17 PM, a second interview was conducted with CNA 2. CNA 2 stated after inquiring, resident 22 was changed to a puree diet because of having difficulty swallowing. On 2/6/24 at 2:17 PM, an observation was made of resident 22's paper medical record. No order could be found for a puree diet. On 2/6/24 at 4:43 PM, an interview was conducted with the Director of Nursing (DON). The DON stated that on 2/3/24, she received a request from Registered Nurse (RN) 3 to trial resident 22 with a puree diet. The DON stated that resident 22 did well with a pureed diet and she thought RN 3 had written an order for the diet change. The DON stated she did not know if RN 3 spoke to the physician. On 2/7/24 at 10:49 AM, a second observation was made of resident 22's paper medical record. A telephone order dated 2/3/24 was located for a puree diet and that resident 22 was having difficulty eating the mechanical soft diet. On 2/7/24 at 11:44, an interview was conducted with RN 3. RN 3 stated resident 22 did not have any difficulty chewing or swallowing. RN 3 stated the aids in the dining room told her resident 22 was taking a long to eat. RN 3 stated she asked the kitchen staff if resident 22 could have a trial of pureed food at the lunch meal. RN 3 stated it was not that resident 22 would not eat a mechanical soft diet, but it was a time factor and had been going on for weeks. RN 3 stated she should have documented in a progress note. RN 3 stated she spoke to the DON about doing the trial of a puree diet, and texted the physician about making the change. RN 3 also stated she spoke with resident 22's family member after doing the trial to report that it was successful. It should be noted that resident 22's diet order was changed in the electronic medical record on 2/6/24.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0840 (Tag F0840)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review it was determined, for 1 of 20 sampled residents, that the facility did not arrange outside...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review it was determined, for 1 of 20 sampled residents, that the facility did not arrange outside resources in a timely manner for residents. Specifically, a resident with a referral for cataracts to be evaluated was not completed. Resident identifier: 38. Findings include: Resident 38 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included dementia, psychotic disturbance, mood disorder and macular degeneration. Resident 38's medical record was reviewed 2/6/24. A nursing progress note dated 6/8/23 at 4:45 PM revealed, Resident supervised with her care this morning. She c/o [complained of] R [right] eye pain and itching, eye is red from her rubbing it. She does have a history of macular degeneration. Prior to coming here, she had been getting an injection in her eye. She was given PRN [as needed] Tylenol and reported that it had helped some. I suggested that we talk with her family about getting an eye appointment here for her and possibly treatment with medication. A referral was made by an Optometrist to refer to a local eye center for cataract consult for both eyes dated 6/27/23. An eye exam dated 6/27/23 revealed, 1. Hypertensive retinopathy, bilateral - order color test, ERG [electroretinography] and photo to document. Monitor q [every] 6 months 2. Age-related nuclear cataract, bilateral - discussed referral to [name removed] eye center [city] for cataract consult. 3. Hypermetropia bilateral - continue with OTC [over the counter] readers until cataract sx [surgery]. A physician's visit dated 7/31/23 revealed, Assessment/Plan: 1. Visual disturbance. The patient complains of some blurriness and visual disturbance in the right eye. She was complaining about this at the last visit and is [sic} I have gotten more familiar with her history it does appear she had some shots in her eyes but has not done what for some time. I told the patient we could at a minimum had her see the ophthalmologist and see what they recommend. She did want to go ahead with this and so hopefully we can get her to see the ophthalmologist next time they come to town. Ordered: Referral to ophthalmology. A nursing progress note dated 12/1/23 at 4:50 PM revealed, [Physician 1] was in to see resident. He asked if she went to her eye appointment, I told him that it was passed on that her son would take her but she did not make it to the appointment. He said that is her chief complaint is her eyes. He would like us to schedule an appointment for her. A nursing progress note dated 12/6/23 at 4:40 PM revealed, I called and talked to resident's son, [name removed] about the eye appointment. He was under the impression that we would make the appointment and take her to it. He did not know about the previous appointment. He said if she is to have surgery, that he would take her up. I called and scheduled an appointment with the [name removed] eye specialist that comes to [city removed]. The soonest that she can get in was January 26th, 2024, at 0945. Resident was told about the appointment and we will take her. On 2/6/24 at 9:46 AM, an interview was conducted with Registered Nurse (RN) 1. RN 1 stated for appointments the nurse called and set-up the appointment. RN 1 said sometimes the Resident Advocate (RA) set up appointments because she was good at arranging transportation. RN 1 stated resident 38 had not been to see an eye doctor but had been seen in house. RN 1 stated the eye doctor came to the facility every month or every other month. RN 1 stated if there was a referral it should be done, so she Can't imagine the cataract consult was not done. RN 1 stated the DON would know if resident 38 went to the cataract appointment. RN 1 stated she did not think resident 38 had cataract surgery. On 2/6/24 at 1:18 PM, an interview was conducted with the DON. The DON stated that when a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) or resident said something about needing an appointment, then the nurse called and made the appointment. The DON stated staff would see if the family can take the resident first and if they were unable to, the facility staff would provide transport. The DON stated the management team talked about appointments in the morning meetings. The DON stated if a nurse made an appointment, it would be in a nursing note and in the calendar at the nurses station. On 2/6/24 at 2:48 PM, an interview was conducted with the Resident Advocate (RA). The RA stated that resident 38 had an appointment set up in January and no one took her to the appointment. The RA stated the appointment was rescheduled for 4/26/24. The RA stated she had just called and rescheduled the eye appointment for 2/29/24. The RA stated the Optometrist visited the facility every other month, and April was the next scheduled time. The RA stated she was not sure why there was not an appointment sooner than January 2024 scheduled for resident 38.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0849 (Tag F0849)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, it was determined for 1 of 20 sampled residents, that the facility did not ensure that the...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, it was determined for 1 of 20 sampled residents, that the facility did not ensure that the hospice services met professional standards and principles that applied to providing services in the facility and to the timeliness of those services. Specifically, the facility did not obtain from the hospice provider the most recent hospice plan of care, physician re-certification of terminal illness, and all communication visit notes were not maintained in the resident's medical record. Resident identifier: 14. Findings include: Resident 14 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included malignant neoplasm of endocrine pancreas, type 2 diabetes, neoplasm related pain, anxiety disorder, nausea with vomiting, thrombocytopenia, and occlusion and stenosis of aortic artery. Resident 14's medical records were reviewed between 2/5/24 and 2/7/24. Resident 14's care plan revealed, The resident has a terminal prognosis r/t [related to] cancer. The goal was The resident's comfort will be maintained through the review date. Interventions included, Consult with physician and social services to have hospice care for resident in the facility and Work cooperatively with hospice team to ensure the resident's spiritual, emotional, intellectual, physical, and social needs are met. A social service progress note dated 1/2/24 at 10:30 PM revealed, Resident is on hospice. No hospice notes or communication could be located in resident 14's medical record. On 2/6/24 at 3:57 PM, an interview was conducted with Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) 2. CNA 2 stated she received information from the nurse regarding resident 14's needs. CNA 2 stated that she usually worked the night shift so she did not have any contact with the hospice staff. On 2/6/24 at 4:01 PM, an interview was conducted with Registered Nurse (RN) 2. RN 2 stated, The hospice schedule is random. RN 2 stated hospice social worker, chaplain, nurse came every week. RN 2 stated a couple of different nurses came to the facility. RN 2 stated the facility staff provided all of the resident's care needs, including taking vitals, providing medications and bathing. RN 2 stated the hospice staff mostly came in and asked how the resident was doing. RN 2 stated she only communicated with the resident's primary physician and did not communicate with the hospice physician. RN 2 stated if she was working when the hospice nurse came to the facility she should write a note indicating that the hospice nurse had been in. RN 2 stated she did not know what other staff were doing. RN 2 stated communication was generally verbal. RN 2 stated she followed the orders of the admitting physician and did not deal with the hospice physician. RN 2 stated the staff called hospice staff if they needed anything. On 2/6/24 at 4:21 PM, an interview was conducted with the Director of Nursing (DON). The DON stated, we do everything for hospice, they come in and do extra and above what the facility does. The DON stated when the hospice staff did their visits the staff talked with the hospice staff. The DON stated the hospice sent the facility a copy of their visit notes, if she requested them. The DON stated she would like the nurses documented when the hospice staff came in. The DON stated the hospice provider's physician approved orders for hospice, and wrote orders. The DON stated if a change to the order was made, it would be provided to her on an order form or she would get a copy. The DON stated the facility nurse communicated the orders to the resident's primary physician. The DON stated resident 14 was receiving hospice services the day before his admission to the facility. The DON stated resident 14 discharged from the facility with hospice. The DON stated that the hospice team had come to see resident 14. The DON stated she did not get the hospice agreement filled out for resident 14. The DON stated she did not know the staff for resident 14's hospice provider and had not communicated with them.
CONCERN (E)

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

Drug Regimen Review (Tag F0756)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, it was determined for 5 of 20 sampled residents, that the facility did not ensure that eac...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, it was determined for 5 of 20 sampled residents, that the facility did not ensure that each resident's drug regimen was reviewed once a month by the licensed pharmacist, and that any irregularities were reported to the physician and were acted upon. Specifically, monthly pharmacy reviews were not being conducted between July 2023 and January 2024. Resident identifiers: 14, 19, 20, 22 and 32. Findings include: 1. Resident 14 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included malignant neoplasm of endocrine pancreas, type 2 diabetes, neoplasm related pain, anxiety disorder, nausea with vomiting, thrombocytopenia, and occlusion and stenosis of aortic artery. Resident 14's medical record was reviewed between 2/5/24 and 2/7/24. No pharmacy reviews were located in resident 14's medical record. 2. Resident 19 was admitted to the facility initially on 4/17/22 and then again on 11/17/23 with diagnoses that included fracture of coccyx, muscle weakness, displace fracture of left humerous, encephalopathy, chronic kidney disease, type 2 diabetes, major depressive disorder and dementia. Resident 19's medical record was reviewed between 2/5/24 and 2/7/24. Resident 19's last pharmacy review was completed on 1/30/23. There were no other pharmacy reviews located in resident 19's medical record. 3. Resident 22 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included dementia with other behavioral disturbance, psychophysiologic insomnia, mood disorder with depressive features, and anxiety disorder. Resident 22's medical record was reviewed between 2/5/24 and 2/7/24. Resident 22's last pharmacy review was completed on 7/20/23. There were no other pharmacy reviews located in resident 22's medical record after 7/20/23. 4. Resident 32 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included type 2 diabetes, major depressive disorder, macular degeneration, dementia, anxiety disorder, insomnia, pneumonia, and influenza A with respiratory manifestations. Resident 32's medical record was reviewed between 2/5/24 and 2/7/24. Resident 32's last pharmacy review was completed 5/24/23. There were no other pharmacy reviews located in resident 32's chart after 5/24/23. 5. Resident 20 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included atrial fibrillation, hypoxemia, pain in thoracic spine, unsteady on feet, wedge compression fracture, low back pain, pain in hip, heart failure, hypertension, and osteoporosis. Resident 20's medical record was reviewed 2/5/24 through 2/7/24. Resident 20's last pharmacy review was completed on 7/28/23. There were no other pharmacy reviews located in resident 20's medical record. Pharmacy reviews were requested. The Pharmacist provided a binder with 3 recommendations from July 2023. On 2/6/24 at 8:17 AM, an interview was conducted with the Pharmacist and the Administrator. The Pharmacist stated he had a medical emergency in August 2023 and had not completed medication reviews since then. The Pharmacist stated the last time he was at the facility to document his medication regimen reviews was July 2023. The Administrator stated there was no Pharmacist to fill in while the facility Pharmacist was unavailable. On 2/7/24 at 12:12 PM, an interview was conducted with the Director of Nursing (DON). The DON stated she had not received any pharmacy recommendations since August 2023. The DON stated no other Pharmacist had been asked to complete reviews while the facility pharmacist was not available. The DON stated the Pharmacist signed the order summaries every month but there were no recommendations from those.
CONCERN (E)

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

Medication Errors (Tag F0758)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. Resident 14 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included malignant neoplasm of endocrine pancreas, typ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. Resident 14 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included malignant neoplasm of endocrine pancreas, type 2 diabetes, neoplasm related pain, anxiety disorder, nausea with vomiting, thrombocytopenia, and occlusion and stenosis of aortic artery. Resident 14's medical records were reviewed between 2/5/24 and 2/7/24. Physician orders included: a. Venlafaxine HCL (Hydrochloride) ER (extended release) oral capsule 75 mg (milligrams); Give 2 capsules by mouth in the morning related to anxiety disorder. b. Olanzapine oral tablet 5 mg; Give 1 tablet by mouth at bedtime. d. Mirtazapine oral tablet 7.5 mg; Give 1 tablet by mouth at bedtime. e. Ativan oral tablet 2 mg; Give 1 tablet by mouth every 8 hours as needed for anxiety/agitation. An admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed that resident 14 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 11, which indicated moderate cognitive impairment. A review of the admission Care Area Assessment (CAA) dated 1/1/24 revealed care areas triggered were cognitive loss/dementia and psychotropic drug use. A review of resident 14's care plan initiated on 12/18/23, revealed no care focus areas addressing his use of psychotropic medications, monitoring for behaviors or having dementia. No pharmacy reviews of psychotropic medications were found in resident 14's medical record. On 2/5/24, psychotropic reviews were completed by the Director of Nursing [DON} and the pharmacist. Resident 14 discharged on 2/5/24 and a psychotropic review was not completed for this resident. 3. Resident 19 was admitted to the facility initially on 4/17/22 and then again on 11/17/23 with diagnoses that included fracture of coccyx, muscle weakness, displace fracture of left humerous, encephalopathy, chronic kidney disease, type 2 diabetes, major depressive disorder and dementia. Resident 19's medical records were reviewed between 2/5/24 and 2/7/24. Physician orders included: a.Quetiapine Fumarate tablet 100 mg; Give 1 tablet by mouth at bedtime related to major depressive disorder. b. Sertraline oral capsule 100 mg; Give one capsule by mouth one time a day related to major depressive disorder. (Discontinued 2/6/24) c. Sertraline oral capsule 150 mg; Give one capsule by mouth one time a day related to major depressive disorder. (Started 2/6/24) Physician orders for monitoring of antidepressant target behaviors and antidepressant medication side effects were not found in resident 19's medical record. An admission MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed that resident 19 had a BIMS score of 11, which indicated moderate cognitive impairment. A review of resident 19's CAA dated 11/21/23 revealed care areas triggered were cognitive impairment/dementia and use of psychotropic drugs. A care plan created on 1/16/24 revealed, Resident has delusions, paranoia or hallucinations. The goal was, Resident will not make delusional or paranoid statements. Interventions included the following: a. Do not argue, criticize or correct the resident. b. Help resident to feel safe. c. Remind resident that resident is safe. A care plan created on 1/26/24 revealed, Resident has mental health issue/depression. The goal was, Resident will verbalize relief of symptoms of mental illness when asked. Interventions included the following: a. Encourage pursuit of activities and hobbies. b. Offer music of resident's choice. A care plan created on 1/22/23 revealed, Resident has cognitive function/dementia. The goal was, The resident will be able to communicate basic needs on a daily basis through the review date. Interventions included: a. Administer medications as ordered. Monitor/document for side effects and effectiveness. b. Communicate with the resident/family/caregivers regarding residents capabilities and needs. c. COMMUNICATION: Use the resident preferred name. Identify yourself at each interaction. Face the resident when speaking and make eye contact. Reduce any distractions-turn off TV, radio, close door, etc. d. Cue, reorient and supervise as needed. e. Keep the resident's routine consistent and try to provide consistent care givers as much as possible in order to decrease confusion. A care plan created on 1/22/23 revealed, Resident uses psychotropic medications (Seroquel, Zoloft) r/t dementia and depression. The goal was, The resident will be/remain free of psychotropic drug related complications, including movement disorder, discomfort, hypotension, gait disturbance, constipation/impaction or cognitive/behavioral impairment through review date. Interventions included: a. Administer psychotropic medications as ordered by physician. Monitor for side effects and effectiveness Q-shift. b. Monitor/document/report PRN any adverse reactions of PSYCHOTROPIC medications, unsteady gait, tardive dyskinesia, EPS [Extra pyramidal side effects] (shuffling gait, rigid muscles, shaking), frequent falls, refusal to eat, difficulty swallowing, dry mouth, depression, suicidal ideation, social isolation, blurred vision, diarrhea, fatigue, insomnia, loss of appetite, weight loss, muscle cramps, nausea, vomiting, behavior symptoms not usual to the person. c. Monitor/record occurrences of for target behavior symptoms: pacing, wandering, disrobing, inappropriate response to verbal communication, violence/aggression towards staff/others, etc. and document per facility protocol. The admission MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed no Gradual Dose Reductions [GDR] had been attempted and no physician statement for contraindication to GDR had been documented. 4. Resident 22 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included dementia with other behavioral disturbance, psychophysiologic insomnia, mood disorder with depressive features, and anxiety disorder. Resident 22's medical records were reviewed between 2/5/24 and 2/7/24. Physician orders included: a. Seroquel (Quetiapine Fumarate) 25 mg; Give .5 tablet by mouth at bedtime related to dementia with behavioral disturbance. b. Exelon patch 24 hr (hour) 13.3 mg/24 hr; Apply 1 patch transdermally in the morning related to dementia with behavioral disturbance. c. Lexapro Tablet 20 mg; Give 1 tablet by mouth in the morning related to mood disorder. d. Buspirone HCL tab 10 mg; Give 1 tablet by mouth three times a day related to anxiety disorder. Physician orders dated 3/14/19 revealed, antidepressant side effects: {Monitor for significant side effects: common side effects: (A) Sedation, (B) Drowsiness, (C) Dry Mouth, (D) Blurred vision, (E) Urinary Retention, (F) Tachycardia, (G) Muscle Tremor, (H) Agitation, (I) Headache, (J) Skin Rash, (K) Photosensitivity/skin, (L) Weight Gain, (M) Suicidal Thinking/Behaviors, (N) Other. Physician orders dated 3/14/23 revealed, antipsychotic behaviors: 1. Hallucination, 2. Delusions, 3. Paranoid Statements, 4. Continuously crying out (greater than 15 minutes= 1 episode). Physician orders dated 3/14/23 revealed, Antidepressant target behaviors: 1. Symptoms of anxiety (SOB V Worry, nervous pacing, irritability, restlessness V anxiety, wringing of hands) 2. V. Sadness, 3. Tearfulness/crying, 4. V. Hopelessness, 5. Negative comments about self or situation. Physician orders dated 3/14/19 revealed, Anti-anxiety behaviors monitor for 1. Restlessness, 2. Verbalizes anxiety, 3. wringing of hands, 4. nervous pacing, 5. Irritability, 6. Verbalizes worry, 7. Shortness of breath. An annual MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed resident 22 had a BIMS score of 99, which indicated severe cognitive impairment and inability to be evaluated. A quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed the last GDR attempt was 6/6/22. A review of resident 22's CAA dated 9/7/23 revealed care areas triggered were cognitive loss/dementia, behavior symptoms, and use of psychotropic medications. A care plan created on 6/13/19 revealed, Resident has anxiety and depression r/t dementia. The goal was, The resident will exhibit indicators of depression, anxiety, or sad mood less than daily by review date. Interventions included: a. Administer medications as ordered. Monitor/document for side effects and effectiveness. b. Monitor/document/ report PRN any s/sx of depression, including hopelessness, anxiety, sadness, insomnia, anorexia, verbalizing, negative statements, repetitive anxious or health-related complaints, tearfulness. c. SS [Social Services] will meet with resident for supportive visits as needed. Staff will help identify personal strengths and abilities. Praise resident for accomplishments. d. The resident needs time to talk as needed. Encourage the resident to express feelings. A care plan created on 6/6/23 revealed, Resident has hallucinations. The goal was, Resident will not make paranoid statements. Interventions included: a. Help resident to feel safe. b. Remind resident that they are safe. A care plan created on 3/21/19 revealed, The resident is resistive to cares r/t Anxiety, Dementia. The goal was, The resident will cooperate with care through next review date. Interventions included: a. Allow the resident to make decisions about treatment regime, to provide sense of control. b. Encourage as much participation/interaction by the resident as possible during care activities. c. If resident resists with ADL's (activities of daily living), reassure resident, leave and return 5-10 minutes later and try again. A care plan created on 8/21/20 revealed, The resident is/has potential to be physically and verbally aggressive r/t dementia. The goal was, The resident will have less than 3 delusions per week through the review date .The resident will not harm self or others through the review date. Interventions included: a. Redirect resident away from any residents who upset resident. If resident becomes upset, redirect resident to a quiet place away from others so resident can calm down. b. If resident handles a difficult situation calmly without yelling or hitting tell resident that resident did very well. c. Explain to resident what you are there to do before you touch the resident. A physician progress note dated 11/8/23 revealed, It is medically contraindicated to make changes to her psychotropic medications at this time. Also documented, I am aware of the black box warning for the psychotropic drug. The benefits of the medication however, outweigh the risks, especially for this patient. Continue current care . 5. Resident 32 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included type 2 diabetes, major depressive disorder, macular degeneration, dementia, anxiety disorder, insomnia, pneumonia, and influenza A with respiratory manifestations. Resident 32's medical records were reviewed between 2/5/24 and 2/7/24. Physician orders included: a. Seroquel Tablet 100 mg; Take 1 tablet by mouth at bedtime for dementia. b. Seroquel Tablet 50 mg; Take 1 tablet by mouth in the afternoon for encephalitis. c. Buspirone HCL oral tablet 5 mg; Take 1 tablet by mouth every morning and at bedtime for dementia. Physician orders dated 8/22/23 revealed, Antipsychotic medication-monitor for dry mouth, constipation blurred vision, disorientation/confusion, difficulty urinating, hypotension, dark urine, yellow skin, N/V (nausea/vomiting), lethargy, drooling, EPS, symptoms (Tremors, disturbed gait, increased agitation, restlessness, involuntary movement of mouth or tongue). Document: 'Y' if monitored and none of the above observed. 'N' if monitored and any of the above was observed, select chart code 'other/See Nurses Notes' and progress notes findings. Physician orders dated 8/22/23 revealed, Antipsychotic side effects/observe closely for significant side effects-COMMON SIDE EFFECTS-): Sedation, (B) drowsiness, (C) Dry mouth, (D) Constipation, (E) Blurred Vision, (F) Extra Pyramidal Reaction, (G) Weight Gain, (H) Edema, (I) Postural Hypotension, (J) Sweating, (K) Loss of appetite, (L) Urinary Retention. ATTENTION FOR: (M) Tardive Dyskinesia, (N) Seizure disorder, (O) Chronic constipation, (P) Glaucoma, (Q) Diarrhea, (R) Skin Pigmentation, (S) Jaundice, (T) other. An MDS dated [DATE] revealed resident 32 had a BIMS score of 8, which indicated moderately impaired cognition. A care plan dated 12/7/23 revealed, Resident is anxious at times. The goal was Resident will calm down within 10 minutes of becoming anxious. Interventions included: a. Assist resident to breathe more slowly. b. Assist resident to think about something calm and peaceful (guided imagery). A care plan dated 10/13/21 revealed, The resident has impaired cognitive function/dementia or impaired thought processes r/t dementia. The goal was, The resident will develop skills to cope with cognitive decline and maintain safety by the review date. Interventions included: a. Administer medications as ordered. Monitor/document for side effects and effectiveness. b. Communicate with the resident/family/caregivers regarding residents capabilities and needs. c. COMMUNICATION: Use the residents preferred name. Identify yourself at each interaction. Face the resident when speaking and make eye contact. Provide the resident with necessary cues-stop and return if agitated. d. Cue, reorient, and supervise as needed. e. Discuss concerns about confusion, disease process, NH (nursing home) placement with resident/family/caregivers. f. Keep the resident's routine consistent and try to provide consistent care givers as much as possible in order to decrease confusion. g. Provide the resident with a homelike environment. No psychotropic reviews were found in resident 32's medical record. Additionally, no documentation was found regarding a GDR for psychotropic medications, or a physician's documentation of contraindication for attempting a GDR. Based on interview and record review it was determined, for 5 of 20 sampled residents, that the facility did not ensure that residents who used psychotropic drugs received a gradual dose reduction (GDR), and behavioral interventions, unless it was clinically contraindicated. Specifically, residents prescribed psychotropic drugs did not have a GDR attempted. In addition, documentation for contraindication for GDR's were not documented. Resident identifier: 14, 19, 20, 22 and 32. Findings include: 1. Resident 20 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included atrial fibrillation, hypoxemia, pain in thoracic spine, unsteady on feet, wedge compression fracture, low back pain, pain in hip, heart failure, hypertension and osteoporosis. Resident 20's medical record was reviewed 2/5/24 through 2/7/24. Resident 20's physician's order dated 4/30/2020 revealed, Pristiq 100 milligrams (mg) to administer 1 tablet by mouth one time a day related to anxiety. Resident 20's physicians order dated 3/24/2020 revealed, Anti-anxiety behaviors: Monitor for 1. restless, 2. Verbalizes anxiety, 3. Wringing of hands, 4. Nervous pacing, 5. Irritability, 6. Verbalizes worry, 7. shortness of breath every shift. A care plan dated 6/5/2020 and revised on 2/6/24 revealed, The resident is resistive to care r/t [related to] Anxiety. The goal was, The resident will cooperate with care through next review date. Interventions included the following: a. Allow the resident to make decisions about treatment regime, to provide sense of control. b. Encourage as much participation/interaction by the resident as possible during care activities. c. Provide resident with opportunities for choice during care provision. Another care plan dated 5/7/2020 and revised on 2/6/24 revealed, The resident has a psychosocial well being problem r/t Anxiety. The goal was, The resident will demonstrate adjustment to nursing home placement by/through review date. The interventions included the following: a. The resident will verbalize feelings related to emotional state by review date. b. Encourage participation from resident who depends on others to make own decisions. c. Provide opportunities for the resident and family to participate in care. A physician's visit dated 1/10/24 revealed resident 20 had a review of systems, Psychiatric: anxiety, personality change, depression and emotional problems (Generalized anxiety disorder. Depression. Managed with medications.) The current medications listed did not include Pristiq. There was a note, It is medically contraindicated to made [sic] changes to her psychotropic medications at this time. There was no further information why it was contraindicated for resident 20. On 2/5/24 at 11:00 AM, an interview was conducted with the Director of Nursing (DON). The DON stated she had been working with patient care and was unable to complete her DON duties. The DON stated she had not had a psychotropic drug meeting since July 2023. On 2/6/24 at 8:00 AM, an interview was conducted with the DON. The DON stated she completed her psychotropic meeting on 2/5/24 with the pharmacist. The DON provided the Psychotropic Drug Review form dated 2/5/24. The form revealed the drug was Pristiq 100 mg 1 tablet once daily. The diagnosis was F43.22 (Adjustment disorder with anxiety) and the Interdisciplinary Team recommendations were to maintain with the comments, No changes stable. There was one signature at the bottom of the form for the IDT and it was the Pharmacist. The form did not have targeted behaviors, number of behavioral episodes and if the behaviors had changed. On 2/7/24 at 12:12 PM, a follow-up interview was conducted with the DON. The DON stated there should be a progress note from the physician regarding why resident had not had a GDR. The DON provided the Physician's note from 1/10/24 regarding why resident 20 was contraindicated for a GDR.
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0761 (Tag F0761)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on observation and interview it was determined that the facility failed to store all drugs and biologicals in locked compartments. Specifically, two refrigerators that contained medications were...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation and interview it was determined that the facility failed to store all drugs and biologicals in locked compartments. Specifically, two refrigerators that contained medications were unlocked. Findings include: On 2/6/24 at 2:05 PM, an observation was made of the north side nursing station medication refrigerator. The medication refrigerator was unlocked and contained insulin medications. On 2/6/24 at 2:22 PM, an observation was made of the south side nursing station medication refrigerator. The medication refrigerator was unlocked and contained insulin medications. On 2/6/24 at 2:22 PM, an interview was conducted with Registered Nurse (RN) 1. RN 1 stated the medication refrigerator contained insulin and suppository medications. RN 1 further stated the south side medication refrigerator did not have a lock on it. On 2/6/24 at 2:35 PM, an interview was conducted with RN 2. RN 2 stated the medication refrigerator always needed to be locked. RN 2 stated the refrigerator contained insulin, eye drops, and suppository medications. On 2/6/24 at 4:35 PM, an interview was conducted with the Director of Nursing (DON). The DON stated the medication refrigerators contained insulin and suppository medications. The DON stated the refrigerators should be locked at all times and that the south side medication refrigerator did not have a locking mechanism on it.
CONCERN (F)

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

Infection Control (Tag F0880)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

Based on observation, interview and record review it was determined that the facility did not maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary and comfortable ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview and record review it was determined that the facility did not maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections, including COVID-19. Specifically, a staff member tested positive for COVID-19 and was not excluded from working in the facility. Findings include: On 2/5/24 upon entering the facility, an interview was conducted with the Administrator. The Administrator stated the Maintenance Director tested positive for COVID-19 that morning. The Administrator stated he fixed the facility washing machine and then tested positive. The Administrator stated he was not feeling well and he was sent home. The Administrator stated the Maintenance Director did not feel good Friday and left early. The Administrator stated the Maintenance Director did not work Saturday or Sunday. On 2/6/24 at 10:05 AM, an observation was made of the Maintenance Director. The Maintenance Director was wearing a black surgical mask. The Maintenance Director was observed pushing a cart with tools wearing a mask through the 100 hallway. At 11:11 AM, the Maintenance Director was observed walking to the 200 hallway. At 11:14 AM, the Maintenance Director was walking through the 200 hallway with chairs on a flat bed. The Maintenance Director walked past the nurses station and dining room in the 100, 200 and 300 hallway. On 2/6/24 at 3:00 PM, an interview was conducted with the Administrator. The Administrator stated that he sent the Maintenance Director home because he looked like he was sick. The Administrator stated that because the Life Safety surveyor did not come, he went home and would be back tomorrow. On 2/6/24 at 3:07 PM, a phone interview was conducted with the Maintenance Director (MD). The MD stated he did not feel good Friday 2/2/24. The MD stated on Saturday 2/3/24, he did some stuff around his house and his bones were hurting. The MD stated he had a fever on Sunday 2/4/24. The MD stated he went to the facility Monday morning 2/5/24 because a washing machine had broken down. The MD stated the Director of Nursing (DON) tested him on Monday and he was positive. The MD stated he wore a mask, used sanitizer and washed his hands when he was in the facility. The MD stated the DON told him to go home for the day and to not come back until his fever was gone. The MD stated his fever broke on 2/5/24 at midnight. The MD stated he did not feel good and went home on 2/6/24 after working a half day. The MD stated the Administrator instructed him to to do what he could and then he could go home. The MD stated he fixed a call light in a resident room that was vacant. The MD stated he put gloves on and fixed the call light. The MD stated he left the facility between 11:30 AM and 12:00 PM. On 2/6/24 at 4:01 PM, an interview was conducted with the DON. The DON stated if a staff member tested positive for COVID-19, the policy was for the staff member to go home. The DON stated the staff member should stay home until they tested negative after 5 days. The DON stated the facility was having a staffing shortage, so if a staff member was positive they wore a KN94 mask. The DON stated residents were tested if they had symptoms. The DON stated if a staff member was exposed, they wore a KN94 mask. The DON stated it was the Korean brand of KN95 masks. The DON stated the MD tested positive at about 7:30 AM and he came into the facility after the DON. The DON stated the MD talked to the Administrator about something and then he was tested. The DON stated the MD was not tested Friday because he was not having symptoms. The DON stated the MD worked a couple of hours Friday before going home. The DON stated the MD may have checked the washing machine on 2/5/24. The DON stated the MD worked on 2/6/24 and wore a KN94 mask. The DON stated she did not contact the County Health Department or the HAI (Healthcare Associated Infections) team for recommendations. The DON stated the MD was at the facility on 2/6/24 to get ready for his survey. The DON stated the concern with a staff member working with COVID-19 was that it could transfer it to residents or other staff members. The DON stated she tested positive for COVID-19 on New Year's Eve and worked the night shift. The DON stated she used the KN94 mask, performed hand hygiene, and was assigned half of the facility on New Year's Eve. The KN94 masks were observed. The mask was labeled KF94 and were flat masks with pleats in it, like a surgical mask. On 2/6/24 at 4:18 PM, an interview was conducted with Registered Nurse (RN) 1. RN 1 stated if a resident was coughing and had a fever she would test the resident for COVID-19 and notify the physician. RN 1 stated no residents had tested positive for COVID-19 since October or November 2023. On 2/6/24 at 4:26 PM, an interview was conducted with the Administrator. The Administrator stated the Human Resource(HR)/Payroll Director was the last staff member to test positive on 12/31/23. The Administrator stated she was really sick and tested positive for COVID-19. The Administrator stated he did not know if she worked at the facility before or after testing positive for COVID-19 because she worked from home. On 2/6/24 at 4:26 PM, an interview was conducted with the HR/Payroll Director. The HR/Payroll Director stated she tested positive for COVID-19 after Christmas. The HR/Payroll Director stated she had a cough, sore throat, body aches, fever, chills, coughing, headache and felt awful. The HR/Payroll Director stated she went to work at the facility on 1/2/24 until 1:00 PM because she needed to pick up paperwork to close out payroll. The HR/Payroll Director stated she could not remember if she tested positive on 1/2/24. According to the Center for Disease Control updated 9/23/22 the Return to Work Criteria for HCP [Healthcare Professional] with SARS-CoV-2 [COVID-19] Infection. The following are criteria to determine when HCP with SARS-CoV-2 infection could return to work and are influenced by severity of symptoms and presence of immunocompromising conditions. After returning to work, HCP should self-monitor for symptoms and seek re-evaluation from occupational health if symptoms recur or worsen. If symptoms recur (e.g., rebound) these HCP should be restricted from work and follow recommended practices to prevent transmission to others (e.g., use of well-fitting source control) until they again meet the healthcare criteria below to return to work unless an alternative diagnosis is identified. The CDC continued: HCP with mild to moderate illness who are not moderately to severely immunocompromised could return to work after the following criteria have been met: At least 7 days have passed since symptoms first appeared if a negative viral test* is obtained within 48 hours prior to returning to work (or 10 days if testing is not performed or if a positive test at day 5-7), and At least 24 hours have passed since last fever without the use of fever-reducing medications, and Symptoms (e.g., cough, shortness of breath) have improved. *Either a NAAT (molecular) or antigen test may be used. If using an antigen test, HCP should have a negative test obtained on day 5 and again 48 hours later HCP who were asymptomatic throughout their infection and are not moderately to severely immunocompromised could return to work after the following criteria have been met: At least 7 days have passed since the date of their first positive viral test if a negative viral test* is obtained within 48 hours prior to returning to work (or 10 days if testing is not performed or if a positive test at day 5-7). *Either a NAAT (molecular) or antigen test may be used. If using an antigen test, HCP should have a negative test obtained on day 5 and again 48 hours later HCP with severe to critical illness who are not moderately to severely immunocompromised could return to work after the following criteria have been met: At least 10 days and up to 20 days have passed since symptoms first appeared, and At least 24 hours have passed since last fever without the use of fever-reducing medications, and Symptoms (e.g., cough, shortness of breath) have improved. The test-based strategy as described below for moderately to severely immunocompromised HCP can be used to inform the duration of work restriction. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/guidance-risk-assesment-hcp.html
CONCERN (F)

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

Deficiency F0882 (Tag F0882)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

Based on observation, interview and record review, it was determined the facility did not designate one or more individuals as the infection preventionist (IP) who are responsible for the facility's i...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview and record review, it was determined the facility did not designate one or more individuals as the infection preventionist (IP) who are responsible for the facility's infection control program. Findings include: The facility's Infection control documentation was requested. No Infection Control Surveillance Logs were available from the previous survey 5/5/22 to current. On 2/6/24 at 4:34 PM, an interview was conducted with the Director of Nursing (DON). The DON stated the facility had not had an IP since the previous survey. The DON stated she had not completed the IP training. The DON stated she was unable to fill the IP position because then it would take a nurse from patient care. The DON stated she did not have infection control tracking or trending. The DON stated she should have infection control tracking and trending for each month. [Cross refer to F880]
May 2022 8 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

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

Comprehensive Assessments (Tag F0636)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review it was determined for 1 of 37 sampled residents, the facility did not conduct a periodic co...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review it was determined for 1 of 37 sampled residents, the facility did not conduct a periodic comprehensive, accurate, standardized, and reproducible Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment of each resident's functional capacity. Specifically, an annual MDS assessment was not completed timely. Resident identifier: 35. Findings include: Resident 35 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included morbid obesity with alveolar hypoventilation, chronic kidney disease, type 2 diabetes with diabetic neuropathy, lymphedema, hypoxemia, mood disorder with depressive features, obstructive sleep apnea, acute chronic diastolic heart failure and Charcot's joint-left ankle and foot. Resident 35's medical record was reviewed on 5/4/22. Resident 35's annual MDS assessment had a target date of 4/15/22. An observation was made that the annual MDS assessment on resident 35 was In Progress and the MDS viewer was flagged stating the annual assessment was 14 days overdue. On 5/5/22 at 9:30 AM, an interview was conducted with the facility's Director of Nursing (DON). The DON stated the MDS assessments were being completed by the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON). The DON stated MDS assessments were required annually and quarterly, and if there was a change in the resident's condition. The DON stated the MDS assessments were being completed on time and that the ADON tries to keep her stuff up to date. On 5/5/22 at 10:30 AM, an interview was conducted with the facility's ADON. The ADON stated MDS comprehensive assessments were created within the first 14 days from admission and updated quarterly, or as needed if things come up. The ADON stated they were supposed to be completed within 14 days of the Assessment Reference Date (ARD). The ADON stated that was the goal, sometimes it was hard to get them done. The ADON stated that completing the MDS assessment was not happening all the time. The ADON stated she was able to keep up with the MDS assessments prior to the COVID pandemic but has not since they were given permission to get behind. The ADON stated I'm sure I could fine something that was not completed.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0638 (Tag F0638)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review the facility did not use the quarterly review instrument once every three months for 1 of 3...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review the facility did not use the quarterly review instrument once every three months for 1 of 37 sampled residents. Specifically, a Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment was not completed and submitted in a timely manner. Resident Identifier: 23. Findings included: Resident 23 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included Parkinson's disease, hypokalemia, dementia, psychotic disorders with delusions and hallucinations, benign prostatic hyperplasia, heart failure, amnesia, edema, insomnia, restless leg syndrome, hypertension, and gout. On 5/5/22 resident 23's electronic medical record (EMR) was reviewed. Resident 23's Quarterly MDS assessment had a target Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 4/1/22. Resident 23's EMR indicated that the Quarterly assessment was In Progress and the MDS viewer was flagged stating the Quarterly Assessment was 20 days overdue. [Note: A Quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] was the last submitted and accepted MDS assessment located in resident 23's EMR.] On 5/5/22 at 11:02 AM, an interview was conducted with the facility's MDS Coordinator (MDSC). The MDSC confirmed that resident 23's 3/31/22 Quarterly MDS had not been completed and submitted on time.
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, it was determined that the facility did not develop and implement a baseline care plan for...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, it was determined that the facility did not develop and implement a baseline care plan for each resident that included the instruction needed to provide effective and person-centered care of the resident that meets professional standards of quality care. Specifically, a baseline care plan was not completed for a newly admitted resident, which left facility staff without the needed instruction to provide the resident with effective, person-centered care. Resident identifier: 252. Finding included: Resident 252 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included dementia with Lewy bodies, iron deficiency anemia, muscle weakness, repeated falls, rheumatoid arthritis without rheumatoid factor, epilepsy, major depressive disorder, and anxiety. Resident 252's medical record was reviewed on 5/5/22. The record review revealed that a baseline care plan was not completed or implemented for resident 252. Records showed that an admission assessment was completed on 4/19/22 but was not utilized to complete or implement a baseline care plan for resident 252. [Note: The document titled ICP - INTERIM CARE PLAN dated 4/19/22 was an admission assessment that can be utilized to start building the interim care plan. The document itself did not include instructions for resident care.] The record review further showed that a comprehensive care plan had been developed for resident 252. Records indicated that the comprehensive care plan was initiated six days after resident 252 was admitted to the facility. [Note: The facility staff did not have the instructions needed to provide resident 252 with effective, person-centered care for the first six days of her stay at the facility because a baseline care plan had not been completed.] On 05/05/22 at 11:33 AM, an interview was conducted with the Director of Nursing (DON). The DON was made aware that resident 252 did not have a baseline care plan in her medical record. The DON looked through resident 252's record and acknowledged that the baseline care plan was missing.
CONCERN (D)

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

Quality of Care (Tag F0684)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review it was determined the facility did not provide treatment and care in accordan...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review it was determined the facility did not provide treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice. Specifically, for 1 out of 37 sampled residents, the facility did not provide baseline monitoring of a resident's blood sugars. Resident identifier: 202. Findings include: Resident 202 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with a diagnosis that included: hemiplegia, heart failure, cerebral infarction, type 2 diabetes, hyperlipidemia, and chronic kidney disease. On 5/3/22 a review of resident 202's medical record was completed. Physician orders dated 4/22/22 stated continue to recheck blood sugar if BS (blood sugar) is below 70 or above 430 every hour until within these parameters. There were no physician orders to establish a baseline blood sugar. No blood sugar data was available during resident 202's stay. On 5/4/22 at 11:45 AM an interview was conducted with Registered Nurse (RN) 1, During this interview, RN 1 stated that she should have recognized that a baseline BS was not being done, and that she would have called the physician to clarify his orders. On 5/4/22 at 1:10 PM an interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) was conducted. During this interview, the DON stated that it was her duty to verify and check physician orders and that this was an oversight.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0692 (Tag F0692)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, interview, and record review it was determined that the facility did not maintain acceptable parameters of nutrition status, such as usual body weight or desirable body weight ra...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and record review it was determined that the facility did not maintain acceptable parameters of nutrition status, such as usual body weight or desirable body weight range, unless the resident's clinical condition demonstrated that this was not possible. Specifically, there was 1 of 37 sampled residents that lost weight and nutritional interventions recommended were not implemented timely. Resident identifier: 9. Findings include: Resident 9 was admitted to the facility initially on 6/5/17, had subsequent admissions on 10/4/2018 and 10/20/2019, and most recent readmission was on 4/13/22. Diagnoses upon admission included pneumonia, respiratory failure, severe sepsis, gastroesophageal reflux disease, anxiety disorder, systolic congestive heart failure, and mild cognitive impairment. On 5/2/22 at 2:55 PM an interview was conducted with resident 9. Resident 9 stated that she had not been included in decisions that were made about her care. Resident 9 also stated she was unsure if she had lost weight recently. Resident 9 was observed in her room, dressed for the day, and watching television. She appeared thin and frail. On 5/3/22 resident 9's electronic medical record was reviewed. On 5/3/22 resident 9's Minimum Data Set (MDS) was reviewed. a. Section K-Swallowing /Nutrition status revealed that resident 9 had a weight loss of 5% or more in the last month or loss of 10% or more in the last 6 months and was not on a physician prescribed weight-loss regimen. On 3/10/22, a quarterly nutrition assessment was completed by the Registered Dietitian (RD). The RD noted significant weight loss and recommended a fortified diet. A diet order for a fortified diet was not ordered by the physician until 4/13/22. Resident 9's diet order was reviewed and confirmed to be fortified. Resident 9's weights were reviewed, and a 12.6% weight loss was noted between 1/4/22 and 5/2/22. (Clinically significant weight loss: 5% within 1 month, 7.5% over 3 months, and 10% within 6 months) Note: Resident 9 had a 10.2% weight loss between 4/5/22 and 4/13/22 during hospitalization. On 4/21/22, resident 9 was assessed by the facility RD. The assessment revealed that resident 9 had a Body Mass Index (BMI) of 21.2, within range of Ideal Body Weight (IBW). Intake was estimated at about 75% at meals. The RD documented that resident 9 was having weight loss and recommended 2 ounces (oz) of Glucerna, three times daily. A new physician order for MEDPass 2.0 was not ordered until 5/3/22. On 5/4/22 at 1:21 PM, an interview was conducted with the Dietary Manager (DM). The DM stated that the RD came to the facility a couple of times each month. The DM stated that the RD reviewed resident weights weekly. The DM stated she gave the RD a list from the Inter-Disciplinary Team (IDT) meetings of residents that needed to be seen. The DM stated the RD mostly worked from home. The DM stated the RD sent a spread sheet with recommendations regularly and it would be given to the Director of Nursing (DON) to forward to the physician. The DM stated the RD provided her with a summary of recommendations. The DM stated she monitored resident intake and weights. The DM stated when a recommendation was sent to the physician the approval came back within 1 day. The DM stated the DON put orders for supplements into the system, she entered dietary orders. The DM stated she and the RD communicated weekly by phone or text message. The DM confirmed that resident 9 was on a fortified diet and that MedPass was ordered on 5/3/22. On 5/5/22 at 10:41 AM, an interview was conducted with the facility RD. The RD stated assessments were completed quarterly. The RD stated she received a weight report every 2 weeks when she came to the facility. The RD stated she would talk with nurses and see residents if needed. The RD stated she felt the DM and nurses had a good understanding of what goes on day to day with residents. The RD stated if she recommended a supplement or specialized diet, she had a form she filled out and would give to the DM who would then give it to the DON, who would forward it to the physician. The RD stated if she were at the facility, she would give the form to the DON personally. The RD stated physicians were quick to respond to recommendations, however, sometimes it could take longer. The RD stated she did not necessarily follow-up after giving a recommendation but mostly looked at the resident during the next assessment. The RD stated she attended the morning meetings on the days she was at the facility. The RD stated she knew that the DM and the DON attended skin and weight meetings regularly. The RD stated probably [the assistant director of nursing (ADON)] as well. The RD stated part of resident 9's weight change was fluctuating edema, cognition, and physical decline. The RD stated resident 9 had been provided a fortified diet for some time. The RD stated she last looked at resident 9 in April 2022 and was not due to review her for a while. The RD stated she would monitor the weights and if things are not improving would recommend increasing the MedPass to 4 oz. On 5/5/22 at 11:30 AM, an interview was conducted with the DON. The DON stated that the DM gave her recommendations from the RD, and she gave them to the physician. The DON stated if they were late, it was on her because sometimes, they would get lost on her desk and she did not get them to the physician in a timely manner.
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0578 (Tag F0578)

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 it was determined the facility did not provide the right for residents to cho...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review it was determined the facility did not provide the right for residents to choose medical treatment. Specifically, for 4 out of 37 sampled residents, residents Physicians Orders for Life Sustaining Treatment (POLST) forms were not completely filled out. Resident identifiers: 2, 41, 202 and 23. Findings include: 1. Resident 2 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with a diagnoses that included: heart failure, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), atrial fibrillation, anxiety, polyneuropathy, cerebral infarction and dysphasia. On [DATE] a review of resident 2's medical record was conducted. During this review, it was discovered that resident 2's POLST was not completely filled out in Section D. 2. Resident 41 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE], with a diagnoses that included: hepatic failure, hypotension, bacteremia, esophageal varicies, type 2 diabetes, hypomagnesia and anemia. On [DATE] a review of resident 41's medical record was conducted. During this review, it was discovered that resident 41's POLST was not completely filled out in Section D. 3. Resident 202 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with a diagnoses that included: hemiplegia, heart failure, cerebral infarction, type 2 diabetes, hyperlipidemia and chronic kidney disease. On [DATE] a review of resident 202's medical record was conducted. During this review, it was discovered that Resident 202's POLST was not completely filled out in Section D. On [DATE] at 12:52 an interview was conducted with Registered Nurse (RN) 1. During this interview, RN 1 stated that in the event of a full code, if she was unsure, she would begin life saving activities until she was allowed to check the POLST for directions. RN 1 stated that the POLST paperwork was filled out by the Director of Nursing (DON). On [DATE] at 1:43 PM, an interview with the DON was conducted. The DON stated that she and the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) fill out the POLST paperwork. The DON stated that then the physician signs them. The DON stated that she was unable to verify the POLST paperwork was completed due to her schedule. 4. Resident 23 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included Parkinson's disease, hypokalemia, dementia, psychotic disorders with delusions and hallucinations, benign prostatic hyperplasia, heart failure, amnesia, edema, insomnia, restless leg syndrome, hypertension, and gout. On [DATE] at 12:01 PM, resident 23's current Provider Order for Life-Sustaining Treatments (POLST), signed on [DATE] by resident 23's medical provider was found in resident 23's binder at the nurses' station. Section A. CARDIOPULMONARY RESUSCITATION (CPR), which listed three Treatment options when the patient does not have a pulse and is not breathing, was not completed. The three options were: Attempt to resuscitate . Do not attempt or continue any resuscitation (DNR) (Allow Natural Death) I do not wish to express a preference (selecting this may lead to attempt to resuscitate) Resident 23's electronic medical record (EMR) was reviewed was reviewed on [DATE]. A copy of resident 23's POLST in resident 23's EMR revealed the same Section A not completed. [Note: Leaving Section A blank gives no guidance to staff whether to perform CPR or not, which was one of the primary purposes for having a POLST.] On [DATE] at 12:05 PM, an interview was conducted with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) 1. LPN 1 reviewed resident 23's POLST and stated that Section A should have been completed. LPN 1 further stated that by default, she would perform CPR on resident 23 if resident 23 had no pulse and was not breathing. On [DATE] at 12:17 PM, the Director of Nursing (DON) was interviewed. The DON reviewed resident 23's POLST and confirmed that Section A was not completed. The DON stated she did not know that Section A on resident 23's POLST was not completed but further stated that Section A should have been completed. The DON stated that resident 23's wife was coming to the facility later that day and that she would talk with her about whether CPR should be performed or not. The DON stated that a new POLST would be completed for resident 23.
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** 3. Resident 252 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included dementia with Lewy bodies, iron deficiency a...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 3. Resident 252 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included dementia with Lewy bodies, iron deficiency anemia, muscle weakness, repeated falls, rheumatoid arthritis without rheumatoid factor, epilepsy, major depressive disorder, and anxiety. Resident 252's medical record was reviewed on 5/5/22. A review of resident 252's care plan revealed the care plan to be incomplete. Resident 252's care plan was initiated on 4/25/22 with the next review date scheduled for 5/6/22. Resident 252's care plan had a focus area initiated on 4/26/22 which stated, The resident has an ADL (activities of daily living) self-care performance deficit r/t (related to) dementia, musculoskeletal impairment, weakness. This focus area had one goal, initiated on 4/26/22, which stated, The resident will improve current level of function in ADL ability through the review date. This focus area and goal had six incomplete interventions, initiated on 4/26/22, which read: a. BED MOBILITY: The resident requires (SPECIFY what assistance) by (X) staff to turn and reposition in bed (SPECIFY FREQ) and as necessary. b. DRESSING: The resident requires (SPECIFY what assistance) by (X) staff to dress. c. EATING: The resident requires (SPECIFY what assistance) by (X) staff to eat. d. PERSONAL HYGIENE: The resident requires (SPECIFY assistance) by (X) staff with personal hygiene and oral care. e. TOILET USE: The resident requires (SPECIFY assistance) by (X) staff for toileting. f. TRANSFER: The resident requires (SPECIFY what assistance) by (X) staff to move between surfaces (SPECIFY FREQ) and as necessary. 2. Resident 5 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with a diagnoses that included: Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), scoliosis, schizoaffective disorder, fracture of right forearm, hyperlipidemia, fibromyalgia, and opioid dependence. On 5/2/22 a review of resident 5's medical record was conducted. Review of the care plan dated 4/16/22 stated to monitor closely for signs of psychosis and a need to adjust Seroquel. The care plan was revised 6/9/20, and again 2/23/22. Review of residents Medical Administration Report (MAR) shows resident was not taking Seroquel. According to physician orders, Seroquel was discontinued on 2/23/22. On 5/3/22 at 1:20 PM an interview was conducted with the Director of Nursing (DON). The DON stated that she was the one who was supposed to update care plans, and that the update of resident 5's care plan was an oversight. 4. Resident 9 was admitted to the facility initially on 6/5/17 and was readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included pneumonia, respiratory failure, severe sepsis, gastroesophageal reflux disease, anxiety disorder, systolic congestive heart failure, and mild cognitive impairment. On 5/2/22 at 2:50 PM, an interview was conducted with resident 9. Resident 9 stated that staff had not discussed her plan of care with her and did not determine what her goals were when developing her comprehensive care plan. Resident 9's medical record was reviewed on 5/3/22. Resident 9's re- admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) was completed on 4/18/22. Section K-Swallowing /Nutrition status revealed that resident 9 had a weight loss of 5% or more in the last month or loss of 10% or more in the last 6 months and was not on a physician prescribed weight-loss regimen. A quarterly nutrition risk assessment dated [DATE], before resident 9 was discharged to the hospital, revealed that resident 9 was seen by the facility's Registered Dietitian (RD). The RD noted weight loss at that time and recommended a fortified diet. Resident 9 was discharged to the hospital on 4/7/22 and re-admitted on [DATE]. On 4/13/22, after resident 9 was re-admitted to the facility from the hospital, an order was placed by the physician for a fortified diet. A document titled Millard Care & Rehabilitation Risk Assessment for Eating and Swallowing problems dated 4/13/22 revealed that resident 9 had significant weight loss. On 4/18/22, a Multidisciplinary Care Conference was held, and a conference worksheet was completed. Staff members noted to be in attendance were Registered Nurse, Dietary, and Activation. The Dietary entry included in the conference notes documented resident 9's current diet as CCHO (Consistent Carbohydrate) diet. Regular Consistency. Nutrition supplements were marked none. Appetite was listed as fair. Oral intake was documented as 51-75%. Resident 9's weight was noted to be 112 pounds (lbs.) with a Body Mass Index (BMI) of 22.6. Nutritional risk was marked as medium, and the present problems noted confused at times at meals. Resident goals included stable weight and adequate daily nutritional intake. The nutrition portion was completed by the facility Dietary Manager (DM). A re-admission assessment was completed by the RD on 4/21/22 which noted resident 9's significant weight loss. The RD recommended Glucerna, 2 ounces (oz), three times daily between meals with a goal of maintaining or increasing weight. On 5/3/22, an order was placed by the physician for MedPass, 2 oz. after meals. Note: this order was received 12 days after RD made the recommendation. Resident 9's care plan, initiated on 12/3/19, documented fall risk, discharge planning, Activities of Daily Living (ADL) and self-care, COVID, recreation, verbal aggression, skin impairment, behaviors/delusions, anxiety, cognitive function and dementia, leg pain, diabetes mellitus, mood, shortness of breath, and refusal of care. Note: A care area for weight loss or potential for weight loss was not developed as part of the comprehensive care plan. 5. Resident 48 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included acute respiratory failure with hypoxia, pleural effusion, dehydration, type 2 diabetes, acidosis, urinary tract infection, fracture of shaft of humerus, atrial flutter, dementia, depression, and weakness. On 5/2/22 at 11:52 AM, an interview was conducted with resident 48. Resident 48 stated the facility did not discuss her plan of care with her, but instead may talk to my son. On 5/3/22 resident 48's medical record was reviewed. Resident 48's care plan, initiated on 3/10/22, documented care areas for diabetes, bowel continence, discharge planning, catheter care, pain, facility adjustment and anticoagulation therapy. The review of resident 48's care plan revealed the care areas contained incomplete focus areas, incomplete or missing goals, and/or incomplete or missing interventions. a. Anticoagulation therapy: Focus area stated: The resident is on anticoagulation therapy (SPECIFY medication) r/t, Date initiated: 3/28/22. Note: The focus area did not include any goals or interventions. b. Adjustment: Focus area stated: Resident will adjust to daily life here as well as possible. Date initiated: 4/4/22. Goal area stated Advocate will be available for resident as needs arise. Date Initiated: 4/4/22, Target Date: 4/6/22. Note: The focus area did not include any interventions. c. Pain: Focus area stated: The resident has (SPECIFY) acute/chronic pain r/t, Date Initiated: 3/28/22. Note: The focus area was incomplete and did not include any goals or interventions. d. Catheter Care: Focus area stated: The resident has (SPECIFY: Condom/Intermittent/Indwelling suprapubic) Catheter: Date Initiated 3/28/22. The goal section was empty. The Intervention section states CATHETER: The resident has (SPECIFY Size) (SPECIFY Type of Catheter). Position catheter bag and tubing below the level of the bladder and away from entrance room door. Date Initiated: 3/28/22. Note: The focus area was incomplete, did not include any goals, and contained incomplete interventions. e. Discharge Planning: Focus area stated: Discharge Planning, Resident plans to rehab and strengthen, she will be staying at the facility for LTC. Date Initiated: 4/4/22. The Goal section states: Residents family is coordinating with advocate. Date Initiated: 4/4/22, Revision on: 4/27/22, Target Date: 7/4/22. Note: The focus area did not include any interventions. f. Bowel Incontinence: Focus area stated: The resident has bowel incontinence r/t, Date Initiated: 3/28/22. Note: The focus area did not include any goals or interventions. g. Diabetes: Focus area stated: The resident has Diabetes Mellitus, Date Initiated: 3/28/22. Note: The focus area did not include any goals or interventions. Resident 48 had a diagnosis of dehydration and a physician order for a fluid restriction, with no specification of what it was related to. Note: This was not included in resident 48's care plan. On 5/4/22 at 10:47 AM, an interview was conducted with Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) 1 and Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) 1. CNA 1 stated that the Director of Nursing (DON) and Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) discussed a care plan for each resident. LPN 1 stated the DON then put the care plan in the hard chart. CNA 1 stated information about the care plan was passed on by word of mouth at shift change and throughout the shift. CNA 1 stated she had not looked at the hard chart. LPN 1 stated the care plan was in the electronic medical record (EMR) and she could look there to see what was on the resident's care plan. LPN 1 stated if something changed in the care plan a note would be in the computer and she would pay attention to that. LPN 1 also stated she would get information about residents at the morning meetings. On 5/5/22 at 9:30 AM, an interview was conducted with the DON. The DON stated care plan meetings were held on Wednesdays. The DON stated she met with the ADON and Resident Advocate (RA) on Mondays. The DON stated family did not come to care plan meetings because staff talked to the resident's family weekly. The DON stated the physician did not come to care plan meetings. The DON stated goals and interventions were determined from the Minimum Data Set (MDS) put in the system by the ADON. The DON stated information was disseminated to staff through notes on the resident's chart for the nurses. The DON also stated tasks could be added for CNA's. The DON stated she would have to go back and look at a resident's chart to see if the care plan was being followed and items completed. The DON stated she had the ability to link care areas to CNA charting and she did that for falls, but not other care area items. The DON stated she did not have time to play with it so she had not been using that feature. The DON stated if a change was going to be made on the resident's plan of care, the staff would discuss it with the family beforehand. The DON stated family have often called and talked to the staff about the residents. The DON stated residents had not been participating in care plan meetings. The DON stated they used to be invited but was unsure what the protocol was after the COVID restriction period. The DON stated the MDS assessments were completed by the ADON with input from the resident advocate, therapy and recreation. The DON stated care plans were required quarterly, annually, and if there was a change in the resident's condition. The DON stated that MDS's were completed on time as the [ADON] tries to keep her stuff up to date. On 5/5/22 at 10:30 AM, an interview was conducted with the ADON. The ADON stated the process for care planning was when the resident was admitted , the admitting nurse would do an initial assessment. The ADON stated after the initial assessment, an Inter-Disciplinary Team (IDT) meeting was held to go over sections of the care areas. The ADON stated if a resident had a fall or a change in condition, the nurses would provide information about it on the actual care plan. The ADON stated if a resident fell, staff would be given information in a post fall huddle to evaluate why it happened, what actions were taken and what could be done to improve. At that point, interventions would be agreed upon and the nurses were responsible for updating the care plan and passing the information on to other staff. The ADON stated the facility had a 72-hour post event protocol for updating care plans. The ADON stated goals and interventions were determined by the resident's ability to carry them out and were feasible and helpful. The ADON stated a care plan was created within the first 14 days after admission and updated quarterly or as needed if things come up. The ADON also stated that is the goal, sometimes it is hard to get them done. The ADON stated the first IDT meeting would be held the Wednesday following the week of the resident's admission. The ADON stated the care plan was disseminated to staff in Point Click Care (PCC), and a paper copy was placed in the hard chart. The ADON stated the CNAs were supposed to look in the hard chart for resident care information. The ADON stated she tracked if the resident's care plan was being followed by going through the MDS and seeing if the items on prior care plan were still in place. The ADON stated the MDS was completed quarterly, annually and if there was a change in condition. The ADON stated they were supposed to be completed within 14 days of the Assessment Reference Date (ARD). The ADON stated it is not happening all the time. The ADON stated she was able to keep up the MDS tasks prior to the COVID pandemic but had not since they were given permission to get behind. The ADON stated for care plans, there should be a goal and intervention for each care area. The ADON also stated I'm sure I could find something that is not completed. Based on Interview and record review the facility did not develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for 5 of 37 sampled residents that included measurable objectives and time frames to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs that are identified in the comprehensive assessment. Specifically, one resident, who was receiving psychotropic medications for anxiety, did not have anxiety addressed in her care plan. Additionally, another resident's care plan included an active focus for a psychotropic medication which had been discontinues months prior. Additionally, another resident's care plan included a focus area and goal for Activities of Daily Living, but the six interventions were not completed. Additionally, another resident had significant weight loss that was not addressed in her care plan. Additionally, another resident had multiple focus areas identified in her care plan that did not have goals nor interventions. Resident Identifiers: 5, 9, 33, 48, and 252. Findings included: 1. Resident 33 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included chronic osteomyelitis, right ankle and foot, drug induced movement disorders, altered mental status, anxiety disorders, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, chronic respiratory failure, and adverse effect of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors. Resident 33's medical record was reviewed on 5/3/22. Resident 33's Admitting Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], revealed that resident 33 had a diagnosis of anxiety. Resident 33's May 2022 Medication Administration Record (MAR) revealed resident 33 was receiving the following psychotropic medications for anxiety: 1. Duloxetine HCl (hydrogen chloride), delayed release sprinkle, 60 mg (milligram) by mouth daily. Start Date: 2/26/22. 2. Seroquel 150 mg (Quetiapine Fumarate) by mouth at bedtime. Start Date: 2/25/22. 3. Xanax 0.5 mg (Alprazolam) by mouth three times a day. Start Date: 3/7/22. Review of resident 33's current comprehensive care plan revealed no mention of resident 33's anxiety. On 5/4/22 at 2:25 PM, an interview was conducted with the facility's Director of Nursing (DON). The DON confirmed that resident 33 had been receiving multiple psychotropic medications for anxiety and that resident 33's care plan did not include any measurable objectives or interventions related to anxiety.
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 observations and interviews, it was determined that the facility did not ensure that standard precautions and hand hygi...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations and interviews, it was determined that the facility did not ensure that standard precautions and hand hygiene procedures were followed by staff in direct resident contact to prevent the spread of infection. Specifically, staff members did not perform hand hygiene before and after providing resident care, did not perform hand hygiene between resident encounters, and did not disinfect the weight bench before and after each resident use. Findings included: On 05/02/22 at 1:14 PM, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) 2 was observed assisting a resident to her room. It was observed that CNA 2 did not perform hand hygiene upon entering the resident's room or before providing care to the resident. It was observed that another staff member entered the same room and assisted CNA 2 to transfer the resident without performing hand hygiene before or after the encounter. On 05/03/22 at 12:45 PM, it was observed that CNA 2 and another staff member weighed the resident in room [ROOM NUMBER] with the weight bench. It was observed that CNA 2 and the staff member exited room [ROOM NUMBER] with the weight bench and entered another resident room without disinfecting the weight bench. It was observed that CNA 2 and the staff member did not disinfect the weight bench before weighing the second resident. On 05/03/22 at 1:02 PM, it was observed that CNA 2 did not disinfect the weight bench before exiting room [ROOM NUMBER]. It was then observed that CNA 2 put the weight bench in a storage room without disinfecting the weight bench. On 05/05/22 at 9:32 AM, an interview was conducted with CNA 3. CNA 3 stated that standard precautions mean that gloves are worn, and hand hygiene was performed. CNA 3 stated that hand hygiene was using hand sanitizer or washing one's hands with soap and water. CNA 3 stated hand hygiene is performed before entering and after leaving a resident room, while in the resident room, before feeding a resident, or whenever one feels it was needed. CNA 3 stated the weight bench should be wiped down after each use with a disinfectant wipe. CNA 3 stated the disinfectant wipes were kept in a cupboard behind the nurses' station. On 05/05/22 at 9:47 AM, an interview was conducted with CNA 2. CNA 2 stated that standard precautions were the minimum requirements and included hand washing and wearing gloves. CNA 2 stated that hand hygiene was washing hands. CNA 2 stated hand hygiene should be performed before and after taking a resident to the bathroom, before feeding a resident, between residents, and before entering and after leaving a resident room. CNA 2 stated disinfectant wipes are used to wipe down equipment. CNA 2 stated the weight bench should be disinfected before and after each resident use. On 5/2/22 at 12:30 PM it was observed that staff delivering resident meals in the dining room were not sanitizing hands between serving the residents their lunch. On 5/3/22 at 12:35 PM it was observed that staff delivering resident meals in the dining room were not sanitizing hands between serving the residents their lunch. On 5/5/22 at 12:12 PM it was observed that staff delivering resident meals in the dining room were not sanitizing hands between serving the residents their lunch. On 5/4/22 at 10:55 AM, an observation was made of Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) 1 checking a resident's blood sugar at the nurse's station. As LPN 1 was finishing with the blood sugar, another resident in a wheelchair came up and asked for help opening a popsicle. LPN 1 took the popsicle from the resident in the wheelchair and opened it. LPN 1 did not remove the gloves or sanitize her hands before having contact with the popsicle. On 5/5/22 at 10:02 AM, an interview was conducted with Registered Nurse (RN) 2. RN 2 stated staff had been educated on hand hygiene and infection control. RN 2 stated staff were observed and had to sign off that it was being done properly multiple times. RN 2 stated staff should always wash hands or use hand sanitizer between resident contact. RN 2 stated if hands were visibly soiled, hands should be washed with soap and water. RN 2 stated if a resident was being helped and another resident approached and asked for help hands should be sanitized before helping the second resident. RN 2 stated infection transmission could occur if hands were not sanitized between residents.
Dec 2019 4 deficiencies 1 Harm
SERIOUS (G)

Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures

Accident Prevention (Tag F0689)

A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 3. Resident 3 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included dementia, opioid dependence, asthma, restless ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 3. Resident 3 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included dementia, opioid dependence, asthma, restless leg syndrome, depression, anxiety, cognitive impairment, orthopedic aftercare, diabetes mellitus, muscle weakness, history of falls, low back pain, cerebral atherosclerosis, chronic kidney disease, hypothyroidism, hypertension, Parkinson's disease and a history of traumatic fracture On 12/2/19 at 1:01 PM an interview was conducted with resident 3. Resident 3 stated that she had fallen a few times. On 12/3/19 the resident's medical record was reviewed. Event reports revealed that resident 3 had falls on the following dates: 2/21/19, 6/21/19, 7/1/19, 7/4/19, 8/2/19, 9/10/19, 9/20/19, 9/30/19, 10/5/19, 11/7/19. Records revealed: a. The Event Report Worksheet (ERW) from 2/21/19 revealed that [resident 3] was found sitting on the floor. Resident 3 stated that resident 3 tried to sit on a chair and ended up on the floor. The ERW revealed that resident 3 was assessed for injuries and vital signs were taken. No injuries were noted. No intervention was listed on the form. b.The ERW from 6/21/19 revealed that [resident 3] was found on the ground with the chair on the side of her tipped over. Resident 3 stated that she was trying to pick up a puzzle piece. The ERW revealed that resident 3 was assessed for injuries, assisted resident 3 up and vital signs were taken. No injuries were noted. No intervention was listed on the form. c. The ERW from 7/1/19 revealed that the nurse down to room to take [resident 3] her medication. Upon entering room [resident 3] was found sitting on the floor in front of her recliner. Resident 3 stated that she was trying to out something out of her dresser, when she lost her balance as she was turning. Resident 3 then grabbed hold of the foot board of her bed to help guide herself to the floor, where she landed on her butt. The ERW revealed that resident 3 was assessed for injuries. Range of motion performed and vital signs taken. Resident 3 had a skin tear 1 centimeter (cm) x 3.5 cm. Area cleansed with Normal saline, edges approximated well, skin prep to wound and sterri-strips applied. Foam dressing in place over sterri-strip. d. The ERW from 7/4/19 revealed that [resident 3] was found sitting on the floor. Resident 3 stated 'I tried to get up and my legs are swollen. I lost my balance and slide down front of recliner. The ERW revealed that a head to toe assessment was done and the [resident 3] was taken to the bathroom. No injuries were noted and Resident 3 was advised to call and accept more help even though she doesn't like to. No intervention was listed on the form. e.The ERW from 8/2/19 revealed that the nurse found resident 3 was found sitting on the bathroom floor next to the door. Resident 3 stated that she was finishing her shower; she slid down the wall to her bottom. Resident 3 was assessed for injuries and vital signs were done. Resident 3 had a skin tear on her left wrist. No intervention was listed on the form other than resident 3 was reminded to call every time and not do anything on her own. f. The ERW from 9/10/19 revealed that staff was helping resident 3's roommate when [resident 3] yelled for help. When staff went to resident 3's side of the room the found resident 3 sitting in the closet. Resident 3 stated I was getting my clothes in my closet and I lost my balance. I am shaky. Resident 3 was assessed for injuries and vital signs were taken. No injuries were noted. Staff checked her bed alarm which resident 3 had removed from her bed. No intervention was listed on the form. g. The ERW from 9/20/19 revealed that resident 3 was found on the floor in front of her chair. Resident 3 stated that she was trying to get up from her wheel chair and slide to close to the edge. Resident 3 was assessed for injuries, pain, range of motion, staff identified if there was a problem. Resident 3 had a skin tear about 2.5 cm by 1 cm. Staff asked resident 3 to call for help when resident 3 needed it. No intervention was listed on the form. h. The ERW from 9/30/19 revealed that resident 3 was found sitting on the floor between her wheel chair and the recliner in resident 3's room. Resident 3 stated she was transferring from the wheel chair to the recliner when the wheel chair rolled back. Resident 3 stated that she forgot to set the brakes. Resident 3 was assessed for injuries and vital signs were taken. No injuries were noted. Staff placed bed alarm back on chair. i. The ERW from 10/5/19 revealed that resident 3 was trying to set a paper on her table when she lost her balance and leaned against the wall after losing her balance. Resident 3 stated that she didn't fall but, slid to the floor. CNA was in the room because she heard the bed alarm but, didn't make it in time to stop resident 3 from sliding to the floor. Resident 3 was assessed for injuries, assisted to her wheel chair, and vital signs were taken. Resident 3 had a 1.5 cm x1.5 cm skin tear on her elbow the skin tear was cleaned with normal saline and sterri-strips and dressing applied. Reminded resident 3 to let staff help her with transfers and ambulation. Resident 3 stated she was standing working on the puzzle when she turned to sit down and missed the wheel chair. Resident 3 was assessed for injuries. No injuries were noted j. The ERW from 11/7/19 revealed that resident 3 was found crawling on the floor by the desk down the hall. Resident stated she stood up to fix her puzzle turned around to sit down and missed the wheel chair. Staff reminded resident to call for help when resident 3 needed it and to lock the wheel chair breaks Care plan stated the following for falls on 6/21/19, 7/1/19, 7/4/19, 9/10/19, 10/5/19, 6/11/19: Focus: The resident had has an actual call (date) with (Specify) poor balance, poor communications/comprehension, and unsteady gait. Goals: The resident will resume usual activities without further incident through the review date. (OVERDUE) Intervention/Tasks: Continue interventions on the at-risk plan. For no apparent acute injury, determine and address causative factors of the fall Monitor/document/report (As need) PRNx 72hours to MD for (Signs and symptoms) s/sx: Pain, bruises, change in mental status. New onset: Confusion, sleepiness, inability to maintain posture, agitation. There are no assigned tasks. The Care plan addressed the fall after resident 3 had fallen but, once the care plan had been developed it was never reviewed or revised to prevent future falls. The care plan has not been updated since 7/6/19. 4. Resident 8 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included dementia, altered mental status, acute kidney failure, thyrotoxicosis, hearing loss, hypertension, and history of falls. On 12/3/19 the resident's medical record was reviewed. Event reports revealed that resident 8 had falls on the following dates: 6/11/19, 8/9/19, 8/30/19. Record reveals: a. The Event Report Worksheet (ERW) from 6/11/19 revealed that resident 8 was found sitting on the floor by the doorway to the bathroom with her brief around her ankles. Resident stated that she slipped and fell. The ERW revealed that resident 8 was assesses for injuries, vital signs were taken, range of motion was assessed. Resident was helped to the bathroom and was given a shower. No injuries were noted and no interventions were listed. b. The ERW from 8/9/19 revealed that call light was going off when CNA went to answer the call light resident 8 CNA found resident 8 on the floor. Resident 8 stated that she missed the toilet. The ERW revealed that resident 8 was assisted to the toilet and then bed, vital signs taken. No injuries noted. Intervention was to remind her to use the call light. c. The ERW from 8/30/19 revealed that resident 8 had picked up a box of the floor and threw it which caused resident 8 to loss her balance and fall. Due to dementia resident was unable to explain the fall. The ERW revealed that resident 8 was assessed for injury, vitals were taken. No injuries and interventions were noted. d. The ERW from 11/21/19 revealed that resident 8 was picking eggs up off the floor and slipped. Resident 8 landed on her buttocks. Resident 8 stated that she was picking up eggs off the floor and that resident 8s wrist hurt. The ERW revealed that resident 8 was assisted up, vital signs were taken, and range of motion was checked. Resident 8 was placed on the couch to rest. No injury or interventions were noted. Care plan initiated on 6/5/19 and revised on 7/28/19 stated the following: Focus: The resident 8 has limited physical mobility, history of falls and forgets her walker. Goals: The resident will maintain current level of mobility, able to walk with four wheel walker and supervision. Interventions: Ambulation: The resident 8 is able to walk with four wheel walker but requires supervision and reminders to use her walker. Resident 8 has had three falls sense the care plan was updated. On 12/3/19 at 2:47 PM CNAs 1, CNA 2, and CNA 3 during a simultanous interview stated that bed and wheel chair alarms were placed on resident 3's wheel chair and bed when resident 3 fell the first time. On 12/3/19 at 3:22 PM Registered nurse (RN) 1 during an interview stated that nurses are supposed to update the care plan after each fall. On 12/3/19 at 3:25 PM, the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) during an interview stated that after a resident has a fall the nurse on shift should update the care plan. A review of the care plans showed that the falls were documented but no interventions were added to prevent future falls. 2. Resident 6 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (BPH) with lower urinary tract symptoms, acute kidney failure, retention of urine, dementia with behavioral disturbance, weakness, repeated falls and anxiety disorder. On 12/2/19 at 3:35 PM resident 6 was observed sitting in the wheelchair in the common area in his unit. On 12/3/19 at 1:30 PM resident 6's medical record was reviewed. Record revealed that resident 6 had falls on following dates: 6/8/19, 6/9/19, 7/30/19, 7/31/19, 8/7/19, 9/6/19, 10/1/19, 10/3/19, 10/8/19, 10/16/19, 10/21/19, 10/27/19 and 10/28/19. Records revealed following: a. The Incident Report from 6/8/19 revealed that, Bed alarm went off. CNA's (Certified Nursing Assistant) down to room, upon entering found resident sitting on the floor leaning against his bed. Resident unable to give description. This incident report revealed that resident did not sustain an injury. He was assessed and his vital signs (VS) were taken. There was no intervention listed on the form. b. The Incident Report from 6/9/19 revealed that, Call light sounding and staff ran (sic) to room and [Resident 6] was 1/2 lying and 1/2 sitting on the floor. Resident unable to give description. This incident report revealed that resident did not sustain injury. Resident 6's VS were taken, head to toe assessment completed and he was put back in bed. There was no intervention listed on the form. c. The Event Report Worksheet from 7/30/19 revealed that resident 6 had fall at 6:30 AM. Per this report, aide walked by room and found him [Resident 6] on floor. Bed-alarm on and working, but his arm [Resident 6's] was on it so did not go off.; [Resident 6] unable to explain, was assessed and assisted up. The intervention listed on the report was,Unable to prevent him sliding out of bed at his will. The report revealed that Care Plan was updated and Red star was placed on residents door. d. The Event Report Worksheet from 7/31/19 revealed that resident 6 had fall at 6:00 AM. Per this report, heard bell go off, found him [Resident 6] on floor next to his bed same as yesterday.; [Resident 6] unable to explain, was assessed, help up into bed, V/S. The intervention listed was, ?Fall cushion pad next to bed?. The report revealed that Care plan was updated and Red star was placed on residents door. e. The Event Report Worksheet from 8/7/19 revealed that resident 6 had fall at 6:30 AM. Per this report, pt found on floor at side of bed.; Dementia-pt unable to verbalize occurrence. The intervention listed was, staff assisted pt up and ambulate to BR (bedroom). Assessed for injury. VS taken. PT up and ambulated to south dining area for observation. f. The Event Report Worksheet from 9/6/19 revealed that resident 6 had fall at 8:15 AM. Per this report,[Resident 6] was sitting on his butt and back against bed when I got there. While waiting for help resident rolled onto left side.; [Resident 6] confused. The intervention listed was,assessed for injuries, ROM (range of motions) and gait, assisted back on bed, V/S taken, resident showered, notified all parties. The report revealed that Care Plan was updated and Red star placed on residents door. g. The Event Report Worksheet from 10/1/19 revealed that resident 6 had fall at 7:15 AM. Per this report, Bed alarm went off, found him {Resident 6] wrapped in his blankets sliding to floor-assisted him to floor. No injuries. The intervention listed was, assisted up onto bed, toileted.; Unable to prevent, keep monitoring. The report revealed that Red star was placed on residents door. h. The Event Report Worksheet from 10/3/19 revealed that resident 6 had fall at 4:00 PM. Per this report, [Resident 6] was found just inside staff breakroom on the floor. Per this report, [Resident 6] sustained 1 centimeter (cm) lac (laceration) on r(right) back of head. The intervention listed was, assess for injury, obtain vitals. Ensure that he has a chair alarm at all times. The report revealed that Care Plan was updated and Red star was placed on residents door. i. The Event Report Worksheet from 10/8/19 revealed that resident 6 had fall at 8:00 AM. Per this report, [Resident 6] was found on the floor of his room next to his bed kneeling. The intervention listed was, assess for injury, obtain vitals. Frequent monitoring in the morning. The report revealed that Red star was placed on residents door. j. The Event Report Worksheet from 1016/19 revealed that resident 6 had fall at 9:20 PM. Per this report, Alarm sounding, [Resident 6] sitting on floor (upright) next to bed with right hand on side rail. Resident 6's description of the incident was was, I was waiting for you, I guess. The intervention listed was, Skin assessment, VS, given fluids, tucked back into bed with warm blanket. The report revealed that Red star was placed on residents door. k. The Event Report Worksheet from 10/21/19 revealed that resident 6 had fall at 3:50 AM. Per this report, [Resident 6] was on the side of bed with arms and torso mostly on left side, legs on floor also on left side. There was no interventions listed. l. The Event Report Worksheet from 10/27/19 revealed that resident 6 had fall at 1:00 AM. Per this report, no witness to the fall. Post fall witness CNA's found pt. on floor with head resting on bed. The intervention listed was, assess, V/S, motor function. Need to find how resident fall so fast. m. The Event report Worksheet from 10/28/19 revealed that resident 6 had fall at 8:45 PM. Per this report, when light and alarm went off and the time we got there, pt. is already with body on the floor almost in sitting position. The intervention listed was, assess, notify DON, family and DR. Continue to identify how to prevent this from happening. The report revealed that Care Plan was updated. Records revealed Care Plan dated 5/24/19 with following focus:The resident is at HIGH risk for falls r/t (related to) severe weakness, recent acute illness. The goal listed was, The resident would be free of falls through the review date. The interventions listed were, The resident uses bed & chair electronic alarm. Ensure the device is in place as needed.; Pt. evaluate and treat as ordered or PRN (as needed).;Low bed to decrease risk of injury.; Be sure The resident's call light is within reach and encourage the resident to use it for assistance as needed. The resident needs prompt response to all requests for assistance.; Anticipate and meet the resident's needs. Record revealed Care Plan dated 10/29/19 with following focus:[Resident 6] frequently slides out of bed. Family, staff and MD are aware of this problem. The goal listed was, [Resident 6] will not sustain injury from sliding out of bed. The interventions listed were, If [Resident 6] slides out of low bed, help him of the floor, and write a progress note about the incident. No need to notify family/ MD or to complete the facility fall protocol.; Utilize low bed and leave it locked at lowest position when [Resident 6] is in bed. Records revealed that the facility created separate care plans for each resident 6's fall. The goal listed for all falls was, The resident will resume usual activities without further incident through the review date. The interventions listed for all falls were, Continue interventions on the at-risk plan.; For no apparent acute injury, determine and address causative factors of the fall.; Monitor/document/report PRN x 72h (hours) to MD for s/sx: Pain, bruises, change in mental status, New onset: confusion, sleepiness, inability to maintain posture, agitation. An interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) was conducted on 12/03/19 at 3:52 PM. She stated that resident 6 had few falls and they were all when he slid of the bed. The DON stated that they moved resident 6 closer to nursing station, lowered his bed to low position, implemented bed and chair alarm usage. The DON stated that resident 6 was stationed close to nursing station during the day so the staff kept an eye on him. The DON stated that resident 6 was confused and not able to explain how the falls occurred or to follow education/ directions provided. The DON stated that she did not have time to put all interventions on resident 6's care plan. Based on observation, interview, and record review it was determined, for 4 of 25 sample residents, that the facility did not ensure that the resident environment remained as free of accident hazards as was possible and each resident received adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents. Specifically, three residents had multiple falls with inadequate interventions in an attempt to decrease the number of falls. The findings for resident 47 were found to have occurred at a harm level. Resident identifiers: 3, 6, 8, and 47. Findings include: 1. Resident 47 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included weakness, disorientation, dementia, a history of falls, paranoid personality disorder, heart failure, and generalized anxiety disorder. Resident 47's medical record was reviewed on 12/3/19. An admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment indicated that resident 47 had a short term and long term memory problem, with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of 6. Incident reports were reviewed for resident 47 and revealed the following: a. On 1/9/19, resident 47 was standing in front of her sink. The staff member with her turned away, the resident fell on her buttocks - hurting her lower back. Interventions listed to prevent further incidents included bed tender (bed alarm) remains in place - pt (patient) checks started - standby assist - pt teaching. b. On 3/13/19, resident 47 was found on the floor crawling on her hands and feet. The report indicated that resident 47 had left her walker in her bedroom. The reports also indicated that Resident has dementia and is confused, needs verbal reminders and cueing. There were no interventions listed on the incident report to prevent further falls. c. On 4/18/19, staff found resident 47 on her butt in the south dining room. No interventions were listed to prevent further incidents. [Note: A replacement care plan was initiated in a new electronic medical records system on 5/22/19. This care plan included interventions to prevent falls such as anticipate and meet the resident's needs, make sure the call light is in reach, follow the facility protocol for falls, and ensure the bed alarm is in place.] d. On 6/12/19, resident 47 went to sit on couch after walking back from breakfast. She couldn't pick her feet up (shuffles while walking) and lost footing when she hit the sticky spill. Interventions listed to prevent further incidents included cleaning up the spill. The resident's care plan was updated to include continue interventions, monitor for 72 hours, and determine the cause of falls. e. On 7/13/19, resident 47 was found laying on lt (left) side in front of couch in south dining area. No interventions were listed to prevent further incidents. Resident 47's care plan was not updated to include additional interventions to prevent further incidents. f. On 7/17/19, resident 47 was found on the floor with back against the closet [and] walker near by . Resident stated she got herself off the toilet and went [down] onto her butt. Interventions listed to prevent further incidents included Do not leave resident unattended in BR (bathroom); supervision when ambulating. Resident 47's care plan was not updated to include additional interventions to prevent further incidents. g. On 8/29/19, resident 47 was found laying on the floor in front of her closet, her chair cushion along with her alarm was on the floor with her. Interventions listed to prevent further incidents included Resident in view of staff when not in bed. Resident 47's care plan was not updated to include additional interventions to prevent further incidents. h. On 10/17/19, staff was assisting resident in transferring from chair to standing position down in dining room. Staff then placed resident's walker in front of her with gaitbelt in place. Staff proceeded with transferring resident. Staff asked resident to stand still while she handed another resident her walker so she could leave dinning (sic) room as well. Resident standing stated ok in response to staff's instructions. Staff then removed hand from standing resident's gaitbelt while standing next to resident. Staff handed other resident her walker when staff heard resident say Oh! Was unable to stop resident from falling . Resident hit head L (left) hip L elbow forearm on wall. Interventions listed to prevent further incidents included training on ambulating one person at a time [with] gait belt [and] walker. Nurses notes for resident 47 on 10/17/19 indicated the following: CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant) reported at 0900 (9:00 AM), staff was assisting resident in transferring from chair to a standing position down in dining room resident. Staff then placed resident's walker in front of her with the gait belt in place staff proceeded with transferring the resident. Staff asked resident to stand still while she handed other resident her walker so she could leave the dining room as well. Resident standing stated ok in response to staff's instructions. Staff then removed hand from standing residents gait belt while standing right next to standing resident handed other resident walker when staff hear OH! from standing resident staff was unable to stop standing residents fall. Standing resident fell landing on left hip left arm hitting her head on dining room wall. Staff notified nurse. I was giving a resident her AM medications, I told them to leave her until I got down there to assess her. I went down as soon as I was done giving the medications to another resident. [Resident 47] was very anxious and in pain. V/S taken . Pain at a 10. I had her raise her arms and she did so, I had her grip my hands and she did. DON (Director of Nursing) got there and I asked resident to move her legs and she stated I can't they hurt. No bruising noted on the back of her head at this time. She does have a light bruise showing up on her left elbow. We assisted resident into a wheelchair. She would not bear any weight on her left leg. DON notified [name of physician]. all documents were sent with resident and staff to take to [name of local hospital] for medical evaluation and x-ray of Left hip d/t (due to) pain. A review of the emergency department notes from the hospital revealed that resident 47 sustained a left hip fracture, and the family declined surgical intervention. The resident returned to the facility the same day. On 12/3/19 at 2:30 PM, an interview was conducted with Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) 4. CNA 4 stated that on 10/17/19, she was assisting resident 47 out of the dining room, while holding on to a gait belt around resident 47's waist. CNA 4 stated that resident 47 was standing up, and was holding on to her walker. CNA 4 stated that just as we got to the corner of the table, another resident asked for help. CNA 4 stated that she spoke with the other resident while holding on to resident 47's gait belt. CNA 4 then changed her statement, saying that she actually let go of resident 47's gait belt, but did have one hand on resident 47's walker. CNA 4 stated that resident 47 dropped to the ground suddenly with no warning. CNA 4 stated that she later received training not to let go of a resident's gait belt. CNA 4 stated that despite resident 47's previous falls while ambulating with a walker, resident 47 was doing better on the walker that day. CNA 4 stated that resident 47 would use a wheelchair or a walker based on how cognitive she was and how well she stood on a particular day. On 12/4/19 at 8:09 AM, an interview was conducted with CNA 5. CNA 5 stated that she witnessed resident 47's fall on 10/17/19. CNA 5 stated that CNA 4 came to the dining room to assist resident 47 back to the resident's room. CNA 5 stated that CNA 4 was assisting resident 47 by holding on to the resident's gait belt as resident 47 ambulated with her walker. CNA 5 stated that CNA 4 let go of the gait belt and turned her back on the resident to assist another resident. CNA 5 stated that resident 47 lost her balance and tipped over to the left, hitting the wall and sliding down onto the floor. CNA 5 stated that resident 47 did not just fall all of a sudden. On 12/3/19 at 3:55 PM, an interview was conducted with the Director of Nursing (DON). The DON stated that after resident 47's fall on 10/17/19, staff had been inserviced on the proper use of gait belts.
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, it was determined that the facility did not develop and implement a comprehen...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review, it was determined that the facility did not develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident that included measurable objectives and timeframes to meet the resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs that were identified in the comprehensive assessment for 1 of 22 sample residents. Specifically, the Foley Catheter care plan was not developed as required. Resident identifier: 6. Findings include: Resident 6 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis which included Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (BPH) with lower urinary tract symptoms, acute kidney failure, and retention of urine. On 12/2/19 at 3:35 PM resident 6 was observed sitting in the wheelchair in the common area in his unit. It was observed that he had a Foley catheter hanging on the side of the wheelchair. The catheter was secured in the protective bag. On 12/3/19 at 1:30 PM resident 6's medical record was reviewed. The record revealed that on 5/20/19, a physician order was received to insert a Foley catheter to down drain using sterile technique one time a day every (Q) 14 days related to retention of urine. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, section H (pertained to bowel and bladder), from 5/20/19 revealed that resident 6 had a Foley catheter in place. On 5/22/19 the facility staff created a care plan regarding resident 6's Foley catheter. The facility staff documented, [Resident 6] has an indwelling catheter. The goal developed was, [Resident 6] will show no signs and symptoms (s/sx) of Urinary infection through review date. (OVERDUE), The resident will be/remain free from catheter-related trauma through review date. The interventions developed to achieve the goal was: [Resident 6] has indwelling catheter. Position catheter bag and tubing below the level of the bladder and away from entrance room door. On 12/3/19 at 3:44 PM, an interview was conducted with the Director of Nursing (DON). The DON stated that they switched computer systems in March of 2019. She stated that the assessments for all residents were done, but some of the care plans were not developed or completed. The DON stated that they provided catheter care to resident 6 every day. The DON stated that resident 6's catheter was changed Q 14 days and that the nurses checked the catheter for leaks and proper positioning every shift. The DON stated that resident 6 was monitored for s/sx of urinary infection and discomfort related to the Foley catheter every shift. The DON stated that the care plan regarding resident 6's Foley catheter could be more detailed.
CONCERN (E)

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** 3. Resident 3 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included dementia, opioid dependence, asthma, restless ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 3. Resident 3 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included dementia, opioid dependence, asthma, restless leg syndrome, depression, anxiety, cognitive impairment, orthopedic aftercare, diabetes mellitus, muscle weakness, history of falls, low back pain, cerebral atherosclerosis, chronic kidney disease, hypothyroidism, hypertension, Parkinson's disease and a history of traumatic fracture On 12/2/19 at 1:01 PM an interview was conducted with resident 3. Resident 3 stated that she had fallen a few times. On 12/3/19 the resident's medical record was reviewed. Event reports revealed that resident 3 had falls on the following dates: 2/21/19, 6/21/19, 7/1/19, 7/4/19, 8/2/19, 9/10/19, 9/20/19, 9/30/19, 10/5/19, 11/7/19. Records revealed: a. The Event Report Worksheet (ERW) from 2/21/19 revealed that [resident 3] was found sitting on the floor. Resident 3 stated that resident 3 tried to sit on a chair and ended up on the floor. The ERW revealed that resident 3 was assessed for injuries and vital signs were taken. No injuries were noted. No intervention was listed on the form. b.The ERW from 6/21/19 revealed that [resident 3] was found on the ground with the chair on the side of her tipped over. Resident 3 stated that she was trying to pick up a puzzle piece. The ERW revealed that resident 3 was assessed for injuries, assisted resident 3 up and vital signs were taken. No injuries were noted. No intervention was listed on the form. c. The ERW from 7/1/19 revealed that the nurse down to room to take [resident 3] her medication. Upon entering room [resident 3] was found sitting on the floor in front of her recliner. Resident 3 stated that she was trying to out something out of her dresser, when she lost her balance as she was turning. Resident 3 then grabbed hold of the foot board of her bed to help guide herself to the floor, where she landed on her butt. The ERW revealed that resident 3 was assessed for injuries. Range of motion performed and vital signs taken. Resident 3 had a skin tear 1 centimeter (cm) x 3.5 cm. Area cleansed with Normal saline, edges approximated well, skin prep to wound and sterri-strips applied. Foam dressing in place over sterri-strip. d. The ERW from 7/4/19 revealed that [resident 3] was found sitting on the floor. Resident 3 stated 'I tried to get up and my legs are swollen. I lost my balance and slide down front of recliner. The ERW revealed that a head to toe assessment was done and the [resident 3] was taken to the bathroom. No injuries were noted and Resident 3 was advised to call and accept more help even though she doesn't like to. No intervention was listed on the form. e.The ERW from 8/2/19 revealed that the nurse found resident 3 was found sitting on the bathroom floor next to the door. Resident 3 stated that she was finishing her shower; she slid down the wall to her bottom. Resident 3 was assessed for injuries and vital signs were done. Resident 3 had a skin tear on her left wrist. No intervention was listed on the form other than resident 3 was reminded to call every time and not do anything on her own. f. The ERW from 9/10/19 revealed that staff was helping resident 3's roommate when [resident 3] yelled for help. When staff went to resident 3's side of the room the found resident 3 sitting in the closet. Resident 3 stated I was getting my clothes in my closet and I lost my balance. I am shaky. Resident 3 was assessed for injuries and vital signs were taken. No injuries were noted. Staff checked her bed alarm which resident 3 had removed from her bed. No intervention was listed on the form. g. The ERW from 9/20/19 revealed that resident 3 was found on the floor in front of her chair. Resident 3 stated that she was trying to get up from her wheel chair and slide to close to the edge. Resident 3 was assessed for injuries, pain, range of motion, staff identified if there was a problem. Resident 3 had a skin tear about 2.5 cm by 1 cm. Staff asked resident 3 to call for help when resident 3 needed it. No intervention was listed on the form. h. The ERW from 9/30/19 revealed that resident 3 was found sitting on the floor between her wheel chair and the recliner in resident 3's room. Resident 3 stated she was transferring from the wheel chair to the recliner when the wheel chair rolled back. Resident 3 stated that she forgot to set the brakes. Resident 3 was assessed for injuries and vital signs were taken. No injuries were noted. Staff placed bed alarm back on chair. i. The ERW from 10/5/19 revealed that resident 3 was trying to set a paper on her table when she lost her balance and leaned against the wall after losing her balance. Resident 3 stated that she didn't fall but, slid to the floor. CNA was in the room because she heard the bed alarm but, didn't make it in time to stop resident 3 from sliding to the floor. Resident 3 was assessed for injuries, assisted to her wheel chair, and vital signs were taken. Resident 3 had a 1.5 cm x1.5 cm skin tear on her elbow the skin tear was cleaned with normal saline and sterri-strips and dressing applied. Reminded resident 3 to let staff help her with transfers and ambulation. Resident 3 stated she was standing working on the puzzle when she turned to sit down and missed the wheel chair. Resident 3 was assessed for injuries. No injuries were noted j. The ERW from 11/7/19 revealed that resident 3 was found crawling on the floor by the desk down the hall. Resident stated she stood up to fix her puzzle turned around to sit down and missed the wheel chair. Staff reminded resident to call for help when resident 3 needed it and to lock the wheel chair breaks Care plan stated the following for falls on 6/21/19, 7/1/19, 7/4/19, 9/10/19, 10/5/19, 6/11/19: Focus: The resident had has an actual call (date) with (Specify) poor balance, poor communications/comprehension, and unsteady gait. Goals: The resident will resume usual activities without further incident through the review date. (OVERDUE) Intervention/Tasks: Continue interventions on the at-risk plan. For no apparent acute injury, determine and address causative factors of the fall Monitor/document/report (As need) PRNx 72hours to MD for (Signs and symptoms) s/sx: Pain, bruises, change in mental status. New onset: Confusion, sleepiness, inability to maintain posture, agitation. There are no assigned tasks. The Care plan addressed the fall after resident 3 had fallen but, once the care plan had been developed it was never reviewed or revised to prevent future falls. The care plan has not been updated since 7/6/19. 4. Resident 8 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included dementia, altered mental status, acute kidney failure, thyrotoxicosis, hearing loss, hypertension, and history of falls. On 12/3/19 the resident's medical record was reviewed. Event reports revealed that resident 8 had falls on the following dates: 6/11/19, 8/9/19, 8/30/19. Record reveals: a. The Event Report Worksheet (ERW) from 6/11/19 revealed that resident 8 was found sitting on the floor by the doorway to the bathroom with her brief around her ankles. Resident stated that she slipped and fell. The ERW revealed that resident 8 was assesses for injuries, vital signs were taken, range of motion was assessed. Resident was helped to the bathroom and was given a shower. No injuries were noted and no interventions were listed. b. The ERW from 8/9/19 revealed that call light was going off when CNA went to answer the call light resident 8 CNA found resident 8 on the floor. Resident 8 stated that she missed the toilet. The ERW revealed that resident 8 was assisted to the toilet and then bed, vital signs taken. No injuries noted. Intervention was to remind her to use the call light. c. The ERW from 8/30/19 revealed that resident 8 had picked up a box of the floor and threw it which caused resident 8 to loss her balance and fall. Due to dementia resident was unable to explain the fall. The ERW revealed that resident 8 was assessed for injury, vitals were taken. No injuries and interventions were noted. d. The ERW from 11/21/19 revealed that resident 8 was picking eggs up off the floor and slipped. Resident 8 landed on her buttocks. Resident 8 stated that she was picking up eggs off the floor and that resident 8s wrist hurt. The ERW revealed that resident 8 was assisted up, vital signs were taken, and range of motion was checked. Resident 8 was placed on the couch to rest. No injury or interventions were noted. Care plan initiated on 6/5/19 and revised on 7/28/19 stated the following: Focus: The resident 8 has limited physical mobility, history of falls and forgets her walker. Goals: The resident will maintain current level of mobility, able to walk with four wheel walker and supervision. Interventions: Ambulation: The resident 8 is able to walk with four wheel walker but requires supervision and reminders to use her walker. Resident 8 has had three falls sense the care plan was updated. On 12/3/19 at 2:47 PM CNAs 1, CNA 2, and CNA 3 during a simultanous interview stated that bed and wheel chair alarms were placed on resident 3's wheel chair and bed when resident 3 fell the first time. On 12/3/19 at 3:22 PM Registered nurse (RN) 1 during an interview stated that nurses are supposed to update the care plan after each fall. On 12/3/19 at 3:25 PM, the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) during an interview stated that after a resident has a fall the nurse on shift should update the care plan. A review of the care plans showed that the falls were documented but no interventions were added to prevent future falls. 2. Resident 6 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (BPH) with lower urinary tract symptoms, acute kidney failure, retention of urine, dementia with behavioral disturbance, weakness, repeated falls and anxiety disorder. On 12/2/19 at 3:35 PM resident 6 was observed sitting in the wheelchair in the common area in his unit. On 12/3/19 at 1:30 PM resident 6's medical record was reviewed. Record revealed that resident 6 had falls on following dates: 6/8/19, 6/9/19, 7/30/19, 7/31/19, 8/7/19, 9/6/19, 10/1/19, 10/3/19, 10/8/19, 10/16/19, 10/21/19, 10/27/19 and 10/28/19. Records revealed following: a. The Incident Report from 6/8/19 revealed that, Bed alarm went off. CNA's (Certified Nursing Assistant) down to room, upon entering found resident sitting on the floor leaning against his bed. Resident unable to give description. This incident report revealed that resident did not sustain an injury. He was assessed and his vital signs (VS) were taken. There was no intervention listed on the form. b. The Incident Report from 6/9/19 revealed that, Call light sounding and staff ran (sic) to room and [Resident 6] was 1/2 lying and 1/2 sitting on the floor. Resident unable to give description. This incident report revealed that resident did not sustain injury. Resident 6's VS were taken, head to toe assessment completed and he was put back in bed. There was no intervention listed on the form. c. The Event Report Worksheet from 7/30/19 revealed that resident 6 had fall at 6:30 AM. Per this report, aide walked by room and found him [Resident 6] on floor. Bed-alarm on and working, but his arm [Resident 6's] was on it so did not go off.; [Resident 6] unable to explain, was assessed and assisted up. The intervention listed on the report was,Unable to prevent him sliding out of bed at his will. The report revealed that Care Plan was updated and Red star was placed on residents door. d. The Event Report Worksheet from 7/31/19 revealed that resident 6 had fall at 6:00 AM. Per this report, heard bell go off, found him [Resident 6] on floor next to his bed same as yesterday.; [Resident 6] unable to explain, was assessed, help up into bed, V/S. The intervention listed was, ?Fall cushion pad next to bed?. The report revealed that Care plan was updated and Red star was placed on residents door. e. The Event Report Worksheet from 8/7/19 revealed that resident 6 had fall at 6:30 AM. Per this report, pt found on floor at side of bed.; Dementia-pt unable to verbalize occurrence. The intervention listed was, staff assisted pt up and ambulate to BR (bedroom). Assessed for injury. VS taken. PT up and ambulated to south dining area for observation. f. The Event Report Worksheet from 9/6/19 revealed that resident 6 had fall at 8:15 AM. Per this report,[Resident 6] was sitting on his butt and back against bed when I got there. While waiting for help resident rolled onto left side.; [Resident 6] confused. The intervention listed was,assessed for injuries, ROM (range of motions) and gait, assisted back on bed, V/S taken, resident showered, notified all parties. The report revealed that Care Plan was updated and Red star placed on residents door. g. The Event Report Worksheet from 10/1/19 revealed that resident 6 had fall at 7:15 AM. Per this report, Bed alarm went off, found him {Resident 6] wrapped in his blankets sliding to floor-assisted him to floor. No injuries. The intervention listed was, assisted up onto bed, toileted.; Unable to prevent, keep monitoring. The report revealed that Red star was placed on residents door. h. The Event Report Worksheet from 10/3/19 revealed that resident 6 had fall at 4:00 PM. Per this report, [Resident 6] was found just inside staff breakroom on the floor. Per this report, [Resident 6] sustained 1 centimeter (cm) lac (laceration) on r(right) back of head. The intervention listed was, assess for injury, obtain vitals. Ensure that he has a chair alarm at all times. The report revealed that Care Plan was updated and Red star was placed on residents door. i. The Event Report Worksheet from 10/8/19 revealed that resident 6 had fall at 8:00 AM. Per this report, [Resident 6] was found on the floor of his room next to his bed kneeling. The intervention listed was, assess for injury, obtain vitals. Frequent monitoring in the morning. The report revealed that Red star was placed on residents door. j. The Event Report Worksheet from 1016/19 revealed that resident 6 had fall at 9:20 PM. Per this report, Alarm sounding, [Resident 6] sitting on floor (upright) next to bed with right hand on side rail. Resident 6's description of the incident was was, I was waiting for you, I guess. The intervention listed was, Skin assessment, VS, given fluids, tucked back into bed with warm blanket. The report revealed that Red star was placed on residents door. k. The Event Report Worksheet from 10/21/19 revealed that resident 6 had fall at 3:50 AM. Per this report, [Resident 6] was on the side of bed with arms and torso mostly on left side, legs on floor also on left side. There was no interventions listed. l. The Event Report Worksheet from 10/27/19 revealed that resident 6 had fall at 1:00 AM. Per this report, no witness to the fall. Post fall witness CNA's found pt. on floor with head resting on bed. The intervention listed was, assess, V/S, motor function. Need to find how resident fall so fast. m. The Event report Worksheet from 10/28/19 revealed that resident 6 had fall at 8:45 PM. Per this report, when light and alarm went off and the time we got there, pt. is already with body on the floor almost in sitting position. The intervention listed was, assess, notify DON, family and DR. Continue to identify how to prevent this from happening. The report revealed that Care Plan was updated. Records revealed Care Plan dated 5/24/19 with following focus:The resident is at HIGH risk for falls r/t (related to) severe weakness, recent acute illness. The goal listed was, The resident would be free of falls through the review date. The interventions listed were, The resident uses bed & chair electronic alarm. Ensure the device is in place as needed.; Pt. evaluate and treat as ordered or PRN (as needed).;Low bed to decrease risk of injury.; Be sure The resident's call light is within reach and encourage the resident to use it for assistance as needed. The resident needs prompt response to all requests for assistance.; Anticipate and meet the resident's needs. Record revealed Care Plan dated 10/29/19 with following focus:[Resident 6] frequently slides out of bed. Family, staff and MD are aware of this problem. The goal listed was, [Resident 6] will not sustain injury from sliding out of bed. The interventions listed were, If [Resident 6] slides out of low bed, help him of the floor, and write a progress note about the incident. No need to notify family/ MD or to complete the facility fall protocol.; Utilize low bed and leave it locked at lowest position when [Resident 6] is in bed. Records revealed that the facility created separate care plans for each resident 6's fall. The goal listed for all falls was, The resident will resume usual activities without further incident through the review date. The interventions listed for all falls were, Continue interventions on the at-risk plan.; For no apparent acute injury, determine and address causative factors of the fall.; Monitor/document/report PRN x 72h (hours) to MD for s/sx: Pain, bruises, change in mental status, New onset: confusion, sleepiness, inability to maintain posture, agitation. An interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) was conducted on 12/03/19 at 3:52 PM. She stated that resident 6 had few falls and they were all when he slid of the bed. The DON stated that they moved resident 6 closer to nursing station, lowered his bed to low position, implemented bed and chair alarm usage. The DON stated that resident 6 was stationed close to nursing station during the day so the staff kept an eye on him. The DON stated that resident 6 was confused and not able to explain how the falls occurred or to follow education/ directions provided. The DON stated that she did not have time to put all interventions on resident 6's care plan. Based on interview and record review, the facility did not review and revise the comprehensive care plans after 4 of 25 sample residents experienced multiple falls. Resident identifiers: 3, 6, 8, and 47. Findings include: 1. Resident 47 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included weakness, disorientation, dementia, a history of falls, paranoid personality disorder, heart failure, and generalized anxiety disorder. Resident 47's medical record was reviewed on 12/3/19. An admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment indicated that resident 47 had a short term and long term memory problem, with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of 6. Incident reports were reviewed for resident 47 and revealed the following: a. On 1/9/19, resident 47 was standing in front of her sink. The staff member with her turned away, the resident fell on her buttocks - hurting her lower back. Interventions listed to prevent further incidents included bed tender (bed alarm) remains in place - pt (patient) checks started - standby assist - pt teaching. b. On 3/13/19, resident 47 was found on the floor crawling on her hands and feet. The report indicated that resident 47 had left her walker in her bedroom. The reports also indicated that Resident has dementia and is confused, needs verbal reminders and cueing. There were no interventions listed on the incident report to prevent further falls. c. On 4/18/19, staff found resident 47 on her butt in the south dining room. No interventions were listed to prevent further incidents. [Note: A replacement care plan was initiated in a new electronic medical records system on 5/22/19. This care plan included interventions to prevent falls such as anticipate and meet the resident's needs, make sure the call light is in reach, follow the facility protocol for falls, and ensure the bed alarm is in place.] d. On 6/12/19, resident 47 went to sit on couch after walking back from breakfast. She couldn't pick her feet up (shuffles while walking) and lost footing when she hit the sticky spill. Interventions listed to prevent further incidents included cleaning up the spill. The resident's care plan was updated to include continue interventions, monitor for 72 hours, and determine the cause of falls. e. On 7/13/19, resident 47 was found laying on lt (left) side in front of couch in south dining area. No interventions were listed to prevent further incidents. Resident 47's care plan was not updated to include additional interventions to prevent further incidents. f. On 7/17/19, resident 47 was found on the floor with back against the closet [and] walker near by . Resident stated she got herself off the toilet and went [down] onto her butt. Interventions listed to prevent further incidents included Do not leave resident unattended in BR (bathroom); supervision when ambulating. Resident 47's care plan was not updated to include additional interventions to prevent further incidents. g. On 8/29/19, resident 47 was found laying on the floor in front of her closet, her chair cushion along with her alarm was on the floor with her. Interventions listed to prevent further incidents included Resident in view of staff when not in bed. Resident 47's care plan was not updated to include additional interventions to prevent further incidents.
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0761 (Tag F0761)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation and interview it was determined that the facility did not ensure safe and secure storage of drugs and biolo...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation and interview it was determined that the facility did not ensure safe and secure storage of drugs and biologicals in accordance with accepted professional principles; or include the appropriate accessory and cautionary instructions, and the expiration date on the medication. Specifically, medications were found in the medication administration carts that had been expired and were available for use by the facility nursing staff. Resident identifiers: 19, 23, 24, 26, 30 and 43. Findings include: 1. On [DATE] at 10:10 AM, medication administration carts for halls 100, 200 and 300 were inspected. The following was identified: a. Resident 19's medication card with 14 capsules of Docusate Sodium 100 mg (milligrams) expired on 5/19. The label on the front of the medication card noted Discard after [DATE]. b. Resident 19's medication card with 7 tablets of Bisadocyl EC (Enteric Coated) 5 mg expired on [DATE]. The label on the front of the medication card noted Discard after [DATE]. An interview with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) 1 was conducted on [DATE] at 10:53 AM. LPN 1 stated that she was not sure why the medication card with resident 19's Docusate Sodium was still in the medication administration cart because resident 19 had not been receiving this medication for a while. LPN 1 stated that resident 19 had Bysadocyl 5 mg prescribed instead. LPN 1 stated that they usually checked the expiration date on the back of the card. LPN 1 stated if there was no expiration date on the back, then the nurses followed the date on the label on the front. LPN 1 stated that checking medications for expiration dates was the nurses responsibility first and then the Director of Nursing (DON) and the pharmacist. On [DATE] at 11:00 AM, the medication administration carts for halls 400, 500 and 600 were inspected. The following was identified: a. Resident 43's medication card with 47 tablets of Docusate Sodium 100 mg expired on 8/19. The label on the front of medication card noted Discard after [DATE]. b. Resident 43's medication card with 4 pills of Senexon did not have expiration date on the back. The label on the front of medication card noted Discard after [DATE]. c. Resident 24's medication card with 28 tablets of Loperamide 2 mg expired on 9/19. The label on the front of medication card noted Discard after [DATE]. d. Resident 30's medication card with 30 tablets of Loperamide 2 mg expired on 4/18. The label on the front of medication card noted Discard after [DATE]. f. Resident 26's medication card with 6 capsules of Amoxicillin 500 mg expired on [DATE]. The label on the front of medication card noted Discard after [DATE]. g. Resident 23's medication card with 92 tablets of Senexon did not have expiration date on the back. The label on the front of medication card noted Discard after [DATE]. An interview with Registered Nurse (RN) 1 was conducted on [DATE] at 11:21 AM. RN 1 stated that she did not know that some of residents' medications in her carts had expired. RN 1 stated that nurses usually followed the date on the back of the card. RN 1 stated that if there was no date on the back, then they followed the date on the front label placed by the pharmacy. RN 1 stated that medications in the medication administration cart were checked by the pharmacy, the DON and the nurses. An interview with the DON was conducted on [DATE] at 11:27 AM. The DON stated that it was possible that all medications were fine, but that the pharmacy placed wrong labels or dated the cards wrong. The DON stated that her expectation from the pharmacy and her staff members was to ensure all medications in the medication administration carts and medication storage cabinets were up to date and not expired. The DON stated that she checked medication administration carts from time to time. The DON stated that the valid date was written on the back of the medication card by the pharmacy and her staff members checked that date before they checked the label on front. The DON stated that besides her staff members education, she would need to call the pharmacy and discuss this issue with them as well.
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

  • "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
  • • 31 deficiencies on record, including 2 serious (caused harm) violations. Ask about corrective actions taken.
  • • $19,656 in fines. Above average for Utah. Some compliance problems on record.
  • • Grade F (38/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
  • • 86% turnover. Very high, 38 points above average. Constant new faces learning your loved one's needs.
Bottom line: Trust Score of 38/100 indicates significant concerns. Thoroughly evaluate alternatives.

About This Facility

What is Millard County Care And Rehabilitation's CMS Rating?

CMS assigns Millard County Care and Rehabilitation an overall rating of 3 out of 5 stars, which is considered average nationally. Within Utah, this rating places the facility higher than 0% of the state's 100 nursing homes. This mid-range rating indicates the facility meets federal standards but may have areas for improvement.

How is Millard County Care And Rehabilitation Staffed?

CMS rates Millard County Care and Rehabilitation's staffing level at 3 out of 5 stars, which is average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 86%, which is 40 percentage points above the Utah average of 46%. High turnover can affect care consistency as new staff learn residents' individual needs. RN turnover specifically is 90%, which is notably high. RNs provide skilled clinical oversight, so turnover in this role can affect medical care quality.

What Have Inspectors Found at Millard County Care And Rehabilitation?

State health inspectors documented 31 deficiencies at Millard County Care and Rehabilitation during 2019 to 2024. These included: 2 that caused actual resident harm and 29 with potential for harm. Deficiencies causing actual harm indicate documented cases where residents experienced negative health consequences.

Who Owns and Operates Millard County Care And Rehabilitation?

Millard County Care and Rehabilitation is owned by a government entity. Government-operated facilities are typically run by state, county, or municipal agencies. The facility operates independently rather than as part of a larger chain. With 60 certified beds and approximately 51 residents (about 85% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in Delta, Utah.

How Does Millard County Care And Rehabilitation Compare to Other Utah Nursing Homes?

Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Utah, Millard County Care and Rehabilitation's overall rating (3 stars) is below the state average of 3.3, staff turnover (86%) 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 Millard County Care And Rehabilitation?

Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "How do you ensure continuity of care given staff turnover, and what is your staff retention strategy?" "Can I visit during a mealtime to observe dining assistance and food quality?" "How do you handle medical emergencies, and what is your hospital transfer rate?" "Can I speak with family members of current residents about their experience?" These questions are particularly relevant given the facility's high staff turnover rate.

Is Millard County Care And Rehabilitation Safe?

Based on CMS inspection data, Millard County Care and Rehabilitation has a clean safety record: no substantiated abuse findings (meaning no confirmed cases of resident harm), no Immediate Jeopardy citations (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death), and is not on the Special Focus Facility watch list (a federal program monitoring the lowest-performing 1% of nursing homes). The facility has a 3-star overall rating and ranks #100 of 100 nursing homes in Utah. While no facility is perfect, families should still ask about staff-to-resident ratios and recent inspection results during their visit.

Do Nurses at Millard County Care And Rehabilitation Stick Around?

Staff turnover at Millard County Care and Rehabilitation is high. At 86%, the facility is 40 percentage points above the Utah average of 46%. Registered Nurse turnover is particularly concerning at 90%. 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 Millard County Care And Rehabilitation Ever Fined?

Millard County Care and Rehabilitation has been fined $19,656 across 1 penalty action. This is below the Utah average of $33,275. 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 Millard County Care And Rehabilitation on Any Federal Watch List?

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