Meadow Peak Rehabilitation

6084 South Summit Vista Boulevard, Taylorsville, UT 84129 (385) 255-1105
For profit - Limited Liability company 75 Beds MONUMENT HEALTH GROUP Data: November 2025
Trust Grade
65/100
#33 of 97 in UT
Last Inspection: May 2024

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

Overview

Meadow Peak Rehabilitation in Taylorsville, Utah has a Trust Grade of C+, indicating it is slightly above average but not exceptional. It ranks #33 out of 97 facilities in Utah, placing it in the top half, and #13 out of 35 in Salt Lake County, meaning there are only a few local options that perform better. The facility is improving, with issues decreasing from four in 2024 to just one in 2025. Staffing is a strong point, rated 4 out of 5 stars with a 44% turnover rate, which is better than the state average, suggesting a stable workforce that knows the residents well. However, there have been serious incidents, including a resident left unattended in the shower who suffered a pelvic fracture and head injuries, highlighting significant concerns about supervision and safety. While the absence of fines and a decent RN coverage level are positives, families should weigh these strengths against the serious safety incidents reported.

Trust Score
C+
65/100
In Utah
#33/97
Top 34%
Safety Record
Moderate
Needs review
Inspections
Getting Better
4 → 1 violations
Staff Stability
○ Average
44% turnover. Near Utah's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
Penalties
✓ Good
No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Utah facilities.
Skilled Nurses
✓ Good
Each resident gets 71 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than 97% of Utah nursing homes. RNs are the most trained staff who catch health problems before they become serious.
Violations
⚠ Watch
13 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
★★★★☆
4.0
Overall Rating
★★★★☆
4.0
Staff Levels
★★★★★
5.0
Care Quality
★★★☆☆
3.0
Inspection Score
Stable
2024: 4 issues
2025: 1 issues

The Good

  • 4-Star Staffing Rating · Above-average nurse staffing levels
  • 5-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
  • Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
  • No fines on record
  • Staff turnover below average (44%)

    4 points below Utah average of 48%

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

The Bad

Staff Turnover: 44%

Near Utah avg (46%)

Typical for the industry

Chain: MONUMENT HEALTH GROUP

Part of a multi-facility chain

Ask about local staffing decisions and management

The Ugly 13 deficiencies on record

2 actual harm
Jul 2025 1 deficiency
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Deficiency F0676 (Tag F0676)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

An abbreviated complaint survey was conducted on July 9, 2025. Based on interview, observation, and record review, it was determined that for 1 of 5 sampled residents, that the facility failed to prov...

Read full inspector narrative →
An abbreviated complaint survey was conducted on July 9, 2025. Based on interview, observation, and record review, it was determined that for 1 of 5 sampled residents, that the facility failed to provide the services consistent with the resident's needs and choices. Specifically, a resident was not offered a shower for 15 days. Resident identifier: 1. An abbreviated complaint survey was conducted on July 9, 2025. Based on interview, observation, and record review, it was determined that for 1 of 5 sampled residents, that the facility failed to provide the services consistent with the resident's needs and choices. Specifically, a resident was not offered a shower for 15 days. Resident identifier: 1. Findings IncludeThe surveyor reviewed Resident 1's medical records, and the following entries were observed: Resident 1's care plan, initiated May 30, 2025, indicated that Resident 1 had an Activities of Daily Living self-care performance deficit related to her diagnoses. The intervention listed that Resident 1 was able to bathe with a one-person staff assist. Resident 1's Minimum Data Set assessment, dated June 11, 2025, indicated that Resident 1 required substantial/maximal assistance for showering or bathing. Resident 1's shower log revealed that Resident 1 was given a shower on June 13, 2025. It should be noted that this was the first shower given to Resident 1 in 15 days. On July 15, 2025, the survey interviewed the Director of Nursing (DON). The DON stated that all residents are offered showers twice a week. The DON stated that residents can refuse showers or request more showers, and the facility staff would accommodate the residents' needs. The DON stated that staff were instructed to document shower refusals. The DON stated that Resident 1 had refused showers and staff failed to document the refusals. The DON stated that Resident 1 had been given showers that were not documented.
May 2024 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** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that the resident environment remained as free...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that the resident environment remained as free of accident hazards as was possible and each resident received adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents. Specifically, for 1 out of 25 sampled residents, a resident that was dependent on cares was left unattended in the shower, sustained a head laceration that required eight staples and six stitches, and the resident sustained a pelvic fracture. Resident identifier: 118. Findings included: Resident 118 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included, but were not limited to, Alzheimer's disease, fracture of pubis, subluxation of right shoulder joint, localized edema, dysphagia, history of falling, moderate protein-calorie malnutrition, and essential hypertension. Resident 118's medical record was reviewed on 5/20/24. A state optional Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], documented that resident 118 required extensive assistance of two plus persons for bed mobility, transfers, and toilet use. A quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE], documented that resident 118 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 6. A BIMS score of 0 to 7 would indicate severe cognitive impairment. On 1/29/24 at 10:08 AM, a Skilled Nursing Note documented Resident is A&Ox2 [alert and oriented to person and place] and speaks Cantonese only. Staff to anticipate her needs. Resident had no negative behaviors observed or reported this morning. Resident took her morning medications with applesauce with no difficulty swallowing. Resident is an extensive assist x [by] 2 person for ADL's [activities of daily living], bed mobility, and transfers. Resident users her wheelchair for mobility with extensive assist x 1 person. Resident is very limited with ROM [range of motion] r/t [related to] disease process. Resident is turned and repositioned q2h [every two hours] and prn [as needed] to prevent skin breakdown. Call light within reach. On 3/2/24 at 6:45 AM, a Nursing Progress Note documented Note Text: FALL EVENT: CNA [Certified Nursing Assistant] reported to RN [Registered Nurse] that resident has fallen on the floor while attempting her morning shower. RN approached and noted blood on residents face. CNA was applying pressure on the right side of her head to stop the active bleeding. RN observed her head and noted a laceration on the right side of her forehead. Resident was unresponsive to stimuli for a minute. She came back and became agitated and calling out words in her primary language. Vitals [vital signs] immediately taken BP [blood pressure] 169/83 HR [heart rate] 86 O2 [oxygen] 90% @RA [at room air], temp [temperature] 97.4F [Fahrenheit] by CNA and nursing student. RN meanwhile called provider to report and called 911. Report was given 911 representative. Patient family or daughter was notified over the phone. First responders arrived, report given with patient info and they told RN that she will be taken to the nearest hospital which is [name of hospital redacted]. On 3/2/24, an Emergency Department (ED) physician note documented . Alzheimer's dementia who presents to the emergency department from her care facility with concern of fall resulting in head trauma with a laceration. Unclear how the patient fell, as reported she fell while showering but patient is nonambulatory and has chronic contractures of her arms and legs. She was offered admission but family has decided they would like to put her back on hospice and send her back to her care facility. They do not want any further interventions and understands she could get worsening [sic] even die from these injuries and her electrolyte abnormalities, . ASSESSMENT AND PLAN: #Pelvic fractures . Nonoperative, Weight-bear as tolerated though nonambulatory at baseline, Unable to provide benefit with PT [physical therapy] #Age Indeterminate nondisplaced rib fractures . #Chronic right shoulder subluxation . #Forehead laceration Laceration was stapled by the ED attending . On 3/3/24 at 4:46 PM, a Nursing Progress Note documented Late Entry: Note Text: Late entry for 3/3/24: [name of hospice company redacted] nurse informed this nurse that resident had a fractured pelvis. Stated that is what was on the hospital discharge papers. Nurse assessed and no s/s [signs or symptoms] of pain while turning was observed. Resident has head laceration to the left side of her head. Resident has 8 staples and 6 stitches to head laceration. Wound shows no s/s of infection. Resident was more lethargic than her baseline. Resident would respond to verbal stimulation but would go right back to sleep. Resident requires O2 to maintain sats [saturations] > [greater than] 90%. O2 running at 2 L/min [liters per minute]. Resident lungs auscultated upper and lower lobes bilaterally with decreased sounds in the bases and crackles heard in the upper lobes with expiratory wheezing. Resident is sat up in bed to 30 degrees or more to help with her breathing. Resident is resting at this time with no s/s of distress. Staff to continue to monitor resident status throughout this shift. On 3/4/24 at 5:01 PM, a Nursing Progress Note documented Note Text: Resident had a recent fall with injuries. Resident has a head laceration to the left side of her head with 8 staples and 6 stitches. Wound shows no s/s of infection. Wound was cleansed with NS [normal saline] and pat dried with gauze. This nurse spoke with [name redacted], [name of hospice company redacted], and he verified that resident does have a pelvic fracture and fractures to her 4th and 5th rib on the left side. Resident shows no grimacing or guarding during cares. Today, resident asked, through translation through her daughter, [name redacted], that she wanted to use the restroom. Staff got resident up into her wheelchair and was able to use the restroom. Resident had a medium BM [bowel movement]. V/S [vital signs] taken BP: 122/58 P [pulse]: 76 R [respirations]: 16 T [temperature]: 97.7 O2: 87% on 2 L [liters] O2 via NC [nasal cannula]. O2 was titrated up to 3 L O2. While resident was on the toilet, resident had clear, yellowish emesis. Staff got resident into bed and raised the HOB [head of bed] to >30 degrees. Resident did eventually stopped vomiting. New order received from [name of hospice company redacted] on 3/4/24: 1. Albuterol 0.63 mg [milligrams]/3 ml [milliliters] 1 vial nebulize vial q4h [every four hours] PRN for SOB [shortness of breath]; 2. suction machine use yaunker suction PRN for secretions; 3. Keep HOB up 30 degrees at all times, do not lay flat; 4. 2 person assist for any moving/transferring of patient; 5. Please premedicate before any moves or brief changes. A care plan Focus dated 3/5/24, documented [Resident 118] is risk for falls r/t hx [history] of frequent falls. The interventions initiated on 3/5/24, included: a. Anticipate and meet resident 118's needs. Encourage to wait for assistance. b. Be sure bed was in low position and locked in place. c. Be sure resident 118's call light was within reach and encourage the resident to use it for assistance as needed. Resident 118 needs prompt response to all requests for assistance. d. Educate the resident, family, and caregivers about safety reminders and what to do if a fall occurs. e. Encourage to wear well-fitting, non-skid footwear when transferring and ambulating. f. Ensure adequate lighting in room. Check night lights and call lights at bedside, bathrooms and shower rooms, ensure call light was within reach. On 3/5/24 at 7:49 AM, a Nursing Progress Note documented Note Text: Resident had a recent [fall] with injuries. Resident has a laceration to the right side of her head with 8 staples and 6 stitches. Wound shows no s/s of infection. Resident also sustained fractured pelvis and the 4th and 5th ribs on her left side. Nurse educated staff on careful turning and repositioning during cares. Resident is premedicated before all cares for Pain. Resident had no s/s of pain with no facial grimacing or guarding during cares. V/S taken this morning BP: 105/56 P: 67 R: 16 T: 97.6 O2: 90% on 3L O2 via NC. Resident has expiratory wheezes and crackles. Nurse suctioned her this morning per MD [Medical Director] order. Lungs auscultated upper and lower lobes bilaterally with decreased sounds in the bases and crackles heard in the upper lobes. Resident is sat up to 30 degrees or more per MD order. Nurse observed right sided weakness. She is having a hard time getting her right arm up to her walker when she's using the restroom to help balance herself. Staff to stay with her while she's on the toilet. Resident is alert to self and is unable to appropriately communicate her needs r/t language barrier. Staff to anticipate needs and use her picture board to help convey her needs. Resident is more lethargic and did not wake during V/S this morning. Resident is turned and repositioned q2h and PRN to prevent skin breakdown. Staff to continue to monitor resident throughout this shift to ensure comfort and safety. Push pad call light is within reach. On 3/5/24 at 4:57 PM, a Nursing Progress Note documented Note Text : CNA informed nurse that resident wasn't responding to verbal or physical stimuli. Nurse went in and found resident not breathing and pale. Nurse auscultated heart for five minutes and heard no sounds. Time of death 1625 [4:25 PM] on 3/5/24. Family was present while nurse was listening to her heart. [Name redacted] from [name of hospice company redacted] was notified. On 5/21/24 at 12:15 PM, an interview was conducted with CNA 2. CNA 2 stated on the day in question it was resident 118's shower day. CNA 2 stated he put resident 118 in the shower chair and pushed resident 118 into the shower room. CNA 2 stated the shower room was in the resident's bathroom. CNA 2 stated the towels and gloves were in the chair in resident 118's room. CNA 2 state he grabbed the towels and gloves that were in the chair and when he came back to the shower room resident 118 was on the floor. CNA 2 stated there should have been two people for the transfer of resident 118 to the shower Chair. CNA 2 stated when he put resident 118 in bed he could do that by himself even though resident 118 was heavy. CNA 2 stated that CNA 3 had helped him transfer resident 118 to the shower chair and then CNA 3 left to go back to her section. CNA 3 stated that resident 118 only needed one person for the shower. On 5/21/24 at 2:51 PM, an interview was conducted with CNA 3. CNA 3 stated that she had helped CNA 2 transfer resident 118 from the bed to the chair but she did not help CNA 2 transfer resident 118 to the shower chair the night of the incident. CNA 3 stated that CNA 2 was tall and a big guy and he probably transferred resident 118 himself. CNA 3 stated that she had heard resident 118 scream but resident 118 was already on the floor when she had arrived at resident 118's room. CNA 3 stated that resident 118 was not able to sit in a chair by herself and that resident 118 would lean over. CNA 3 stated that the shower chair was a bench with holes and it did not have sides. CNA 3 stated resident 118 was a two person assist for transfers, resident 118 could not walk, and resident 118 was total dependent with cares. CNA 3 stated that resident 118 was a one person assist for showers. On 5/21/24 at 3:01 PM, an interview was conducted with the PT Director. The PT Director stated that resident 118 was never able to ambulate while resident 118 was a resident at the facility. The PT Director stated that resident 118's right ankle had limited ROM and the left ankle was more so limited. The PT Director stated that resident 118's right hand had limited ROM. The PT Director stated that resident 118 was able to sit in a chair unassisted. The PT Director stated if the shower chair had a back rest he would think that resident 118 would have been able to sit up. The PT Director stated that resident 118 would sit in the bedside chair for extended periods. On 5/21/24 at 3:13 PM, an interview was conducted with Medication Technician (MT) 3. MT 3 stated she was not working the night that resident 118 fell. MT 3 stated the day that resident 118 was getting her shower the staff were not using the shower chair that should have been used. An observation was conducted with MT 3 of a similar shower chair that was used when resident 118 fell. The shower chair was observed to be a bench with holes and the bench had a back rest attached. An observation was conducted with MT 3 of a similar shower chair that resident 118 should of been using. The shower chair was observed to look like a bedside commode with arm rest but according to MT 3 the one resident 118 used was smaller. MT 3 stated that resident 118 did not lean when sitting in a chair and was more ridged. MT 3 stated that resident 118 was dependent on all cares. MT 3 stated that resident 118 was not able to hold onto the arm rests of the shower chair and the arm rests were more for security. MT 3 stated that resident 118 had limited ROM in her hands but would hold onto a walker from a sitting position in the wheelchair. MT 3 stated resident 118 would not be able to grasp the walker to get up and walk. On 5/21/24 at 3:30 PM, an interview was conducted with RN 2. RN 2 stated it was early morning and she had just started her shift. RN 2 stated that she liked to do rounds to look in on the residents to see how they were doing and resident 118 was sleeping. RN 2 stated the CNA went to shower resident 118 and it happened so fast. RN 2 stated that resident 118 was bleeding from the head and she had applied pressure to the area. RN 2 stated that resident 118 usually required one person for showers. RN 2 stated that resident 118 was very low maintenance. RN 2 stated that resident 118 spoke Cantonese and the family was very involved. RN 2 stated that during the day resident 118 would sit in her chair and would have a walker in front of her. RN 2 stated that having the walker in front of resident 118 was a mental thing and resident 118 had her bags on the walker. RN 2 stated that resident 118 could not pull herself up or walk. RN 2 stated it was an unfortunate event. On 5/22/24 at 12:49 PM, an interview was conducted with the Director of Nursing (DON). The DON stated they had continued education with the staff regarding gathering supplies before going into the shower and using the call light to ask for assistance. The DON stated that she would have not thought that resident 118 could not be left alone. The DON stated that resident 118 would sit on the edge of the bed. The DON stated that resident 118 did not have to have the walker to sit on the edge of the bed.
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, the facility did not ensure each resident's drug regime was free from unnecessary drugs. S...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility did not ensure each resident's drug regime was free from unnecessary drugs. Specifically, for 1 out of 25 sampled residents, staff were not monitoring a resident's blood pressure as instructed in a physician's order. Resident identifier: 33. Findings Included: Resident 33 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included end state heart failure, depression, hypertensive heart and chronic kidney disease, encounter for palliative care, chronic combined systolic and diastolic heart failure, anxiety disorder, paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chronic kidney disease, hyperlipidemia, essential hypertension, and gastro-esophageal reflux disease. Resident 33's medical record was reviewed on 5/23/24. Resident 33 had a physician's order that stated, amLODIPine Besylate Oral Tablet 10 MG [milligrams] (Amlodipine Besylate). The order stated, Give 10 mg by mouth one time a day related to ESSENTIAL (PRIMARY) HYPERTENSION. The order instructed to Hold if SBP [systolic blood pressure] < [less than] 110 or DBP [diastolic blood pressure] <60. Call physician if SBP > [greater than] 180. The Start Date was 12/2/23 at 8:00 AM. Resident 33's Medication Administration Record (MAR) was reviewed. a. The March 2024 MAR documented that resident 33 received Amlodipine from 3/1/24 to 3/12/24, and 3/14/24 to 3/31/24. Resident 33 did not receive Amlodipine on 3/13/24, due to the resident not being at the facility that day. b. The April 2024 MAR documented that resident 33 received Amlodipine from 4/1/24 to 4/29/24, and Amlodipine was refused by resident 33 on 4/30/24. c. The May 2024 MAR documented that resident 33 received Amlodipine each day from 5/1/23 to 5/23/23. Resident 33's blood pressure (BP) values were reviewed and the following were documented. The BP values were recorded in millimeters of mercury. a. On 3/22/24, 100/52 b. On 3/23/24, 110/57 c. On 3/24/24, 102/66 d. On 3/24/24, 99/69 e. On 3/26/24, 112/69 f. On 4/13/24, 102/58 g. On 5/19/24, 109/59 h. On 5/23/24, 130/70 On 5/22/24 at 8:08 AM, an interview with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) 1 was conducted. LPN 1 stated that if he were to documented a resident's vital signs prior to administering a blood pressure medication he would document the vital signs in the medical record under the vital signs tab. LPN 1 further stated that he may document the vital signs on the MAR also. LPN 1 stated he was not sure where the Certified Nursing Assistant's (CNA's) documented the vitals signs that they had collected. On 5/22/24 at 8:25 AM, an interview with Medication Technician (MT) 2 was conducted. MT 2 stated that if the nurse needed vital signs for a resident assessment then the nurse would document the vital signs. MT 2 stated that the other vital signs collected by the CNA's would have been documented by the CNA under the vital signs section of the resident's medical record. On 5/23/24 at 8:36 AM, an interview with MT 1 was conducted. MT 1 stated that typically when a resident had an order with specific parameters, the vital signs could be directly added to the MAR when medications were administered. MT 1 stated that resident 33's current vital signs were typically documented in resident 33's medical record, and she would refer to the most recent vital signs prior to administering the Amlodipine. MT 1 stated that resident 33's most recent blood pressure was documented on 5/19/24. MT 1 stated that she would take resident 33's blood pressure today prior to administering the Amlodipine because resident 33 did not have a more current blood pressure reading. MT 1 stated that resident 33's blood pressure would get documented in the vitals section of the medical record because there was not a place to add the blood pressure values to the MAR. On 5/23/24 at 9:00 AM, an interview with CNA 1 was conducted. CNA 1 stated that a nurse would instruct the CNA's as to which resident's needed vital signs taken. CNA 1 stated that sometimes the CNA's would chart the vital signs, and sometimes the CNA's would write down the vital signs and give the information to the nurse. CNA 1 stated that she had not yet taken resident 33's blood pressure today. On 5/23/24 at 9:06 AM, an interview with Registered Nurse (RN) 1 was conducted. RN 1 stated that nurses would normally create a sheet that included which residents needed their vital signs taken. RN 1 stated that if a resident had a medication that had specific parameters, the nurse or MT administering the medication was responsible for ensuring that the vital signs were recently done or checking the vital signs themselves prior to administering the medication. RN 1 stated that resident 33 had her blood pressure checked every morning. RN 1 stated that whomever checked resident 33's blood pressure would document the vital signs into resident 33's medical record. On 5/23/24 at 10:25 AM, an interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) was conducted. The DON stated that checking a resident's blood pressure was not always required for long term residents who were on a stable blood pressure medication. The DON stated that resident 33's order was changed in December of 2023 and the requirement to check the resident's blood pressure was supposed to be removed. The DON stated that the verbiage that instructed staff to check resident 33's blood pressure was left on the order, and that it was a mistake and should have been taken off.
CONCERN (D)

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

Medication Errors (Tag F0758)

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 ensure that residents did not receive psychotropic drugs pursuant to ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility did not ensure that residents did not receive psychotropic drugs pursuant to an as needed (PRN) order unless the PRN order for psychotropic drugs were limited to 14 days. If the attending physician or prescribing practitioner believed that it was appropriate for the PRN order to be extended beyond 14 days, they should document their rationale in the resident's medical record and indicate the duration for the PRN order. In addition, residents who have not used psychotropic drugs were not given these drugs unless the medication was necessary to treat a specific condition as diagnosed and documented in the clinical record. Specifically, for 2 out of 25 sampled residents, residents had PRN orders for Trazodone that were not limited to 14 days, and the physician or prescribing practitioner had not evaluated the residents for the appropriateness of the medication. In addition, a resident with an order for an antipsychotic medication did not have an appropriate indication for use. Resident identifiers: 28 and 44. Findings included: 1. Resident 44 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included, but were not limited to, encounter for orthopedic aftercare following surgical amputation, acquired absence of right foot, acute osteomyelitis right ankle and foot, dehiscence of amputation stump, type 2 diabetes mellitus, traumatic subdural hemorrhage with loss of consciousness, abrasion left great toe, dementia severe with agitation, essential hypertension, and normal pressure hydrocephalus. Resident 44's medical record was reviewed on 5/21/24. On 4/18/24, a physician's order documented traZODone HCl [hydrochloride] Oral Tablet 50 MG [milligrams] (Trazodone HCl) Give 25 mg by mouth every 4 hours as needed for agitation. The physician's order had an indefinite end date and was discontinued on 5/21/24. [Note: The physician's order was not limited to 14 days and the physician did not document their rationale in the resident's medical record for extending the Trazodone.] On 5/21/24, a physician's order documented traZODone HCl Oral Tablet 50 MG (Trazodone HCl) Give 25 mg by mouth every 4 hours as needed for sleep pattern disturbance with depressive symptoms. The April and May 2024 Medication Administration Record (MAR) were reviewed. Resident 44 did not have any requested administrations of Trazodone in April 2024. Resident 44 had requested Trazodone on one occasion in May 2024 on 5/7/24. On 5/21/24 at 8:18 AM, a Nursing Progress Note documented Note Text: Resident is on psychotropic medications without appropriate diagnoses: Aripiprazole, Trazodone. Notified provider to address for appropriateness/continuation of medications. Resident does have sleep pattern disturbance, Dementia with occasional behaviors, and Moca [Montreal Cognitive Assessment] of 3. 2. Resident 28 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included, but were not limited to, hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction affection right dominant side, functional quadriplegia, type 2 diabetes mellitus with foot ulcer and autonomic neuropathy, chronic kidney disease stage 3, esophageal varices without bleeding, atrial fibrillation, and chronic pain. Resident 28's medical record was reviewed on 5/22/24. The hospital discharge orders dated 5/2/24, included a prescription details for quetiapine fumarate. The prescription included to dispense five tablets with no refills. On 5/2/24, a physician's order documented QUEtiapine Fumarate Oral Tablet 25 MG (Quetiapine Fumarate) Give 6.25 mg by mouth at bedtime for delusions. Resident 28 had no documented behaviors of delusions and resident 28 did not have an appropriate indication for use. On 5/2/24, a physician's order documented traZODone HCl Oral Tablet 50 MG (Trazodone HCl) Give 50 mg by mouth every 24 hours as needed for sleep. The physician's order had an indefinite end date and was discontinued on 5/21/24. [Note: The physician's order was not limited to 14 days and the physician did not document their rationale in the resident's medical record for extending the Trazodone.] On 5/21/24, a physician's order documented traZODone HCl Oral Tablet 50 MG (Trazodone HCl) Give 50 mg by mouth every 24 hours as needed for sleep pattern disturbance related to INSOMNIA, . The May 2024 MAR was reviewed. Resident 28 did not have any requested administrations of Trazodone in May 2024. On 5/22/24 at 12:52 PM, an interview was conducted with the Director of Nursing (DON) and the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON). The DON stated that psychotropics were reviewed on admission and the goal was to have a 14 day stop on PRN psychotropics and a review of the medications. The DON stated the psychotropic meeting was held once a month and the Medical Director attended. The DON stated that gradual dose reductions were in place for residents. The DON stated that she preferred not to use many psychotropics but some residents required them. The DON stated the psychotropic meeting would have been held today and the residents in question would have been reviewed. The ADON stated if the resident was not using the PRN medication then it would have been discontinued.
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, the facility did not obtain laboratory (lab) services only when ordered by a physician; ph...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility did not obtain laboratory (lab) services only when ordered by a physician; physician assistant; nurse practitioner (NP) or clinical nurse specialist. Specifically, for 1 out of 25 sampled residents, a resident had additional labs completed without a physician's order after the resident had completed their antibiotic therapy. Resident identifier: 44. Findings included: Resident 44 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included, but were not limited to, encounter for orthopedic aftercare following surgical amputation, acquired absence of right foot, acute osteomyelitis right ankle and foot, dehiscence of amputation stump, type 2 diabetes mellitus, traumatic subdural hemorrhage with loss of consciousness, abrasion left great toe, dementia severe with agitation, essential hypertension, and normal pressure hydrocephalus. Resident 44's medical record was reviewed on 5/21/24. On 4/5/24, the hospital Discharge Orders documented . Discharge Antimicrobial Recommendation: Patient will need: Cefuroxime 500 mg [milligrams] PO [by mouth] twice daily for 2 weeks. Second antibiotic: Doxycycline 100 mg PO twice daily for 2 weeks. Stop Date: 4/26/24 While receiving antibiotics recommend the following labs near planned stop date of therapy (SNF [Skilled Nursing Facility], please draw) CBC [complete blood count] w/diff [with differential] CMP [comprehensive metabolic panel] ESR [erythrocyte sedimentation rate] CRP [c-reactive protein] . A physician's order dated 4/18/24, documented Cefuroxime Axetil Oral Tablet 500 MG (Cefuroxime Axetil) Give 500 mg by mouth two times a day for infection until 04/26/2024 23:59 [11:59 PM]. A physician's order dated 4/18/24, documented Doxycycline Hyclate Oral Tablet 100 MG (Doxycycline Hyclate) Give 100 mg by mouth two times a day for infection until 04/26/2024 23:59. A physician's order dated 4/19/24, documented CBC with Diff, CMP, ESR, CRP fax to [doctors name redacted] when results received on 4/24/2024 one time only for 4 Days. The physician's order had a start date of 4/23/24. On 4/29/24 at 9:06 AM, a Nursing Progress Note documented Late Entry: Note Text: NP reviewed recent lab work from 04.29.2024, NNO [no new orders]. CBC W/ [with] Auto Diff [differential], CMP, ESR, [NAME], Sed [sedimentation] Rate, CRP. A lab result dated 5/8/24, documented that a CBC, CMP, and a CRP test were collected. On 5/10/24 at 9:26 AM, a Nursing Progress Note documented Note Text: NP reviewed recent CMP CRP CBC results from 05.08.2024, NNO. A lab result dated 5/16/24, documented that a CBC, CMP, CRP, and an ESR were collected. No documentation could be located or provided to indicate a physician's order was written for the labs collected on 5/8/24 and 5/16/24. On 5/22/24 at 12:47 PM, an interview was conducted with the Director of Nursing (DON) and the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON). The DON stated that the order from the hospital was to complete the labs weekly. The ADON stated that the antibiotic was stopped on 4/26/24. The ADON stated that resident 44 saw the infectious disease doctor on 5/14/24. The DON stated that they continued the lab orders until resident 44 saw the infectious disease doctor.
Oct 2022 8 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** Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined, the facility failed to ensure that the resident environme...

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 failed to 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, for 2 out of 23 sampled residents, residents did not receive preventative interventions and/or adequate supervision to prevent falls and accidents from occurring. Resident identifiers: 2 and 35. Findings included: 1. Resident 2 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses which included, but not limited to, chronic osteomyelitis of left thigh, non-pressure chronic ulcer of left thigh with necrosis of muscle, severe protein-calorie malnutrition, acute respiratory failure with hypoxia, staphlococcus, proteus, essential hypertension, postpolio syndrome, paraplegia, chronic pain syndrome, and retention of urine. On 10/24/22 at 12:38 PM, an interview was conducted with resident 2. Resident 2 stated that he had fallen at the facility. Resident 2 stated that he had broken his leg during one of the falls. Resident 2 stated that he was dumped out of the shower chair by accident by a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA). Resident 2 stated the staff thought his leg was sprained but resident 2 stated his leg hurt too bad to be a [NAME]. Resident 2 stated the CNA turned the shower chair around with him in it and the CNA was not paying attention when he fell out of the shower chair. Resident 2's medical record was reviewed on 10/25/22. A Care Plan Focus initiated on 4/8/22 documented FALLS [name of resident 2 removed] is at risk for falls r/t [related to] postpolio syndrome, long term use of opioid medications, fall hx [history]. Interventions included, but not limited to, Staff educated regarding shower chairs and safe transfers. Initiated on 2/2/22. On 2/4/22 at 4:25 PM, a Fall incident report documented Nursing Description: Aide [CNA] had just finished showering resident and was trying to wheel him back towards his bed in the shower chair when it tipped over. That specific shower chair needs to be pulled backwards instead of pushed forward so it doesn't tip, aide said she forgot about that. Resident Description: Resident stated that he didn't his [sic] his head when he fell, just landed on shoulder. Injuries Observed at Time of Incident bruise, right inner ankle, bruise, right outer ankle. Level of pain 4/10. On 2/5/22 at 4:58 PM, a Nursing Progress Note documented Resident c/o [complains of] pain continuing in right foot. Area that is bruised has increased from 1x1 cm [centimeter] in two spots to three 3x3 cm spots on foot. Swelling has also increased. Notified on-call doctor and received order for ankle and foot x-ray to rule out fracture. [Name of x-ray company removed] x-ray tech [technician] arrived at 1700 [5:00 PM] and is getting x-ray. Will update physician and PCC [Point Click Care] with results. Resident is his own responsible party. On 2/5/22 at 5:05 PM, a Lab/XRAY documented Type of Lab/XRAY Completed: 3-view ankle and 3-view foot Abnormal Results?: Fx [Fracture] of tibia and fibula New Orders or Redraws?: Order for rigid walking boot to keep foot in correct position. Order to set up ortho [orthopedic] consult next week. Changing oxycodone 10 mg [milligrams] from tid [three times daily] to q6h [every 6 hours], adding new order for ibuprofen 800 mg q8h [every 8 hours] PRN [as needed] x 14 days for breakthrough pain. On 2/5/22 at 8:07 PM, a Nursing Progress Note documented Received order from [Name of physician removed] to send resident to ER [Emergency Room] to assess fx. [Name of Ambulance company removed] EMTs [Emergency Medical Technicians] picked him up at 1800 [6:00 PM]. They weren't sure which hospital would take him but said that it would probably either be [name of hospital removed] or [name of hospital removed]. Administered scheduled oxycodone and methadone to resident before he left in an attempt to manage pain before leaving. On 2/5/22 at 9:13 PM, a Lab/XRAY documented Type of Lab/XRAY Completed: Right ankle and right foot 3-view x-ray Abnormal Results?: Right ankle: There are acute osteoporotic fractures involving distal tibial metaphysis and distal fibular metastasis without significant displacement. Ankle joint is still maintained. There is significant soft tissue swelling. IMPRESSION: Acute distal tibia and fibula fractures. New Orders or Redraws?: Sent to ER to have fx assessed and fitted with boot. On 2/6/22 at 12:29 AM, a Nursing Progress Note documented Resident was brought from the [name of hospital removed] at 23.30 [11:30 PM] pm by [name of Ambulance company removed] [NAME] [sic] having Diagnosed Closed rt [right] ankle fracture & F/U [follow up] orthopedic Surgeon. Resident is alert & oriented, asked for HS [at bedtime] meds [medications] & went to sleep v/s [vital signs] BP [blood pressure] 116/55, pulse 87, Resp [respirations] 18, Temp [temperature] 98.6 & O2 [oxygen] sat [saturations] 93 . Will cont [continue] to monitor. On 2/7/22 at 5:23 PM, a Skilled Progress Note documented Alert and oriented. Uses electric w/c [wheelchiar] for mobility. Feeds himself. Verbalizes needs. Currently NWB [non-weight bearing] to his right leg d/t [due to] closed ankle fx. To f/u with orthopedic. Not yet scheduled. Resp even and unlabored. On 2/8/22 at 5:01 PM, a Skilled Progress Note documented Resident is alert and oriented x 3-4 [oriented to person, place, time, and situation]. resident co [complains] generalized increased pain andesp [sic] d/t right ankle fx. Resident has breakdown on his gluteal area. Right ankle splinted. Resident is able to make needs known. Resident oob [out of bed] in electric chair this morning. New orders for scheduled tylenol 650 mg q 6 hrs. On 2/9/22 at 11:13 AM, a Skilled Progress Note documented Resident is alert and oriented x4. Resident c/o generalized increased pain d/t right ankle fx. Resident has breakdown on his gluteal area. Right ankle splinted. Resident is able to make needs known. F/u ortho appt [appointment] scheduled today at 1300 [1:00 PM]. New orders for scheduled Tylenol 650 mg q6h. Resident stable today. Will update with any new orders from appt. On 2/9/22 at 8:24 PM, a Nursing Progress Note documented [Name of physician removed] ordered to increase Oxycodone to q4h [every 4 hours] prn x 10 days then back to original order. On 2/10/22 at 12:54 PM, a Skilled Progress Note documented [Name of resident 2 removed] is AXOx4 [alert and oriented to person, place, time, and situation]. He is able to make his wants and needs known. He has been pleasant and cooperative with all aspects of care. He continues to c/o generalized increased pain d/t right ankle fx. Continues to have breakdown on his gluteal area with treatments being followed per MD [Medical Director] order. Right ankle is casted. A care plan intervention initiated on 2/18/22, documented CNAs educated on transfers and proper use of shower chair. [Note: No new interventions were implemented. The same intervention was initiated on 2/2/22, Staff educated regarding shower chairs and safe transfers.] On 3/9/22 at 12:01 PM, a COMMUNICATION - with Physician documented Situation: Ortho follow-up appt with [name of physician removed] at [name of hospital removed] Background: Orders to continue vitamin D3, continue cast x 4 weeks, follow-up appt in 4 weeks (left copy of order for appt coordinator), continue NWB. Notified house physician, no other orders. Resident stable. On 10/25/22 at 1:11 PM, an interview was conducted with Restorative Nurse Assistant (RNA) 1. RNA 1 stated when she showered a resident she would ask the resident if it was there shower day, if the resident would like a shower, and what clothes would the resident like to pick out. RNA 1 stated if the resident could walk or use a walker RNA 1 would assist the resident to walk to the shower room. RNA 1 stated if the resident used a wheelchair RNA 1 would take the resident to the shower room in a wheelchair. RNA 1 stated the shower chair was located in the shower room. RNA 1 stated she would use the shower chair to move the resident if the resident required the hoyer lift to transfer. RNA 1 stated that she would transfer the resident from the bed with the hoyer lift to the shower chair with two CNAs. RNA 1 stated that she pushed the shower chair forward with the resident facing the direction she was moving. RNA 1 stated that she had never had a shower chair tip over. RNA 1 stated that resident 2 should be transferred with the hoyer lift but resident 2 did not like the hoyer lift. RNA 1 stated that two CNAs' would transfer resident 2 to the shower chair by lifting him. RNA 1 stated that resident 2 had an accident in the shower chair one time. RNA 1 stated that she heard that the CNA had pushed the shower chair with resident 2 in the shower chair and RNA 1 thought the wheel was not working very well and the CNA pushed the shower chair harder and the wheel got stuck. RNA 1 stated that the CNA that was pushing resident 2 did not work at the facility anymore. On 10/25/22 at 2:22 PM, an interview was conducted with CNA 4. CNA 4 stated that she was a shower CNA. CNA 4 stated that she transported the residents to the shower room in the shower chair. CNA 4 stated there were two shower chairs, a small shower chair and a big shower chair. CNA 4 stated that she had no issues with the shower chairs. CNA 4 stated that resident 2 used the small shower chair. CNA 4 stated that resident 2 required a two person transfer to the shower chair and CNA 4 would put a towel under his legs. CNA 4 stated that resident 2 did not have any accidents with her. CNA 4 stated that resident 2 told her that he had an accident when the CNA transferred the resident from his motorized wheelchair to the bed. CNA 4 stated that resident 2 required two persons for a transfer. On 10/26/22 at 10:52 AM, an interview was conducted with Registered Nurse (RN) 2. RN 2 stated the CNA was helping resident 2 and the shower chair only worked if pushed backwards. RN 2 stated that the CNA was pushing resident 2 forward in the shower chair and resident 2's foot got stuck somehow and the shower chair may have tipped. RN 2 stated that the CNA forgot that she needed to push the shower chair backwards. RN 2 stated that she had understood that if resident 2's feet were not stuck under the chair it would not have been an issue. RN 2 stated that the weight of resident 2 falling caused the break. RN 2 stated that she helped resident 2 back to bed and resident 2 had no pain until the next day and his ankle swelled more. RN 2 stated that was the first time she had heard of the shower chair having problems. RN 2 stated that she had not seen that shower chair in the facility since the incident. RN 2 stated that the CNA involved in the accident stopped working at the facility a few months ago. On 10/26/22 at 1:26 PM, an interview was conducted with the Director of Nursing (DON). The DON stated if a resident had a fall the nursing staff would do an assessment of the resident if the resident was on the floor. The DON stated if the resident hit their head the staff would start neurological checks for 72 hours after the fall. The DON stated that staff were to Notify the MD, family, and case manager. The DON stated after everything was completed the staff were to watch the resident. The DON stated if the resident had an injury the staff were to get clarification from the MD. The DON stated if the resident had broken bones the staff were to get an x-ray or send the resident to the hospital with guidance from the MD. The DON stated that the staff were to do as much diagnostics in house as they could. The DON stated the facility had a funky shower chair that was a newer shower chair and resident 2 was getting a shower from one of his favorite CNAs. The DON stated that the shower chair was designed to be pulled backwards. The DON stated that the CNA was pushing resident 2 forward in the shower chair at resident 2's request and the shower chair abruptly stopped and resident 2 fell out of the shower chair. The DON stated that resident 2 had no bruising at the time of fall. The DON stated that the MD was notified and resident 2 was his own representative. The DON stated that the next day bruising was noticed on resident 2 and a X-ray was obtained. The DON stated that resident 2 had lack of feeling in his lower extremities. The DON stated the shower chair and all similar shower chairs were thrown out and new shower chairs were purchased. The DON stated that the CNAs and nurses had to pass competencies with the new shower chairs. The DON stated the incident was a singular incident and interventions were implemented immediately. 2. Resident 35 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses which included, but not limited to, depression, restless leg syndrome, type 2 diabetes mellitus with diabetic chronic kidney disease and diabetic neuropathy, severe protein-calorie malnutrition, opioid dependence, essential hypertension, pulmonary hypertension, chronic atrial fibrillation, chronic diastolic congestive heart failure, peripheral vascular disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, stage 3 chronic kidney disease, and repeated falls. On 10/24/22 at 11:05 AM, an interview was conducted with resident 35. Resident 35 stated she had a fall three to four weeks ago. Resident 35 stated the bed pushed her out and it flipped over. Resident 35 stated that she had a new bed now. Resident 35 stated that she had cut her knee when she fell and had to have 15 stitches in her right knee. Resident 35 stated that her knee was healing very well, and staff were quick to help when she fell. Resident 35's medical record was reviewed on 10/27/22. On 9/7/21, an Alert Charting documented that resident 35 was a High Risk for falls. On 11/19/21 at 4:09 PM, a Fall incident report documented an Incident Description Nurses were called over radio to assist a patient at the front entrance parking lot. Pt [Patient] was found supin [sic] on parking lot floor next to open car door. Patient was A&Ox3 [alert and oriented to person, place, and time], Asked if pt was in pain and pt responded no. Assessed for any lacerations, bruises, bumps or any bleeding and all negative. PERRLA [pupil, equal, round, reactive to light and accommodation] intact. Denied any headaches, neck pain, or lingering pain. Resident Description Pt stated she just fell. Husband [name removed] stated he thought he had her and was not able to tolerate all the weight. Immediate Action Taken Patient was pulled up and transferred to wheel chair with the help of another nurse and therapy director. Pt was brought back into bldg. [building] and assessed for 30 mins [minutes] Vital signs WNL [within normal limits]. Asked by DON if she felt comfortable of [sic] going home and if she was going to have some help getting [sic] out of the care. Pt stated she would ask neighbors for help with trasnferring [sic] out of car when arriving at home. No injuries observed at time of incident. On 11/19/21, an Alert Charting was Incomplete and a fall risk score was not documented. On 11/19/21 at 5:16 PM, a Skilled Progress Note documented Resident is alert and oriented x3 with some forgetfulness. Resident is pleasant and cooperative. PRN Medications given whole with water, no issue noted. Resident uses call light to use toilet instead of brief. Pt happy to go home today. On 11/20/21 at 5:18 PM, a Skilled Progress Note documented Resident is alert and oriented x3 with some forgetfulness. Generalized weakness. Resident is pleasant and cooperative. PRN Medications given whole with water, no issue noted. Resident uses call light to use toilet instead of brief. Pt re-admitted today around 1800. On 11/23/21, an Alert Charting was Incomplete and a fall risk score was not documented. A care plan Focus initiated on 11/28/21, documented RESOLVED: ACTUAL FALL The resident has an actual [fall] on 11/19/21. The Goal initiated on 11/22/21, documented RESOLVED: The infection will resolve without complication by the next review. The Interventions initiated included the following: a. RESOLVED: Call light within reach.Date initiated 11/23/21 and date resolved 1/4/22. b. RESOLVED: Educate family, significant other, & visitors of importance of quarantine/transmission based precautions in room on admission & for out of facility absences, LOA [leave of absence], appointments, etc. per facility policy. Date initiated 11/22/21 and date resolved 1/4/22. c. RESOLVED: PT [physical therapy]/OT [occupational therapy] to treat as ordered. Date initiated 11/23/21 and date resolved 1/4/22. On 12/15/21, an Alert Charting documented that resident 35 was a High Risk for falls. An admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], documented that resident 35 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14. A BIMS score of 13 to 15 indicated the resident was cognitively intact. In addition, resident 35 required extensive assistance of one person for transfers, locomotion on and off unit, dressing, toilet use, and personal hygiene. On 2/2/22 at 9:10 PM, a Fall incident report documented an Incident Description Aides called me into resident's room and stated that they found her on the ground. Aides had been rounding on all residents regularly all evening and her door was open. They had changed her brief 1-2 hours before her fall. Resident Description Resident stated that she had to go to the bathroom and got out of bed by herself. She made it to the wall by her bed by herself and lost her balance and fell to the floor. She fell onto her right hand and back but stated that she lifted her head up so she wouldn't hit it. She stated that she forgot that she should have used her call light. An order was received from physician to send resident to emergency room for x-ray. No signs or symptoms of injury but acute pain from right shoulder all the way down the arm. [Note: Resident 35 did not have a care plan in place to prevent falls. The previous care plan was resolved on 1/4/22.] On 2/2/22, an Alert Charting documented that resident 35 was a High Risk for falls. On 2/2/22 at 11:22 PM, a Diagnostic Radiology report from the Medical Center documented that an x-ray of the right shoulder with three views was obtained. Resident 35 had a mildly displaced and angulated fracture at the surgical neck of the humerus. On 2/3/22 at 1:38 PM, a Nursing Progress Note documented Resident was seen at [name of Medical Center removed] after an unwitnessed fall. Discharge Dx [diagnoses]: Fall, right Shoulder fracture and UTI [urinary tract infection] symptoms. Follow up appt to be made with [name of physician removed]. Order state to leave shoulder immobilizer or sling in place (adjust so that hand is level with elbow). Apply ice pack to sight for 20 min [minutes] q [every] 1-2 hrs [hours] day one then 3-4 times a day for 2-3 days then as needed. Sling is to remain in place until appt. New order for Norco 5/325 for prn pain po [by mouth] q4h prn x 2 days. On 2/15/22 at 5:24 PM, a Nursing Progress Note documented Resident returned from [Name of Orthopedic physician removed] F/U for shoulder fracture. Orders are for PT to RUE [right upper extremity], hand/wrist and elbow - ROM [range of motion] as tolerated. Forward hang of right shoulder. Follow up in 3 weeks. On 2/17/22 at 10:37 AM, an Orders-Administration Note documented Hand/Wrist and Elbow: ROM as tolerated. Passive only flexion to right shoulder. Every shift Notified Therapy to see if they will follow up. [Note: There were no therapy notes located within resident 35's medical record for the timeframe indicated.] On 3/11/22 at 2:44 PM, a Nursing Progress Note documented Resident returned from appt with new orders: Wean out of sling. Okay to progress range of motion and strengthening at the shoulder but limit to less than 5 lbs [pounds]. Return in 6 weeks with repeat XR [xray]. Resident is own rp [representative] and aware. On 3/31/22, an Alert Charting was Incomplete and a fall risk score was not documented. On 4/16/22 at 12:54 PM, a Lab/XRAY documented a 2-view right shoulder x-ray for follow up orthopedic appointment. Impression documented a surgical neck fracture with impaction present of the right shoulder. Resident stable. On 6/14/22, an Alert Charting was In Progress and a fall risk score was not documented. A quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE], documented that resident 35 had a BIMS score of 99. A BIMS score of 99 indicated the resident was unable to complete the interview. In addition, resident 35 required extensive assistance of one person for transfers, walk in room, locomotion on and off unit, dressing, toilet use, and personal hygiene. On 8/2/22 at 4:19 AM, a Nursing Progress Note documented Resident had a unwitnessed fall off the bed. Resident found sitting on the floor leaning against the side of the bed. She states she had a dream and rolled off the bed, right knee scraping the side of the bed and having a laceration up to her bone. Left hand also got a small laceration. Resident fully conscious, states that did not hit her head. Vitals stable. Resident helped back into bed with keeping leg stable. Leg raised on pillows and iced. Called 911 and resident is taken to the hospital. On 8/2/22 at 4:54 AM, a Fall incident report documented an Incident Description Resident found sitting on floor leaning against the left hand side of the bed yelling for help. Resident visibly has a big deep laceration on right knee the size of the the [sic] length of the knee and a smaller one on left hand the size of 1 inch x 1 inch. Resident is conscious and responsive and does not appear to have hit her head. Resident Description Resident states she had a bad dream and rolled off the left side of the bed. She states she did not hit her head, does not feel any dizziness or feel any discomfort or pain in chest. On 8/2/22, an Alert Charting documented that resident 35 was a High Risk for falls. On 8/2/22 at 10:39 AM, a Nursing Progress Note documented Resident returned from hospital. With her knee laceration sutured. Left forearm laceration bandaged. She was also treated for atrial fibrillation and given a dose of metoprolol IV [intravenous]. House NP [Nurse Practitioner] and notified. On 8/2/22, the Medical Center Discharge Handout documented that resident 35 had a fall from bed, knee laceration, and rapid atrial fibrillation. Resident 35's right knee required 15 sutures. On 8/2/22 at 10:45 AM, a Nursing Progress Note documented Resident also stated that her righ [sic] knee hit the bottom of the sink cabinet when she fell. That's where she believes she cut her knee open. On 8/26/22, an Alert Charting documented that resident 35 was a Low Risk for falls. A care plan Focus initiated on 8/26/22, documented [Name of resident 35 removed] is high risk for falls r/t generalized weakness, repeated falls in facility, confusion/poor safety awareness. The Goal initiated on 8/26/22, documented [Name of resident 35 removed] will not sustain serious injury through the review date. The Interventions initiated included the following: a. RESOLVED: Anticipate and meet the resident's needs. Encourage to wait for assistance. Date initiated 11/23/21 and date resolved. 11/28/21. b. 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 request for assistance. Date initiated 11/22/21. c. Call don't fall sign added to room. Date initiated 2/18/22. d. Continually educate the resident regarding safety issues. Date initiated 11/23/21. e. RESOLVED: Educate family, significant other, & visitors of importance of quarantine/transmission based precautions in room on admission & for out of facility absences, LOA, appointments, etc. per facility policy. Date initiated 1/4/22 and date resolved 4/17/22. f. Encourage Resident to wait for assistance. Date initiated 10/25/22. g. Encourage to wear well-fitting, non-skid footwear when transferring/ambulating. Date initiated 2/18/22. h. Ensure proper body positioning. Date initiated 10/25/22. i. Keep room free of clutter and ensure objects the resident may need are within reach. Date initiated 10/25/22. j. Make sure eyeglasses are clean & properly fitting. Date initiated 11/23/21. k. Monitor for signs and symptoms of discomfort, i.e., pain, anxiety, thirst or hunger and the need to toilet. Date initiated 10/25/22. l. Pt/ot evaluate and treat as ordered or PRN. Date initiated 1/4/22. m. RESOLVED: UA [urinalysis] to be done. 2/4/22. Date initiated 8/26/22 and date resolved 10/25/22. n. Visual Cue to use call light (Call don't fall). Date initiated 2/4/22. [Note: The care plan was initiated on 8/26/22, after resident 35 had a fall that resulted in a right shoulder fracture and a fall that resulted in a laceration of the knee to the bone that required sutures.] On 10/25/22 at 11:20 AM, an interview was conducted with CNA 1. CNA 1 stated if a resident was found on the floor, she would use the radio to call for help, tell the nurse, ask the resident if he or she was okay, ask what happened, stay with the resident and assist the nurse, and explain what happened. CNA 1 stated the fall prevention measures for resident 35 included to put bed in low position, check on resident frequently, put table close so resident 35 could reach water and personal items, and make sure the call light was within reach. On 10/25/22 at 12:12 PM, an interview was conducted with CNA 2. CNA 2 stated that resident 35 had not had any recent falls. CNA 2 stated interventions used to prevent falls were to put bed in low position and answer call lights quickly. On 10/25/22 at 2:42 PM, an interview was conducted with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) 3. LPN 3 stated that resident 35 had not had any recent falls. On 10/26/22 at 1:25 PM, an interview was conducted with the CNA Coordinator. The CNA Coordinator stated that resident 35 had not had any recent falls. The CNA Coordinator stated interventions in place to prevent falls were to keep resident 35's door open, help resident 35 to the bathroom or change her in bed, round every two hours or more frequently, put personal items and call light close to resident 35, put bed in lowest position, make sure resident 35 wore shoes or grippy socks with transfers. On 10/26/22 at 2:20 PM, an observed was conducted of resident 35 in bed watching TV, the door was open, bed in lowest position, call light in reach, and a Call, don't fall sign was observed on the bathroom door. On 10/27/22 at 1:20 PM, an interview was conducted with CNA 3. CNA 3 stated that resident 35 had not had any recent fall. CNA 3 stated that she ensured that resident 35's bed was down, the call light was answered, the door was kept open, and CNA 3 would check resident 35 every time she went by the room. CNA 3 stated that resident 35 stayed in the bed most of the time. On 10/27/22 at 2:13 PM, an interview was conducted with the DON. The DON stated pre-fall interventions included call don't fall signs posted in the resident room, education and talking to the resident, and reminding the resident to use the call light. The DON stated an initial fall assessment would be completed and frequent rounding was done. The DON stated that after a fall the resident was assessed for injuries. If the resident hit their head the staff would initiate neurological checks. If the fall was unwitnessed and the resident was not able to state what happened, the nurse would assess and initiate neurological checks. The DON stated the nurses would notify the MD and family after the assessment and ensure the resident was safe. The DON stated the staff were to send the resident to the hospital or conduct diagnostics if needed. The DON stated that staff were to treat the resident as ordered. The DON stated that the care plan should be updated after each fall or injury. The DON stated the care plan to [NAME] or point of care should be updated for the CNAs and nurses would have access to the care plan. The DON stated she would expect to see new interventions identified after each fall. The DON stated that resident 35's fall on 11/19/21, happened at resident 35's house. The DON stated that she did not know the full details, resident 35 was discharged from the facility at the time and came back the same day. The DON stated that resident 35 had no injuries identified after the fall. The DON stated that resident 35's husband stated that resident 35 fell. The DON stated that upon readmission resident 35 had no injuries noted. The DON stated the fall resident 35 had on 2/2/22, was an unwitnessed fall and resident 35 was on her way to the bathroom. The DON stated that resident 35 should have used the call light and she did not. The resident was A&Ox3. The interventions were to use call light, and to send resident 35 for an x-ray due to her complaints of shoulder pain. The DON stated that the intervention was to use the call light as resident 35 stated she had not done. The DON stated that the fall on 8/2/22, the resident reported she had a bad dream and fell out of bed. The DON stated that resident 35 refused to have the bed in a low position. It should be noted that no documentation could be found for the refusal of this intervention. The DON stated that resident 35 had fall mats in place prior to the fall and they helped to break the fall. The DON stated the laceration was because resident 35 twisted and fell and she caught her knee under the sink. The DON stated that they placed foam on the area under the sink where she lacerated her leg after the fall occurred. The DON stated that the bed was placed next to the sink. The DON stated that she asked resident 35 if they could move her bed and the resident said no. The DON stated they did not identify this as an intervention and they did not document it anywhere.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0554 (Tag F0554)

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, the facility did not ensure that the interdisciplinary team had determi...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, it was determined, the facility did not ensure that the interdisciplinary team had determined that the right to self-administer medications was clinically appropriate. Specifically, for 1 out of 23 sampled residents, a resident was self administering a medication without an evaluation to determine if the practice was safe. Resident identifier: 6. Findings included: Resident 6 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses which included multiple sclerosis (MS), polyneuropathy, osteoarthritis, scoliosis, methicillin resistant staphylococcus aureus infection, urogential implants, sinusitis, history of urinary tract infections, chronic pain, hypothyroidism, insomnia, mood disorder, psoriasis, rosacea, and intervertebral disc degeneration. On 10/26/22, resident 6's medical record was reviewed. Review of resident 6's physician orders revealed Tecfidera Capsule Delayed Release 240 milligrams, give 1 capsule by mouth in the evening every other day for MS, takes with dinner. The order stated, medication may be left in residents room for self administration. The order was initiated on 4/20/21. No documentation could be found for a self administration evaluation for the Tecfidera medication. On 10/27/22 at 8:35 AM, an interview was conducted with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) 1. LPN 1 stated that resident 6 was knowledgeable about her medication. LPN 1 stated that the Tecfidera was kept in the medication cart and resident 6 could self administer. LPN 1 stated that resident 6 took all her medication on her own. LPN 1 stated that the Tecfidera was left at resident 6's bedside because she preferred to take the medication after she had eaten dinner. On 10/27/22 at 11:37 AM, an interview was conducted with the Director of Nursing (DON). The DON stated that she would locate the self administration evaluation for the Tecfidera medication. The DON stated that was something that was implemented prior to her arrival at the facility. The DON stated that there were a few medications that were evaluated. On 10/27/22 at 12:23 PM, an interview was conducted with Corporate Resource Nurse (CRN) 1. CRN 1 stated that resident 6 did not self administer the Tecfidera medication. CRN 1 stated that the order had been there a long time. CRN 1 stated that they did not perform a self administration evaluation for the Tecfidera medication. CRN 1 stated that if the medication was left in resident 6's room for self administration, then they would need to conduct a self administration evaluation.
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

Based on interview and record review it was determined, the facility did not consult with the resident's physician and notify, when there was a need to alter the resident's treatment. Specifically, fo...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview and record review it was determined, the facility did not consult with the resident's physician and notify, when there was a need to alter the resident's treatment. Specifically, for 1 out of 23 sampled residents, a resident's physician was not notified when the resident had a decline in mental status after a fall. Resident identifier: 55. Findings included: Resident 55 was admitted to facility on 7/17/22 with diagnoses which included hypertension, atrial fibrillation, benign prostatic hyperplasia, dementia, presence of aortocoronary bypass graft, encounter for other orthopedic aftercare, unspecified protein-calorie malnutrition, and pneumonia. Resident 55's closed medical record was reviewed on 10/25/22. A Nursing Progress Note dated 8/29/22 at 4:06 PM, documented that a Certified Nurse Assistant reported resident 55 to be on the floor. The day nurse noted resident 55 was on the floor with his nose bleeding. A bump and abrasion above the left forehead and brow were noted. An incident report was initiated at 3:45 PM on 8/29/22. Immediate action taken, Assessed, placed cold to back of neck and pinched nose bridge to stop bleeding. Initiated neuro [neurological] checks. Review of resident 55's physician orders revealed an order for an anticoagulant mediation - monitor for discolored urine, black tarry stools, sudden severe headache, nausea and vomiting, diarrhea, muscle joint pain, lethargy, bruising, vital signs (V/S), shortness of breath, and nose bleeds. Monitor every shift. Order was initiated on 7/17/22. A Nursing Progress Note dated 8/29/22 at 5:10 PM, documented that neurological assessments where initiated. Review of resident 55's Neurological Flow Sheet revealed a statement listed near the bottom of form, Notify MD [Medical Director] IMMEDIATELY of signs and symptoms of Intracranial Pressure!!! There were no neuro-checks documented on 8/29/22 at 6:30 PM, 7:30 PM, 8:30 PM, 9:30 PM, and 10:30 PM and there were not any checks completed on 8/30/22. There were no V/S documented at 8/29/22 at 4:00 PM, 4:30 PM, 5:00 PM, 5:30 PM, 6:00 PM, 6:30 PM, 7:30 PM, 8:30 PM, and 9:30 PM. A Nursing Progress Note dated 8/30/22 at 12:57 AM, documented resident 55 was found at 12:30 AM, with some emesis on bed. Emesis was black and chunky and had a foul smell. Resident 55 would not rouse with sternal rub stimulation. [Note: Documentation was not located that a physician was contacted regarding signs and symptoms of lethargy and vomiting as ordered by the physician on 7/17/22.] A Nursing Progress Note dated 8/30/22 at 5:12 AM, documented resident 55 passed away at 4:44 AM on 8/30/22. On 10/26/22 at 1:25 PM, an interview was conducted with the Director of Nursing (DON). The DON stated the protocols for all resident falls that involve head injuries was the nurse was to notify the family, physician, and DON as soon as possible and start the Neuro Matrix immediately. The DON stated a Neuro Matrix was a neurological assessment over a 72-hour period which was documented on the Neurological Flow Sheet and the information was passed along at shift changes. The DON stated that any change of status of the resident including medical, physical, and mental alertness needed to be reported to the nurse who was to notify the physician, even if the family decided not to treat. The DON stated the nurse was to document any notification in the nursing notes. On 10/27/22 at 2:18 PM, an interview was conducted with physician 1. Physician 1 stated that she was notified regarding the fall and initial assessment of resident 55. Physician 1 stated she did not get notified about the change in condition for resident 55's status. Physician 1 stated she would have liked to have been notified of the change of status.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0658 (Tag F0658)

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 ensure that services provided met pr...

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 ensure that services provided met professional standards of quality. Specifically, for 1 out of 23 sampled residents, a nasojejunal (NJ) tube feeding did not have the bag labeled with the formula type, rate of infusion, or the nurse initials who initiated and prepared the infusion. Resident identifier: 27. Findings included: Resident 27 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included encephalopathy, severe protein-calorie malnutrition, altered mental status, hypertension, depression, malignant neoplasm of esophagus, gastrostomy status, cirrhosis of liver, nutritional anemia, hyperlipidemia, and gastro-esophageal reflux disease. On 10/25/22, resident 27's record was reviewed. Review of resident 27's physician orders revealed the following: a. Enteral Feed one time a day, on at 2:00 PM Enteral Nutrition via Pump - Jevity 1.5 at 71 milliliters (ml) per hour (hr) times (x) 20 hours, and a free water flush (FWF) 35 ml/hr x 20 hours via pump per (NJ) tube. The order was initiated on 9/26/22. b. Enteral Feed one time a day, off at 10:00 AM Formula: Jevity 1.5 (1422 ml or 6 cartons) at 71 ml/hour x 20 hours, FWF 35 ml/hour x 20 hours (700 ml total). Nutrients provided: 1422 ml formula, 2133 kilocalorie, 91 grams protein, 1780 ml total free water (1080 ml form., 700 ml FWF). The order was initiated on 9/26/22. Resident 27's care plan revealed a focus area of required tube feedings related to malignant neoplasm of the esophagus. The interventions identified included to administer tube feeding and water flushes as ordered; check tube for placement prior to starting tube feeding or flushing tube; elevate the head of the bed at least 30 degrees while tube feeding was running; and monitor/document/report as needed any signs and symptoms of aspiration. The care plan was initiated on 9/23/22. On 10/25/22 at 8:36 AM, resident 27 was observed seated in a chair at the bedside. Resident 27's tube feed (TF) was infusing through a NJ tube in the right nare. The TF was infusing at a rate of 71 ml/hr with a water flush infusing at 35 ml/hr. The TF formula was contained in an enteral feeding pump bag and had approximately 300 ml remaining. The TF bag was labeled with resident 27's first name, and the date was documented as 10/24 at 1430 (2:30 PM). The formula type, infusion rate or the initials of the staff who initiated the infusion were not documented on the bag label. The water pump bag was not labeled and the water bag had approximately 400 ml remaining. On 10/25/22 at 12:07 PM, an interview was conducted with Registered Nurse (RN) 1. RN 1 stated that she disconnected resident 27's TF at 10:00 AM. RN 1 stated that the formula was Jevity 1.5. RN 1 stated that she hung the TF bag yesterday at 2:46 PM, and the time was verified on the Medication Administration Record (MAR). RN 1 stated that she put the name, date, and time on the label of the formula bag. RN 1 stated that she did not put the formula type, infusion rate, or her signature on the TF bag. RN 1 stated that she did not fill out the entire sticker with all the fields of information completed. RN 1 stated that she did not label the TF bag with the formula type because the order was in the computer. RN 1 stated that she did not sign the TF bag because she figured she was on shift and it was documented on the MAR. On 10/25/22 at 1:32 PM, an interview was conducted with the Director of Nursing (DON). The DON stated that the TF bag should have a label sticker that documented the start time, stop time, formula, date, and rate of infusion. The DON stated that the nurse was encouraged to sign the label but it was not required, as it was not in the policy. The DON stated that staff should date and time the TF bag because a lot of them are timed feedings. The DON stated she did not believe it needed a signature by the nurse who initiated the infusion as they could look in the electronic medical records to see who signed it off. On 10/25/22 at 2:30 PM, an interview was conducted with RN 1. RN 1 stated that she was hanging resident 27's TF and wanted to show me the label. The TF label contained the resident's name, room number, formula type, rate of infusion, date and time initiated, and the nurse's initials. RN 1 stated that the water flush bag did not require a label, but she was surprised that the TF label did not have a spot for the water flush information. Resident 27 was observed with the head of the bed elevated to 30 degrees. Resident 27 was observed to reposition himself in bed and utilized the side rail to pull himself up further in bed. Review of the Lippincott Nursing Procedures documented under Enteral Gastric, Duodenal, and Jejunal Tube Feedings and Implementation to Make sure that the enteral formula container is labeled with the patient's identifiers; formula name (and strength if diluted); date and time of formula preparation; date and time the formula was hung; administration route, rate, and duration (if cycled or intermittent); initials of who prepared, hung, and checked the enteral formula against the order; expiration date and time; dosing weight (if appropriate); and notation ENTERAL USE ONLY--NOT FOR IV USE. Wolters Kluwer. Lippincott Nursing Procedure. Ninth Edition. Philadelphia, PA. (2023), pp. 296.
CONCERN (D)

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

ADL Care (Tag F0677)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined, the facility did not ensure that residents unable to carr...

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 ensure that residents unable to carry out their own activities of daily living (ADLs) received the necessary services to maintain grooming and personal and oral hygiene. Specifically, for 1 out of 23 sampled residents, a resident who was dependent on staff for grooming and personal hygiene did not receive the services needed for his toenails. Resident identifier: 47. Findings included: Resident 47 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included Alzheimer's disease, dementia unspecified severity with anxiety, abnormal weight loss, history of falling, depression, benign prostatic hyperplasia, and chronic pain. Resident 47 was receiving hospice services when admitted . On 10/24/22 at 9:49 AM, resident 47 was observed to have very long, jagged, thick toenails. A review of resident 47's medical record was completed. Resident 47's ADL-Bathing task revealed that from 9/28/22 through 10/6/22, resident 47 received one shower on 9/28/22, two showers on 10/1/22, and one shower on 10/5/22. Resident 47's ADL - Personal Hygiene task showed that from 9/28/22 through 10/6/22, resident 47 received assistance with personal hygiene twice daily every day except for 10/8/22, 10/18/22, and 10/22/22, where he received assistance once daily. The assistance resident 47 required ranged from independent to total dependence. Resident 47's facility Care Plan had a focus which stated [Resident 47] has an ADL self-care performance deficit r/t [related to] Impaired cognition an associated goal which stated [Resident 47] will maintain current level of function in ADLs through the review date, and interventions which stated BATHING/SHOWERING: [Resident 47] requires usually dependent assistance by 1 staff Date Initiated: 10/07/2022 and PERSONAL HYGIENE: [Resident 47] requires usually limited assistance by 1 staff with personal hygiene and oral care. Date Initiated: 10/07/2022. The care plan showed that the staff to provide these interventions were Certified Nursing Assistants (CNAs), Licensed Practical Nurses (LPNs), and Registered Nurses. Resident 47's Hospice Care Plan showed that resident 47 received care from the hospice CNA to assist with ADL's three times per week. No documentation was found in resident 47's chart that showed what cares or services to assist with ADLs were provided to resident 47 by hospice. On 10/25/22 at 10:31 AM, an interview was conducted with LPN 2. LPN 2 stated if the facility had a podiatrist that came to the building, LPN 2 had never seen him. LPN 2 stated he was told not to touch the residents' feet, and the podiatrist was the one who provided foot care. LPN 2 stated he had told the CNAs not to provide foot care. LPN 2 stated that nurses and CNAs could clean, trim, and file fingernails. LPN 2 stated he checked the resident nails as he did assessments. LPN 2 stated if a resident needed their fingernails trimmed or cleaned, he would ask a CNA to do it or would do it himself. LPN 2 stated resident 47 was on hospice, and hospice provided his showers. LPN 2 stated the hospice CNAs were not required to chart in the facility's electronic health record. LPN 2 stated he had not received a report on resident 47 or feedback from hospice. LPN 2 stated he was unaware that resident 47 needed his toenails trimmed. On 10/25/22 at 11:20 AM, an interview was conducted with CNA 1. CNA 1 stated she provided personal cares to the residents. CNA 1 stated she did not do anything with toenails but would clean resident fingernails. CNA 1 stated she told the nurse and the CNA Coordinator if she saw that a resident had really long toenails. CNA 1 stated she saw that resident 47 had long toenails and told her supervisor. CNA 1 stated her supervisor told her to tell the nurse, which she did. CNA 1 stated she did not remember which nurse she told. On 10/25/22 at 12:12 PM, an interview was conducted with CNA 2. CNA 2 stated he cleaned resident fingernails if needed, but not toenails. On 10/25/22 at 2:42 PM, an interview was conducted with LPN 3. LPN 3 stated the podiatrist came to the facility once a month. LPN 3 stated she told the Unit Manager (UM) which residents needed to see the podiatrist and the UM added them to the list. LPN 3 stated the facility shower CNA was really good to report any issues like long toenails. LPN 3 stated she conducted a weekly head to toe assessment on all residents if they allowed it. LPN 3 stated she would see during the assessment if a resident needed foot care, or their toenails trimmed. On 10/26/22 at 9:31 AM, an interview was conducted with the Director of Nursing (DON). The DON stated the podiatrist came monthly (every 3rd Thursday) to see the residents on the list. The DON stated the podiatrist would also see anyone in need who was not on the list. The DON stated that any resident on hospice could see the facility's podiatrist if needed. On 10/26/22 at 9:53 AM, an interview was conducted with UM 1. UM 1 stated she scheduled the resident appointments with the podiatrist. UM 1 stated residents, nurses, and CNAs could tell her when a resident needed to see the podiatrist, and she would add them to the list. UM 1 stated she arranged for residents on hospice to see the podiatrist if needed. On 10/26/22 at 3:23 PM, an observation was made of resident 47 lying in his bed, not wearing shoes or socks. Resident 47 was observed to have very long, jagged, thick toenails. On 10/27/22 at 1:20 PM, an interview was conducted with CNA 3. CNA 3 stated the CNAs were required to ask the nurse before resident fingernails could be trimmed. CNA 3 stated she felt it was safer to file the nails instead. CNA 3 stated she checked resident nails all the time, cleaned them frequently, and assisted residents to wash their hands after using the bathroom. On 10/27/22 at 1:25 PM, an interview was conducted with the CNA Coordinator. The CNA Coordinator stated that CNAs should clean resident fingernails when dirty and could file resident fingernails with approval from the nurse. The CNA Coordinator stated CNAs were not allowed to cut or file resident toenails but should notify the nurse if a resident needed to see the podiatrist. The CNA Coordinator stated resident nails should be checked on their shower days, and the shower CNA should clean nails if dirty. The CNA Coordinator stated the shower CNA should do a full body check on each resident with each shower. The CNA Coordinator turned in a skin check/shower sheet for each resident after their shower. The CNA Coordinator stated that hospice showered resident 47, and scheduled showers directly with resident 47. The CNA Coordinator stated he did not know when hospice came to shower resident 47 or how many showers he received each week. The CNA Coordinator stated that hospice should arrange for a podiatrist to visit resident 47 or notify the facility. The CNA Coordinator stated resident 47 did not like to be checked on, often refused care, dressed himself with standby assist only, and was very particular about cares. The CNA Coordinator stated that hospice did not communicate with the facility. On 10/27/22 at 3:29 PM, an interview was conducted with the DON. The DON stated hospice nurses signed in at the front desk, but hospice CNAs did not. The DON stated the facility did not track showers or personal care provided by hospice but could get information from the company if needed.
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

Based on interview and record review, it was determined, the facility did not ensure that residents received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview and record review, it was determined, the facility did not ensure that residents received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan and the residents' choice. Specifically, for 1 out of 23 sampled residents, a resident was not provided treatment and care after a fall and the resident had a decline in mental status. Resident identifier: 55. Findings included: Resident 55 was admitted to facility on 7/17/22 with diagnoses which included essential hypertension, atrial fibrillation, benign prostatic hyperplasia without lower urinary tract symptoms, dementia, presence of aortocoronary bypass graft, encounter for other orthopedic aftercare, unspecified protein-calorie malnutrition, and pneumonia. Resident 55's closed medical record was reviewed on 10/25/22. A Nursing Progress Note dated 8/29/22 at 4:06 PM, documented that a Certified Nurse Assistant reported resident 55 to be on the floor. The day nurse noted resident 55 was on the floor with his nose bleeding. A bump and abrasion above the left forehead and brow were noted. An incident report was initiated at 3:45 PM on 8/29/22. The incident documented action taken, Assessed, placed cold to back of neck and pinched nose bridge to stop bleeding. Initiated neuro [neurological] checks. A physician's order for resident 55 dated 7/17/22, documented an anticoagulant mediation - monitor for discolored urine, black tarry stools, sudden severe headache, nausea and vomiting, diarrhea, muscle joint pain, lethargy, bruising, vital signs (V/S), shortness of breath, and nose bleeds. Monitor every shift. Order was initiated on 7/17/22. A Nursing Progress Note dated 8/29/22 at 5:10 PM, documented that a neurological assessment was initiated. Review of resident 55's Neurological Flow Sheet revealed the following: a. Hand-written date of 8/29 and time 1545 (3:45 PM). b. Instructions stating, Vital Signs and Neuro Checks: Every 15 minutes for 1 hour, every 30 minutes for 1 hour, every hour over 4 hours, and every 4 hours for 24 hours. Progress along this time scheduled ONLY if signs are stable. Hand-written time beginning at 16 (4:00 PM) continuing until 8/31 at 1430 (2:30 PM). c. Statement listed near the bottom of form, Notify MD [Medical Director] IMMEDIATELY of signs and symptoms of Intracranial Pressure!!! d. Neuro-checks which include level of consciousness, movement, hand grasps, pupil size and reaction for both eyes, and speech were documented on 8/29/22 at 16, 4:15 PM, 4:30 PM, 4:45 PM, 17 (5:00 PM), 5:30 PM, and 6:00 PM. e. There were no neuro-checks documented on 8/29/22 at 6:30 PM, 7:30 PM, 8:30 PM, 9:30 PM, and 10:30 PM, and there were not any neuro-checks completed on 8/30/22. f. V/S which included Blood Pressure, Pulse, Respirations, Temperature, and Oxygen Saturations were documented on 8/29 at 4:15 PM, 4:45 PM, 10:30 PM, and on 8/30/22 at 2:30 AM. g. There were no V/S documented on 8/29/22 at 16, 4:30 PM, 17, 5:30 PM, 6:00 PM, 6:30 PM, 7:30 PM, 8:30 PM, and 9:30 PM. A Nursing Progress Note dated 8/30/22 at 12:57 AM, documented resident 55 was found at 12:30 AM, with some emesis on bed. Emesis was black and chunky and had a foul smell. Resident 55 would not rouse with sternal rub stimulation. Resident is a DNR [Do Not Resuscitate] and will be monitored closely this shift to ensure comfort and safety. Review of resident 55's Provider Order for Life-Sustaining Treatment effective date 7/17/22, revealed the following: a. Section B. Medical Interventions Treatment options when the patient has a pulse and is breathing. b. Limited Additional Interventions. Treating medical conditions while avoiding burdensome measures. Medical care may include treatment of airway obstruction, bag/valve/mask ventilation, monitoring of cardiac rhythm, IV [intravenous] fluids, IV antibiotics and other medications as indicated. Also, included medical care described below. No endotracheal intubation or mechanical ventilation. Generally avoid the Intensive Care Unit. A Nursing Progress Note dated 8/30/22 at 5:12 AM, documented resident 55 passed away at 4:44 AM on 8/30/22. On 10/26/22 at 1:25 PM, an interview was conducted with the Director of Nursing (DON). The DON stated the protocols for all resident falls that involved head injuries was the nurse was to notify the family, physician, and DON as soon as possible and start the Neuro Matrix immediately. The DON stated that a Neuro Matrix was a neurological assessment over a 72-hour period which was documented on the Neurological Flow Sheet and the information was passed along at shift changes. The DON stated that any change of status of the resident to include medical, physical, and mental alertness needed to be reported to the nurse who was to notify the physician, even if the family decided not to treat. The DON stated the nurse was to document any notifications in the nursing notes. On 10/27/22 at 2:18 PM, an interview was conducted with physician 1. Physician 1 stated that she was notified regarding the fall and initial assessment of resident 55. Physician 1 stated she did not get notified about the change in condition for resident 55's status. Physician 1 stated she would have liked to have been notified of the change of status.
CONCERN (D)

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

Medication Errors (Tag F0758)

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, the facility did not ensure that residents who used psychotropic drugs ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, it was determined, the facility did not ensure that residents who used psychotropic drugs received a gradual dose reduction (GDR), and behavioral interventions, unless clinically contraindicated, in an effort to discontinue these drugs. Specifically, for 1 out of 23 sampled residents, a resident was receiving an anxiolytic, Diazepam, and had not had a GDR attempted or had an evaluation with rationale by the provider to determine that a GDR was clinically contraindicated. Resident identifier: 6. Findings included: Resident 6 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses which included multiple sclerosis (MS), polyneuropathy, osteoarthritis, scoliosis, methicillin resistant staphylococcus aureus infection, urogential implants, sinusitis, history of urinary tract infections, chronic pain, hypothyroidism, insomnia, mood disorder, psoriasis, rosacea, and intervertebral disc degeneration. On 10/26/22, resident 6's medical record was reviewed. Review of resident 6's physician orders revealed the following: a. Diazepam Tablet 5 milligrams (mg), Give 1 tablet by mouth with meals for MS. The order was initiated on 4/19/21 and discontinued on 4/20/21. b. Diazepam Tablet 5 mg, Give 1 tablet by mouth three times a day for MS. The order was initiated on 4/20/21 and discontinued on 4/20/21. c. Diazepam Tablet 5 mg, Give 1 tablet by mouth three times a day for Muscle Spasms. The order was initiated on 4/20/21 and discontinued on 7/2/21. d. Diazepam Tablet 5 mg, Give 1 tablet by mouth one time a day for Muscle Spasms AND Give 1 tablet by mouth one time a day for Muscle Spasms AND Give 1 tablet by mouth one time a day for Muscle Spasms. The order was was initiated on 7/2/21 and discontinued on 2/3/22. e. Diazepam Tablet 5 mg, Give 1 tablet by mouth one time a day for Muscle Spasms AND Give 1 tablet by mouth one time a day for Muscle Spasms AND Give 1 tablet by mouth at bedtime for Muscle Spasms prefers with her other meds at 2000 [8:00 PM]. The order was initiated on 2/4/22 and discontinued on 2/27/22. f. Diazepam Tablet 5 mg, Give 1 tablet by mouth one time a day for Muscle Spasms AND Give 1 tablet by mouth one time a day for Muscle Spasms AND Give 1 tablet by mouth one time a day for Muscle Spasms prefers with her other meds at 2000. The order was active and was initiated on 2/27/22. Review of resident 6's Medication Administration Record for October 2022 revealed that the Diazepam 5 mg was administered three times a day at 8:00 AM, 4:00 PM, and 9:30 PM. All scheduled doses were documented as administered per the physician order. No documentation could be found in resident 6's medical record of a GDR attempt or a physician rationale for a clinical contraindication to a GDR for the Diazepam medication. On 10/27/22 at 11:37 AM, an interview was conducted with the Director of Nursing (DON). The DON stated that the diazepam was used for muscle spasms and not as an anxiolytic so there was not a GDR attempted. The DON stated that anytime they had tried to do a GDR resident 6 was opposed to that. It should be noted that no documentation was found of any prior attempt at a GDR or a failed GDR for resident 6's diazepam. On 10/27/22 at 12:23 PM, an interview was conducted with Corporate Resource Nurse (CRN) 2. CRN 2 stated that they never attempted a GDR for a psychotropic medication if the clinical use was intended for muscle spasms as was the case with the Diazepam. CRN 2 stated that she had worked in the industry for 25 years and was not aware that a GDR was required for all psychotropic medication regardless of the intended use of the medication.
CONCERN (E)

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

Food Safety (Tag F0812)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on observation and interview, it was determined, the facility did not store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. Specifically, t...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation and interview, it was determined, the facility did not store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. Specifically, the grill in the food preparation area was dirty, the oil in the deep fryer was cloudy, food items in the walk-in freezer were open to air, food items in the walk-in refrigerator were open to air, food items in the dry storage area were open to air, and a dented can was not removed from the area where usable canned goods were stored. Findings included: On 10/24/22 at 8:28 AM, an initial walk-through was conducted in the kitchen. In the dry storage area, a can of jellied cranberry sauce was observed to be dented and with the usable cans of cranberry sauce. A box of raisins was open to air and a box of fried oriental noodles was open to air. In the walk-in freezer, a box of cinnamon rolls was open to air, a box of cookie dough was open to air, a box of beef patties was open to air and a box of Krabbycakes was open to air. Additionally, the oil in the deep fryer was cloudy and the griddle in the food preparation area had dried grease drippings on the grates. On 10/24/22 at 8:38 AM, an interview was conducted with the morning cook. The morning cook stated the oil in the deep fryer was changed every week. On 10/27/22 at 9:06 AM, a second walk-through was conducted in the kitchen. In the dry storage area, a box of raisins was open to air, a box of dried cranberries was open to air, a box of fried oriental noodles was open to air, and a can of jellied cranberry sauce was dented and with the cans of usable cranberry sauce. In the walk-in refrigerator a box of sausage patties was open to air and a package of luncheon meat was open to air. In the walk-in freezer, a box of beef patties was open to air, a box with lasagna sheets was open to air and had ice crystals on the lasagna sheets, a box of pita chips was open to air, a box of Krabbycakes was open to air, a box of oatmeal raisin cookie dough was open to air, a box of chocolate cookie dough was open to air. [Note: While surveyors were in the walk-in freezer, the Dietary Manager (DM) came to the walk-in freezer and removed the box of chocolate chip cookie dough. The morning cook was making cookies and the DM stated she needed more chocolate chip cookie dough.] On 10/27/22 at 9:23 AM, an interview was conducted with the DM. The DM stated he received the shipments of food items weekly. The DM stated he inspected and dated the food items before putting them away. The DM stated he liked to check the quality of the food items coming to the kitchen. The DM stated the Corporate Dietitian (CD) was at the facility every Tuesday for meetings and would walk through the kitchen to inspect for sanitation and food safety. The DM stated the CD completed a form that would be sent to himself and the Administrator. The DM stated the inspection included sanitation, temperature logs, labeling and dating of food items, and open containers. The DM stated the oil in the deep fryer was changed after every use. The DM stated he did not keep a bunch of oil in the kitchen and did not have any oil for the deep fryer at the time. The DM stated there were no fried foods on the menu for the week, however, chicken strips were always available on the alternate menu. The DM stated chicken strips were served yesterday. The DM stated he told staff to put dented cans in a specific area in the dry food storage room so they could be returned. The DM stated he was aware that there was a can of hominy in the dry food storage room that was not put in the designated spot. The DM stated he had explained to staff about concern for botulism with dented cans and they could not be used. The DM stated staff were aware of where to place dented cans. The DM stated he tried to do weekly education with staff and then stated, but to be honest, it ends up being monthly. The DM stated there was a language barrier with some of the staff so staff had to be educated and shown how to do things correctly in the kitchen. The DM stated he had tried to educate staff about sealing food when they put it back in the refrigerator and freezer, but the language barrier is a thing. The DM stated his assistant or the Certified Nursing Assistant Coordinator were willing to help with communication. The DM stated the in-services he had provided to staff included proper food temperatures, food presentation, hand washing, and sanitation.
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

  • "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
  • "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"

Our Honest Assessment

Strengths
  • • No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Utah facilities.
  • • 44% turnover. Below Utah's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
Concerns
  • • 13 deficiencies on record, including 2 serious (caused harm) violations. Ask about corrective actions taken.
Bottom line: Mixed indicators with Trust Score of 65/100. Visit in person and ask pointed questions.

About This Facility

What is Meadow Peak Rehabilitation's CMS Rating?

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

How is Meadow Peak Rehabilitation Staffed?

CMS rates Meadow Peak Rehabilitation's staffing level at 4 out of 5 stars, which is above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 44%, compared to the Utah average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.

What Have Inspectors Found at Meadow Peak Rehabilitation?

State health inspectors documented 13 deficiencies at Meadow Peak Rehabilitation during 2022 to 2025. These included: 2 that caused actual resident harm and 11 with potential for harm. Deficiencies causing actual harm indicate documented cases where residents experienced negative health consequences.

Who Owns and Operates Meadow Peak Rehabilitation?

Meadow Peak Rehabilitation is owned by a for-profit company. For-profit facilities operate as businesses with obligations to shareholders or private owners. The facility is operated by MONUMENT HEALTH GROUP, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 75 certified beds and approximately 71 residents (about 95% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in Taylorsville, Utah.

How Does Meadow Peak Rehabilitation Compare to Other Utah Nursing Homes?

Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Utah, Meadow Peak Rehabilitation's overall rating (4 stars) is above the state average of 3.4, staff turnover (44%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (3 stars) is at the national benchmark.

What Should Families Ask When Visiting Meadow Peak Rehabilitation?

Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "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?"

Is Meadow Peak Rehabilitation Safe?

Based on CMS inspection data, Meadow Peak 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 4-star overall rating and ranks #1 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 Meadow Peak Rehabilitation Stick Around?

Meadow Peak Rehabilitation has a staff turnover rate of 44%, which is about average for Utah nursing homes (state average: 46%). Moderate turnover is common in nursing homes, but families should still ask about staff tenure and how the facility maintains care continuity when employees leave.

Was Meadow Peak Rehabilitation Ever Fined?

Meadow Peak Rehabilitation has no federal fines on record. CMS issues fines when nursing homes fail to meet care standards or don't correct problems found during inspections. The absence of fines suggests the facility has either maintained compliance or corrected any issues before penalties were assessed. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review recent inspection reports for the full picture.

Is Meadow Peak Rehabilitation on Any Federal Watch List?

Meadow Peak 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.