NELLA'S AT AUTUMN LAKE HEALTHCARE

499 FERGUSON ROAD, ELKINS, WV 26241 (304) 636-1008
For profit - Limited Liability company 100 Beds AUTUMN LAKE HEALTHCARE Data: November 2025 2 Immediate Jeopardy citations
Trust Grade
6/100
#109 of 122 in WV
Last Inspection: August 2025

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

Overview

Nella's at Autumn Lake Healthcare has received a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns about the facility's care and management. It ranks #109 out of 122 nursing homes in West Virginia, placing it in the bottom half, and #3 out of 3 in Randolph County, meaning only one other local option is better. The situation is worsening, with reported issues increasing from 2 in 2024 to 14 in 2025, reflecting deeper problems in care quality. While the staffing rating is below average at 2 out of 5 stars, the turnover rate is average at 52%, suggesting some consistency; however, the facility has concerning RN coverage, being lower than 94% of state facilities. Additionally, significant fines of $71,911 indicate compliance issues, and recent inspections revealed critical incidents, including dangerously high water temperatures that pose burn risks and failure to protect residents from sexually aggressive behavior, highlighting serious deficiencies in resident safety and care planning.

Trust Score
F
6/100
In West Virginia
#109/122
Bottom 11%
Safety Record
High Risk
Review needed
Inspections
Getting Worse
2 → 14 violations
Staff Stability
⚠ Watch
52% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
Penalties
⚠ Watch
$71,911 in fines. Higher than 93% of West Virginia facilities. Major compliance failures.
Skilled Nurses
⚠ Watch
Each resident gets only 18 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for West Virginia. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
Violations
⚠ Watch
32 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
★☆☆☆☆
1.0
Overall Rating
★★☆☆☆
2.0
Staff Levels
★★☆☆☆
2.0
Care Quality
★☆☆☆☆
1.0
Inspection Score
Stable
2024: 2 issues
2025: 14 issues

The Good

  • Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
  • No fines on record

Facility shows strength in fire safety.

The Bad

1-Star Overall Rating

Below West Virginia average (2.7)

Significant quality concerns identified by CMS

Staff Turnover: 52%

Near West Virginia avg (46%)

Higher turnover may affect care consistency

Federal Fines: $71,911

Well above median ($33,413)

Moderate penalties - review what triggered them

Chain: AUTUMN LAKE HEALTHCARE

Part of a multi-facility chain

Ask about local staffing decisions and management

The Ugly 32 deficiencies on record

2 life-threatening
Aug 2025 14 deficiencies 1 IJ (1 facility-wide)
CRITICAL (L)

Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation

Accident Prevention (Tag F0689)

Someone could have died · This affected most or all residents

⚠️ Facility-wide issue

Based on observation, record review, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure the environment over which it had control was as free from accident hazards as possible. Hot water temperatures ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, record review, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure the environment over which it had control was as free from accident hazards as possible. Hot water temperatures in resident areas exceeded 120 degrees Fahrenheit (F). This deficient practice was determined to be an immediate jeopardy situation that placed all residents at risk for burns from hot water. Facility census: 91.Findings included:a) Hot water temperatures The facility's policy statement titled Safe Water Temperatures, with no implementation or revision dates given, stated as follows:Direct care staff will monitor residents during prolonged exposure to to warm or hot water for any signs or symptoms of burns, and will respond appropriately. Staff will be educated on safe water temperatures upon employment and on a regular basis. Thermometers will be available as needed for use by all staff. Staff will report abnormal findings, such as complaints of water too cold or hot, burns or redness, or any problems with water temperatures (ex. water is painful to touch or causes redness) to the supervisor and/or maintenance staff.Water temperatures will be set to a temperature of no more than 110 degrees Fahrenheit (43.33 degrees Celsius), or the state's allowable maximum water temperature. Maintenance staff will check water heater temperature controls and the temperatures of tap water in all hot water circuits weekly and as needed. Documentation of testing will be maintained for 3 years and kept in the maintenance office. On 07/30/25 at approximately 8:00 AM, the hot water temperatures in rooms B #111 and A #127 were noted by surveyors to seem hot to touch.On 07/30/25 at 8:45 AM, the hot water temperature in the sink in room B #111 was checked by the Maintenance Supervisor with the surveyor observing. The water ran for two (2) minutes before the temperature was checked. The temperature was 121.1 degrees Fahrenheit. On 07/30/25 at 8:53 AM, the hot water temperature in the sink in room A #127 was checked by the Maintenance Supervisor with the surveyor observing. The water ran for two (2) minutes before the temperature was checked. The temperature was 126.3 degrees Fahrenheit.The Maintenance Supervisor confirmed the temperatures were too high. He stated he liked to keep the hot water temperatures between 105 to 110 degrees. He stated the building only has one mixing valve that serves all resident rooms and shower rooms. The Maintenance Supervisor stated water temperatures were monitored weekly. He provided documentation for the month of July 2025 showing weekly testing of the water in the shower rooms and six (6) randomly selected resident rooms in each hallway. For the month of July, recorded temperatures did not reach 110 degrees F. The temperature monitoring was last conducted on 07/24/25. On 07/30/25 at 10:30 AM, the facility was informed an immediate jeopardy situation existed due to the water temperature in resident areas exceeding 120 degrees, which placed residents at risk for burns. On 07/30/25 at 4:00 PM, the State Agency accepted the following Plan of Correction: Corrective Measures for Resident(s) Affected: The maintenance director adjusted the mixing valve to the hot water on 07/30/25 at approximately 10:30 AM and flushed the remaining hot water. The facility will continue to monitor all residents' rooms' water temps immediately, then in 30 minutes, then in one-hour times 4 hours, and then every shift in affected resident rooms. Any out-of-range temperatures will be reported to the NHA [Nursing Home Administrator] and DON [Director of Nursing], and the hot water to that sink and/or shower will be shut off. Anticipated date of compliance is 07/30/25. Identification of others with the potential to be affected: All facility residents have the potential to be affected. On 07/30/25 at 10:30 AM the facility-initiated water temperature checks in each resident's room to ensure temperatures are in the safe temperature range of 95-110 degrees. Each shift starting 07/30/25 supervisor will check water temperatures in affected resident rooms to ensure that temperatures are in the safe temperature range of 95-110 degrees. Any out-of-range temperatures will be reported to the DON and NHA< and the hot water to that sink will be shut off. The anticipated date of compliance is 07/30/25. Measures to Prevent Recurrence: Facility Safe water temperature policy has been reviewed by Corporate Compliance Nurse. The Director of Nursing or designee-initiated education with all departments on the safe water temperature policy. Education included safe water temperature ranges for hot water and the need to report findings such as water temperature being too hot or cold, redness or burns or any problem with water temperatures to the supervisor and maintenance immediately. The anticipated date of compliance is 07/30/25. The facility Orientation Process will be adjusted to include a review of the safe water temperature policy. Anticipated date of compliance will be 07/30/25 and ongoing. The nursing supervisors will receive education on obtaining a water temperature and the need to immediately check the temperature upon notification of staff memers of water temperature concerns. The anticipated date of compliance is 07/30/25. The Facility Administrator completed one on one education with the maintenance department. This education included a review of the safe water temperature range of no greater than 110 degrees and no less than 95 degrees. The maintenance department was educated of the need to monitor hot water temperatures for all hot water sources weekly and document their findings. This education included steps to be taken if the hot water temperature is determined to be out of range. The anticipated date of compliance is 07/30/25. Monitoring of Corrective Measures: The Facility Maintenance Director will complete random audits of facility hot water temperatures to ensure that temperatures are in the safe temperature range of 95-110 degrees. The audits will occur on the following schedule: Daily until 100% compliance is noted for four (4) consecutive weeks, and then monthly for a minimum of three months or until such time that substantial compliance has been achieved. Audit results will be forwarded to the facility QAPI (Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement) committee. On 07/31/25, the facility's in-service sign-sheets regarding Safe Water Temperature Awareness and Reporting were reviewed. The in-service content was as follows: Department(s): All Staff (Nursing, Maintenance, Housekeeping, etc.) Purpose: To ensure resident safety by maintaining appropriate and safe water temperatures throughout the facility and to comply with facility policy and regulatory standards. Water temperature safety is a critical aspect of resident care in long-term care facilities. Older adults are at greater risk of burns and scalds due to thinner skin, slower reaction times, and reduced sensation. Ensuring water temperatures remain within safe limits protects residents from harm. Key Points Covered: 1. Resident Safety First Staff must monitor residents during bathing or other prolonged exposure to hot water. Watch for any signs of discomfort, burns, or redness and respond immediately. 2. Temperature Limits Hot water temperature should not exceed 110 degrees F (43.33 degrees C) or the state-regulated maximum. If water is uncomfortably hot or cold, staff must report it right away. Facility uses mixing valves or thermostatic controls to regulate water temperature to the point of use. 3. Staff Responsibilities All staff will receive education on safe water temperatures during orientation and periodically thereafter. Thermometers are available for staff use when needed. 4. Reporting Procedure Any complaints of extreme water temperatures or evidence of burns/redness must be reported to a supervisor and/or maintenance immediately. Use professional judgement; if water feels too hot to the touch, it may be unsafe for resident use. 5. Maintenance Role Maintenance will check water heater settings and tap temperatures in all hot water circuits weekly and as needed. And address equipment failures and unsafe readings without delay. Any identified issues with temperatures out of range will be adjusted by maintenance and if necessary, outside vendor if unable to correct. All water temperature checks will be documented, and any corrective actions needs will be kept on file. Staff Acknowledgement: I have received training on the Safe Water Temperature policy. I understand the importance of monitoring and reporting unsafe water conditions to protect our residents from harm. On 07/31/25 at 10:00 AM, staff were interviewed regarding steps to take if the water was too hot in the resident's room or in the shower rooms. The staff gave correct responses. On 07/31/25, the Maintenance Supervisor was interviewed regarding monitoring of hot water temperatures and steps to be taken if the water was too hot. The Maintenance Supervisor gave correct responses. The Maintenance Supervisor provided documentation of the water monitoring conducted overnight. The last monitoring was completed on 07/31/25 at 10:00 AM. No water temperatures exceeded 104 degrees F. The Maintenance Supervisor performed the following testing with the surveyor in attendance:At 10:00 AM, the sink in room B 111 was 102.3 degrees F.At 10:05 AM, the sink in room A 127 was 101.6 degrees F.At 10:10 AM, the sink in the A hallway resident toilet was 103.2 degrees F.At 10:15 AM, the sink in the B hallway resident toilet was 103.8 degrees F.The maintenance supervisor stated the resident toilet sinks were the resident-accessible areas closest to the mixing valve. Immediate Jeopardy was abated 07/31/25 at 10:20 AM.
CONCERN (D)

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

Safe Environment (Tag F0584)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

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

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation and staff interview the facility failed to provide a clean, comfortable, homelike environment. This failed practice was a random opportunity for discovery and had the potential to affect a limited number of residents during the Long-Term Care Survey Process. Facility Census: 91. Findings include: a) room [ROOM NUMBER]-B The initial observation on 07/30/25 at 11:16 AM, revealed in the bathroom of room [ROOM NUMBER]-B, around the entire base of the toilet was a dried orange, yellow and brown substance. The floor was sticky, and the bathroom had a strong urine odor. During an interview on 07/31/25 at 12:28 PM, The Housekeeping Supervisor (HS) confirmed that the bathroom was dirty, and stated, I will get that cleaned up.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0628 (Tag F0628)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure documentation that required transfer information was p...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure documentation that required transfer information was provided to the receiving hospital. This deficient practice had the potential to affect one (1) of two (2) residents reviewed for care area of hospitalization. Resident identifier: #21. Facility census: 91. Findings included:a) Resident #21 Review of Resident #21's electronic medical records showed the resident was transferred to the hospital on [DATE] due to a fall, altered mental status, and an elevated blood glucose level. Further review of Resident #21's electronic medical records did not reveal documentation regarding what information was sent to the hospital to which the resident was transferred. On 08/04/2025 at 3:07 PM, the Director of Nursing (DON) provided a document titled Acute Care Transfer Document Checklist. The document had Resident #21's name written on it, along with the date 07/13/25. The document gave the following instructions: Copies sent with resident, check all apply. The document contained two (2) lists with boxes to be checked. The first list stated, These documents should ALWAYS accompany patient and included a universal transfer form, face sheet, current medication list or current medication administration record, advance directives or Physician's Orders for Scope of Treatment form, facility capabilities list, transfer notification, bed hold policy and notification, and immunization record. The bottom of the form stated, By signing you agree that the above has been provided to the resident upon transfer to the hospital. The form was signed by the nurse and by the ambulance staff accepting the envelope of documents. The second list stated, Send these documents as INDICATED and included acute change in condition/nurse's progress note, most recent history and physical and any recent hospital discharge summary, recent physician, nurse practitioner, or physician's assistant orders related to acute condition, relevant lab results, and personal belongings sent with the resident. None of the items on the checklist had been checked to indicate the information was sent to the hospital with Resident #21 on 07/13/25. The Director of Nursing confirmed this checklist was the only document available regarding the information sent to the hospital with Resident #21 on 07/13/25. No further information was provided through the completion of the survey process.
CONCERN (D)

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

Assessment Accuracy (Tag F0641)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based upon record review and staff interview, the facility failed to accurately reflect the resident's diagnoses in the assessment. This was found to be true for one (1) of twenty-seven (27) residents...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based upon record review and staff interview, the facility failed to accurately reflect the resident's diagnoses in the assessment. This was found to be true for one (1) of twenty-seven (27) residents reviewed during the annual survey process. Resident identifier: #9. Facility census: 91.Findings included: a) Resident #9 A review of the electronic health record reflects the Resident has the following diagnoses related to mental health:ANXIETY DISORDER, UNSPECIFIED 6/17/2024MAJOR DEPRESSIVE DISORDER, RECURRENT SEVERE WITHOUT PSYCHOTIC FEATURES 6/17/2024POST-TRAUMATIC STRESS DISORDER, UNSPECIFIED 6/17/2024 The most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment was completed on 06/26/25. Under Section I: Active Diagnoses, Psychiatric/Mood Disorder, the facility only marked Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. Anxiety disorder or depression were not marked. These findings were reviewed with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 08/04/25 at 1:00 PM. The DON acknowledged the error.
CONCERN (D)

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

PASARR Coordination (Tag F0644)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based upon record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to update the Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) when new diagnoses were given. This was found to be true for two (...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based upon record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to update the Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) when new diagnoses were given. This was found to be true for two (2) of eight (8) residents reviewed during the annual survey process. Resident identifiers: #9, #42. Facility census: 91. Findings included: a) Resident #9 A review of the electronic health record reflected the Resident had the following diagnoses related to mental health:ANXIETY DISORDER, UNSPECIFIED 6/17/2024MAJOR DEPRESSIVE DISORDER, RECURRENT SEVERE WITHOUT PSYCHOTIC FEATURES 6/17/2024POST-TRAUMATIC STRESS DISORDER, UNSPECIFIED 6/17/2024 The resident's most recent Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) was completed on 09/25/24 by the facility. Under the section III, MI/MR, Current Diagnosis, None was marked. There is a box for Major Depression, but it was not selected. There is also a selection for Other Relation Conditions, and it was not marked. Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and Anxiety could have been specified in that section. The resident's Medical Diagnostic Screening (MDS) assessment was last completed on 06/26/25. Under Section I Active Diagnoses, Psychiatric/Mood Disorder question, Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) is marked. But, Anxiety Disorder is not marked, and Depression is not marked. Comparing the MDS and the PASARR, the diagnoses do not agree. Nor, do the diagnoses in the resident's electronic health record (EHR) agree with either the MDS or the PASARR. This was reviewed with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 08/04/25 at 1:00 PM. Comparing the documents, the DON agreed the diagnoses in the electronic health record were accurate, and the MDS and PASARR diagnoses were not coordinated. b) Resident #42 On 08/04/25 at 01:02 PM, Resident #42's PASARR and Diagnosis List were reviewed. A diagnosis of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder was listed, but was not on the resident's PASARR. On 08/04/2025 at 01:27 PM, the Director of Nursing and Social Worker confirmed the PTSD diagnosis was not on the resident's PASARR.
CONCERN (D)

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

Tube Feeding (Tag F0693)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, resident interview and staff interview, the facility failed to provide appropriate treatment and service...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, resident interview and staff interview, the facility failed to provide appropriate treatment and services to restore a resident's normal eating skills. This failed practice was found to be true for Resident #6 during the annual survey process and had the potential to affect a limited number of residents. Resident Identifier: #6. Facility Census: 91. Findings included: a) Resident #6 On 07/30/25 at 9:55 AM, the state surveyor interviewed Resident 6 as part of the annual survey process. The resident stated he could not eat anymore because he aspirates and gets pneumonia. The resident reported he had not had any Speech Therapy (ST) for swallowing difficulties. The resident's diet order was noted as follows :NPO diet, NPO texture, NPO (nothing by Mouth) consistency. The State Surveyor interviewed the Director of Nursing (DON) on 07/31/25 at 11:30 AM. The DON reported the Speech-Language Pathologist (SLP) had retired and speech therapy services were provided via Telehealth pending the results of a resident's Modified Barium Swallow Study (MBSS). The DON reported Resident #6's last MBSS was in 2016. The resident's last SLP Evaluation was completed on 02/01/23. The resident was discharged from speech therapy services for dysphagia on 02/13/23. Diet recommendations included: Solids: - Any/all solids/liquids and Liquids-Thin cup/IDDSI 0, Thin Straw/IDDSI 0. Progress Note dated 05/12/25 stated, Pt. seen by telehealth to assess if appropriate to have chewing gum following MD request. Pt. is currently NPO receiving g-tube feedings as primary source of nutrition/hydration. Pt. presents with reduced alertness, poor positioning and currently on ABT for PNA. Pt. is not appropriate for gum/anything by mouth at this time 2'2 high risk of aspiration. Pt. agreeable. Continue Oral care and elevated HOB during g-tube feedings. Reconsult SLP if change in status. The resident was screened quarterly on 04/24/25 and 06/12/25 with no ST services indicated at this time. The resident received Physical Therapy (PT) services during the 06/12/25 quarterly screen. The facility's screening Policy Statement stated, Therapy Services will perform for needed services for all new admissions and readmissions to the facility. The patient has had several hospitalizations with Admitting and Discharge Diagnoses of Recurrent aspiration pneumonia . On 03/12/24, the resident's admitting diagnosis from (name of local hospital) was acute on chronic hypoxemic: respiratory failure Recurrent aspiration. On 06/08/24, the resident's admitting and discharge diagnosis from (name of local hospital) was Aspiration pneumonia. On 06/24/24, DMC Discharge summary stated, This gentleman is well known to our service and has had multiple admissions over the last 12 months, requiring HPNC to bipap and intubation. He has been deemed to have capacity, is known to aspirate, he does not wish to change his diet, nor does he want a feeding tube. On 07/20/2024. The resident's discharge summary stated: Recurrent Aspiration pneumonia and regular diet. On 03/06/25 the resident was hospitalized at (name of local hospital) with an admitting dx of Sepsis due to left lower lobe aspiration type pneumonia. Discharge summary stated, mechanical soft diet. Discharge from (name of local hospital) dated 03/28/25 had an admitting and discharge diagnosis of Aspiration pneumonia. Discharge summary dated [DATE], had a discharge diagnosis with Dysphagia with recurrent aspiration. Informed Decision to Refuse to Follow Physician's Dietary Orders and Release of Liability were completed on the following dates:- 01/24/2016 1500 cal diet- 02/22/2016 Nectar thick liquids- 11/10/2021 Nectar thickened liquids Dietary order changes were as follows: Regular diet, Regular texture, Nectar Thickened Liquids consistency(Mildly thicken Liquid) Free water protocolDiet Discontinued 12/27/2021 Regular diet, Regular texture, Regular consistencylow residue diet x3 days the resume previous dietDiet Completed 07/27/2022Regular diet, Regular texture, Regular consistencyregular thin liquidsDiet Discontinued 02/1/2023 Regular diet, Regular texture, Nectar Thickened Liquids consistency(Mildly thicken Liquid) Free water protocolDiet Discontinued 04/12/2023 Regular diet, Regular texture, Nectar Thickened Liquids consistency(Mildly thicken Liquid) Free water protocolDiet Discontinued 10/24/2023 Regular diet, Chopped texture, Thin Liquids consistencyDiet Discontinued 01/21/2023 Regular diet, Regular texture, Nectar Thickened Liquids consistency(Mildly thicken Liquid) Free water protocolDiet Discontinued 12/03/2023 Regular diet, Chopped texture, Thin Liquids consistencyDiet Discontinued 12/16/2023 Regular diet, Pureed texture, Thin Liquids consistencyDiet Completed 12/28/2023 Regular diet, Chopped texture, Thin Liquids consistencyDiet Discontinued 12/31/2023 Regular diet, Chopped texture, Thin Liquids consistencyDiet Discontinued 02/01/2024Regular diet, Regular texture, Nectar Thickened Liquids consistency(Mildly thicken Liquid) Free water protocolDiet Discontinued 03/13/2024 Regular diet, Regular texture, Nectar Thickened Liquids consistency(Mildly thicken Liquid) Free water protocolDiet Discontinued 03/27/2024 Regular diet, Pureed texture, Nectar Thickened Liquids consistency(No salt packet)Diet Discontinued 03/27/2024 Regular diet, Pureed texture, Nectar Thickened Liquids consistency(No salt packet)Diet Discontinued 06/08/2024 Regular diet, Pureed texture, Nectar Thickened Liquids consistencyDiet Discontinued 06/24/2024 NPO diet, NPO textureDiet Discontinued 07/20/2024 Regular diet, Regular texture, Regular consistencyfor diet changeDiet Discontinued 11/11/2024 Regular diet, Regular texture, Regular consistencyfor diet changeDiet Discontinued 11/20/2024 Regular diet, Chopped texture, Regular consistencyfor diet changeDiet Discontinued 03/06/2025 Regular diet, Regular texture, Regular consistencyfor diet changeDiet Discontinued 03/07/2025 NPO diet, NPO texture, NPO (Nothing by Mouth) consistencyDiet Active 05/07/2025 On 08/04/2025 at 10:06 AM, the Regional Rehab Manager was interviewed via phone. The Director of Rehab (DOR) was on vacation. The Regional Rehab Manager reported that the previous SLP had retired in October of 2024. Speech therapy services are contracted with hospitals for outpatient speech therapy services. A telehealth evaluation is completed via telehealth and if therapy is recommended, they go to (name of hospital) for outpatient therapy services. The Regional Rehab Manager reported the screening process as follows:-Screening Procedure - nursing referral to rehab via Point Click Care, based on hospital discharge paperwork. -Quarterly Long Term Care (LTC screenings) are interdisciplinary - refer if a change.-DOR tracks screens for significant change and quarterly for LTC residents.-DOR attends Interdisciplinary Meetings (IDT)meetings and Care Plan Meetings.-Protocol for change in diet or swallowing difficulty - notified by nursing or updated during meetings - daily or as scheduled. On 08/05/2025 at 8:52 AM, the DON reported the staff meet every morning to discuss changes, incidents/accidents and significant changes and that there was no actual IDT meetings. On 08/05/2025 at 3:34 PM - Resident #6 was interviewed by the State Surveyor and the resident reported he would like to eat and stated, I'd like to, but I know I can't. He reported it had been three (3) months since he had something to eat by mouth. The patient reported he had not had swallowing therapy or exercises, no swallowing x-rays, or any tests to check to see if he could eat.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0745 (Tag F0745)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based upon record review and staff interview, the facility failed to provide medically-related social services to assist the res...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based upon record review and staff interview, the facility failed to provide medically-related social services to assist the resident in attaining or maintaining their mental and psychosocial health. This was found to be true to one (1) of six (6) residents reviewed during the annual survey process. Resident identifier: #9. Facility census: 91. Findings included:a) Resident #9Upon admission to the facility on [DATE], the Resident had a diagnosis of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), Anxiety and Major Depressive Disorder, Recurrent and Severe. The diagnosis for PTSD was also found on her Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review Assessment. A review of her medical record documents revealed, a Social Service Assessment, was performed by the Director of Social Services on 06/20/24. Section G of this document consisted of a Trauma Screen. The resident responded No to all the questions, thus scoring negative for trauma. Resident #9's care plan document stated she had a communiction problem related to choosing not to speak at times. Her score on her Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) at the time of admission was nine (9). There were no indications that the Social Services Assessment was completed with the resident's representative's input. The Social Services Assessment completed on the resident failed to probe for any PTSD triggers. Further, there was no referral for psychological evaluation, or psychological services offered. The Director of Social Service's notes and assessment do not address PTSD at all. There were no attempts to determine triggers for PTSD.An interview with the DON on 08/04/2025 1:00 PM reviewed MDS, Care Plan, PASARR, Social Worker notes, no referral for psych. She acknowledged they were missing.On 08/04/2025 at approximately 1:40 PM, an interview was completed with the Director of Social Services. When she was asked why the resident did not have care plan goals or interventions for depression or PTSD, psychological referral for evaluation and treatment or behavioral services offered, the Director of Social Services stated she did not feel it was necessary because the resident had responded no to all the questions under the Trauma Screening.
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 F0825 (Tag F0825)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on policy review, record review and staff interview, the facility failed to provide specialized rehabilitation services fo...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on policy review, record review and staff interview, the facility failed to provide specialized rehabilitation services for speech therapy. This failed practice was found to be true for two (2) of two (2) residents during the annual survey process and had the potential to affect a limited number of residents. Resident Identifiers: #6 and #84. Facility Census: 91. a) Resident #84 A record review on 08/04/25 at 11:45 AM, revealed that Resident #84 was ordered a regular diet, regular texture, thin liquids diet on 02/07/25. The diet was changed on 07/25/25 to a regular diet, puree texture, thin liquids. A record review of Resident #84's weights shows that her actual admission weight, taken the day after admission was 116.4 pounds (lbs.) and her current weight taken on 07/07/25 was 110 lbs. Further record review revealed that Resident #84 had ordered supplements throughout the weight loss but had not had any Speech Therapy Consults before her diet was downgraded to the puree texture. During a telephone interview on 08/04/25 at 12:58 PM, The Registered Dietician (RD) stated, I would agree that it is a big downgrade in diet to go from regular texture to puree without a speech consult first. During an interview on 08/04/2025 at 3:20 PM, The Director of Nursing (DON) stated, I just started education with my staff saying that they cannot downgrade a diet that far without a speech consult. That there are steps that need to be followed. b) Resident #6 On 07/30/25 at 9:55 AM, the state surveyor interviewed Resident 6 as part of the annual survey process. The resident stated he could not eat anymore because he aspirates and gets pneumonia. The resident reported he had not had any Speech Therapy (ST) for swallowing difficulties. The resident's diet order was noted as follows :NPO diet, NPO texture, NPO (nothing by Mouth) consistency. The State Surveyor interviewed the Director of Nursing (DON) on 07/31/25 at 11:30 AM. The DON reported the Speech-Language Pathologist (SLP) had retired and speech therapy services were provided via Telehealth pending the results of a resident's Modified Barium Swallow Study (MBSS). The DON reported Resident #6's last MBSS was in 2016. The resident's last SLP Evaluation was completed on 02/01/23. The resident was discharged from speech therapy services for dysphagia on 02/13/23. Diet recommendations included: Solids: - Any/all solids/liquids and Liquids-Thin cup/IDDSI 0, Thin Straw/IDDSI 0. Progress Note dated 05/12/25 stated, Pt. seen by telehealth to assess if appropriate to have chewing gum following MD request. Pt. is currently NPO receiving g-tube feedings as primary source of nutrition/hydration. Pt. presents with reduced alertness, poor positioning and currently on ABT for PNA. Pt. is not appropriate for gum/anything by mouth at this time 2'2 high risk of aspiration. Pt. agreeable. Continue Oral care and elevated HOB during g-tube feedings. Reconsult SLP if change in status. The resident was screened quarterly on 04/24/25 and 06/12/25 with no ST services indicated at this time. The resident received Physical Therapy (PT) services during the 06/12/25 quarterly screen. The facility's screening Policy Statement stated, Therapy Services will perform for needed services for all new admissions and readmissions to the facility. The patient has had several hospitalizations with Admitting and Discharge Diagnoses of Recurrent aspiration pneumonia . On 03/12/24, the resident's admitting diagnosis from (name of local hospital) was acute on chronic hypoxemic: respiratory failure Recurrent aspiration. On 06/08/24, the resident's admitting and discharge diagnosis from (name of local hospital) was Aspiration pneumonia. On 06/24/24, DMC Discharge summary stated, This gentleman is well known to our service and has had multiple admissions over the last 12 months, requiring HPNC to bipap and intubation. He has been deemed to have capacity, is known to aspirate, he does not wish to change his diet, nor does he want a feeding tube. On 07/20/2024. The resident's discharge summary stated: Recurrent Aspiration pneumonia and regular diet. On 03/06/25 the resident was hospitalized at (name of local hospital) with an admitting dx of Sepsis due to left lower lobe aspiration type pneumonia. Discharge summary stated, mechanical soft diet. Discharge from (name of local hospital) dated 03/28/25 had an admitting and discharge diagnosis of Aspiration pneumonia. Discharge summary dated [DATE], had a discharge diagnosis with Dysphagia with recurrent aspiration. Informed Decision to Refuse to Follow Physician's Dietary Orders and Release of Liability were completed on the following dates: - 01/24/2016 1500 cal diet - 02/22/2016 Nectar thick liquids - 11/10/2021 Nectar thickened liquids Dietary order changes were as follows: Regular diet, Regular texture, Nectar Thickened Liquids consistency(Mildly thicken Liquid) Free water protocolDiet Discontinued 12/27/2021 Regular diet, Regular texture, Regular consistencylow residue diet x3 days the resume previous dietDiet Completed 07/27/2022 Regular diet, Regular texture, Regular consistencyregular thin liquidsDiet Discontinued 02/1/2023 Regular diet, Regular texture, Nectar Thickened Liquids consistency(Mildly thicken Liquid) Free water protocolDiet Discontinued 04/12/2023 Regular diet, Regular texture, Nectar Thickened Liquids consistency(Mildly thicken Liquid) Free water protocolDiet Discontinued 10/24/2023 Regular diet, Chopped texture, Thin Liquids consistencyDiet Discontinued 01/21/2023 Regular diet, Regular texture, Nectar Thickened Liquids consistency(Mildly thicken Liquid) Free water protocolDiet Discontinued 12/03/2023 Regular diet, Chopped texture, Thin Liquids consistencyDiet Discontinued 12/16/2023 Regular diet, Pureed texture, Thin Liquids consistencyDiet Completed 12/28/2023 Regular diet, Chopped texture, Thin Liquids consistencyDiet Discontinued 12/31/2023 Regular diet, Chopped texture, Thin Liquids consistencyDiet Discontinued 02/01/2024 Regular diet, Regular texture, Nectar Thickened Liquids consistency(Mildly thicken Liquid) Free water protocolDiet Discontinued 03/13/2024 Regular diet, Regular texture, Nectar Thickened Liquids consistency(Mildly thicken Liquid) Free water protocolDiet Discontinued 03/27/2024 Regular diet, Pureed texture, Nectar Thickened Liquids consistency(No salt packet)Diet Discontinued 03/27/2024 Regular diet, Pureed texture, Nectar Thickened Liquids consistency(No salt packet)Diet Discontinued 06/08/2024 Regular diet, Pureed texture, Nectar Thickened Liquids consistencyDiet Discontinued 06/24/2024 NPO diet, NPO textureDiet Discontinued 07/20/2024 Regular diet, Regular texture, Regular consistencyfor diet changeDiet Discontinued 11/11/2024 Regular diet, Regular texture, Regular consistencyfor diet changeDiet Discontinued 11/20/2024 Regular diet, Chopped texture, Regular consistencyfor diet changeDiet Discontinued 03/06/2025 Regular diet, Regular texture, Regular consistencyfor diet changeDiet Discontinued 03/07/2025 NPO diet, NPO texture, NPO (Nothing by Mouth) consistencyDiet Active 05/07/2025 On 08/04/2025 at 10:06 AM, the Regional Rehab Manager was interviewed via phone. The Director of Rehab (DOR) was on vacation. The Regional Rehab Manager reported that the previous SLP had retired in October of 2024. Speech therapy services are contracted with hospitals for outpatient speech therapy services. A telehealth evaluation is completed via telehealth and if therapy is recommended, they go to (name of hospital) for outpatient therapy services. The Regional Rehab Manager reported the screening process as follows: -Screening Procedure - nursing referral to rehab via Point Click Care, based on hospital discharge paperwork. -Quarterly Long Term Care (LTC screenings) are interdisciplinary - refer if a change. -DOR tracks screens for significant change and quarterly for LTC residents. -DOR attends Interdisciplinary Meetings (IDT)meetings and Care Plan Meetings. -Protocol for change in diet or swallowing difficulty - notified by nursing or updated during meetings - daily or as scheduled. On 08/05/2025 at 8:52 AM, the DON reported the staff meet every morning to discuss changes, incidents/accidents and significant changes and that there was no actual IDT meetings. On 08/05/2025 at 3:34 PM - Resident #6 was interviewed by the State Surveyor and the resident reported he would like to eat and stated, I'd like to, but I know I can't. He reported it had been three (3) months since he had something to eat by mouth. The patient reported he had not had swallowing therapy or exercises, no swallowing x-rays, or any tests to check to see if he could eat.
CONCERN (D)

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

Infection Control (Tag F0880)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections. The facility failed to follow appropriate infection control practices during medication administration. The facility also failed to follow enhanced barrier precautions. These were random opportunities for discovery. Resident Identifiers: #27 and #6. Facility Census: 91.Findings included:a) Resident #27 The facility's policy titled Medication Administration, with no date of implementation or revision documented, gave instructions to take care not to touch medications with bare hands while removing the medications from their source. On 07/31/2025 at 9:23 AM, Registered Nurse (RN) #33 was observed administering medications to Resident #27. The medications were contained in blister packs. Each dose was individually sealed within the pack and needed to be pushed through the package by the nurse. When two (2) of the resident's medications, clonazepam and sertraline, were removed from the blister packaging, they fell onto the uncovered medication cart. RN #33 then used her bare fingers to put the medications in the medication cup to be administered to the resident. On 07/31/25 at 8:45 AM, the Director of Nursing (DON) stated medications dropped on the top of the medication cart should be discarded and bare hands should not be used to touch medications. No further information was provided through the completion of the survey. b) Resident #6 The facility's policy titled Enhance [sic] Barrier Precautions, with no implementation or revision dates given, stated enhanced barrier precautions (EBP) would be followed for residents with indwelling medical devices. The policy also stated that gown and gloves would be worn during high-contact resident care for residents in EBP. Feeding tube care or use was included in the list of high-contact resident care activities. Review of Resident #6's physician's orders showed an order written on 05/13/25 for enhanced barrier precautions to be maintained at all times for wounds and gastroscopy tube.On the door to Resident #6's room was a sign stating, Enhanced Barrier PrecautionsEveryone Must:Clean their hands, including before entering and when leaving the room.Providers and staff must also:Wear gloves and a gown for the following High-Contact Resident Care Activities.DressingBathing/ShoweringTransferringChanging LinensProviding Hygiene Changing briefs or assisting with toiletingDevice care or use: central line, urinary catheter, feeding tube, tracheostomy Wound Care: any skin opening requiring a dressing On 08/04/2025 at 12:18 PM, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #5 was observed flushing Resident #6's gastroscopy tube and connecting a bag of enteral feeding to infuse over one (1) hour. To provide the treatment, LPN #5 wore gloves but did not wear a gown. On 08/04/2025 at 12:26 PM, the Director of Nursing confirmed gowns should be worn by staff performing enteral flushes and feeding. No further information was provided through the completion of the survey process.
CONCERN (E)

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

Comprehensive Care Plan (Tag F0656)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to develop and/or implement individualized care plans related to...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to develop and/or implement individualized care plans related to Activities, Depression, and Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome (PTSD). This failed practice was found true for (7) seven of 27 residents reviewed for care plan accuracy during the Long-Term Care Survey Process. Resident identifiers #5, #74, #83, #9, #13, #42, and #72. Facility census 91. a) Resident #9 Under the Activities Section of the Care Plan, the goal was Will have the opportunity to enjoy activities of choice through the next review date. Interventions were: Invite/encourage resident to attend activities daily. Provide resident with a calendar of scheduled activities. Remind resident at least 15 minutes prior to the start of the activity. Resident requires assistance with mobility to and from activities. However, the Care Plan did not state what activities the resident enjoys doing. This resident has diagnoses of PTSD, Anxiety, and Depression. Her Care Plan included Anxiety but did not address Depression or PTSD at all. b) Resident #13 A review of Resident #13's Care Plan revealed it was not personalized for the activities she liked to do. Under the Activities Section of the Care Plan, the goal was Will have the opportunity to enjoy activities of choice through the next review date. Interventions were: Invite/encourage resident to attend activities daily. Provide resident with a calendar of scheduled activities. The Care Plan does not state what activities the resident enjoys doing. The medical record contains progress notes dated 07/15/25, completed by the Activities Director, of resident attending bingo and social activities. When asked about the resident's preferred activities, the Director of Activities could state some of the things the resident enjoyed doing. When asked about why these were not included in the Care Plan, the Director stated he is not invited to attend the care plan meetings. This interview occurred on 08/04/2025 at 2:45 PM. During an interview with the Social Worker #6, on 08/04/25 at approximately 1:40 PM, when asked about the process for establishing a resident's Care Plan, she stated she normally developed the Care Plan by going through the medical record of the resident. When asked if she had a sign-in sheet for the people attending the Care Plan meetings, she stated she did not keep one. When asked if Dietary, Nursing, Activities, etc. attended the Care plan meetings, she stated, “no.” When asked if the resident or the resident's representative were invited to the meetings, she stated, “occasionally.” c) Resident #42 On 07/30/2025 at 12:19 PM, Resident #42's care plan was reviewed. The resident's care plan did not address the resident's diagnosis of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). On 08/04/2025 at 01:27 PM , the Director of Nursing and Social Worker confirmed the resident's comprehensive care plan did not include PTSD. d) Resident #72 The most recent MDS, dated [DATE], indicates that the resident experiences pain that interferes with both sleep and daily function. This is documented under Section J (Pain Management), with responses marked “Yes” to both pain interference questions. Review of the resident’s care plan reveals a pain goal that reads: “Resident reports occasional pain. Staff to monitor and offer PRN medications.” However, this care plan lacks measurable objectives, timeframes, and person-centered details such as pain location, frequency, or severity. No evidence of interdisciplinary input or individualized planning related to pain goals or preferences was found. The July and August 2025 MARs confirm that Acetaminophen 650 mg PO Q6H PRN was administered for pain, but no scheduled pain medications were noted. While the TAR includes general documentation of PRN effectiveness, there was no ongoing evaluation or reassessment documented to determine whether the pain management approach remained adequate. Progress notes from 05/14/2025 and 06/11/2025 describe the resident as complaining of back or leg pain, including the statement, “It’s sore today, probably the weather.” No documented follow-up, care plan revision, or interdisciplinary discussion was noted in response. Close inspection of the MAR shows that staff tracked pain using a 1–10 scale in association with administration of Meloxicam, but this was not reflected in the formal care plan or used to update goals. On 08/04/2025 at 12:45 PM, the Social Worker stated that she did not have recollection of any recent updates to the resident's care plan. She stated that she had not communicated with the resident or representatives recently regarding pain management goals. When asked if she knew anything about why he refuses care (appointments/medications/direct care), she stated that there might not be a particular reason so much as the fact that he can be cantankerous and difficult. In an interview on 08/05/2025 at 10:13 AM, the unit nurse stated that from what she knew, the resident’s pain is “sporadic,” and that he often refuses pain medications because of how they make him feel. This was not reflected in the care plan for pain. e) Resident #5 A record review on 08/04/25 at 1:00 PM, revealed an Activity care plan initiated 05/27/2025 for Resident #5 that reads as follows: Focus: Activities. Goal: Will have the opportunity to enjoy activities of choice through the next review date. Interventions: Activities staff to provide in room visits and 1:1 visits. Invite/encourage resident to attend activities daily. Provide resident with a calendar of scheduled activities. Remind resident at least 15 minutes prior to start of activity. Resident requires assistance with mobility to and from activities. Further record review revealed an admission Activity Assessment that has the following marked as interest for Resident #5: crafts, music, being outdoors, watching TV, gardening, puzzles, animals, cooking, baseball games, and Bible study. A review of the Activity Participation Record (APR) for 05/2025 to 08/2025 revealed that Resident #5 had not received any one to one visits. During an interview on 08/04/2025 at 2:50 PM, The State Agency (SA), asked The Activity Director (AD) if he felt that Resident #5's care plan was personalized for activities? The AD replied, No, but I do not do my own care plans. The person that does the MDS does them. The AD confirmed that Resident #5 was not receiving one to one visits as care planned and that her care plan was not individualized to meet her needs. f) Resident #74 A record review on 08/04/25 at 12:30 PM, revealed an Quarterly Activity Progress note that reads as follows: Resident does not attend any activities. Resident is sometimes out in the dining area watching tv or in her room. Activities staff will continue to encourage resident to attend activities of her interest. Activities staff will also continue to complete in room visits once daily for this resident . Activities staff will complete one on ones twice weekly for this resident. Further record review revealed an Activity care plan that reads as follows: Focus: Social isolation r/t inability to makeneeds/wants known she has severe MRwhich limits her attention span. Goals: Needs are met, continue goals.The residents needs will bemet through next review. Interventions: Activities staff to provide in room visits and 1:1. Invite/encourage the resident's family members to attend activities with the resident in order to support participation. Monitor nutritional status. The resident needs, adequate nutritional intake tomaintain normal activity level . Monitor/document for impact of medical problems on activity level. Resident requires assistance with mobility to and from activities. The resident needs assistance/escort activity functions. Further record review revealed that Resident #74 was admitted to the facility in 2016, and no activity assessments could be found. A review of the APR's for 05/2025, 06/2025, and 07/2025 revealed that according to the care plan Resident #74 was scheduled for 26 one to one visits and only received 18. During an interview ON 08/04/25 at 2:40 PM the Activity Director (AD) stated, I do not know why but I could not find an activity assessment on her. There has not been one done. She has been here since 2016, I have been doing this just for a year and I did not catch it. The State Agency (SA) asked the AD why her care plan was not personalized with her interest? The AD replied, I do not know, I do not do my own care plans, the MDS person does them. He confirmed that Resident #5's care plan was not personalized, and that she was not receiving one to one visits as scheduled. g) Resident #83 A record review on 08/05/2025 at 11:30 AM, revealed an Activities care plan for Resident #83 that reads as follows: Focus: Activities. Goal: Will have the opportunity to enjoy activities of choice through the next review date. Interventions: Activities staff to provide in room visits and 1:1. Provide resident with a calendar of scheduled activities. Remind resident at least 15 minutes prior to the start of activities. Resident requires assistance with mobility to and from activities. Further record review revealed an Annual Activities assessment dated [DATE] with current interest indicated as follows: Music, Watching TV, Talking/conversing, and animals. None of the above interests are indicated in the care plan. A review of the APR's for 05/2025, 06/2025, and 07/2025 shows that from 07/11/25 to present Resident #83 had only received (1) one, one to one visit. During an interview on 08/04/2025 at 2:50 PM, The State Agency (SA), asked The Activity Director (AD) if he felt that Resident #s 83's care plan was personalized for activities? The AD replied, No, but I do not do my own care plans. The person that does the MDS does them. The AD confirmed that Resident # 83 was not receiving one to one visits as care planned and that her care plan was not individualized to meet her needs.
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0657 (Tag F0657)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on policy review, resident interviews, record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure residents and/or responsible party as well as required staff were included in care plan me...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on policy review, resident interviews, record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure residents and/or responsible party as well as required staff were included in care plan meetings. In addition, a care plan was not revised when new medications were added. This failed practice affected three (3) of 27 sample residents. Resident identifiers: #38, #86, #11. Facility census: 91.Findings included: a) Resident #11 On 08/04/2025, Resident # 11's Pharmacy Orders were reviewed. Two psychotropic medications, Tramadol and Lorazepam, were not included on the resident's comprehensive care plan. On 08/05/2025 at 08:51 AM, the Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed the medications were not included on the care plan and stated, Tramadol was recently started. and Okay. b) Resident #38 The Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) provided a copy of the policy titled Comprehensive Care Plans with a date reviewed/revised of 04/28/25 on 08/05/25 at 4:00 PM. A review of the policy found the following: The comprehensive care plan will be prepared by the interdisciplinary team, that includes, but is not limited to: the attending physician or non-physician practitioner designee involved in the resident 's care .' ; a Registered Nurse with the responsibility for that resident; a nurse aide with responsibility for the resident; a member of the food and nutrition services staff; the resident and the resident's representative, to the extent practicable. On 07/30/25 at 1:26 PM when Resident #38 was interviewed, she stated that she did not know what a care plan was. Resident #38's Brief Interview Mental Status (BIMS) score was 15 which reflects cognition is intact. The Social Worker (SW) was asked on 08/04/25 at 12:04 PM for evidence of care plan meetings as none were found in Resident #38's Electronic Medical Record (EMR). The SW produced a notebook on 08/04/25 at 12:10 PM with a form titled Care Plan Cheat Sheet. A review of the care plan cheat sheet found the Resident's Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) had no evidence of who attended the care plan meeting 07/08/25. An interview was conducted on 08/04/25 at 1:40 PM with the SW. When asked to explain the facility care plan process, she stated that she (SW) and the MDS coordinator get the information to complete the paper Care Plan Cheat sheet and care plan from the EMR. No other disciplines are involved in the care plan process. She does mail a letter to the responsible party at either the beginning or end of each month but does not follow up to see if they are planning on attending the meeting. She does not send or give a letter or invite in-house residents to attend the meeting or go to the resident’s room to go over the care plan with the resident. c) Resident #86 On 07/30/25 at 11:22 AM when Resident #86 was asked about her care plan, she did not know what a care plan was. Resident #86's Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score was 15 which reflects cognition is intact. The Social Worker (SW) was asked on 08/04/25 at 12:04 PM for evidence of care plan meetings as there were none in Resident #38's Electronic Medical Record (EMR). The SW produced a notebook on 08/04/25 at 12:10 PM with a form titled Care Plan Cheat Sheet. A review of the care plan cheat sheet found for the Resident's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) found no evidence of who attended the care plan meeting. An interview was conducted on 08/04/25 at 1:40 PM with the SW. When asked to explain the facility care plan process, she stated that she (SW) and the MDS coordinator get the information to complete the paper Care Plan Cheat sheet and care plan from the EMR. No other disciplines are involved in the care plan process. The SW mailed a letter to the responsible party at either the beginning or end of each month but did not follow up to see if they were planning on attending the meeting. She did not send or give a letter or invite in-house residents to attend the meeting or go to the residents room to go over the care plan with the resident.
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0679 (Tag F0679)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, staff interview, and record review the facility failed to provide an ongoing program of activities to meet...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, staff interview, and record review the facility failed to provide an ongoing program of activities to meet the needs and interest of each resident. This failed practice was found true for (3) three of (6) six residents reviewed for activities during the Long-Term Care Survey Process. Resident identifiers #5, #74, #83. Facility Census 91.Findings include: a) Resident #5 During the initial observation on 07/30/25 at 10:30 am, showed Resident #5 lying in her bed, patting her blanket. Resident was hollering out. No stimulation was on in the resident's room.A record review on 08/04/25 at 1:00 PM, revealed an activity care plan initiated 05/27/25 for Resident #5 that reads as follows: Focus:Activities. Goal:Will have the opportunity to enjoy activities of choice through the next review date. Interventions:Activities staff to provide in room visits and 1:1 visits.Invite/encourage resident to attend activities daily.Provide resident with a calendar of scheduled activities.Remind resident at least 15 minutes prior to start of activity.Resident requires assistance with mobility to and from activities. Further record review revealed an admission Activity Assessment that has the following marked as interest for Resident #5: crafts, music, being outdoors, watching TV, gardening, puzzles, animals, cooking, baseball games, and Bible study. A review of the Activity Participation Record (APR) for 05/25 to 08/25 revealed that Resident #5 had not received any one-to-one visits. An observation on 08/04/25 at 2:15 PM, Showed Resident #5 lying in her bed, hollering out curse words. No stimulation was on in the resident's room. During an interview on 08/04/2025 at 2:50 PM, The State Agency (SA), asked The Activity Director (AD) if he felt that Resident #5's care plan was personalized for activities. The AD replied, No, but I do not do my own care plans. The person that does the MDS does them. The AD confirmed that Resident #5 was not receiving one-to-one visits as care planned and that her care plan was not individualized to meet her needs. During an interview on 08/05/25 at 1:00 PM, The AD stated, When my staff does the coffee cart in the mornings, they are supposed to be turning on residents' TV's. I will definitely get on this and check into it. b) Resident #74 During the initial observation on 07/30/25 at 1:30 PM showed Resident #74's room door was shut due to being on contact precautions. During an interview on 07/30/25 at 1:30 PM, Nursing Assistant (NA) #60 opened Resident #74's door and stated, We keep the door shut due to them being on contact precautions. NA #60 confirmed that no stimulation was on in Resident #60's room. A record review on 08/04/25 at 12:30 PM, revealed a Quarterly Activity Progress note that read as follows: Resident does not attend any activities. Resident is sometimes out in the dining area watching tv or in her room. Activities staff will continue to encourage resident to attend activities of her interest. Activities staff will also continue to complete in room visits once daily for this resident . Activities staff will complete one on ones twice weekly for this resident. Further record review revealed an Activity care plan that reads as follows:Focus: Social isolation r/t inability to makeneeds/wants known she has severe MRwhich limits her attention span. Goals:Needs are met, continue goals.The residents needs will bemet through next review. Interventions: Activities staff to provide in room visits and 1:1. Invite/encourage the resident's family members to attend activities with the resident in order to support participation. Monitor nutritional status. The resident needs, adequate nutritional intake tomaintain normal activity level. Monitor/document for impact of medical problems on activity level. Resident requires assistance with mobility to and from activities.The resident needs assistance/escort activity functions. Further record review revealed that Resident #74 was admitted to the facility in 2016, and no activity assessments could be found. A review of the Activity Participation Records for 05/25, 06/25, and 07/25 revealed that according to the care plan Resident #74 was scheduled for 26 one to one visit and only received 18. An observation on 08/04/25 at 2:15 PM, Showed Resident # 74's door was shut due to being on contact precautions. The State Agency (SA) knocked and asked permission to come in. The resident was sitting in her geri chair, and no stimulation was on in the room. During an interview ON 08/04/25 at 2:40 PM the Activity Director (AD) stated, I do not know why but I could not find an activity assessment on her. There has not been one done. She has been here since 2016; I have been doing this just for a year and I did not catch it. The State Agency (SA) asked the AD why her care plan was not personalized with her interest? The AD replied, I do not know, I do not do my own care plans, the MDS person does them. He confirmed that Resident #5's care plan was not personalized, and that she was not receiving one-to-one visits as scheduled. During an interview on 08/05/25 at 1:00 PM, The AD stated, When my staff does the coffee cart in the mornings, they are supposed to be turning on residents' TV's. I will definitely get on this and check into it. c) Resident #83 During the initial observation on 07/30/25 at 1:30 PM showed Resident #83's room door was shut due to being on contact precautions. During an interview on 07/30/25 at 1:30 PM, Nursing Assistant (NA) #60 opened Resident #83's door and stated, We keep the door shut due to them being on contact precautions. NA #60 confirmed that no stimulation was on in Resident #83's room. A record review on 08/05/2025 at 11:30 AM, revealed an Activities care plan for Resident #83 that reads as follows: Focus: Activities. Goal: Will have the opportunity to enjoy activities of choice through the next review date. Interventions: Activities staff to provide in room visits and 1:1. Provide resident with a calendar of scheduled activities. Remind resident at least 15 minutes prior to the start of activities. Resident requires assistance with mobility to and from activities. Further record review revealed an Annual Activities assessment dated [DATE] with current interest indicated as follows: Music, Watching TV, Talking/conversing, and animals. None of the above interests are indicated in the care plan. A review of the Activity Participation Records (APRs) for 05/25, 06/25, and 07/25 shows that from 07/11/25 to present Resident #83 had only received (1) one, one to one visit. An observation on 08/04/25 at 2:15 PM, Showed Resident #83's door was shut due to being on contact precautions. The State Agency (SA) knocked and asked permission to come in. The resident was lying in the bed, and no stimulation was on in the room. During an interview on 08/04/25 at 2:50 PM, The State Agency (SA), asked The Activity Director (AD) if he felt that Resident #s 83's care plan was personalized for activities. The AD replied, No, but I do not do my own care plans. The person that does the MDS does them. The AD confirmed that Resident # 83 was not receiving one-to-one visits as care planned and that her care plan was not individualized to meet her needs. During an interview on 08/05/25 at 1:00 PM, The AD stated, When my staff does the coffee cart in the mornings, they are supposed to be turning on residents' TV's. I will definitely get on this and check into it.
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 staff interview the facility failed to store, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. This failed practice was a random o...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, and staff interview the facility failed to store, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. This failed practice was a random opportunity for discovery and the potential to affect more than a limited number of residents during the Long-Term Care Survey Process. Facility census: 91. Findings include: a) Kitchen An observation on 08/05/25 at approximately 12:45 PM revealed the cook was starting to fix plates. The first plate the cook pulled out of the plate holder was wet. The cook then placed a tuna hoagie and chips on the plate. The cook then handed the plate to the kitchen aide to put on the tray cart. The cook then pulled out the next plate that was wet and put chopped tuna on it. The State Agency (SA) asked, Are all of those plates wet? The Certified Dietary Manager (CDM) started pulling plates from the plate holder and all the plates that she pulled off were wet. The CDM stated, Go get Styrofoam trays from our emergency stock and serve lunch on those today? The CDM then went to check out the dishwasher and stated, I found the problem, the dishwasher was out of the dry assist for the dishes. The CDM further confirmed that the serving plates were wet and could draw bacteria.
CONCERN (E)

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

Medical Records (Tag F0842)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure complete and accurate medical records. For five (5) of six (6) residents reviewed for the care area of advance directives, the...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure complete and accurate medical records. For five (5) of six (6) residents reviewed for the care area of advance directives, the Physician Order for Scope of Treatment (POST) forms were incomplete. For two (2) of three (3) residents reviewed for the care area of beneficiary notices, the beneficiary notices were incomplete. For one (1) of six (6) residents reviewed for the care area of nutrition, the admission weight documentation was incorrect. Resident Identifiers: #86, #60, #21, #4, #94, #62, #72, and #84. Facility census: 91. Findings included:a) Resident #72 The facility failed to verify and document the legal authority of the resident’s designated representatives, failed to ensure the validity and proper execution of the resident’s POST (Physician Orders for Scope of Treatment) form, and failed to retain complete documentation of consent for high-risk physical interventions. The resident’s record included a signed Checklist for Surrogate Selection dated 11/17/22 identifying Son #1 as the medical power of attorney (MPOA). However, the most recent POST form on file, dated 11/18/22, reflected only a verbal consent and lacked a physical signature from either of the resident’s officially recognized representatives. The witness signatures were minimally legible and marked by a strikethrough, offering insufficient assurance of proper execution or witnessing. At the time the POST form was completed, the [NAME] Virginia Department of Health and Human Resources (DHHR) was listed as the official healthcare surrogate. No documentation was found to demonstrate communication with DHHR regarding transition of decision-making authority, nor were there clinical notes indicating that surrogate authority had been formally transferred or discontinued. Despite documentation indicating that Son #1 visited frequently and maintained regular contact by phone, the facility did not initiate follow-up to obtain a valid POST with written, verified consent from the authorized representative(s), nor did it clarify which individual currently held legal authority to direct care decisions. On 08/04/2025 at 12:30 PM, this surveyor interviewed the facility’s Social Worker regarding the process for obtaining written signatures on POST forms. When asked how the facility ensures that POST forms are fully executed with physical signatures, the Social Worker stated that she does not have an official process in place for securing signatures following verbal acknowledgements. She explained that while she “sometimes” mails the forms to out-of-state representatives, they are “more often than not” unreturned. She was unable to provide documentation showing any follow-up efforts related to Resident #72’s POST form or confirmation that it had been physically signed by the authorized representative. These failures created ambiguity regarding the resident’s legal representation and undermined the validity of the POST form on file, placing the facility at risk for acting on treatment orders without properly verified consent. Additionally, the medical record contained a Consent for Use of Side Rails dated 07/17/2023, recommending the use of partial side rails on both sides for “Transfers T&R” (turning and repositioning). The form listed associated risks, including entrapment, bruising, injury from falls, and reduced mobility. However, in the section designated for representative authorization, the form stated only “verbal consent obtained.” No signature, printed name, date, or legal designation was provided to confirm that the resident’s MPOA had authorized the intervention. The absence of a completed signature block rendered the consent form invalid and incomplete. On 08/05/2025, this surveyor interviewed the facility’s Social Worker, who stated that LPN #36 was responsible for obtaining consent for bedrail use. Upon review of the resident’s authorization form, the Social Worker confirmed it stated “verbal consent obtained” but was unable to identify who provided the consent or whether a representative had been contacted. She stated she was unfamiliar with the consent process used by the nurse. In a follow-up interview, LPN #36 confirmed that she obtained verbal consent but had forgotten to document the name of the individual who gave it. She explained that she typically tried to complete authorizations and consents at admission and obtained verbal or written consent “as she is able.” She acknowledged the omission and apologized. b) Resident #4 On 07/30/2025 at 12:42 PM, Resident # 4's Physician's Orders for Scope of Treatment (POST) form was reviewed. Verbal consent was given on 04/24/25 with only one witness signature obtained. Resident #4's POST form was not given to the responsible party to review and sign. 0n 7/31/2025 at 10:20 AM, the Social Worker confirmed the signatures for the POST forms when verbal consent was given were not obtained and POST forms were not sent to the responsible party. The Social Worker stated, I do not send anything. c) Resident #94 07/31/2025 at 9:12 AM , Resident #94's Advance Beneficiary Notice (ABN) was reviewed for a Medicare Part A Skilled Service Episode beginning 03/11/2025 with ending date 03/27/2025. Verbal Consent was obtained from the resident's Health Care Surrogate (HCS) on 03/25/25. On 07/31/2025 at 09:27 AM, the Social worker confirmed there was no attempt by the facility to obtain signatures. The Social Worker stated, I just got the verbal consent. and That would be a lot of postage. The social worker then stated, I guess I could start mailing them. The facility's policy and procedure for Advance Beneficiary Notices: Delivery Requirements stated, d. If the notice cannot be hand-delivered (for example such as in the case of an incompetent resident and the representative is out of town) a telephone notice shall be made, followed up immediately with a mailed, emailed faxed or hand-delivered notice. Documentation shall comply with form instructions regarding telephone notices. d) Resident #62 07/31/2025 at 9:12 AM , Resident #62's Advance Beneficiary Notice (ABN) was reviewed for a Medicare Part A Skilled Service Episode beginning 02/27/2025 with ending date 04/04/2025. Verbal Consent was obtained from the resident's Medical Power of Attorney (MPOA) on 03/25/2025. On 07/31/2025 at 09:27 AM, the Social worker confirmed there was no attempt by the facility to obtain signatures. The Social Worker stated, I just got the verbal consent. and That would be a lot of postage. The social worker then stated, I guess I could start mailing them. The facility's policy and procedure for Advance Beneficiary Notices: Delivery Requirements stated, d. If the notice cannot be hand-delivered (for example such as in the case of an incompetent resident and the representative is out of town) a telephone notice shall be made, followed up immediately wit a mailed, emailed faxed or hand-delivered notice. Documentation shall comply with form instructions regarding telephone notices. e) Resident #21 Physician's Orders for Scope of Treatment (POST) form guidance A POST form is a document that outlines a patient's preferences for medical treatment, particularly in situations involving serious illness or end-of-life care. For residents that do not have the capacity to make medical decisions, the form can be completed by their Medical Power of Attorney [MPOA] or Health Care Surrogate. According to the manual titled Using the POST Form: Guidance for Health Care Professionals, available on-line at www.wvendoflife.org, If the incapacitated patient’s MPOA representative or health care surrogate is unavailable at the time of form completion, this section can be signed by two witnesses for verbal confirmation of agreement from the patient’s MPOA representative or health care surrogate. The form should be signed at the earliest available opportunity. Resident #21 Review of Resident #21's medical record showed a POST form dated 05/14/24. Verbal consent for the POST form had been obtained from the resident's MPOA. The consent was witnessed by two (2) staff members who signed the form. However, a signature from the MPOA had not been subsequently obtained. On 07/30/2025 at 1:52 PM, Resident #21's MPOA was interviewed. She stated she visited the resident almost every week. f) Resident #60 Review of Resident #60's medical record showed a POST form dated 07/26/24. Verbal consent for the POST form had been obtained from the resident's Health Care Surrogate (HCS) but the form was not signed by any staff members who witnessed the verbal consent. Additionally, a signature from the HCS had not been subsequently obtained. g) Resident #85 Review of Resident #85's medical record showed a POST form dated 08/21/23. Verbal consent for the POST form had been obtained from the resident's MPOA but the form was only signed by one (1) staff member who witnessed the verbal consent. Additionally, a signature from the MPOA had not been subsequently obtained. h) Resident #84 A record review on 07/31/25 at 9:30 AM, revealed that Resident #84 was admitted to the facility and had an admission weight of 140.7 pounds (lbs.). Her weight on 07/07/25 was 110 lbs. Further record review showed that Resident #84 was admitted to this facility from (an area hospital named) with a discharge weight of 128 lbs. During a telephone interview on 08/04/25 at 12:58 PM, The Registered Dietician (RD) stated, I did my assessments by her actual admission weight taken the next day after her admission which was 116.4 lbs. During an interview on 08/04/2025 at 3:20 PM, The Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed that the admission weight in the chart was incorrect and that it should have been struck out.
Jul 2024 2 deficiencies
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Room Equipment (Tag F0908)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, resident interview and staff interview, the facility failed to maintain a functioning room air conditioner...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, resident interview and staff interview, the facility failed to maintain a functioning room air conditioner when water was leaking from the air conditioning unit in room [ROOM NUMBER] on A Hall. Facility census: 87. Findings include: a) room [ROOM NUMBER] On 07/02/24 at 12:46 PM Resident #50 stated, the air conditioning unit had been leaking into the floor from the time she was admitted which was about a year ago. She stated, they put towels around it because the water runs down the floor. Resident #50 stated, she was afraid she could fall with the water in the floor. An observation of the unit found the filter was partially pulled out and was wet. The unit fan would not turn on. NHA was told about the leak at 1:40 PM on 07/02/24. An interview with the Maintenance Director on 07/03/24 at approximately 9:30 AM confirmed he didn't have a work order regarding the unit leaking. He stated, the drain tube was plugged up and had been opened. An additional observation found the floor dry and the filter had been replaced and was dry.
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Safe Environment (Tag F0584)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** . Based on observation, resident interviews and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure resident room temperatures were ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** . Based on observation, resident interviews and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure resident room temperatures were maintained between 71 to 81 degrees Fahrenheit (F). This failed practice has the potential to affect more than a limited number of residents. Facility census: 87. Findings include: An unannounced complaint investigation was conducted. Upon entering the building, an interview was conducted with Registered Nurse (RN) # 42 at 9:20 AM. When asked if the building was hot on 06/29/24. RN # 42 answered it was hot especially on B side of the building. I understand parts have been ordered. After meeting with the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) and providing a request of documents and electronic medical record access, a tour was conducted on the A Hall at 12:22 PM. The outside temperature was 77 degrees F at the time. Observations of the resident rooms on the A Hall found the following concerns: 110 No air conditioning (AC) 104 Resident #49 complained the room was too hot and the AC unit was not blowing any air and the switch could not be moved to turn on AC. Reported to the Maintenance Director on 07/02/24 at 1:48 PM. room [ROOM NUMBER] little air coming from AC unit. room [ROOM NUMBER] Air not cool. room [ROOM NUMBER] No fan on on AC unit Resident #9 said the room was hot. room [ROOM NUMBER] Fan turned off and no air moving. room [ROOM NUMBER] Resident #50 stated that the unit had been leaking into the floor from the time she was admitted which was about a year. Stated, they put towels around it because the water runs down the floor. The unit filter was partially pulled out and was wet. Fan would not turn on. NHA was told about leak at 1:40 PM on 07/02/24. NHA stated he would have the Maintenance Director take care of the leak. At 12:49 PM the outdoor temperature had risen to 78 degrees F. At 12:58 PM, found the room hot and found Resident #72 naked in bed in room [ROOM NUMBER] A. An interview with Nurse Aide (NA) #44 found this resident sleeps naked at all times and has all of her life. The room mate was fully clothed and the door to the room was closed and the curtain pulled between the residents. On 07/02/24 at 1:15 PM the outdoor temperature was 79 degrees F. All rooms on the B hall were toured with the Maintenance Director and found the temperatures ranged from 71.2 degrees F to 79.4 degrees F in room [ROOM NUMBER]. Resident #20 in room B115 stated the room was hot but she knows they are trying to get this fixed. At 4:24 PM, room [ROOM NUMBER] temperature was rechecked and found to be 83 degrees F. This was reported immediately to the NHA. He stated he would take care of it. In addition he stated the room air conditioners were being picked up and would be installed once they arrived. In addition he stated, an AC company had inspected the AC unit on 06/27/24 and were to replace several parts in each room unit. He further stated they were awaiting the estimate approval from corporate. On 07/03/24 at approximately 9:00 AM, found both residents in room [ROOM NUMBER] had been moved to another room and room [ROOM NUMBER] had no residents in the room. An interview with Resident #20 stated, she was glad they were moved and this room was more comfortable.
Nov 2023 13 deficiencies 1 IJ (1 affecting multiple)
CRITICAL (K)

Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation

Free from Abuse/Neglect (Tag F0600)

Someone could have died · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on resident interview, record review, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from sexually...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on resident interview, record review, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from sexually aggressive behavior (such as making sexually explicit comments and forced observation of masturbation and exposure ) from Resident #59. The lack of action from the facility to address and protect the other residents resulted in an immediate jeopardy situation for more than an isolated number of residents. The facility was notified of the immediate jeopardy on 11/07/23 at 5:01 PM. The plan of correction, as follows, was accepted at 6:57 PM on 11/07/23: -Resident #59 will be placed on 24 hour, one on one supervision effective 5:00 pm on November 7, 2023, to protect all residents. Documentation will be done q (every) 15 minutes as to what the resident is doing, and log will be maintained. (Log attached) -An immediate report will be submitted to OHFLAC, APS, and the Regional Ombudsman on November 7, 2023. -Resident #132 will be moved over to B-Side of facility at his request. This will be done November 7, 2023. -Referral will be made for geriatric psych placement and evaluation and treatment. Upon acceptance at geriatric psych facility, Resident #59 will be admitted . -Resident #59 will not be given a roommate for a minimum of 90 days pending geriatric psych admission, pending their acceptance of resident and their recommendations. -Resident #59 will be seen by (Name of Telepsych) for medication review and recommendations. Resident is already established with (Name of Telepsych company) at Nella's at [NAME] Lake Healthcare. -Resident #59 ' s behaviors will be documented on q shift, for the next 90 days, by licensed nursing staff and will be reviewed at monthly QAPI meetings. The Immediate Jeopardy was abated on 11/08/23 at 10:41 AM. The deficient practice remained a scope and severity of G, for Resident #132 who suffered emotional harm and concern that Resident #59 would return to his room as Resident #59 remained near this resident. Resident identifiers: #59 and #132. Facility census: 79. Findings included: a) Resident #132 Review of the facility's narrative of complaints filed in the last six (6) months on the morning of 11/7/23, provided to the survey team by the Social Worker (SW) #2 found the summary dated 11/04/23: (Typed as written) (Name of Resident #132) reported that his roommate (Resident #59) asked him if he could F*** him in the a**. This resident was immediately moved to another room; he had concerns that he was still in the same hallway near (Resident #59.) Plans are being made to move (Name of Resident) to the other side of the building. Staff confirmed with (Name of Resident) and his mother that (Name of Resident #59) only made inappropriate remarks but never tried to touch (Name of Resident #59.) On 11/07/23 at 12:05 PM, the surveyor asked Resident #132 how he was. The resident stated, I'm madder than hell. When asked why, he stated, My roommate made some derogatory sexual comments to me over the weekend and now I am across the hall from him. I still have to look at him. I want moved as far away from him as I can. I want moved to the other side of the building. He can still see me, and I can still see him. He can come into my room at any time, he can walk right over to my room. The resident said when he told the staff about the incident, he was moved out of his room to a room directly across the hallway from Resident #59. Resident #132 said he called the police and wanted Resident #59 arrested. He said he was told Resident #59 had Dementia and cannot be arrested. Resident #132 said Resident #59 knows exactly what he is doing. He keeps coming to his doorway and staring at me. The resident said he was unable to get out of bed by himself and that once staff got him up in his wheelchair he was mobile. Resident #132 said if Resident #59 would get close enough to him he could hit him. He said he feared what he might do to Resident #59 if he could. Record review found Resident #132 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The Resident was placed in a room with Resident #59. Review of Resident #132's medical record found a nurse's note, dated 11/04/23 noting the Resident had made multiple calls to 911 for the alleged incident that occurred with the previous roommate. This nurse spoke with emergency services to let them know the Resident was not in harm. On 11/04/23 at 11:10 AM, the resident's mother wanted information regarding her son's previous hospital visits. The nurse noted his mother was not on the list of family members to have information about the resident. The nurse allowed the resident to grant permission for his mother to have information. There was no indication that the resident lacked capacity at this time. The Medical Record contained a capacity statement noting the resident had capacity to make medical decisions from a previous admission to the facility. Record review found Resident #132 was sent to the local hospital on [DATE], after the resident and his mother insisted, he be sent to the hospital. The resident left for the emergency room in the afternoon and was in the building around 4:30 PM on the same day. On 11/07/23 at 1:31 PM, the Social Worker (SW) #2 was asked if she was aware of the incident. She stated she was and provided witness statements. SW #2 said the incident was not reported to the proper State authorities. She said she did not know why but Resident #59 hadn't done anything else. The SW provided a copy of a Complaint, Comment Concern Resolution, dated 11/04/23: The form noted Resident #132 reported his roommate (Resident #59) asked him if he could F*** him in the A**. Resident #132 was immediately moved to another room. When Resident #132 was still concerned because he was only moved across the hall, Resident #132 was moved to the other side of the building. The follow up resolution was: Resident #132 was satisfied with the resolution of moving him to the other side of the building. The form was signed by the administrator, Director of Nursing (DON) and the Social Worker on 11/06/23. Observation on 11/07/23 during the morning, found the Resident had never been moved to the other side of the building. On the morning of 11/07/23 the Resident was observed by the survey team to be directly across the hallway from his old roommate, Resident #59. Statements attached to the complaint included: A statement from a Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #36, dated 11/04/23 at 1:52 PM, Revealed the LPN received a telephone call from the Resident's sister stating she wanted to report a sexual assault against her brother. The sister was at the hospital with Resident #132 when the call was made to the facility. The LPN spoke to the sister and the resident who related the same story regarding Resident #59. Resident #132 denied being physically touched by Resident #59. The LPN said she would tell the social worker and the administrator about the situation. A second statement from Nurse Aide (NA) #23 revealed the resident had reported the incident to her and said Resident #59 was whispering things to him in the night saying he wanted to F*** him in the A**. Then his mother came in and they started the process of sending him to the hospital. She stated she reported it the first chance she had because of everything going on. The statement was signed by NA #23 but was not dated. A statement dated 11/4/23 from the activity assistant (AA) #28 documented she was also aware of the situation after the Resident told her what the roommate #59 said. Resident #59 asked if he could F*** him in the A**. At 9:40 AM on 11/08/23, LPN #36 said she became aware of the situation after Resident #132's sister called her on the telephone when the Resident was in the emergency room. She said she called the administrator to let him know. She said she did not report the incident because no one told her to. At 9:44 AM on 11/08/23, NA #23 said she became aware of the situation around breakfast on the morning of 11/04/23 when Resident #132 told her what happened. She said it was a busy morning and she forgot to tell the nurse about it. It was a busy morning, because Resident #132 wanted to go to the hospital because he said he needed to get the fluid drawn off of him. I was trying to get him ready to go out. At 8:06 AM on 11/08/23, Resident #132 said, I feel like I have no rights, they are supposed to listen to me, I know I have rights. b) Resident #59 Record review found the Resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of the Resident's most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) a quarterly, with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 10/29/23 found this resident is ambulatory and transfers are independent, and no staff assistance is required. Review of daily progress notes found no notes were written on 11/04/23 regarding the alleged incident in this Resident's record. No notes of any kind were written about this Resident on 11/04/23. Review of the progress notes for this Resident from 02/01/23 to present found the following documented behaviors: The Resident's responsible party was notified on 02/28/23, by the SW that he was being admitted for a psychiatric stay due to recent inappropriate sexual behaviors. The behaviors leading up to the hospitalization included: 2/2/2023 03:11 General Nurses Note Note Text: Aid reported to nurse that while showering him he asked if she wanted to play with this while holding his penis in his hand. Aid explained to him that that was inappropriate. While aid was helping resident to dry off and get dressed he again while holding his penis asked her if she would play with it. Aid again explained that that was inappropriate and that he needed to stop. A note dated, 02/06/23 at 5:30 PM, General Nurses Note At approximately 5:30 CNA (Certified Nurse Aide) approached undersigned and another nurse and stated that this male resident had exposed himself to a female resident in B side dining room. CNA informed that female was immediately escorted from dining room and taken to her room. A note dated 2/23/2023, 00:09 General Nurses Note Note Text: Resident was seen multiple times by staff member with private areas exposed in the common area in front of a female resident trying to get her touch him inappropriately. Resident was redirected each time. (This incident was reported to the proper State Authorities.) The Resident was sent to the psychiatric facility on 02/28/23 and returned to the facility on [DATE]. Progress notes indicated the Resident's behaviors continued after his return to the facility: 3/28/2023 01:33 General Nurses Note Note Text: Resident was found playing with penis in hallway while female residents were in hallway multiple times during the shift. This nurse has made multiple attempts to keep residents in room. Resident becomes aggressive when room door is shut. Attempted to redirect with snacks/drink and conversation no effect. Resident at this time is sitting at bedside. Call light within reach. 3/30/2023 02:05 General Nurses Note Note Text: resident was in his room standing in front of door holding his penis in his hand, CNA asked him to shut door if he was going to do that. Resident redirected. 5/5/2023 05:31 General Nurses Note Note Text: while CNA'S doing rounds noted resident standing in doorway with his pants pulled down, holding his penis in his hands looking into the ladies that live across the hall's room. Redirected resident, he became slightly upset but pulled his pants up and laid down on his bed. 6/13/2023 02:00 General Nurses Note Note Text: CNA doing rounds, saw this resident in room [ROOM NUMBER]. hiding between the bed and sink asked resident what he was doing. He stated 'she waved her hand for me to come over there.' Explained to resident that was a males room and he is sleeping. Assisted resident back to his room. Explained to him if he needed anything to ring his call bell. 7/26/2023 02:51 General Nurses Note Note Text: resident up sitting in dining room when Resident #21 went by him he took his penis out of his pants and was trying to show it to her. Resident was educated to how inappropriate that was and assisted back to his room. 7/27/2023 02:38 General Nurses Note Note Text: Resident ambulating throughout facility grabbing at groin. Resident was redirected to room. Resident sitting on side of bed. Denies any pain or discomfort at this time. 7/31/2023 03:45 General Nurses Note Note Text: This nurse was walking down hallway when passed residents room when he was playing with self in doorway with door open. Attempted to close door when resident became agitated grabbing at door. This nurse redirected resident to laying down in bed. Call light within reach. Review of the care plan found the following: The resident has a behavior problem r/t (Related to) sexually inappropriate behaviors, exposing self to others. Date Initiated: 02/06/2023. Revision on: 02/28/2023 No changes noted, continue goals. Date Initiated: 04/27/2023 The goal associated with the problem: Behaviors have lessened since last review. Continuing goals. Date Initiated: 07/28/2023. Revision on: 11/01/2023 Target Date: 01/28/2024 The resident will have fewer episodes of sexually inappropriate behaviors weekly by review date. Date Initiated: 02/06/2023 Revision on: 11/01/2023 Target Date: 01/28/2024 No behaviors noted. Continue goals. Date Initiated: 11/01/2023 Interventions included: Anticipate and meet the resident's needs. Date Initiated: 02/06/23 Revision on: 02/06/23 Attempt to redirect resident when behaviors occur. Date Initiated: 02/06/23 If reasonable, discuss the resident's behavior. Explain/reinforce why behavior is inappropriate and/or unacceptable to the resident. Date Initiated: 02/06/23 Revision on: 02/06/23 Monitor behavior episodes and attempt to determine the underlying cause. Consider location, time of day, persons involved, and situations. Document behavior and potential causes. Date Initiated: 02/06/23. Revision on: 02/06/23 Notify Social Worker as needed. Date Initiated: 02/06/2023. Psych eval and inpatient if needed. Date Initiated: 02/24/2023. At 3:38 PM on 11/07/23, the administrator and the Director of Nursing reviewed the care plan and were asked: How does the facility monitor the Resident's behaviors and how is the cause of the behaviors determined as indicated in the care plan? In addition, the administrator and DON were asked: Who are the other residents involved in the nursing notes in Resident #59's chart? Were incident reports completed? Were any of the incidents reported to the proper State authorities? How are the other residents being protected from Resident #59's behaviors? The DON said the Resident saw a tele-med psychiatrist. Review of the tele-med psychiatrist notes with the DON, found the resident had a visit on 03/30/23 and the psychiatrist noted, .Resident has had no further behaviors . Yet behaviors were recorded on 03/28/23, when the resident was found playing with his penis in the hallway while female residents were present. The attempts at redirection were unsuccessful. The next tele- med visit was on 06/08/23 again the psychiatrist documented no behaviors. The resident did have behaviors on 05/05/23. On 08/25/23, the psychiatrist documented the resident had no behaviors, yet behaviors were documented on 07/26/23, 07/27/23 and 07/31/23. The DON had no answer as to why the psychiatrist did not know about the behaviors. The DON was asked if the facility should be responsible for telling the psychiatrist about the Resident's behaviors? She said yes but could not explain how the psychiatrist did not know about the behaviors. On 11/08/23 10:09 AM, the DON identified Resident #21 from Resident #59's 07/26/23 progress note. A review of Resident #21's progress notes found no notes were written in her medical record regarding the incident on 07/26/23. At the close of the survey no further information was provided regarding how Resident #59's behaviors affected other residents. No information was provided to indicate the facility provided daily monitoring of Resident #59 before the alleged incident on 11/04/23. No information was provided to verify the facility reported the alleged incidents involving other residents after the 02/23/23 reporting.
CONCERN (D)

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

Safe Environment (Tag F0584)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on resident interview, observation and staff interview, the facility failed to provide residents with furniture in good repair. This was a random opportunity for discovery. Resident identifiers:...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on resident interview, observation and staff interview, the facility failed to provide residents with furniture in good repair. This was a random opportunity for discovery. Resident identifiers: Resident #17. Facility Census: 79. Findings included: a) Resident #17 During an initial tour of the facility on 11/06/23 at 11:53 AM, Resident #17's over the bed table's trim was loose and hanging off the table on the floor. While Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #66 was moving the table, the trim that was loose was on the floor and the LPN was pulling the strip while moving the table. During another observation on 11/07/23 at 11:57 AM, Resident #17's over the bed table's trim was still broken. Resident #17 stated the table has been like this for two months and keeps getting worse. During an interview on 11/08/23 at 9:57 AM, Maintenance #93 acknowledged the table needed to be replaced and should have been when the trim started to come loose.
CONCERN (D)

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

Report Alleged Abuse (Tag F0609)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on resident interview, staff interview and record review, the facility failed to report an alleged allegation of sexual ab...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on resident interview, staff interview and record review, the facility failed to report an alleged allegation of sexual abuse to the State Survey Agency, Adult Protective Services, and the Ombudsman. This was a random opportunity for discovery. Resident identifier: #132. Facility census: 79. Findings included: a) Facility Policy- Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation VII. Reporting/Response Reporting of all alleged violations to the Administrator, state agency, adult protective services, and all other required agencies (e.g. law enforcement when applicable) within specified timeframe's: Immediately, but not later than 2 hours after the allegation is made, if the events that cause the allegation involve abuse or result in serious bodily injury . b) Resident #132 Review of the facility's narrative of complaints filed in the last six (6) months on the morning of 11/7/23, provided to the survey team by the Social Worker (SW) #2 found the summary dated 11/04/23: (Typed as written): (Name of Resident #132) reported that his roommate (Resident #59) asked him if he could F*** him in the a**. This resident was immediately moved to another room; he had concerns that is was still in the same hallway near (Resident #59.) Plans are being made to move (Name of Resident) to the other side of the building. Staff confirmed with (Name of Resident) and his mother that (Name of Resident #59) only made inappropriate remarks but never tried to touch (Name of Resident #59.) On 11/07/23 at 12:05 PM, the surveyor asked Resident #132 how he was? The Resident stated, I'm madder than hell. When asked why, he stated, my roommate made some derogatory sexual comments to me over the weekend and now I am across the hall from him. I still have to look at him. I want moved as far away from him as I can. I want moved to the other side of the building. He can still see me and I can still see him. He can come into my room at any time, he can walk right over to my room. The Resident said when he told the staff about the incident he was moved out of his room to a room directly across the hallway from Resident #59. Resident #132 said he called the police and wanted Resident #59 arrested. He said he was told Resident #59 has Dementia and can't be arrested. Resident #132 said Resident #59 knows exactly what he is doing. He keeps coming to his doorway and staring at me. The Resident said he is unable to get out of bed by himself and that once staff get him up in his wheelchair he is mobile. Resident #132 said if Resident #59 would get close enough to him he could hit him. He said he was scared of what he might do to Resident #59 if he could. Record review found Resident #132 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The Resident was placed in a room with Resident #59. On 11/07/23 at 1:31 PM, the Social Worker (SW) #2 was asked if she was aware of the incident. She stated she was, and provided witness statements. SW #2 said the incident was not reported to the proper State authorities. She said she did not know why but Resident #59 hadn't done anything else. The SW provided a copy of a Complaint, Comment Concern Resolution, dated 11/04/23: The form noted Resident #132 reported his roommate (Resident #59) asked him if he could F*** him in the A**. Resident #132 was immediately moved to another room. When Resident #132 was still concerned because he was only moved across the hall, Resident #132 was moved to the other side of the building. The follow up resolution was: Resident #132 was satisfied with the resolution of moving him to the other side of the building. The form was signed by the administrator, Director of Nursing (DON) and the Social Worker on 11/06/23. Observation on 11/07/23, found the Resident had never been moved to the other side of the building. On the morning of 11/07/23 the Resident was observed by the survey team to be directly across the hallway from his old roommate, Resident #59. Statements attached to the complaint included: A statement from a Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #36, dated 11/04/23 at 1:52 PM, The LPN received a telephone call from the Resident's sister stating she wanted to report a sexual assault against her brother. The sister was at the hospital with Resident #132 when the call was made to the facility. The LPN spoke to the sister and the resident who related the same story regarding Resident #59. Resident #132 denied being physically touched by Resident #59. The LPN said she would tell the social worker and the administrator about the situation. A second statement from Nurse Aide (NA) #23 revealed the resident had reported the incident to her and said Resident #59 was whispering things to him in the night saying the he wanted to F*** him in the A**. Then his mother came in and they started the process of sending him to the hospital. She stated she reported it the first chance she had because of everything going on. The statement was signed by NA #23 but was not dated. A statement dated 11/4/23 from the activity assistant (AA) #28 documented she was also aware of the situation after the Resident told her what the roommate #59 said. Resident #59 asked if he could F*** him in the A**. At 3:38 PM on 11/07/23, the Administrator and the Director of Nursing were unable to provide evidence the incident on 11/04/23 involving Resident #132 and Resident #59 was reported to the proper State Officials.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0645 (Tag F0645)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure the resident's Pre admission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) reflected pre-admission diagnoses for one (1) of two (2) r...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure the resident's Pre admission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) reflected pre-admission diagnoses for one (1) of two (2) residents reviewed for the category of PASRR. Resident #26 was diagnosed with Schizophrenia . The lack of pre-screening resulted in the resident's condition not being evaluated through the Level II PASRR process. Resident identifier: Resident #26. Facility Census: 79. Findings Included: a) Resident #26 During a record review, on 11/07/23 at 10:18 AM, Resident #36's medical record revealed admitting diagnoses included unspecified psychosis and schizophrenia. Further review of the medical record revealed a PASRR dated 03/10/23, Section 30 Current Diagnosis, was coded D. Seizure Disorder, G schizophrenic Disorder was not coded. During an interview on 11/07/23 at 10:29 AM Social Services #2 stated, I did not complete the PASRR, that was a previous facility. SS #2 acknowledged the PASRR was not coded correctly for the Schizophrenia diagnosis on admission.
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 record review and staff interview, the facility failed to complete neuro checks after an unwitnessed fall. This was a random opportunity for discovery and has the potential to affect a limi...

Read full inspector narrative →
. Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to complete neuro checks after an unwitnessed fall. This was a random opportunity for discovery and has the potential to affect a limited number of residents that currently reside in the facility. Resident identifier: #350. Facility census 77. Findings included: a) Resident #350 During a review of reportable made by the facility, Resident #350 had an unwitnessed fall on 11/28/23 at 6:15 AM in the bathroom. Facility policy titled, Neurological Assessment/Evaluation Policy: The nurse performs neurological checks, whenever there is the possibility of a head injury. A neurological evaluation will be performed on any un-witnessed fall. Purpose: Accurate assessment/evaluation, and monitoring for changes in resident's neurological status to allow prompt medical notification/treatment. After the initial assessment, the neurological exam is repeated every 15 minutes x 3 (1hour), every 30 minutes times two (2) hours, every hour for four (4) hours, then every shift for six (6) days. A review of the facility forms named AUTM NEURO CHECKS found the first assessment was completed on 11/28/23 at 6:15 AM, seconds, third and fourth were also completed. There was not an assessment done at 7:30 or 8:00 AM. Also, there were not any nursing notes about the condition of Resident #350, until 8:15 AM when she was found unresponsive and having a seizure. Resident #350 was sent to a local hospital then transferred to a larger hospital. Resident #350 was found to have suffered a brain bleed and subsequently passed away on 11/30/23. On 12/12/23 at 12:23 PM a brief interview with the Director of Nurse (DON) about the above findings. DON stated the resident was not assessed for an hour and 15 minutes and agreed it was outside of the time frame of when it should have been done.
CONCERN (D)

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

Accident Prevention (Tag F0689)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, record review and staff interview facility failed to ensure adequate supervision was maintained to ensure safety during medication administration for Resident #55. This failed pr...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, record review and staff interview facility failed to ensure adequate supervision was maintained to ensure safety during medication administration for Resident #55. This failed practice was a random opportunity for discovery and had the potential to affect more than a limited number of Residents. Resident identifier: #55. Facility census: 79 Findings included: On 11/08/23 08:57 AM, observation was made of Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #22 briskly walking into the A Hall dining room with a cup of medications and a small cup of water. LPN #22 tapped Resident #55 on the shoulder to wake him. LPN #22 set the cup of mediations on the dining room table, called the Resident by his first name, and told him, Here is your meds. LPN #22 then turned and briskly walked off, leaving the cup of medications on the table in the dining hall. Resident #55 was accompanied by Resident #24 at the table. Resident #55 dumped out the pills onto the dining room table and began to push them around on the table, unsupervised by any staff. During an interview on 11/08/23 at 9:10 AM, LPN #22 stated, Yea I left them [cup of medications] with him. It was a vitamin, stool softener, and Ocuvite. He [Resident #55] takes them one a time. On 11/08/23 at 10:26 AM, a list of wandering residents was provided by the facility that included the following Residents: #24, #58, #77, #51, #47, #76, #32, #52, #281, #72. Record review showed Resident #55, and Resident #24 do not have capacity. Review of Medication Administration Record (MAR) showed the following medications were ordered and administered to Resident #55 in the dining room for 9:00 AM medication pass by LPN #22: -Ocuvite Eye + Multi Oral Tablet (Multiple Vitamins w/ Minerals). Give 1 tablet by mouth one time a day for Supplement. -Magnesium Oxide Tablet 400 mg. Give 1 tablet by mouth two times a day for Supplement. -Aspirin Tablet Chewable 81 mg. Give 1 tablet by mouth one time a day related to personal history of transient ischemic attack. During an interview on 11/08/23 at 11:30 AM, the Director of Nursing (DON) was asked if staff were allowed to leave medications in the dining room unattended for residents? The DON replied, Absolutely not! They should know better than that. The DON further stated, Residents should be supervised while taking medications, anything could happen.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0943 (Tag F0943)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to provide training to all staff (direct and indirect care) that included activities that constitute abuse, neglect, exploitation, and m...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to provide training to all staff (direct and indirect care) that included activities that constitute abuse, neglect, exploitation, and misappropriation of resident property, the procedures for reporting incidents of abuse, neglect, exploitation or the misappropriation of resident property and Dementia management and resident abuse prevention. This was true for two (2) of five (5) staff reviewed. Staff identifiers: #81 and #60. This had the potential to affect more than a limited number of Residents at the facility. Facility census: 79. Findings included: On 11/08/23 starting at 8:39 AM, five employee files were reviewed with the Human Resources/Payroll manager, HR #65. a) Dietary Aide #60 Dietary Aide #60 was employed on 10/23/23. The time card report was reviewed with HR #65. DA #60 worked on 10/23/23, 10/24/23, 10/26/23, 10/28/23, 10/29/23, 10/30/23, 11/01/23, 11/02/23, and 11/05/23. HR #65 confirmed DA #60 did not have training in activities that constitute abuse, neglect, exploitation, and misappropriation of resident property, the procedures for reporting incidents of abuse, neglect, exploitation or the misappropriation of resident property and Dementia management and resident abuse prevention. b) Nurse Aide #81 Nurse Aide (NA) #81 was employed on 10/12/23. NA #81 has worked the following shifts since her employment: 10/12/23, 10/13/23, 10/14/23, 10/15/23, 10/19/23, 10/20/23, 10/21/23, 10/22/23, 10/27/23, 10/28/23, 10/29/23, 11/02/23, 11/03/23, 11/04/23 and 11/05/23. HR #65 confirmed NA #81 did not receive training in activities that constitute abuse, neglect, exploitation, and misappropriation of resident property, the procedures for reporting incidents of abuse, neglect, exploitation or the misappropriation of resident property and Dementia management and resident abuse prevention. HR #65 said she was sick and was not at work during this time frame and no one put Employees #81 and #60 into the computerized training program so they could complete their training prior to working on the floor. On 11/08/23 at 9:12 AM, the administrator was advised that NA ##81 and DA #60 had not completed the required training. No further information was provided before the close of the survey.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0947 (Tag F0947)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on record review and staff interview the facility failed to provide required in-service training for nurse aides which included dementia management training and resident abuse prevention trainin...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and staff interview the facility failed to provide required in-service training for nurse aides which included dementia management training and resident abuse prevention training. This was true for one (1) of two (2) nurse aides reviewed and had the potential to affect more than a limited number of residents. Staff identifier: #81. Facility census: 79. Findings included: a) Nurse Aide #81 On 11/08/23 starting at 8:39 AM, the employee file of NA #81 was reviewed with the Human Resources/Payroll manager, HR #65. Nurse Aide (NA) #81 was employed on 10/12/23. NA #81 had worked the following shifts since her employment: 10/12/23, 10/13/23, 10/14/23, 10/15/23, 10/19/23, 10/20/23, 10/21/23, 10/22/23, 10/27/23, 10/28/23, 10/29/23, 11/02/23, 11/03/23, 11/04/23 and 11/05/23. HR #65 confirmed NA #81 did not receive training in activities that constitute abuse, neglect, exploitation, and misappropriation of resident property, the procedures for reporting incidents of abuse, neglect, exploitation or the misappropriation of resident property and Dementia management and resident abuse prevention. HR #65 said she was sick and was not at work during this time frame and did not enter NA #81 into the computerized training program so training could be provided prior to working on the floor. On 11/08/23 at 9:12 AM, the administrator was advised that NA #81 had not completed the required training. No further information was provided before the close of the survey.
CONCERN (E)

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

Grievances (Tag F0585)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on observation, policy review, resident council meeting minutes, and staff interview, the facility failed to consider the voiced concerns of residents in resident council as grievances. The faci...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, policy review, resident council meeting minutes, and staff interview, the facility failed to consider the voiced concerns of residents in resident council as grievances. The facility also failed to make grievances forms accessible to all residents and/or residents' family/representatives residing in the facility. This had the potential to affect an unlimited amount of residents living in the facility. Facility census: 79. Findings Included: A review of the facility policy titled Grievances/Complaints Filing with a revision date of 10/2019 read as follows: .Policy Interpretation and Implementation .Grievances and/or complaints may be submitted orally or in writing and may be filed anonymously. During the Long-Term Care Survey Process from 11/06/23 to 11/08/23, many observations throughout the facility revealed no evidence of grievance forms were made accessible to the residents and/or resident representatives. During an interview on 11/07/23 at 1:15 PM, the Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #22 stated if someone has a grievance or concern I give them the Ombudsman phone number or the Administrator name and phone number. During the Resident Council Meeting held on 11/07/23 at 1:40 PM, the Residents as a group were asked the question, Do you know how to file a grievance? Do you know where to access your grievance forms? The residents as a group stated No, we don't. We just tell the Social Worker. During an interview on 11/07/23 at 2:41 PM the Activity Director (AD) stated if there are concerns at the resident council meeting, I just let the Department manager know. Most of the managers attend the meetings, but if not, I just tell them. The AD was asked How do you know if the issues were addressed? Is there any follow up documentation? The AD stated, There is no documentation that I fill out. The AD was asked What about the concern/grievance forms? The AD stated What's that? I don't know anything about that form. During an interview, on 11/07/23 at 2:57 PM, the Administrator acknowledged grievance forms were not accessible to residents and/or their representatives. Also acknowledged that resident council concerns were not being addressed as grievances. The Administrator stated, I am putting a book together for each nurse's station with the grievance/concerns forms and training for staff.
CONCERN (E)

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

Assessment Accuracy (Tag F0641)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

. Based on record review and staff interview the facility failed to ensure an accurate assessment for five (5) of 19 residents whose Minimum Data Sets (MDS's) were reviewed. Resident identifiers: #31,...

Read full inspector narrative →
. Based on record review and staff interview the facility failed to ensure an accurate assessment for five (5) of 19 residents whose Minimum Data Sets (MDS's) were reviewed. Resident identifiers: #31, #15, #56, #36 and #26. Facility census 79. Findings included: a) Resident #31 During a review of medical records found Resident #31 was coded in the Minimum Data Set (MDS) to have Physical Restraints (Physical restraints are any manual method or physical or mechanical device, material or equipment attached or adjacent to the resident's body that the individual cannot remove easily which restricts freedom of movement or normal access to one's body.) Observation on 11/06/23 at 12:45 PM, found Resident #31 was seen in his room in the bed sleeping, no physical restraints were being used. On 11/07/23 at 3:20 PM, the Director of Nursing (DON) was asked what type of physical restraints does Resident #31 have? DON said Resident # 31's restraints were discontinued in January. The DON was shown that the resident was coded for having side rails, used daily as a physical restraint. However, Resident #31 was care planned to have side rails for mobility. b) Resident #15 Record review found Resident #15 was coded in the MDS to have physical restraints, side rail restraints used daily. The care plan and orders stated side rails on the bed for mobility assistance. On 11/07/23 at 3:20 PM, the DON stated the MDS was incorrect. c) Resident #56 During a review of the medical records for Resident #56, the MDS coded the Resident as having a feeding tube. On 11/07/23 at 10:21 AM, an observation of Resident #56 in bed did not find any evidence of a feeding tube being used. In addition, there were not any orders for anything to be given via feeding tube. On 11/08/23 at 12:11 PM, MDS nurse #14 said Resident #56 has never had a feeding tube and agreed the MDS was wrong. d) Resident #26 During an interview on 11/06/23 at 1:59 PM, Resident # 26 stated, I have hearing aids I can't work them. During a record review on 11/08/23 at 8:30 AM, Resident #26's medical record revealed a 360 Care note dated 11/06/23, Reason for Visit: Hearing Aid Check. Hearing Aide Details: The patient is an experienced hearing aid user with bilateral hearing aids. Further record review revealed a Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 10/18/23 Section B: titled Hearing, Speech and Vision. B 0300 Titled Hearing Aid was coded zero (0) No. During interview on 11/08/23 at 10:49 AM, the MDS Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #14 acknowledged the MDS was coded incorrectly for the use of hearing aids. The MDS LPN #14 stated that I will fix the MDS now. e) Resident #36 During a record review on 11/08/23 at 8:47 AM, Resident #36's medical record revealed an MDS with ARD 10/07/23 Section P titled Restraints and Alarms, section P0100 Physical Restraints A. Bed Rails coded two (2) used daily. Further record review revealed the following physician order dated 12/27/21 Bed rails 1/2(half) as an enabler for safety. Further record review revealed the following physician order dated 07/11/23 2(two) x(times) 1/2(half) assist bars when in bed for seizures safety. Further record review revealed the following care plans with a Date Initiated: 10/05/2019 Revision on: 07/07/2021 The focus stated Resident as risk for trauma of seizure. Risk of weakness, balancing difficulties, cognitive limitations/altered consciousness, loss of muscle coordination during seizure, risk of falls/fx (fracture). Resident has 2 1/2 (two half) side rails due to seizure and TBI (Traumatic Brain Injury). Further record review revealed the consent for use of side rails, the Purpose was coded: Enable/safety. During an interview, on 11/07/23 at 6:35 PM, the Director of Nursing (DON) acknowledged the side rails were for turning assistance and for seizure safety. During an interview on 11/08/23 at 10:49 AM, the MDS LPN #14 acknowledged the MDS was coded incorrectly for the use of side rails .
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0697 (Tag F0697)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** b) Resident #181 On 11/06/23 at 12:13 PM Resident #181 stated everything below her knees was hurting. Resident #181 said staff r...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** b) Resident #181 On 11/06/23 at 12:13 PM Resident #181 stated everything below her knees was hurting. Resident #181 said staff rubbed something on her legs and she hoped it quieted down soon. Resident #181 stated, They just gave me a pill I told them I wanted something strong, not the other one. The Residents breathing was labored, and she was grimacing. Record review showed an order for Hydrocodone-Acetaminophen Oral Tablet 7.5-325 MG (Hydrocodone-Acetaminophen). Give 1 tablet by mouth every 6 hours as needed for moderate pain. 11/07/23 03:09 PM Record review showed on 10/31/23 at 9:40 PM, 11/04/23 at 10:12 PM, and 11/05/23 at 1214 PM, staff documented NA (non-applicable) for pain level when administering Hydrocodone-Acetaminophen Oral Tablet 7.5-325 mg tablet. During an interview on 11/06/23 at 12:54 PM the Director of Nursing (DON) stated she had no explanation of why the pain level was documented as NA. The DON said she had placed a phone call to the nurse that gave the medication to inquire why it was done that way. Based on resident interview, record review, and staff interview the facility failed to medicate for pain in a timely manner and failed to evaluate pain using a pain scale to measure the level of pain a resident was experiencing. This is true for two (2) of two (2) reviewed in the care area of pain. Resident identifiers: #132 and #181. Facility census 79. Findings included: a 1) Resident # 132 Observation of the physical condition of the resident found his left leg was very large, with gauze wrapped around the lower part of the leg between the knee and ankle. His left arm and hand appear to have contractures. He was sitting in a wheelchair. On 11/06/23 at 3:04 PM, Resident # 132 said he was admitted on [DATE] and did not get his pain medication for several days. Resident #132 went on to say he had to make the staff send him to a local hospital to get some medicine for his pain in his left leg, groin area and abdomen. He said the facility doctor told him that he ordered pain medication before he went to the hospital, but he was told by the nurses he did not have any pain medication there. General Nurses Notes 11/03/23 at 8:49 AM. Note Text: @0745 Resident c/o I need my pain medicine I have fluid on my stomach and my scrotum, I need to go to the hospital My hernia is hurting, and I am constipated Has told versions of this to various staff members including this nurse. Has called 911 multiple times. Has stated (named the facility attending physician) he isn't going to do anything that will help it. At 8:25 AM, License Practical Nurse LPN #99 called (named the facility attending physician) order received to send to local hospital. (LPN) #99 called 911. At 8:47 AM Resident #132 out of facility (OOF) Via (named local ambulance). General Nurses Note 11/03/2023 1:00PM Note Text: Returned to facility via same route. No new orders. ER (named the hospital physician) wrote script for resident's Oxycodone. Script is duplicate as order was already written by (named the facility attending physician) and filled. No new findings at ER (emergency room) per report Discharge DX (diagnosis) is abdominal pain and HX (history) of liver cirrhosis, Chronic anemia. Resident received 10 mg Oxycodone at ER at 9:40 AM. Review of the Medication Administration Record (MAR) found Resident #132 last received medication for pain at the discharging facility on 10/26/23 at 12:46 PM and was not evaluated for pain at this facility from 10/30/23 to 11/03/23 at 7:48 PM. Orders for Resident # 132 found the Oxycodone HCL oral tablet 10 mg. Give 1 tablet by mouth every 8 hours as needed for pain. Date of order 10/30/23. A review of the facility document called the Controlled Drug Administration Record Tablet, found the order for the Oxycodone was not delivered to the facility until 11/03/23 and the first dose given at the facility was on 11/03/23 at 7:48 PM. During an interview, on 11/07/23 at 12:24 PM Director of Nursing (DON) stated she agrees Resident #132 waited too long to receive pain medication. The DON stated she will be re-educating the staff about ensuring medications get ordered sooner. General Nursing Note 11/08/23 at 7:34 AM Note text: Received a call from the (Named local emergency services), they received a call from this resident stating he had groin pain and couldn't get any help and they had been getting several calls. Staff immediately went to check on Resident and provided care, Resident requested a pain pill and nurse was notified. (Named facility attending physician) has been notified of resident's complaint of groin pain. On 11/08/23 at 8:10 AM, the surveyor asked Registered Nurse (RN) #30 to please come to the room of Resident # 132. Resident # 132 stated he was in a lot of pain due to his elephantiasis (a condition in which a limb or other part of body become very enlarged due to obstruction of the lymphatic vessels.) which can be very painful. RN #30 arrived in the room on 11/08/23 at 8:20 AM. RN #30 asked Resident #132 to rate his pain. Resident #132 reported to her his pain was 15 and she handed him a pill in a medication cup. RN #30 was asked at this time to observe the groin area of Resident # 132 because he is complaining of pain and increased swelling. RN #30 turned and left the room saying she was in the middle of a med pass. Resident #132 and the surveyor waited for RN #30 to return until 8:43 AM. At this time the Director of Nursing (DON) was asked to come to the room of Resident # 132. On 11/08/23 at 8:50 AM DON and Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) arrived in room and asked what did we want? The DON was asked if she could observe the groin because Resident # 132 states, he is very swollen. DON informed Resident #132 he has an appointment to see the doctor on 12/29/23. Resident #132 replied with I cannot wait that long I need something done now. Resident # 132 pulled his gown up and exposed very large testicles that appeared to be the size of a melon. The DON said to Resident # 132, Well they are always that size? Resident # 132 said no they are not. DON asked if they were that that size on Saturday when you went to the ER? Resident # 132 answered no they are bigger, and they will continue to get bigger if I do not get it taken care of now. Resident # 132 went on to tell the DON, Maam, my balls are getting crushed. On 11/08/23 at 9:00 AM, the ADON stated she was working on the paperwork to send him to a Local hospital now. Resident # 132 said that was the first he has heard about going out. Review of the current Care Plan found the following: - The resident has chronic pain receives oxycodone three times a day and baclofen. Oxycodone has a black box warning of life-threatening respiratory depression and is a medication that is high risk for addiction, abuse and misuse. Date Initiated: 11/02/2023. Revision on: 11/02/2023 - The resident will not have an interruption in normal activities due to pain through the review date. Date Initiated: 11/02/2023. Revision on: 11/02/2023 Target Date: 02/02/2024 - Administer analgesia Per MD orders and document effectiveness. Date Initiated: 11/02/2023. Revision on: 11/02/2023 - Monitor/document for side effects of pain medication. Observe for constipation; new. onset or increased agitation, restlessness, confusion, hallucinations, dysphoria. nausea; vomiting; dizziness and falls. Report occurrences to the physician. Date Initiated: 11/02/2023. Revision on: 11/02/2023 NUR (nursing) - Notify physician if interventions are unsuccessful or if current complaint is a significant change from resident's experience of pain. Date Initiated: 11/02/2023. Revision on: 11/02/2023 a 2) A review of the Medication Administration Record (MAR) found the Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #50 had documented Resident's #132 level of pain prior to administering Oxycodone as N/A (not applicable). This was done on the following dates: 11/04/23 at 5:38 PM, 11/05/23 at 12:41 AM, and 6:08 PM, also on 11/06/23 at 6:04 PM. On 11/06/23 at 12:54 DON stated she had no explanation of why the pain level was charted as N/A. She said a phone call was made to the nurse about it and is awaiting a call back and would be educating LPN #50. During an interview on 11/07/23 at 12:24 PM, the Director of Nursing (DON) stated she would re-educate the staff rating pain scale from Zero to 10 and not to ever use N/A. On 11/08/23 at 12:01 PM, the DON confirmed a pain level of NA should never be entered. It should always be numeric number and if the Resident has no pain, then they should not have administered 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 staff interview the facility failed to store utensils in a sanitary manner. This practice had the potential to affect all residents that receive nourishment from the facility ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation and staff interview the facility failed to store utensils in a sanitary manner. This practice had the potential to affect all residents that receive nourishment from the facility kitchen. Facility Census: 79. a) Kitchen Utensils The Certified Dietary Manager (CDM) was not present upon entering the facility. Dietary Aide (DA) #37 oversaw the building on the initial tour of the kitchen on 11/06/23 beginning at 10:54 AM. Tour revealed the following: The three (3) drawer utensils cabinet revealed all utensils were not turned the same way. When someone went to find a serving utensil, they would have had to touch the utensils by the serving part to remove it from the cabinet. During an immediate interview the Dietary Aide (DA) #37 acknowledged the utensils handles should all be turned in the same direction.
MINOR (C)

Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact

Staffing Information (Tag F0732)

Minor procedural issue · This affected most or all residents

Based on record review and staff interview the facility failed to ensure staff posting was correct. This was a random opportunity for discovery and had the potential to affect all Residents at the fac...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and staff interview the facility failed to ensure staff posting was correct. This was a random opportunity for discovery and had the potential to affect all Residents at the facility. Facility census: 79. Findings included: On 11/08/23 at 9:52 AM, the staff posting, dated revealed a posting dated 11/06/23. This was reviewed with the administrator. The administrator confirmed the posting of nurse aides (NA's) for the 11 PM to 7 AM shift was incorrect. The posting noted 6 NAs were working. The administrator said 6 NAs were scheduled but one (1) called in. The staff posting was not changed to reflect only 5 NA's working on the 11 PM to 7 AM shift.
Jun 2021 3 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0578 (Tag F0578)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure one (1) of 18 residents reviewed during the long-term care survey process had a Physician Orders for Scope of Treatment (POST)...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure one (1) of 18 residents reviewed during the long-term care survey process had a Physician Orders for Scope of Treatment (POST) form completed per directions specified by the [NAME] Virginia Center for End-of-Life Care in conjunction with the [NAME] Virginia Health Care Decisions Act (16-30-1). Resident identifier: #60. Facility census: 67. Findings included: a) Resident #60 A record review, on 06/01/21 at 2:17 PM, found a [NAME] Virginia Physician Orders for Scope of Treatment (POST) form on Resident #60's chart. The POST form was signed by Resident #60's Health Care Surrogate (HCS). Under Section E, no information about Resident #60's HCS was provided, leaving the name, address, and telephone number blank. The 2016 edition of Using the POST Form - Guidance for Healthcare Professionals, compiled by the [NAME] Virginia Center for End-of-Life, states: For situations when the person loses or has lost decision-making capacity, the name, address, and phone number of the person legally authorized to make healthcare decisions for the incapacitated person are to be listed on the lines marked Name/Address/Phone. During an interview on 06/02/21 at 9:00 AM, RN #45 confirmed the POST form was not completed in its entirety and the form should be updated.
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0561 (Tag F0561)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** . Based on resident interview, observation, record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure that each resident ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** . Based on resident interview, observation, record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure that each resident had the opportunity to exercise autonomy regarding preferences that are important to their life. The facility failed to provide meal preferences to a resident who desired to be served eggs for meals. This was true for one (1) of four (4) residents reviewed for the care area of nutrition. Resident identifier #59. Facility census: 67. Findings included: a) Resident #59 An interview with Resident #59, on 06/01/21 12:47 PM revealed weight loss. Resident stated, I don't eat much. They said they would serve me breakfast foods all day. This happened for a few days but not anymore, look I got potato soup, pimento sandwich and fruit cocktail. That is a nasty sandwich. An immediate observation of Resident #59's food tray, on 06/01/21 at 12:47 PM revealed a bowl of cream soup, a pimento sandwich and a bowl of fruit cocktail. A brief record review, on 06/01/21 at 1:30 PM, revealed a weight record that stated, on 11/04/20, Resident #59 weighed 141.8 lbs. On 05/05/21, Resident #59 weighed 125.4 pounds which is a -11.57 % loss in a six (6) month time period. On 04/04/21, Resident #59 weighed 132.8 lbs. On 05/05/21, Resident #59 weighed 125.4 pounds which is a -5.57 % loss in a month time period. Further record review, on 06/02/21 at 8:30 AM, revealed multiple notes that reflected Resident #59's desire and preference to receive scrambled or fried eggs for meals. The notes included: - A nutritional note dated 05/04/21 revealed, Spoke again with resident. He specified he likes breakfast foods most. Have advised staff to make him scrambles eggs/bacon and toast per his request. - A nutritional note dated 05/07/21 revealed, Continues to want breakfast foods provided at meals especially scrambled eggs and bacon. - A progress note dated 02/28/21 revealed, a conversation with Resident #59's responsible party and Administrator that stated, I don't care about cinnamon rolls he is [AGE] years old give him whatever he will eat. - A progress note dated 06/01/21 revealed, Resident has requested to have breakfast meal at each meal at present. Family made aware and wants to try this for the next several days to see if this works. Staff have made aware to send resident breakfast type foods each meal until further notice. Scrambled eggs is egg of preference; ever so often he will request fried. Will proceed with this plan to see if helps. An observation, on 06/02/21 at 12:30 PM, revealed Resident # 59 was seated on the edge of the bed with a frown on his face. The food tray in front of Resident #59 contained a plate of turkey, stuffing and carrots. The food tray also contained a sausage biscuit. An immediate interview with Resident # 59, on 06/02/21 at 12:30 PM, Resident #59 stated, I do not like sausage and I do not like turkey or carrots. They know I like eggs and bacon I have told them several times. An interview with Administrator, on 06/02/21 at 12:40 PM, revealed Resident # 59 would get a plate of scrambles eggs and bacon since Resident # 59 was complaining about lunch. An interview with Registered Nurse (RN) #13, on 06/02/21 at 12:50 PM, stated if Resident # 59's preference was eggs and bacon for meals then Resident #59 should have gotten those items for his meal. An additional observation on Resident #59's tray, on 06/02/21 at 1:00 PM, revealed an almost empty plate with only small remnants of eggs and bacon remained. The plate of turkey, dressing and carrots were not touched and the sausage biscuit had one (1) bite out of it. An interview with Resident #59, on 06/02/21 at 1:00 PM, revealed he was happy and satisfied with the eggs and bacon for lunch. Resident #59 stated, I was just not going to eat the turkey, carrots or much of the sausage biscuit cause I don't like them. An interview with Dietary Manager, on 06/02/21 at 1:20 PM, revealed Resident #59 gets a regular tray sent and then if Resident #59 complains then he will get something else. The Dietary Manager stated the kitchen does put on a breakfast item like a sausage biscuit on the regular tray so he does get a breakfast item on the regular trays. .
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0761 (Tag F0761)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** . Based on observation and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility were stored...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** . Based on observation and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility were stored and labeled in accordance with current accepted professional standards. Medications stored in two (2) of (2) medication storage rooms were expired and one (1) of two (2) medication carts inspected did not have medications dated when opened when put in to use. This practice had the potential to effect more than a limited number of residents. Facility census: 67. Findings included: a) Medication Cart (B Side) Observation An observation of the B side Medication cart, on [DATE] at 3:01 PM revealed a stock medication, Ferrous Sulfate 324 mg (milligrams), opened with no date noted. An interview on [DATE], at 3:01 PM, with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #14, revealed the bottle of Ferrous Sulfate was opened and being used. In addition, LPN #14 verified there was no date when the bottle was opened and put in to use. LPN #14, stated further, the facility policy is for stock medications to be dated when opened and put in to use. b) Medication Room (B Side) Observation An observation of B side Medication room, on [DATE] at 2:56 PM, revealed the following: - a stock bottle of Probiotic in the refrigerator accessible for use with an expiration date of 05/21, - a Tresiba insulin injection pen with no date when opened. An interview on [DATE] at 2:56 PM with LPN #14, verified the stock bottle of Probiotic was expired and should not be in the refrigerator. The Tresiba was opened and being used but no date of when it was opened. LPN #14 further stated the Tresiba could only be used for a specific period and there would be no way of knowing when to discard the medication since the medication was not dated when opened. c) Medication Room (A side) Observation An observation on [DATE] at 3:12 PM, of A side medication room, revealed one (1) vial of Humulin R insulin with a date the medication was opened as [DATE]. An interview on [DATE] at 3:12 PM, with LPN #14, verified the vial of Humulin R insulin should have been discarded 28 days after opening it and to date the vial of insulin was still in use. .
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Life-Threatening (Immediate Jeopardy)
J - Isolated K - Pattern L - Widespread
Actual Harm
G - Isolated H - Pattern I - Widespread
Potential for Harm
D - Isolated E - Pattern F - Widespread
No Harm (Minor)
A - Isolated B - Pattern C - Widespread

Questions to Ask on Your Visit

  • "What changes have you made since the serious inspection findings?"
  • "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
  • "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"

Our Honest Assessment

Strengths
  • • Licensed and certified facility. Meets minimum state requirements.
Concerns
  • • Multiple safety concerns identified: 2 life-threatening violation(s), $71,911 in fines. Review inspection reports carefully.
  • • 32 deficiencies on record, including 2 critical (life-threatening) violations. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
  • • $71,911 in fines. Extremely high, among the most fined facilities in West Virginia. Major compliance failures.
  • • Grade F (6/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
Bottom line: Trust Score of 6/100 indicates significant concerns. Thoroughly evaluate alternatives.

About This Facility

What is Nella'S At Autumn Lake Healthcare's CMS Rating?

CMS assigns NELLA'S AT AUTUMN LAKE HEALTHCARE an overall rating of 1 out of 5 stars, which is considered much below average nationally. Within West Virginia, this rating places the facility higher than 0% of the state's 100 nursing homes. A rating at this level reflects concerns identified through health inspections, staffing assessments, or quality measures that families should carefully consider.

How is Nella'S At Autumn Lake Healthcare Staffed?

CMS rates NELLA'S AT AUTUMN LAKE HEALTHCARE's staffing level at 2 out of 5 stars, which is below average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 52%, compared to the West Virginia average of 46%.

What Have Inspectors Found at Nella'S At Autumn Lake Healthcare?

State health inspectors documented 32 deficiencies at NELLA'S AT AUTUMN LAKE HEALTHCARE during 2021 to 2025. These included: 2 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death), 29 with potential for harm, and 1 minor or isolated issues. Immediate Jeopardy findings are rare and represent the most serious regulatory concerns. They require immediate corrective action.

Who Owns and Operates Nella'S At Autumn Lake Healthcare?

NELLA'S AT AUTUMN LAKE HEALTHCARE 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 AUTUMN LAKE HEALTHCARE, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 100 certified beds and approximately 95 residents (about 95% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in ELKINS, West Virginia.

How Does Nella'S At Autumn Lake Healthcare Compare to Other West Virginia Nursing Homes?

Compared to the 100 nursing homes in West Virginia, NELLA'S AT AUTUMN LAKE HEALTHCARE's overall rating (1 stars) is below the state average of 2.7, staff turnover (52%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (1 stars) is much below the national benchmark.

What Should Families Ask When Visiting Nella'S At Autumn Lake Healthcare?

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

Is Nella'S At Autumn Lake Healthcare Safe?

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

Do Nurses at Nella'S At Autumn Lake Healthcare Stick Around?

NELLA'S AT AUTUMN LAKE HEALTHCARE has a staff turnover rate of 52%, which is 6 percentage points above the West Virginia average of 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 Nella'S At Autumn Lake Healthcare Ever Fined?

NELLA'S AT AUTUMN LAKE HEALTHCARE has been fined $71,911 across 2 penalty actions. This is above the West Virginia average of $33,798. Fines in this range indicate compliance issues significant enough for CMS to impose meaningful financial consequences. Common causes include delayed correction of deficiencies, repeat violations, or care failures affecting resident safety. Families should ask facility leadership what changes have been made since these penalties.

Is Nella'S At Autumn Lake Healthcare on Any Federal Watch List?

NELLA'S AT AUTUMN LAKE HEALTHCARE 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.