Complete Care at Maple Grove LLC

3401 Maple Grove Dr., Madison, WI 53719 (608) 845-1000
For profit - Corporation 184 Beds COMPLETE CARE Data: November 2025 2 Immediate Jeopardy citations
Trust Grade
0/100
#270 of 321 in WI
Last Inspection: May 2025

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

Overview

Complete Care at Maple Grove LLC has received a Trust Grade of F, indicating poor performance and significant concerns about care quality. Ranking #270 out of 321 facilities in Wisconsin places it in the bottom half, and #13 out of 15 in Dane County suggests limited options for better care nearby. The facility is showing signs of improvement, with issues dropping from 36 in 2024 to 17 in 2025, though it still has a high staff turnover rate of 67%, compared to the state average of 47%. While staffing is rated 4 out of 5 stars, indicating a strength, the facility has faced serious compliance issues, including failing to ensure adequate supervision for residents, resulting in critical incidents such as a resident choking on improper food and another resident falling without proper safety measures in place. Additionally, the facility has incurred $113,802 in fines, which is a concerning figure and suggests ongoing compliance problems.

Trust Score
F
0/100
In Wisconsin
#270/321
Bottom 16%
Safety Record
High Risk
Review needed
Inspections
Getting Better
36 → 17 violations
Staff Stability
⚠ Watch
67% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
Penalties
✓ Good
$113,802 in fines. Lower than most Wisconsin facilities. Relatively clean record.
Skilled Nurses
✓ Good
Each resident gets 63 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than 97% of Wisconsin nursing homes. RNs are the most trained staff who catch health problems before they become serious.
Violations
⚠ Watch
70 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
★☆☆☆☆
1.0
Overall Rating
★★★★☆
4.0
Staff Levels
★★☆☆☆
2.0
Care Quality
★☆☆☆☆
1.0
Inspection Score
Stable
2024: 36 issues
2025: 17 issues

The Good

  • 4-Star Staffing Rating · Above-average nurse staffing levels
  • Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
  • No fines on record

Facility shows strength in staffing levels, fire safety.

The Bad

1-Star Overall Rating

Below Wisconsin average (3.0)

Significant quality concerns identified by CMS

Staff Turnover: 67%

21pts above Wisconsin avg (46%)

Frequent staff changes - ask about care continuity

Federal Fines: $113,802

Well above median ($33,413)

Significant penalties indicating serious issues

Chain: COMPLETE CARE

Part of a multi-facility chain

Ask about local staffing decisions and management

Staff turnover is elevated (67%)

19 points above Wisconsin average of 48%

The Ugly 70 deficiencies on record

2 life-threatening 5 actual harm
Jul 2025 1 deficiency
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Accident Prevention (Tag F0689)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on interview and record review, the facility did not ensure that the resident environment remains as free of accident hazards as is possible for 1 of 1 incident reviewed.RN C (Registered Nurse) ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview and record review, the facility did not ensure that the resident environment remains as free of accident hazards as is possible for 1 of 1 incident reviewed.RN C (Registered Nurse) burned sage in the facility and the facility did not verify that the sage was extinguished and did not provide education to the staff regarding safety.Evidenced by:Surveyor requested policy related to fire safety / flames in building. No policy provided.Facility email from RN D to NHA A (Nursing Home Administrator) and DON B (Director of Nursing), dated 7/18/25, states, in part: .came into work today, 7/17/25.at about 11:30 PM, smelled marijuana so strong, so I started to walk through all the units, but the smell remained at the atrium.asked RN C about the smell and RN C admitted stating it is me don't say nothing please I am burning sage the smell will go away. Then she demanded for me to give her the narcotic box key stating want to count.I walked away.RN C came back to me erratic requesting the narcotic box key the second time then I became suspicious that she is impaired at this time and will not give her the narcotic box key. I called DON B but was unable to reach then decided to call NHA A to notify about the incident. On 7/29/25 at 11:14 AM, Surveyor called RN D with message left requesting return call. RN D did not return Surveyor's call.On 7/29/25 at 11:52 AM, Surveyor interviewed RN E who stated that, a few nights previous, RN D had called RN E asking for RN E to come to RN D's side of the building because RN D thought someone was smoking marijuana in the building. RN E indicated that on arrival to that area, RN E was not certain about marijuana, but noted there was something smoky in the air; haze and smoky smell. RN E indicated that on arrival, RN D was in the center of the lounge and RN C came out of one of the unit hallways and asked RN D to come and count narcotics with RN C. RN E stated that RN D refused, saying that RN D thought it was not a normal task at that time of night. RN E stated that a few words were exchanged and RN C went into the office. RN E stated that RN C's eyes looked a little red and RN C seemed nervous / wouldn't look at RN E. Surveyor asked if the facility had asked RN E about the incident. RN E stated that RN D had asked RN E to write a statement, but there was not contact from anyone else from the facility. RN E indicated uncertainty about the origin of the smoke but stated that the smoky haze appeared to be in the lounge, near the office.On 7/29/25 at 3:33 PM, Surveyor interviewed NHA A who indicated getting a frantic call around midnight from RN D stating that RN C was smoking in the office. NHA A indicated that RN C had been working, at that time, on a concern related to narcotic medications. NHA A indicated then speaking with RN C on the phone, regarding the allegation and that RN C denied smoking marijuana and indicated that RN C had been burning sage in the office. NHA A indicated that NHA A ordered RN C to leave the building and told RN D that statements would be needed. NHA A stated that RN D told NHA A that the smell was dissipating. NHA A indicated that the next morning, RN C came to the facility and showed NHA A the sage on a dish in the office and voluntarily completed a drug test which was negative. NHA A stated RN C made a mistake and there was no reason to believe that RN C was under the influence at work. Surveyor asked if anyone had gone into the office. NHA A stated I don't think so, I think staff may have stepped in / near and smelled the smell. NHA A stated they confirmed the next day that there was no drug paraphernalia. Surveyor asked if anyone looked into the allegation that night. NHA A stated no, RN C was told to leave. Surveyor asked if anyone walked RN C out. NHA A indicated no, they were able to verify the next day on camera. Surveyor asked if there was any education provided following the incident. NHA A stated that RN C was educated; there is no facility policy on not burning sage, but that facility refers to federal regulation and educated on not burning anything in the facility. Surveyor asked if facility staff were educated. NHA A stated no.On 7/29/25 at 4:04 PM, Surveyor interviewed RN C and asked if smoking or burning of substances is allowed on facility premises. RN C stated no. Surveyor asked about incident. RN C indicated RN C did not smoke anything. We grow sage in my mother's garden; I took a bit and burned it to try to curb the bad energy. RN C stated it was an error in judgement. Surveyor asked what happened to the sage after it had been lit. RN C stated it sat in a meal tray cover (hard plastic covering for a dinner plate). RN C indicated that it remained there until the next morning. RN C indicated speaking to NHA A on the phone and NHA A asking RN C to write a statement. RN C expressed exhaustion and NHA A indicated that the statement could be written in the AM. RN C stated that RN C did not recall if NHA A told RN C to leave the building. RN C stated that RN C did not recall if RN C finished up some tasks prior to leaving or just went home. RN C indicated returning to work the next day and meeting with NHA A and DON B, at which time RN C wrote a statement and completed a drug test that RN C brought along to the building.On 7/29/25 at 5:20 PM, Surveyor asked NHA A if anyone in the building was asked to verify that the smoking substance was put out. NHA A stated no.On 7/29/25 at 5:45 PM, Surveyor asked RN C if sage was extinguished prior to RN C leaving building. RN C stated yes.Important to note: The facility did not verify that the smoking substance was extinguished at the time of the incident and staff were not educated to prevent further incidents from occurring.
May 2025 13 deficiencies 1 Harm
SERIOUS (G)

Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures

Accident Prevention (Tag F0689)

A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure fall interventions were in place per the care pl...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure fall interventions were in place per the care plan and each residents received adequate supervision to prevent accidents for 3 of 23 sampled Residents (R27, R59, & R82) reviewed for falls and supervision. R27 is being cited at scope/severity level 3 (isolated/actual harm). R27 was a fall risk and has had 23 falls since admission on [DATE]. R27's falls typically occurred in the dining room or resident room; there were similarities to the falls including location and time of day. The facility completed a root cause analysis (RCA) and collected data on the falls; however, there is no evidence the interdisciplinary team (IDT) comprehensively reviewed the data or considered increasing R27's supervision. R27 fell resulting in a head injury requiring sutures. R59 is at risk for falls and is care planned to walk with her walker and to have a sign in her room to remind her to walk with her walker. Surveyor observed two instances on different days of R59 walking without her walker. Surveyor was unable to locate a sign in R59's room reminding her to walk with her walker. R82 has long-standing behaviors that include wandering into other residents' rooms as well as acting out toward staff and other residents. The facility staff did not provide increased supervision to prevent R82 from wandering into other Residents' rooms, which puts R82 at risk for potential resident to resident altercations to occur. This is evidenced by: The facility's fall policy titled Fall Prevention Program, dated 2/28/25, states in part: Policy: Each resident will be assessed for fall risk and will receive care and services in accordance with their individualized level of risk to minimize the likelihood of falls. Policy and Explanation and Compliance Guidelines: 1. The facility utilizes a standardized risk assessment for determining a resident's fall risk. a. The risk assessment categorizes residents according to low, moderate or high risk. b. For program identification purposes, the facility utilizes high risk and low/moderate risk, using the scoring method designated on the risk assessment. 2. Upon admission, the nurse will complete a fall risk assessment along with the admission assessment to determine the resident's level of fall risk. 3. The nurse will indicate on the (specify location) the residents' s fall risk and initiate interventions on the resident's baseline care plan, in accordance with the resident's level of risk. 4. The nurse will refer to the facility's High Risk or Low/Moderate Risk protocols when determining primary interventions. 5. Low/Moderate Risk Protocols: a. Implement universal environmental interventions that decrease the risk of resident falling including, but not limited to: a. A clear pathway to the bathroom and bedroom doors. ii. Bed is locked and lowered to a level that allows the resident's feet to be flat on the floor when the resident is sitting on the edge of the bed. iii. Call light and frequently used items are within reach. iv. Adequate lighting. V. Wheelchairs and assistive devices are in good repair. b. Implement routine rounding schedule. c. Monitor for changes in resident's condition, gait, ability to rise/sit, and balance. D. Encourage residents to wear shoes or slippers with non-slip soles when ambulating. e. Ensure eye glasses, if applicable, are clean and the resident wears them when ambulating. f. Monitor vital signs in accordance with facility policy. g. Complete a fall risk assessment every 90 days and as indicated when the resident's condition changes. 6. High Risk Protocols: a. The resident will be placed on the facility's Fall Prevention Program. i. Indicate fall risk on care plan. ii. Place Fall Prevention Indicator (such as star, color coded sticker) on the name plate to resident's room. iii. Place Fall Prevention Indicator on resident's wheelchair. B. Implement interventions from Low/Moderate Risk Protocols. c. Provide interventions that address unique risk factors measured by the risk assessment tool: medications psychological, cognitive status, or recent change in functional status. D. Provide additional interventions as directed by the resident's assessment including but not limited to i. Assistive devices ii. Increased frequency of rounds iii. Sitter, if indicated iv. Medication regime review v. Low bed vi. Alternate call system access vii. Schedule ambulation and toileting assistance viii. Family/caregiver or resident education ix. Therapy services. 7. When a resident who does not have a history of falling experiences a fall, the resident will be placed on the facility's Fall Prevention Program. 8. Each resident's risk factors, and environmental hazards will be evaluated when developing the resident's comprehensive plan of care. a. Interventions will be monitored for effectiveness. b. The plan of care will be revised as needed. 9. When any resident experiences a fall, the facility will: a. Assess the resident b. Complete a post-fall assessment c. Complete an incident report d. Notify the physician and family e. Review the resident's care plan and update as indicated f. Document all assessments and actions g. Obtain witness statements in the case of injury. R27 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that include dementia, seizure disorder, psychotic disturbance, mood disturbance and anxiety, altered mental status, and malaise (weakness). R27's Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 2/20/25 indicates Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) was unable to be performed. A staff assessment of R27's mental status indicates R27 has moderate cognitive impairment. Section C1310 of the assessment indicates R27 has periods of inattention and disorganized thinking. Section GG indicates R27 requires setup assistance with eating, supervision for oral hygiene and upper body dressing, partial to moderate assistance for toileting and personal hygiene, and substantial to maximum assistance for showers, lower body dressing, and footwear. R27's mobility indicates she requires partial to moderate assistance for rolling left to right, sitting to standing, lying to sitting, chair to bed transfer, toilet transfer and walking 50 feet. R27 utilizes a wheelchair and is dependent on locomotion of 150 feet while in the wheelchair. Section J1800 any falls prior assessment indicates yes. Section J1900 number of falls since admission or prior assessment indicates the following: No Injury two or more. B. Injury two or more. C. Major injury indicates one. R27's Activities of Daily Living (ADL) care plan initiated 9/4/24 revised on 11/25/24 states: Focus: At risk and/or potential for complications with deficits with ADLs r/t current medical/ physical status. Has meds/dx (medications/diagnosis) that can/may affect ADLs dated initiated 9/4/24 revised 9/7/24. Goal: Will be clean, dry, dressed appropriately and maintain ability to participate in ADLs through next review date 9/7/24 revised 11/25/24. Will be more independent with ADLs after set-up, cues and able to return to assisted living by discharge date . Interventions: Ambulation - may ambulate in room or hallway with w/c (wheelchair) trail 9/4/24 revised 2/28/25. Bed mobility: 1 assist 9/4/24 revised 2/28/25. Locomotion: 1 assist in Broda Chair 4/1/25. Transfers: 1 assist pivot with gait belt 9/4/24 revised 2/28/25. Prefers to get up around 7:00 AM and goes to bed around 8:00 PM 9/7/24. R27's Safety/Falls care plan date initiated 9/7/24 and revised on 12/16/24 states: Focus: At risk/and/or Potential for complications with or falls r/t (related to) current medical / physical and mental status. Has meds/dx (medication/diagnoses) that can/may affect fall risk. Goal: Reduce risk of fall related injuries date initiated 9/7/24. Revised on 12/18/24. Interventions/Tasks: Assist resident to sit up to table at mealtimes 9/14/24 revised on 2/28/25. Busy box on side of the bed 12/30/24 revised on 2/28/25. Do not recline resident back in wheelchair when resident is agitated 3/12/25 revised on 2/28/25. Due to increasing behaviors, support resident in her room with low lighting, low noise level, no visual stimulation 10/8/24 revised on 2/28/25. During the night when she is restless, frequent attempts to get out of bed offer shower and/or weighted blanket for comfort 1/9/25 revised on 2/28/25. Elevate HOB (head of bed) in seated position for comfort 12/30/24 revised on 2/28/25. Immediate intervention s/p (status post) fall - increased monitoring, given breakfast, NP (nurse practitioner) to see resident. Will re-educate the staff regarding current interventions 1/24/25 revised on 2/28/25. Immediate intervention s/p fall offered/received snack and placed into bed. Discussion with guardian for a perimeter mattress. Guardian in agreement. IDT (Interdisciplinary Team) to review recommendation. Add perimeter mattress to bed 1/3/25 revised on 2/28/25. Immediate intervention s/p (status post) fall send to ER (emergency room) for further evaluation 1/21/25 revised on 2/28/25. Immediate Intervention: Heated blanket placed on resident for comfort and 1:1 with staff. Suggest medication review. Medicated with Tylenol, pain gel and Melatonin 10/16/24 revised on 2/28/25. Move resident closer to the nurses station for increased supervision. Immediate intervention s/p fall 2/11/25 resident moved closer to the nurses station for increased monitoring 11/21/24 revised on 2/28/25. Nonskid socks when up in wheelchair 11/18/24 revised on 2/28/25. Offer a snack during the evening hours, around the time she is going to bed for the night and as requested 1/7/25 revised on 2/28/25. Offer assistance with ambulation in hallway if resident is restless or repeatedly attempting to stand 12/28/24 revised on 2/28/25. Offer hydration and/or snack at change of shift from PM to NOC shift if resident is awake. IDT: During routine rounding and as needed staff to ensure resident has fresh ice water or fluid of choice 12/15/24 revised on 2/28/25. Offer toileting IMMEDIATELY after meals 12/30/24 revised on 2/28/25. Perimeter mattress to better define edges of bed 1/6/25 revised on 2/28/25. Provide a quiet space to be able to rest and relax. Provide her soft lighting and white noise via the light and sound machine provided 12/27/24 revised on 2/28/25. Staff to offer assistance with walking to and from the dining room (per resident's choice) 4/1/25. Therapy to screen and treat for possible BRODA chair till current w/c (wheelchair) is fixed so resident's feet can touch the floor 4/28/25. Walk to the dining room every meal 2/14/25 revised on 2/28/25. When resident is restless, upset, crying, speaking of family offer warm heated blanket and/or busy box for comfort 10/17/24 revised on 2/28/25. Will have therapy eval for w/c positioning and safety 2/12/25 revised on 2/28/25. Call light positioned for easy access 9/7/24. Check for unmet needs: pain, toileting, hunger, thirst, temperature 9/7/24. Do not leave unattended in the Bathroom [ROOM NUMBER]/7/24. Encourage / Assist with non-skid shoes / socks 9/7/24. Ensure environment is free of clutter 9/7/24. Have commonly used articles within easy reach 9/7/24. Scoop mattress to bed 1/22/25 revised on 2/28/25. Other: (Specify) - Nonskid mat to wheelchair 11/18/24. R27's Care plan for Mood/Behavior dated 9/7/24 and revised on 12/17/24 states: Focus: Has a dx of MDD (mood disturbance disorder). She is at risk for changes in mood and cognition. She experiences episodes of tearfulness and heightened anxiety. Curses and makes derogatory statements to people who are not there likely r/t previous stay at ALF (assisted living facility) or past trauma. Also exhibits aggression toward staff as evidenced by grabbing, hitting, and spitting d/t cognitive impairment. Anxiety related to death of parents. She makes paranoid statements about staff at times. Goal: Mood / Behavior will not interfere with ADL status through next review 9/7/24 revised 11/25/24. Will have choices and able to make decisions through next review date 9/11/24 revised 11/25/24. Interventions/Tasks: Offer resident one of her robotic cats to assist with keeping resident calm 11/11/24 revised on 2/28/25. Offer weighted blanket 1/10/25 revised 2/28/25. Provide a quiet space for [Resident's name] to be able to rest and relax. Provide her soft lighting and white noise via the light and sound machine provided date initiated 12/27/24 revised 2/28/25. Provide a warm blanket when she is in bed and agitated 11/11/24 revised 2/28/25. Provide music therapy with resident's CDs (compact disc) 11/11/24 revised 2/28/25. Remove from noisy environment and take to a quiet area to decrease external stimuli 11/20/24 revised on 2/28/25. Resident to be on floor mate [sic] while in room [ROOM NUMBER]/17/25. Allow resident to wander within unit 9/7/24. BIMS / PHQ9 completed upon admission, quarterly, annually, and PRN (as needed) - Notify MD as needed with concerns 9/7/24 revised 2/28/25. Calm approach. Remove stressors i.e.: noisy/overstimulating area or other residents in personal space who are too close 9/7/24. Check for comfort levels - pain, thirst, hunger, temperature - offering comfort as able / accepted 9/7/24. Encourage / Assist to activities of choice 9/7/24. Encourage resident to be out of room [ROOM NUMBER]/7/24. Meds / Labs / Treatments as Ordered 9/7/24. Observe / Monitor / Document behaviors/mood and notify supervisor, SW (social worker), and / or MD as needed 9/7/24. Offer opportunities for resident to express feelings 9/7/24. PASARR Level II - Review & Follow Recommendations as able / accepted 9/7/24. Remind / Redirect and/or reassure as needed 9/7/24. Turn white noise machine on at bedtime. Progress notes dated 9/14/2024 at 12:04 PM state in part: Resident seated in w/c at dining room table. CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant) at nurse station when resident slid out of w/c (wheelchair) and onto to left LUE (left upper extremity) and LLE (left lower extremity) making contact with the carpeted area of floor. CNA alerted wtr (writer) and nurse assessment was completed. Resident was baseline A&O (alert and oriented) and able to state her name and DOB (date of birth ), denied injury, and reported she was trying to scootch closer to the table. No apparent injuries noted on assessment, resident denied pain, nonverbal indicators of pain not present AEB (as evidenced by) a score of 0 on PAINAD scale (scale used to measure pain levels). Dr.'s nurse on call notified. Charge nurse notified. POA (power of attorney) notified. Progress notes dated 9/14/2024 at 13:17 (1:17 PM) state in part: Resident transferred by staff into w/c (wheelchair) and engaged with other residents in activities at table nearest nurse station. Resident was monitored and observed by staff the remainder of the shift. Progress notes dated 9/14/2024 at 16:13 (4:13 PM) state in part: IDT (Intradisciplinary Team) met to review fall. Root cause determined to be resident failed attempt at scooting self closer to the table. Intervention added for staff to assist resident to sit up to table at mealtimes. Kardex up to date. Therapy notes dated 9/20/2024 at 08:04 AM state: patient discharging from physical, occupational, and speech therapy today, 9/20/24. Recommend continued 1 assist with transfers, ambulation, and ADLs. Diet consistency is accurate and appropriate. Patient will remain in this LTC (long-term care) facility which is most appropriate for patient. Patient scored 3.2 on the ACL ([NAME] Cognitive Level screen - a test to assess cognitive function) cognition assessment indicating patient is appropriate for 24-hour supervision. Progress note dated 9/26/2024 at 20:44 (8:44 PM) states: resident had an unwitnessed fall in evening after supper. The resident was lying on the floor on her left side and reports that she did not hit her head. Vitals within normal limits, pain minimal to the left elbow and butt cheek. Resident reports that she was trying to move her wheelchair herself when she slipped out onto the floor. Nurse sat with the resident for an hour to monitor vitals and neuro status. Resident was baseline. Guardian contacted, nurse manager contacted, NP (nurse practitioner) contacted. Will continue to monitor. Progress notes dated 9/27/2024 at 14:41 (2:41 PM): IDT met to review fall. Root cause of fall noted to be resident scooting to move wheelchair into place. Intervention related to root cause: non-skid pad placed in wheelchair. Therapy notes dated 10/2/2024 at 15:51 (3:51 PM) state: PT (physical therapy) evaluated w/c positioning on 10/1/24. Patient is very short making it difficult for her to keep herself properly positioned in the wheelchair and causes her to slide forward in the wheelchair. Therapist searched through all wheelchairs in the building and in extra rooms to see if there was an appropriate w/c for patient. Patient needs a super hemi-wheelchair which most supply companies cannot provide. PT completed work order for seat to be adjusted for drop seat/seat slope: 1.5 (higher front) to see if this helps with better w/c positioning. Progress notes dated 10/3/2024 at 13:20 (1:20 PM) state: IDT Risk. Risk Factors: Frequent Falls, Wheelchair Mobility, Height challenged, Dx Related to Risk: Unspecified Dementia, Failure to Thrive, Disc Disorder, Osteoarthritis, CKD 3 (chronic kidney disease), Unspecified Convulsions, Muscle Weakness. Nursing Issues: Pain control, Decreased mobility, Incontinence, Medications that can attribute to risk: Keppra and Sertraline. Behaviors that can attribute to risk: Noncompliance related to memory issues, Heightened startle reflex, Nutrition Risk Factors: Pureed Diet (no teeth). Weights are good - good intakes. Care Plan review and Risk intervention updates: Nonskid added to wheelchair. CP (care plan) updated. Wheelchair is being adjusted to drop the seat. Plan of care ongoing. Progress notes dated 10/3/2024 at 20:18 (8:18 PM): Patient attempted to stand up multiple times during the shift. States that she left let [sic] hurt. Behavior improved with supper and once she laid down for the evening. Did encourage to elevate leg in WC which the resident did accept and that did help some of the behavior. Progress notes dated 10/6/2024 at 06:00 AM: excerpt from fall report: resident was found lying in prone position on the bedside floormat in resident's bedroom. Resident was log rolled and transferred back to bed with 2 assists by mechanical lift after assessing for injury, no injury was noted, and resident did not verbalize pain. All extremities moved well per residents' baseline. Unit RN completed Neuro (neurological checks - check for potential head injury). Assessed and found to be without injury. Transferred off floor via Hoyer lift and 2 staff assist. Guardian updated. MD updated. DON updated. Care plan updated. Progress notes dated 10/7/2024 at 15:16 (3:16 PM) state: IDT met to review fall. Root cause analysis determined root cause of fall to be resident sitting up on side of bed without assistance (lacking trunk strength/coordination to successfully lay herself back down in bed). Immediate intervention related to root cause: Care plan and Kardex updated to reflect that resident should not be left alone while sitting on the edge of her bed. Progress notes dated 10/8/2024 at 18:21 (6:21 PM): patient was observed self-transferring writer ran to assist patient back to wheelchair patient became weak was lowered to floor, assessed patient from head to toe no injuries observed, performed rom (range of motion - check for injury to extremities) no complaints of pain, vitals measured started neuro checks, nurse on call notified order to call if any new abnormal symptoms occur, guardian notified, educated patient to ask for assistance when needed, distract patient with activities of choice offer snacks. Progress notes dated 10/9/2024 at 12:57 PM Late Entry: IDT met to review fall. Root cause analysis performed. Root cause determined to be resident restlessness and weakness upon standing. Assessment info relayed to NP - new orders received and noted for labs (TSH lab to check thyroid function), change of sertraline timing to HS (at bedtime), and seeing psych (physician for psychiatric/behavioral health) next week. Progress note dated 10/10/2024 at 12:43 PM: IDT clarification regarding root cause: Prior to falling, resident was sitting up at the side of her bed. CNA had offered to assist resident to lay down in bed, and resident refused. Progress note dated 10/17/2024 at 03:02 AM: resident noted sitting on floor mat; her back against the bed with feet extended outwards toward bathroom door. Bed noted in lowest position at this time. Resident stated, I got to go to my momma's house. Resident noted restless, crying and breathing rapidly. Resident denied hitting her head but stated, her legs hurt. Tylenol administered for pain and pain gel rubbed on bilateral legs. No injuries or bruises noted this shift. Neuros WNL (within normal limits). ROM WNL (Range of Motion within normal limits) for resident. PRN (As needed) Melatonin given for sleep. A heated blanket placed on resident for comfort and 1:1 with staff. Charge nurse, On-call physician, and emergency contact notified. Fall intervention suggestion: Medication review needed. All needs met at this time. Call light within reach. Will continue to monitor. Progress note dated 10/17/2024 at 09:28 AM Late Entry: IDT met to review fall. Root cause analysis (RCA) performed. Root cause identified as agitation related to bad dreams/delusions. Intervention related to root cause: Labs, Change of Zoloft to HS and Psych follow-up scheduled. It should be noted the IDT RCA review, dated 10/17/24, is 8 days after R27's fall on 10/9/25. Progress note dated 10/17/2024 at 15:31 (3:31 PM) Activity Progress Note: The writer is updating about a busy box that was created for the patient. Inside this busy box will be a number of things that the patient has seem to take interest in there is some jewelry in there for her to sort due to the fact she loves jewelry. Furthermore, there is a fake pet cat in there along with some puzzles and lastly coloring pages. This is to be located in the dining room of her unit and on her table of where she sits. This is to be used for when activity staff isn't present or to occupy her. Therapy notes dated 10/24/2024 at 13:27 (1:27 PM): Pt's (Patient's) guardian came to writer's office today asking about getting patient a different wheelchair. Guardian feels the wheelchair is not working for her. Discussed that patient has not had any falls from current wheelchair and pt (patient) had two falls from previous wheelchair. Guardian still adamant about therapy trialing different wheelchairs. Guardian requested that elevating wheelchair footrests be on patient's w/c, to have wheelchair footrests slightly elevated, and for footrest cushion to be on patient's wheelchair at all times. Guardian also requested we trial a recline back wheelchair. Writer educated guardian that we [sic] therapy can attempt to trial different chairs but will discuss with IDT before changing anything. Progress notes dated 10/25/2024 at 18:14 (6:14 PM): nurse was advised by CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant) that patient was on the floor in the dining room. Upon assessment, patient was observed laying on the floor in dining room, in front of wheelchair. Inquired about incident and patient stated, I was looking for the door to use the restroom. Nurse assessed for injuries. No apparent injuries noted. ROM (range of motion) applied and patient complained of lower right leg pain. Received routine acetaminophen 1000 mg. Assisted patient off the floor x 2 staff members using Hoyer lift. Patient toileted. Vitals obtained bp (blood pressure): 128/114 p (pulse): 96 r (respirations): 16 O2 (oxygen): 96% room air and t (temperature): 97.1. NP notified. Received orders for neuro checks. Call placed to (guardian name). Voicemail left to call facility back. Currently sitting in wheelchair in dining room coloring. Voiced no concerns at this time. It should be noted R27 has had several falls in the dining room however there is no evidence the IDT discussed not leaving R27 alone in the dining room or increasing supervision for R27 r/t (related to) falls in the dining room. Progress notes dated 11/1/2024 at 16:37 (4:37 PM) state IDT note: 10/25/24, unwitnessed fall without injury. Resident observed lying on the dining room floor. Resident relayed looking for the bathroom door. She most likely needed to use the bathroom. Her dx include Dementia, weakness, failure to thrive, malaise, osteoarthritis. She has poor safety awareness, severe cognitive impairment with a BIMS of 3. Neuro checks initiated. NP, Guardian, and Family Care RN notified. Care plan and CNA Kardex updated to include toilet before and after meals. Will monitor the effectiveness of the interventions and modify as necessary. Of note, toileting before and after meals should be a normal standard of practice for all residents. Toilet upon rising, before and after means at HS (bedtime) and as needed was a care planned intervention dated 9/7/24 on R27's bowel and bladder care plan. Progress notes dated 11/20/2024 at 23:17 (11:17 PM): CNA found the resident on the floor and notified nurse. Doctor was notified as well as POA (power of attorney) and director. There was no apparent injury. Resident was checked and put back in bed. Neuro checks within normal limits and low bed and mat continue to be in place. No new interventions at this time, staff is updated to round frequently throughout the night. NOC (night) charge updated. It should be noted there is no evidence the staff asked R27 what she may have been attempting to do or if R27 had an unmet need; the facility simply returned R27 to her bed. Progress notes dated 11/22/2024 at 08:09 AM state: IDT note unwitnessed fall 11/20/24 without injury. Resident observed on the floor beside her bed. Resident with severe cognitive impairment, BIMS (Brief Interview Mental Status) of 3, dx (diagnosis) of dementia and unable to relay how the incident occurred. She has poor safety awareness and attempted to get out of bed unassisted and slid out of bed onto the fall mat. Bed in lowest position and call light within reach at the time of the incident. No c/o (complaints of) pain. Resident was monitored frequently thru out the night and will be moved closer to the nurses station for increased monitoring. Dr. and guardian notified. Care plan and CNA Kardex updated. Will monitor the effectiveness of the interventions and modify as necessary. Progress notes dated 12/14/2024 at 23:00 (11:00 PM): CNA coming down the hall at 2220 (10:20 PM) and heard resident talking from her room. CNA went to res room and found resident laying on the floor mat with bed in low position. Due to cognitive impairment per res baseline, res unable to articulate what she was attempting to do. VSS (vital signs stable) with neuro checks WNL (within normal limits) to res baseline. No reports of physical pain or signs of injury. PERRLA (pupils equal, round, reactive to light and accommodation - normal eye exam - check for head injury). Res incontinent pad was dry. Res was rambling with rapid speech tearful and frustrated talking about going home to be with her mother. Speech is mostly word salad per res baseline. Res thirsty and asking for something to drink. Hydration provided. Resident's primary care provider notified as residents guardian and case manager. Administrator and DON for facility also updated of fall without injury. New intervention added to POC to offer hydration and/or snack at PM to NOC (night) shift change if res awake. 1:1 provided to resident by staff with active listening and validation of resident sadness and frustration provided. Neuro checks initiated per facility policy. Will monitor. Progress notes dated 12/16/2024 at 21:00 (9:00 PM): resident was found sitting on the floor in front of her bed on the floor mat. The resident did not appear to be in any pain or discomfort, she does not report any injuries. The resident was able to move all extremities without issue. The resident was able to stand up with 2-assist and a gait belt and into the bed. A footrest pillow was placed under her feet to elevate her legs and keep her lower extremities in bed for increased comfort. The resident then became upset and agitated with staff and began yelling and asking not to be touched. The charge nurse was notified of no injuries with the incident. A phone call was placed to the GNP (geriatric nurse practitioner) to alert her of the incident. POA (power of attorney) notified of the incident. Will continue neuro checks and vitals assessments. Progress notes dated 12/17/2024 at 12:50 PM Addendum: IDT NOTE: unwitnessed fall 12/14/24 without injury. Resident observed on the floor parallel to bed. Resident with severe cognitive impairment, BIMS of 3, dx of dementia and unable to relay how the incident occurred. She has poor safety awareness and most likely attempted to get out of bed unassisted and slid out of bed onto the fall mat. Bed in lowest position, gripper socks, and brief clean and dry at the time of the incident. No c/o (complaints of) pain. Neuro checks initiated. Resident verbalized being thirsty and hydration provided. Will offer hydration and/or snack at pm night shift change. Staff will ensure during routine rounds and as needed she has fresh ice water or fluid or choice. Dr. and guardian notified. Care plan and CNA Kardex updated. Will monitor the effectiveness of the interventions and modify as necessary. Progress notes dated 12/18/2024 at 13:15: IDT note met to review resident's recent fall. Fall was in her room. Root cause analysis completed. Root cause identified as confusion and attempting to get out of bed. Resident has been experiencing recent behavioral episodes. Resident was yelling out at the time of assessment. Bed was in lowest position and fall mat was in place. She had been toileted and had been offered snacks. New interventions: positioning the bed at transfer height with fall mat in place and maintaining a low stim environment in resident's room. Progress notes dated 12/18/2024 at 13:41 (1:41 PM): IDT met to review resident's recent fall. Root cause analysis completed. Root cause identified as resident feeling thirsty. Immediate intervention was resident was assisted with a beverage. New interventions: ensure bedside pitcher will be filled with resident's drink of choice. Plan of care ongoing. Progress notes dated 12/19/2024 at 15:15 (3:15 PM): Resident was in the dining [sic] at about 3:15pm when writer heard resident fall in the dining area. When writer looked, resident was laying on her back on the floor, wheelchair by the feet, she had non-slip socks on, she was screaming and calling out, using profanities on staff. Meanwhile, all shift today, resident was up and down in her wheelchair, standing up and dragging her wheelchair while walking around. Staff tried each time to redirect but resident kept fighting and swatting at staff. Assessment completed, VSS wnl (Vital signs stable and within normal limits), resident had a bump on the back of her head from the fall but denies pain, no other injuries noted at the time of assessment. Patient was transported to the hospital via 911. It should be noted that resident was self-transferring in her w/c, standing up and dragging her w/c all day. Staff did attempt to redirect however this was not successful. However, this behavior should have put staff on notice of the high potential of a fall occurring. There is no evidence the facility increased supervision despite this known behavior throughout the day. Progress notes dated 12/19/2024 at 20:45 (9:45 PM): Resident returned from the ER at 8:45pm, no new orders, follow up with primary PCP for symptom management in one week. Resident is currently eating. Floor nurse to complete skin assessment after resident is done eating and in bed. Progress notes dated 12/20/2024 06:43 AM: Repeated fall review-Repeated falls occur due to behavioral outburst and unable to redirect of [sic] touch resident during violent outburst. Injury prevention, resident safety are intervention focus. MD team inform[TRUNCATED]
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0554 (Tag F0554)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure that all residents are clinically appropriate to...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure that all residents are clinically appropriate to self-administer medications for 1 of 1 residents (R17) reviewed for self- administration of medications. R17 was observed to have a cup of medications left on her bedside table for her to take independently. R17 does not have an assessment for self-administration of medications indicating that she is safe to administer medications independently. Evidenced by: The facility's policy titled Resident Self- Administration of Medication dated 4/17/25 states in part, .3. When determining if self- administration is clinically appropriate for a resident, the interdisciplinary team should, at a minimum consider the following: a. The medications appropriate and safe for self- administration; b. The resident's physical capacity to open medication bottles, administer injections. c. The resident's cognitive status, including their ability to correctly name their medications and know what conditions they are taken for. d. The resident's capability to follow directions and tell time to know when medications need to be taken. e. The resident's comprehension of instructions for the medications they are taking, including the dose, timing, and signs of side effects, and when to report to facility staff . R17 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that include polyosteoarthritis (arthritis in five or more joints simultaneously), type 2 diabetes mellitus, muscle weakness, and unspecified macular degeneration (a type of age- related macular degeneration where the specific stage is not clearly defined- symptoms include: blurred or fuzzy vision, difficulty recognizing faces, wavy lines, or a blind spot in the center of vision). R17's most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] states that R17 has a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) of 15 out of 15, indicating that R17 is cognitively intact. The MDS indicates that R17 requires substantial/ maximal assistance for completing Activities of Daily Living (ADLs), including bathing, oral care, dressing, and personal hygiene. The MDS also states that R17 has limited range of motion of her bilateral upper extremities (shoulder, elbow, writs, and hand). The facility's assessment titled Self- Administration of Medications Review Tool dated 11/27/24 states in part .B. Approval 1. Physician order to self- administer medication(s): 2. No, 2. Approval to self- administer medication(s) granted: 2. No, 3. Reason for approval not granted, if applicable: Resident is unable to elaborate enough information regarding medications or administration to safely administer medications. The facility's document titled Self- Administration of Medications with a completed date of 4/28/25 states A. Assessment 1. Is the resident cognitively impaired? 2. No. 2. Does the resident have a visual deficit? 2. No. 3. Is fine motor coordination impaired? 2. No. 4. Can the resident name medication dosages, frequency, and reason for use? 2. No .B. Conclusions .B. Based on the entire assessment and answers to these listed question numbers the resident WOULD BE considered safe to self- administer medications. WOULD BE. C. Plan 1. Does the resident want to self- administer all or some of their medications? 1. Yes .2. If the nurse feels the resident would be able to successfully administer their own medication, they will discuss it with their physician and plan set up for the resident per facility policy and procedure .Resident has requested that the nurse/ MAA (Medication Administration Aide) prepared meds be left by the bedside. Provider ordered. It is important to note that R17 has a diagnosis of macular degeneration and polyosteoarthritis. It is also important to note that the assessment dated [DATE] was not completed, nor the order obtained until after Surveyor made the observation of the medications at bedside. On 4/28/25 at 9:42 AM, Surveyor interviewed R17. Surveyor noticed R17's medications sitting on the bedside table. Surveyor asked R17 if staff always leave the medications for her to take by herself, R17 stated no, lately she has needed help. R17 reported that she called for someone to help with the pills, and no one had come to help. On 4/28/25 at 12:12 PM, Surveyor interviewed MAA FF (Medication Administration Aide). Surveyor asked MAA FF if she administered R17's medications this morning, MAA FF stated yes and that R17 gets upset if her medications aren't there and then she goes back to R17's room and helps her take them. Surveyor asked MAA FF if R17 has a self- administer assessment or order, MAA FF reported that it says to observe her take mediations, but that recently they have been having to give the medications to her. On 4/2825 at 12:27 PM. Surveyor interviewed LPN N (Licensed Practical Nurse). Surveyor asked LPN N if R17 has an assessment or order to self-administer medications, LPN N stated no. Surveyor asked LPN N if R17's medications should be left in her room unattended, LPN N stated no. Nurse's note dated 4/28/25 at 4:18 PM states: Nrs (nurse) manager notified that resident prefers her meds to be self-administered and will not eat her breakfast unless they are nurse/MAA prepared and left at the bedside. CP (Care Plan) updated, assessment completed, and banner updated as well. Order to self-administer bedside meds obtained at an earlier date. Will continue to follow plan of care. On 4/29/25 at 2:58 PM, Surveyor interviewed LPN GG, who is also the Unit Manager. Surveyor asked LPN GG how she was made aware that R17 wanted to self- administer her medications, LPN GG stated that the medication aide told her that R17 will only eat breakfast if the medications were present and that R17 won't eat breakfast if the medications are not on the bedside table. Surveyor asked LPN GG if R17 not eating breakfast is an appropriate reason for leaving the medications at bedside, LPN GG stated no, but they aim to please. Surveyor asked if R17 qualifies to self- administer based on the assessment that was performed, LPN GG stated that R17 does not meet all the qualifications and that R17 is not able to identify the medications. Surveyor asked LPN GG if R17 is physically able to self- administer medications, LPN GG stated yes. Surveyor asked LPN GG if she observed R17 taking her medications, LPN GG stated no, and she was going from the information reported by the med aide. On 4/30/25 at 10:32 AM, Surveyor interviewed R17. Surveyor asked R17 if staff are allowing her to take medications independently, R17 stated no, and that she used to be able to take them independently but now that her condition has deteriorated, she needs help. Surveyor asked R17 if she refuses to eat breakfast until the medications are in the room, R17 stated no and that she wants to have something in her stomach before taking the medications. Surveyor asked R17 if she would be agreeable to having staff bring the medications in after she has eaten breakfast R17 stated yes. Surveyor asked R17 if LPN GG has ever discussed her medications with her, R17 stated no. On 4/30/25 at 10:52 AM, Surveyor interviewed LPN GG. Surveyor asked LPN GG if she ever spoke with R17 about her medications when completing the assessment for self- administration, LPN GG stated no. Surveyor asked LPN GG if she had ever discussed R17's preference with her, LPN GG stated no and that she was going off the information provided by the med aide. Surveyor asked LPN GG how many of the criteria on the assessment need to be met to self- administer medications, LPN GG stated that she was not sure. On 5/1/25 at 2:05 PM, Surveyor interviewed DON B (Director of Nursing). Surveyor asked DON B what the process is for determining if a resident is safe to self- administer medications, DON B reported that staff need to complete an assessment, get an order, update the banner, and update the care plan. Surveyor asked DON B if resident has to meet all of the criteria on the assessment, DON B stated no and that the form they are using does not give a score based on the answers and that residents should know what the medications are. Surveyor asked DON B if staff that are performing the assessments should meet with the resident, DON B stated yes.
CONCERN (D)

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

Grievances (Tag F0585)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not document a thorough investigation and did not resolve grievances as outlined in the facility policy for 1 of 4 residents (R26) ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not document a thorough investigation and did not resolve grievances as outlined in the facility policy for 1 of 4 residents (R26) reviewed for grievances. R26 voiced concern about staff being on their cell phones. The facility failed to follow up on the grievance. Evidenced by: The facility policy, Resident and Family Grievances, dated 10/23, states, in part; .3. The Grievance Official is responsible for overseeing the grievance process; receiving and tracking grievances through to their conclusion; leading any necessary investigations by the facility; maintaining the confidentiality of all information associated with grievances and notifying the person filing the grievance of the decisions and outcome . Surveyor reviewed January 2025 Resident Council Minutes. Minutes indicate R26 voiced concern about staff on their personal cell phones while working. On 4/30/25 at 1:53 PM, Surveyor observed LPN HH (Licensed Practical Nurse) on their personal cell phone attempting to open a bank account. On 4/30/25 at 1:57 PM, Surveyor observed LPN GG on their cell phone on a Facetime call while this Surveyor was completing the Medication Storage task. On 4/30/25 at 3:10 PM, Surveyor observed LPN II on their personal cell phone talking about a resident. On 5/5/25 at 8:21 AM, Activities Director J (AD) indicated any grievances discussed during Resident Council will go to the specific department to follow up on. AD J indicated she remembers R26 voicing a concern with cell phones. AD J indicated she brought the concern to the Director of Nursing. AD J indicated this was a previous DON, and she is unsure if there was any follow up. AD J indicated staff using cell phones during their work hours is an ongoing concern and has been brought up before by management. Surveyor reviewed grievance log and did not see R26's concern. On 5/5/25 at 8:43 AM, R26 indicated no one followed up with her regarding concern with staff on their personal cell phones during work hours. R26 indicated it is still a concern. On 5/5/25 at 10:28 AM, DON B (Director of Nursing) indicated there wasn't specifically a grievance regarding cell phones, but everyone reviewed the cell phone expectations in February 2025. DON B indicated she would expect a thorough investigation and follow up on grievances. The facility did not document a thorough investigation and did not resolve grievances as outlined in facility policy.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0604 (Tag F0604)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

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

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that each resident is free from physical restraints that are not required to treat the resident's medical symptoms for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for restraints (R27). R27 was placed in a low Broda chair (a specialty wheelchair that assists with positioning) that has brakes located on the back of the wheels at the bottom of the chair. R27's brakes were engaged while R27's was at the dining table, not allowing R27 to move the chair. Evidenced by: The facility's policy titled Restraint Free Environment dated 2/2025 states in part .Physical Restraint refers to 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. Physical restraints may include, but are not limited to: .Using devices in conjunction with a chair, such as trays, tables, cushions, bars or belts, that the resident cannot remove and prevents the resident from rising. Placing a resident in a chair that prevents the resident from rising . R27 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that include dementia, seizure disorder, psychotic disturbance, mood disturbance and anxiety, altered mental status, and malaise. R27's Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 2/20/25 indicates a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) was unable to be performed. A staff assessment of R27's mental status indicates R27 has moderate cognitive impairment. Section C1310 of the assessment indicates R27 has periods of inattention and disorganized thinking. Section GG indicates R27 requires setup assistance with eating, supervision for oral hygiene and upper body dressing, partial to moderate assistance for toileting and personal hygiene, and substantial to maximum assistance for showers, lower body dressing, and footwear. R27's mobility indicates she requires partial to moderate assistance for rolling left to right, sitting to standing, lying to sitting, chair to bed transfer, toilet transfer and walking 50 feet. R27 utilizes a wheelchair and is dependent on locomotion of 150 feet while in the wheelchair. Section J1800 any falls prior assessment indicates yes. Section J1900 number of falls since admission or prior assessment indicates the following: No Injury two or more. B. Injury two or more. C. Major injury indicates one. R27's Activities of Daily Living (ADL) care plan initiated 9/4/24 revised on 11/25/24 states: Focus: At risk and/or potential for complications with deficits with ADLs r/t (related to) current medical/ physical status. Has meds/dx (medications/diagnosis) that can/may affect ADLs dated initiated 9/4/24 revised 9/7/24. Goal: Will be clean, dry, dressed appropriately and maintain ability to participate in ADLs through next review date 9/7/24 revised 11/25/24. Will be more independent with ADLs after set-up, cues and able to return to assisted living by discharge date . Interventions: Ambulation - may ambulate in room or hallway with w/c (wheelchair) trail 9/4/24 revised 2/28/25. Bed mobility: 1 assist 9/4/24 revised 2/28/25. Locomotion: 1 assist in Broda Chair 4/1/25. Transfers: 1 assist pivot with gait belt 9/4/24 revised 2/28/25. Prefers to get up around 7:00 AM and goes to bed around 8:00 PM 9/7/24. On 5/5/25 at 8:30 AM, Surveyor observed R27. R27 was noted to be sitting close to the table in the Broda chair with the wheels locked, waiting for breakfast. On 5/5/25 at 9:33 AM, Surveyor observed R27 still sitting at the dining room table in the Broda chair with the wheels locked. R27 was attempting to move the chair with her hands by grabbing onto the wheels, but the brakes remain locked. On 5/5/25 at 10:40 AM, R27 was repositioned in the Broda chair, and the brakes were unlocked. It is important to note that the brakes of the Broda chair are located on the back lower wheels, in a location that R27 is unable to physically reach. Additionally, this was a continuous observation of R27. On 5/5/25 at 10:42 AM, Surveyor interviewed CNA R (Certified Nursing Assistant). Surveyor asked CNA R if R27 is able to self- propel in the Broda chair, CNA R stated that R27 used to be able to self- propel in her old wheelchair, but she hasn't seen R27 do it in the new chair. On 5/5/25 at 1:50 PM, Surveyor interviewed DON B (Director of Nursing). Surveyor asked DON B if R27 is able to self- propel in her current chair, DON B stated yes. Surveyor asked DON B if the Broda chair brakes are located in a position that R27 cannot reach, and they are locked, and R27 is sitting up close to the table, would that be considered a restraint, DON B reported that it is hard to say. Surveyor asked DON B if R27 was attempting to move the wheels on the chair and was unable to do so because the wheels were locked, would that be considered a restraint, DON B did not reply. On 5/5/25 at 2:40 PM, Surveyor observed R27 sitting in the Broda chair, up against the table with the wheels locked. On 5/5/25 at 2:40 PM Surveyor interviewed RN DD (Registered Nurse). Surveyor asked RN DD if R27 can self-propel the Broda chair, RN DD stated yes, and that he has seen R27 do it. Surveyor asked RN DD if having the brakes locked is considered a restraint, RN DD stated yes. R27's brakes were engaged while R27's was at the dining table, not allowing R27 to move the chair.
CONCERN (D)

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

Comprehensive Care Plan (Tag F0656)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Example 3: R28 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and has diagnoses that include: Alzheimer's disease (Progressive brain dis...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Example 3: R28 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and has diagnoses that include: Alzheimer's disease (Progressive brain disorder that slowly damages memory, thinking, and behavior) and polyosteoarthritis (arthritis in multiple joints). R28's Annual Minimum Data Set Assessment (MDS), dated [DATE], shows R28's Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) could not be conducted because R28 is rarely or never understood. Section C indicates R28 has short-term and long-term memory problems and has moderately impaired decision making skills regarding tasks of daily life. Section C also indicates R28 has behaviors of inattention and disorganized thinking. R28's Comprehensive Care Plan indicates: Focus: Mood/Behavior: Due to impaired cognition and dx (diagnosis) of other Alzheimer's disease. [Resident Name] is at risk for changes in mood and or behaviors. Exhibited behaviors consisting of calling out in native language, singing extremely loud, and striking at staff at times. Date initiated: 2/16/23. Interventions/Tasks BIMS/PHQ-9 (Patient Health Questionaire-9, Depression Screening) completed upon admission, quarterly, annually, and PRN (as needed) - PRN - Notify MD (Medical Doctor) as needed with concerns. Date Initiated: 2/16/23. Calm approach. Remove stressors ie (in example): noisy/overstimulating area or other residents in personal space who are too close. Date Initiated: 2/16/23. Check for comfort levels - pain, thirst, hunger, temperature - offering comfort as able/accepted. Date Initiated: 2/16/23. Keep routine the same as much as able. Date Initiated: 2/16/23. Observe/Monitor/Document behaviors/mood and notify supervisor, SW (Social Worker), and/or MD as needed. 1. Loud disruptive chanting. 2. Singing or verbalization that disrupt environment or peers. Date Initiated: 2/16/23. Focus: Cognition: [Resident Name] has a dx of Alzheimer's dx. [Resident Name] is at risk for impaired cognition and ineffective verbal communication. Date Initiated: 2/16/23. Meds/Labs/Treatments as Ordered/Accepted. Date Initiated: 12/20/23. Anticipate needs. Observe for non-verbal cues indicating needs. Date Initiated: 12/20/23. BIMS/PHQ-9 (Patient Health Questionaire-9, Depression Screening) completed upon admission, quarterly, annually, and PRN (as needed) - PRN - Notify MD (Medical Doctor) as needed with concerns. Date Initiated: 2/16/23. Observe for a change in cognition - level of alertness, confusion, forgetfulness. Reorient as needed, determine if able to reorient. Review changes with MD (Medical Doctor)/NP (Nurse Practitioner). Date Initiated: 2/16/23. Remind/Redirect and/or reassure as needed. Using tactile cueing, words from her communication list. Date Initiated: 2/16/23. SS (Social Services) to intervene as needed. Date Initiated: 2/16/23. Resident does not use call light, anticipate needs. Date Initiated: 2/16/23. The section of the Comprehensive Care Plan titled, Special Instructions, states, in part: .Palliative Care Interpreter contact number: Nepalese [Phone number] (ask interpreter to use simple Nepali words). R28's Care Card, posted in R28's bathroom, indicates: Communication: Uses facial expressions to communicate, responds well to laughing and smiling/hand gestures. Psychosocial - Mood: Remind/Redirect and/or reassure as needed. Using tactile cueing, words from her communication list. The Special Instructions section of this document also lists the interpreter phone number. Surveyor requested the facility's Language and Communication Policy. The facility provided Surveyor with instructions on how to use the facility's phone interpreter services. Surveyor notes that Nepalese is listed on the document titled, Top Language Codes. On 4/30/25 at 10:21 AM, Surveyor interviewed LPN N (Licensed Practical Nurse). Surveyor asked LPN N how she communicates with R28. LPN N indicates the facility has a paper they ask R28 to point at but doesn't think R28 really understands. LPN N indicates she tries to show R28 two objects so she can pick between them. Surveyor asked LPN N if R28 speaks any English. LPN N indicates, no. Surveyor asked LPN N if she knew what language R28 speaks. LPN N indicates, no. LPN N also indicates she tried to download a translation app once but it did not work, so she has asked other staff to communicate with R28. On 4/30/25 at 9:53 AM, Surveyor interviewed CNA V (Certified Nursing Assistant). Surveyor asked CNA V if she knows which language R28 speaks. CNA V indicates, no. Surveyor asked CNA V if she has ever used a translator to communicate with R28. CNA V indicates, no. Surveyor asked CNA V if R28 speaks any English. CNA V indicates, no. On 5/5/25 at 2:01 PM, Surveyor asked DON (Director of Nursing) B. Surveyor asked DON B what the expectation is for staff when communicating with residents who speak a different language. DON B indicates staff should check the care plan, use the language line (phone translator), use cueing and picture boards. Surveyor asked DON B if staff should be using a translator to communicate with residents who speak a different language. DON B indicates, yes. Surveyor asked DON B if she knows what language R28 speaks. DON B indicates she does not but it is on her care plan. Surveyor asked DON B if R28 speaks any English. DON B indicates she thinks she understands some English but does not speak English. Surveyor asked DON B what her expectation is of staff when communicating with R28. DON B indicates she expects staff to use gestures, showing the resident objects, and if having bad behaviors to use the language line. R28's care plan was not followed for using the interpretive services to communicate with R28 in her preferred language. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to develop a person-centered comprehensive care plan to meet personal preferences and goals, or address the resident's medical, physical, mental, and psychosocial needs for 3 of 23 residents (R53, R70, and R28). R53's care plan does not include a focus, goal, or interventions for religious preferences. R70's care plan does not include a focus, goal, or interventions for religious preferences. R28's care plan was not followed for using the interpretive services to communicate with R28 in her preferred language. Evidenced by: The facility policy titled, Comprehensive Care Plans states, in part: Policy: It is the policy of this facility to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, consistent with resident's rights, that includes measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs and ALL services that are identified in the resident's comprehensive assessment and meet professional standards of quality. Definitions: Culture is the conceptual system that structures the way people view the world - it is the particular set of beliefs, norms, and values that influence ideas about the nature of relationships, the way people live their lives, and the way people organize their world. Cultural Competency is a developmental process in which individuals or institutions achieve increasing levels of awareness, knowledge, and skills . Cultural competence involves valuing diversity . avoiding stereotypes, managing the dynamics of difference . and adapting to diversity and cultural contexts in communities. Person-centered care means to focus on the resident as the focus of control and support the resident in making their own choices and having control over their daily lives . Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines: 1. The care planning process will include an assessment of the resident's strengths and needs and will incorporate the resident's personal and cultural preferences in developing goals of care. All services provided or arranged by the facility, as outlined by the comprehensive care plan, must meet professional standards of quality, and incorporate culturally competent . care as indicated . 3. The comprehensive care plan will describe, at a minimum, the following: a. The services that are to be furnished to attain or maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being . f. Resident specific interventions that reflect the resident's needs and preferences and align with the resident's cultural identity, as indicated. If the resident is non-English speaking, the facility will identify how communication will occur with the resident. The care plan will identify the language spoken and tools used to communicate . Example 1: R53 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that include Adult Failure to Thrive. R53's most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment, dated 2/4/25, indicates R53's Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score was 15 out of 15, indicating that R53 is cognitively intact. R53's Comprehensive Care Plan indicates: Focus: Communication: At risk and/or potential for complications with hearing/speech/communication. Hearing - Adequate. Devices - None. Speech - Clear. Understands - Usually. Date Initiated: 1/30/25. Revision on: 1/30/25. Goal: Will be free of serious communication concerns through next review date. Date initiated: 1/30/25. Revision on: 2/17/25. Interventions: Ask simple, short questions. Date Initiated: 1/30/25 . Encourage resident to communicate needs. Give resident time to explain needs. Date Initiated: 1/30/25 . Observe for changes in ability to understand what was said and be understood. Observe for hearing loss, cognitive loss, illness. Review with MD (Medical Director). Date Initiated: 1/30/25. Focus: Activities/Life Enrichment: Date Initiated: 1/30/25. Goal: Will engage in activities of interest through next review date. Date Initiated: 1/30/25. Revision on: 2/17/25. Interventions: Assist resident in becoming acclimated with their new surroundings. Date Initiated: 1/30/25 . Offer supplies for independent activities. Assist as needed. Date Initiated: 1/30/25 . Provide an overview of the life enrichment programs which they may choose to engage in. Date Initiated: 1/30/25. Of note, nowhere in R53's comprehensive care plan does it include that R53's primary language is Yugoslavian, or that she is a practicing Muslim, which is important to her. On 4/29/25 at 8:23 AM, Surveyor interviewed R53 who stated that she can't pray when she wants to because, as a Muslim, you have to be very clean before you pray, and you have to have a clean floor to pray on. R53 stated that she was very upset about not being able to pray, because she is used to praying seven times a day as a Muslim. Example 2: R70 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that include Major Depressive Disorder and Depression, unspecified. R70's most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment, dated 3/27/25, indicates R70's Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score was 13 out of 15, indicating that R70 is cognitively intact. R70's Comprehensive Care Plan indicates: Focus: Communication: At risk and/or potential for complications with hearing/speech/communication. Hearing - Adequate. Devices - None. Speech - Garbled. Understood/Understands - Yes. Date Initiated: 7/18/24. Revision on: 7/18/24. Goal: Will be free of serious complications R/T (related to) communication concerns through next review date. Date initiated: 7/18/24. Revision on: 11/25/24. Interventions: Encourage resident to communicate needs. Give resident time to explain needs. Date Initiated: 7/18/24 . Observe for changes in ability to understand what was said and be understood. Observe for hearing loss, cognitive loss, illness. Review with MD (Medical Director). Date Initiated: 7/18/24. Focus: Activities/Life Enrichment: AT risk for social isolation due to being in a new environment. Date Initiated: 7/18/24. Revision on: 7/23/24. Goal: Will engage in activities of interest through next review date. Date Initiated: 7/18/24. Revision on: 11/25/24. Interventions: Assist resident in becoming acclimated with their new surroundings. Date Initiated: 7/18/24 . Invite [Resident Name] to activities. He attends church services, and many different types of activities. Date Initiated: 12/9/24. Revision on: 12/9/24 . Offer supplies for independent activities. Date Initiated: 7/18/24. Revision on: 7/23/24 . Provide an overview of the life enrichment programs which they may choose to engage in. Date Initiated: 7/18/24. Of note, nowhere in R70's comprehensive care plan does it include that R70 is a practicing Muslim, which is important to him. On 4/29/25 at 10:16 AM, Surveyor interviewed R70 who stated that he had been a Muslim for 60 years and that he was used to praying seven times a day. R70 stated that he has asked to go to the chapel to pray by himself, but that staff will not allow him to do that because he is a Muslim. R70 stated it makes him angry that the facility tries to treat everyone the same way, without taking into consideration people's individual needs. On 5/1/25 at 9:08 AM, Surveyor interviewed AD J (Activities Director) and asked her if she would expect that R53 and R70's religious preferences as Muslims would be included on their comprehensive care plan. AD J stated yes, if R53 and R70 were voicing these concerns, that she took it very seriously and would look into it. AD J stated that they do the religious screening on admission, and she thought that was enough. On 5/1/25 at 1:53 PM, Surveyor interviewed DON B (Director of Nursing) about R53 and R70's religious preferences. DON B stated that if a resident has any specific requests, then she would expect that to be on their care plan. Cross Reference: F675
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0660 (Tag F0660)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility did not develop a discharge plan that reflected the resident's goals for 1 of...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility did not develop a discharge plan that reflected the resident's goals for 1 of 23 residents (R76) reviewed for discharge planning. R76's discharge care plan did not match his discharge goals. Evidenced by: The facility's policy titled Discharge Planning Process dated 2/28/25 states in part . Procedure: 1. The facility will support each resident in the exercise to participate in his or her care and treatment, including planning for discharge. 2. The facility will determine the resident's expected goals and outcomes regarding discharge upon admission, routinely in accordance with the MDS (Minimum Data Set) cycle, and as needed .b. Subsequent assessment information and discharge goals will be included in the resident's comprehensive plan of care .5. If discharge to the community is a goal, an active discharge care plan will be implemented and will involve the interdisciplinary team, including the resident and/ or representative. The plan shall be documented on (list facility- specific form, comprehensive care plan, etc.). R76 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that include depression, diverticulitis (inflammation or infection in one or more small pouches in the digestive tract), and obstructive and reflux uropathy (blockage in urinary tract and backward flow of urine from the bladder into the ureters and sometimes the kidneys). R76's most recent MDS dated [DATE] states that R76 has a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) of 12 out of 15, indicating that R76 has moderate cognitive impairment. R76's care plan dated 9/26/23, revised on 9/16/24 states in part DISCHARGE PLAN: Length of stay is viewed as long term, [R76] will always wish to return to his farm. Goal: Will continue to have needs provided by nursing home care during their life/stay through next review date. Interventions/ Tasks: Discuss feelings / goals for placement as needed. Allow them to share concerns. SS (Social Services) to intervene as needed / requested. Involve family / friends as available / able & if needed. Arrange for discharge as needed. On 4/29/25 at 9:04 AM, Surveyor interviewed R76. R76 reported to Surveyor that he would like to go to assisted living. Surveyor asked R76 if he has spoken to the SW (Social Worker) about the discharge plan, R76 stated yes. Surveyor asked R76 if he attends the care conferences, R76 stated no. On 4/30/25 at 2:51 PM, Surveyor interviewed SW K. Surveyor asked SW K how often care conferences are held, SW K stated every 3 months. Surveyor asked if R76 gets invited to the care conferences, SW K stated yes, Surveyor asked SW K if she was aware that R76 wished to go to assisted living, SW K stated yes, Surveyor asked SW K when she was made aware of R76's goal, SW K stated she was made aware in mid-January. SW K reported that they had received a call from an assisted living that indicated that R76 had called and requested admission. SW K stated that she had spoken with the assisted living and discussed barriers to admission, including payer source. SW K reported that after this conversation, she worked with R76 and his representative on enrolling in a MCO (Managed Care Organization) and that the MCO is currently looking for placement. Surveyor asked SW K if R76's care plan should be updated to reflect his current goals, SW K stated yes. Surveyor asked SW K if R76's care plan should have been updated, SW K stated yes. On 5/1/25 at 2:16 PM, Surveyor interviewed DON B (Director of Nursing). Surveyor asked DON B when she would expect a care plan to be updated with new/ current goals, DON B stated as soon as staff know that the goals have changed the care plan should be updated.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0675 (Tag F0675)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review the facility did not ensure that 2 of 19 Residents (R53 and R70) received the necessary car...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review the facility did not ensure that 2 of 19 Residents (R53 and R70) received the necessary care and services to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial wellbeing in accordance with their comprehensive assessment and plan of care. R53 is a Muslim whose custom is to pray seven times a day. R70 is a Muslim whose custom is to pray seven times a day. Evidenced by: The facility policy, titled Quality of Care dated 2/28/25, states, in part: Policy: Based on comprehensive assessments, the facility will ensure that residents receive treatment and care by qualified persons in accordance with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plans, and the residents'' choices . Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines: 1. Each resident will be provided care and services to attain or maintain his/her highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being. 2. A comprehensive care plan will be developed for each resident in accordance with procedures for development of the care plan . The facility policy, titled Promoting/Maintaining Resident Self-Determination (Activities) dated 2/28/25, states, in part: Policy: This facility's activity program is designed to promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice and resident rights. Each resident has the opportunity to exercise his or her autonomy regarding activities participation. Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines: 1. A resident's right to self-determination includes, but is not limited to: . b. the right to make choices about aspects of his or her life in the facility that are significant to the resident . d. The right to participate in other activities, including social, religious, and community activities that do not interfere with the rights of other residents in the facility . 4. The Activity Director shall develop a plan of care for the resident based on the resident's assessment preferences. Consideration for the plan of care include but are not limited to: . c. Preferences regarding spirituality . 5. Resident preferences and interests shall be accommodated . Example 1 R53 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that include Adult Failure to Thrive. R53's most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment, dated 2/4/25, indicates R53's Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score was 15 out of 15, indicating that R53 is cognitively intact. Of note, nowhere in R53's comprehensive care plan does it include that R53's primary language is Yugoslavian, or that she is a practicing Muslim, which is very important to her. R53's Progress Notes include: 2/7/25: Spiritual Care Progress Note: . [Resident Name] is a Muslim and doesn't appear to have a local mosque . I will check back in with [Resident Name] to see if she'd like me to see if there is an [NAME] in town who could visit her . 4/15/25: Spiritual Care Progress Note: Routine visit with [Resident Name] today. We watched Albanian Mosque Service on You Tube channel. She got teary eyed as we watched. She was very pleased to see the Mosque and to hear the service in her language 4/28/25: Spiritual Care Progress Note: Routine visit. [Resident Name] shared her disappointment about not being able to pray the way that she should pray as a Muslim. She said that she needs to be clean, wear clean pajamas and pray on a clean floor . On 4/29/25 at 8:23 AM, Surveyor interviewed R53 who stated that she can't pray when she wants to because, as a Muslim, you have to be very clean before you pray, and you have to have a clean floor to pray on. R53 stated that she was very upset about not being able to pray, because she is used to praying seven times a day as a Muslim. On 4/30/25 at 2:05 PM, Surveyor interviewed R53 and asked if she went to any of the other activities that the facility offered. R53 replied no, that they don't have any activities that she can go to. R53 stated that she just stays in her room and looks at her (R53 gestured towards her iPad tablet). R53 stated that she likes to crochet and sometimes sits outside. Surveyor asked R53 if anyone offered her one-on-one activities. R53 stated no, no one has come to her room and done individual activities with her. R53 stated that she would like to be able to take more showers, as she is used to taking a daily shower and that the showers help with her pain and would make her clean to be able to pray. On 4/30/25 at 2:49 PM, Surveyor interviewed CNA D (Certified Nursing Assistant) about R53's activities and religious preferences. CNA D stated that R53 stays in her room most of the time and does not go to any of the facility activities. CNA D indicated that the residents receive one shower a week, but that R53 had complained about it so she was supposed to be receiving two showers a week, although her care plan had not been updated to reflect the additional shower. CNA D stated that he knew that R53 was a Muslim. On 4/30/25 at 2:51 PM, Surveyor interviewed RN C (Registered Nurse) about R53's activities and religious preferences. RN C stated that he could not remember R53 going to any of the facility activities, and that she likes her privacy. RN C stated that R53 gets two showers a week, but that she can have additional showers whenever she requests. RN C stated he was unaware that R53 was a Muslim, but that he did notice that she keeps her head covered. On 4/30/25 at 2:55 PM, Surveyor interviewed AD J (Activity Director) about R53's activities and religious preferences. AD J stated that R53 mainly comes to music activities, but that she had provided her in room supplies such as yarn to crochet a blanket. AD J stated that R53 was very independent, but that she checked in with her on a weekly basis. Surveyor asked AD J about R53's religious needs. AD J stated that R53 was Buddhist, so she had given her scarves to cover her head, and that R53 watches religious services on her iPad. Of note, R53 is Muslim, not Buddhist. On 5/1/25 at 11:36 AM, Surveyor interviewed CNA F about R53's religious activities and preferences. CNA F stated that R53 told her she was a Muslim and asked her about being able to pray seven times a day and about fasting for [NAME]. CNA F indicated that she told R53 that it really wasn't possible to observe the Muslim prayer rituals or to fast for [NAME] while residing in the facility, but that she makes sure that R53 is not served pork. CNA F stated that R53 does not go to any of activities and prefers being in her room. Example 2 R70 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that include Major Depressive Disorder and Depression, unspecified. R70's most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment, dated 3/27/25, indicates R70's Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score was 13 out of 15, indicating that R70 is cognitively intact. Of note, nowhere in R70's comprehensive care plan does it include that R70 is a practicing Muslim, which is important to him. On 4/29/25 at 10:16 AM, Surveyor interviewed R70 who stated that he had been a Muslim for 60 years and that he was used to praying seven times a day, and that he has asked to go to the chapel to pray by himself, but that staff will not allow him to do that because he is a Muslim. R70 stated it makes him angry that the facility tries to treat everyone the same way, without taking into consideration people's individual needs. On 4/30/25 at 11:14 AM, Surveyor interviewed CNA I and asked about R70's activities and religious preferences. CNA I stated that R70 did go to activities and liked to participate in the religious services. CNA I indicated that she was unaware that R70 was a Muslim, but that she knew that he didn't eat pork. On 5/1/25 at 9:08 AM, Surveyor interviewed AD J (Activities Director) about R70 and R53. Surveyor asked her if she would expect that R53 and R70's religious preferences as Muslims would be included on their comprehensive care plan. AD J stated yes, if R53 and R70 were voicing these concerns, that she took it very seriously and would want to look into it. AD J stated that they do the religious screening on admission, and she thought that was enough. AD J indicated that she was surprised that R70 was a Muslim, because he attended the catholic and ecumenical services that the facility provided. On 5/1/25 at 1:53 PM, Surveyor interviewed DON B (Director of Nursing) about R53 and R70's religious preferences. Surveyor asked DON B how the facility was honoring resident's religious preferences. DON B stated that they were asked about their religion on admission and if they had any specific requests, then she would expect that to be on their care plan. Surveyor asked DON B if she was aware of R53 and R70 being devout Muslim's and needing to pray seven times a day. DON B stated that she was not aware of that, but the facility should be able to accommodate that request easily. Surveyor asked DON B how often a resident could receive a shower in order to meet their religious preferences. DON B indicated that the residents could receive as many showers as they requested. DON B stated that she would expect that all residents' religious needs would be met. Cross Reference: F656 Additonal information was received and reviewed.
CONCERN (D)

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

ADL Care (Tag F0677)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Example 2 R293 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that include displaced intertrochanteric fracture of right ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Example 2 R293 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that include displaced intertrochanteric fracture of right femur (femur fracture), adult failure to thrive, malignant neoplasm of prostate (prostate cancer), anxiety disorder, and heart failure. R293's care plan dated 4/24/25, revised on 4/28/25 states in part .The resident has an ADL (Activities of Daily Living) self- care performance deficit r/t (related to) .Goal: .Interventions/ Tasks: .Personal Hygiene/ Oral Care: The resident is totally dependent on 2 staff for personal hygiene and oral care . R293's task documentation for showering/ bathing/ personal care is as follows: 4/24/25: no documentation 4/25/25: marked not applicable for type of bath received, was hair care provided, was nail care provided, foot care, and was resident shaved. 4/26/25: marked not applicable for type of bath received, was hair care provided, was nail care provided, foot care, and was resident shaved. 4/27/25: marked not applicable for type of bath received, was hair care provided, was nail care provided, foot care, and was resident shaved. 4/28/25: marked not applicable for type of bath received, was hair care provided, was nail care provided, foot care, and was resident shaved. 4/29/25: no documentation 4/30/25: marked not applicable for type of bath received, was hair care provided, was nail care provided, foot care, and was resident shaved. 5/1/25: no documentation 5/2/25: marked not applicable for type of bath received, was hair care provided, was nail care provided, foot care, and was resident shaved. 5/3/25: marked not applicable for type of bath received, was hair care provided, was nail care provided, foot care, and was resident shaved. 5/4/25: no documentation 5/5/24: resident refused all cares (documented at 12:52 PM). It is important to note that, except for 5/5/25, only the night shift was documenting on R293's cares. On 5/5/25 at 9:57 AM, Surveyor observed R293 sitting in the dining room, still in his pajamas with his hair sticking up and scraggly whiskers on his face approximately ¼ inch long. On 5/5/25 at 10:52 AM, Surveyor interviewed R293. Surveyor asked R293 if he likes the whiskers on his face, R293 stated no, and that he doesn't like them R293 stated that he needs someone to shave him. Surveyor asked R293 how it makes him feel, having the long whiskers, R293 stated that he feels crappy and reported that he used to shave every day. Surveyor asked R293 if he likes to have his hair combed, R293 stated yes. On 5/5/25 at 10:57 AM, Surveyor interviewed CNA R (Certified Nursing Assistant). Surveyor asked CNA R how often residents get shaved. CNA R reported that residents usually get shaved on shower days, but there has been no time frame given on how often they have to shave residents. On 5/5/25 at 2:24 PM, Surveyor interviewed DON B (Director of Nursing). Surveyor asked DON B how often residents are scheduled for a shower, DON B reported residents are scheduled for a shower twice a week and per resident preference. Surveyor asked DON B how often residents should be shaved, DON B stated as needed and per preference. Surveyor asked DON B if she would expect residents' hair to be combed in the morning before going to the dining room, DON B stated yes. Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility did not provide toileting assistance for dependent residents for 2 of 19 residents (R37 & R293) reviewed for Activities of Daily Living (ADLs) assistance. Staff did not assist R37 with toileting assistance after several incontinent episodes despite R37 requiring toileting assistance per his plan of care. R293 was observed sitting in the dining room in his pajamas with his hair sticking up, and scraggly (not neat or even) whiskers on his face approximately ¼ inch long. Evidenced by: Facility policy, titled Activities of Daily Living (ADLs), dated 2/25, states, in part: Policy: The facility will, based on the resident's comprehensive assessment and consistent with the resident's needs and choices, ensure a resident's abilities in ADLs do not deteriorate . Care and services will be provided for the following activities of daily living: 1. Bathing, dressing, grooming and oral care; 2. Transfer and ambulation; 3. Toileting . Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines . 3. A resident who is unable to carry out activities of daily living will receive the necessary services to maintain good nutrition, grooming, and personal and oral hygiene . R37 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that include, in part, Parkinson's Disease, Weakness, Neuromuscular Dysfunction of Bladder (lack of bladder control due to a brain, spinal cord or nerve problem), Muscle Weakness, generalized, Adult Failure to Thrive, and Unsteadiness on Feet. R37's most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 2/4/25 documented that R37 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 11 out of 15, indicating R37 has moderate cognitive impairment. R37's Care Plan, includes, in part: Focus: Skin Integrity: Actual/At Risk/ and/or Potential for Complications with impaired skin integrity including skin tears, bruising AND/OR pressure R/T (related to) current medical/physical status. Has medications/dx (diagnoses) that can/may affect skin integrity. Chronic urethral erosion. Date Initiated: 2/17/23. Revision Date: 4/29/25 Goal: Will have clean, dry, intact skin through next review date. Date initiated: 2/17/23. Revision Date: 11/25/24. Intervention: Incontinence care with incontinent brief changes OK to use 2nd incontinence product per resident request. Date Initiated 2/17/23. Revision Date: 2/28/25. Focus: ADL: Actual/At Risk and/or Potential for complications with deficits with ADL's R/T current medical/physical status. Date Initiated: 2/17/23. Revision Date: 3/22/23. Goal: Will be clean, dry, dressed appropriately and maintain ability to participate in ADLs through next review. Date Initiated: 2/17/23. Revision Date: 11/25/24. Intervention: Toilet Use: Hoyer 2 Assist OK to use 2nd incontinent product. Date Initiated: 2/17/23. Revision Date: 4/28/25. Intervention: Transfers: 2 Assist Hoyer Lift. Date Initiated: 4/12/23. Revision Date: 4/15/25. Focus: Bowel/Bladder: Actual/At risk and/or Potential for complications with B&B (bowel and bladder) R/T current medical/physical status. OK to use 2nd incontinence product, per resident request. Date Initiated: 3/10/23. Revision Date: 5/9/24. Goal: Will be clean and dry with incontinence of bowel and cares provided as needed through review date. OK to use 2nd incontinence product. Date Initiated: 3/10/23. Revision Date: 11/25/24. Intervention: Incontinence cares with incontinent episode. OK to use 2nd incontinence product, per resident request. Date Initiated: 3/10/23. Revision Date: 2/28/25. Intervention: Medications and creams as ordered. Date Initiated: 3/10/23. On 4/28/25 at 9:30 AM, Surveyor observed R37 in the lounge asleep in front of the TV in his Broda chair. R37 had a Hoyer sling underneath him in the chair and was still wearing his clothing protector from breakfast. On 4/29/25 at 8:27 AM, Surveyor observed R37 asleep at the breakfast table in his Broda chair. On 4/29/25 at 10:48 AM, Surveyor observed R37 in the lounge asleep in front of the TV in his Broda chair. R37 had a Hoyer sling underneath him in the chair. On 4/29/25 at 3:32 PM, Surveyor interviewed CNA D (Certified Nursing Assistant) and asked about R37's needs and assistance with cares. CNA D stated that R37 had been an EZ stand transfer but that he was unsafe because he would let go of the handles instead of hanging on as instructed. CNA D stated that now R37 uses the Hoyer lift, it is a much safer transfer. CNA D stated that because R37 requires two assistance of staff with toileting and transfers, that he has to fight to get help from other staff to get R37 changed every two hours. CNA D stated that R37 will sit in his pee all day and that the other CNAs don't change him. On 5/5/25 at 9:31, Surveyor observed R37 in the lounge asleep in front of the TV in his Broda chair. R37 had a Hoyer sling underneath him in the chair and was missing one shoe. On 5/5/25 at 10:00 AM, Surveyor interviewed CNA G and asked if she could observe R37's transfer and incontinence care. CNA G stated that she would have to put clean sheets on R37's bed first, as his sheets had been soiled and removed by the noc (overnight) shift. On 5/5/25 at 10:05 AM, Surveyor observed CNA G and CNA E transfer R37 from his Broda chair to the bed using the Hoyer lift. CNA G told R37 that they would have to change his pants because they were wet also. Surveyor noted there was a strong smell of urine and that R37's brief was heavily saturated with urine. On 5/5/25 at 10:28 AM, Surveyor interviewed CNA G about R37's toileting needs and assistance. CNA G stated that R37 is to be changed and toileted every two hours. CNA G indicated that R37 wears a brief and a liner, that he is a heavy soaker and that his liner was soaked, requiring his pants to be changed. Surveyor asked CNA G if she had changed R37 earlier in the day. CNA G stated no, that was the first time she had changed R37 today. On 5/5/25 at 10:43 AM, Surveyor interviewed RN C (Registered Nurse) and asked about R37's toileting needs and assistance. Surveyor asked RN C when the last time R37 had been toileted. RN C pulled up the CNA task charting on the electronic health record and reviewed it with Surveyor. Nothing had been charted for 5/5/25. Surveyor asked RN C if that meant R37 had not been toileted all day. RN C indicated that noc shift checks and changes R37 at 6:00 AM and brings him out by the TV before breakfast. RN C stated that the day shift CNAs had not charted yet if they had changed R37. On 5/5/25 at 11:03 AM, Surveyor interviewed CNA E, who stated that was the first time she had changed R37 today. Surveyor asked CNA E how often R37 was supposed to be toileted and changed. CNA E stated every two hours, but that he sometimes refuses care. Surveyor asked CNA E what she does when R37 refuses care. CNA E stated that she documents the refusal in the electronic health record. On 5/5/25 at 2:07 PM, Surveyor observed CNA D and RN H enter R37's room to toilet and change him. Surveyor interviewed CNA D and asked how often R37 is supposed to be toileted. CNA D stated every two hours but that it is not getting done. Surveyor asked CNA D when was the last time R37 was changed? R37 stated he was not sure, but that he was completely wet and that his brief, his pants, and his shirt all were soaked and had to be changed. Surveyor asked CNA D if R37 ever refuses to be changed. CNA D stated that he does refuse sometimes but that it should be documented in the electronic health record. Surveyor asked CNA D if R37 having his clothes completely soaked with urine would be considered a dignity concern? CNA D answered yes, he would call that a dignity issue. CNA D stated that some staff don't like to change R37 because he can be combative, so they just let him sit and be wet all day. On 5/5/25 at 2:17 PM, Surveyor interviewed R37 and asked him about his change of clothes. R37 indicated he had his clothes changed because he was wet. R37 stated it makes him frustrated when that happens because he doesn't like being wet. On 5/5/25 at 2:35 PM, Surveyor interviewed DON B (Director of Nursing) and asked her what her expectation was for toileting R37. DON B stated R37 should be toileted around every two hours. Surveyor shared with DON B both observations of R37 being soaked in urine and needing to have his clothes and bedding changed. Surveyor asked DON B if she would consider being soaked in urine to be a dignity issue for R37, DON B answered yes, she would consider that a dignity issue, but that sometimes R37 refuses care. Of note, a review of R37's electronic health record revealed R37 had refused care only one time, on 4/15/25. No refusals of cares are documented thus far in May. The facility failed to provide toileting assistance to a dependent resident, resulting in R37's loss of dignity due to being soaked with urine several times a day.
CONCERN (D)

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

Pressure Ulcer Prevention (Tag F0686)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure a resident with a pressure injury (PI) received ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure a resident with a pressure injury (PI) received necessary treatment and services, consistent with standards of practice to promote healing for 1 of 3 residents (R40) reviewed for PIs. R40 has a stage 4 pressure injury, with physician orders to not be in her wheelchair for more than an hour at a time, to be repositioned every 30 minutes while in her wheelchair and to not lay on her left hip while in bed. R40's interventions were not completed as ordered. Evidenced by: Surveyor requested the facility's policy regarding Pressure Injury's; however, none was provided. R40 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including: hypertensive chronic kidney disease (high blood pressure within the kidneys), trochanteric bursitis (inflammation of small, fluid-filled sac on the outer edge of the left hip), hemiplegia (paralysis on one side of the body) and hemiparesis (weakness on one side of the body) following cerebral infarction (stroke) affecting right dominant side, Pressure Ulcer of left hip - Stage 3, Psoas muscle abscess, and Vascular dementia. R40's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 4/11/25, indicates R40 has a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 12 out of 15, indicating R40 has moderate cognitive impairment. Section GG indicates R40 requires partial/moderate assistance with rolling left and right, sitting to lying, and lying to sitting. Section GG also indicates R40 is dependent on staff for moving from sitting to standing. Section M indicates R40 is at risk for developing pressure ulcers, has 1 unhealed stage 4 pressure ulcer, and treatments indicated include pressure reducing devices for R40's chair and bed, nutrition or hydration intervention, pressure ulcer care, and application of nonsurgical dressings. R40's Physician Orders indicate: Check placement of dressing to left hip Q (every) shift. If no dressing to site, follow treatment orders and replace dressing. Every shift. Start date: 4/17/25. Order status: Active. Continue to offload and keep pressure away from this wound. Do not lay on your left hip while in bed. Every shift. Start date: 11/7/24. Order status: Active. Up to chair max three times a day, max 1 hour at a time. Must reposition in chair every 30 minutes while up. -Must be seated on pressure offloading cushion when up in chair. Start date: 12/28/23. Order status: Active. R40's Comprehensive Care Plan indicates: Focus: Skin Integrity: At risk and/or potential for complications with impaired skin integrity including skin tears, bruising and/or pressure r/t (related to) current medical/physical status. Has meds/dx that can/may affect skin integrity. Stage 4 pressure injury left hip upon admission. Date Initiated: 11/15/23. Interventions/Tasks: Meds/Labs/Treatments as ordered. Date Initiated: 11/15/23. Assist/Encourage pressure relief as needed/accepted. Date Initiated: 11/15/23. Float heels with heels up cushion. Date Initiated: 11/15/23. Follow community skin protocol. Date Initiated: 11/15/23. Incontinence care with incontinent brief changes. Date Initiated: 11/15/23. Observe skin with AM/PM cares and with toileting for redness, rashes, open areas, pain, swelling and report them to team leader. Weekly skin check. Lotion to dry skin. Date Initiated: 11/15/23. Pressure guard reduction mattress on bed. Pump settings may be titrated per resident comfort. Date Initiated: 11/15/23. Pressure reduction cushion in W/C (wheelchair). Date Initiated: 11/15/23 . (Of note: Physician order: Up to chair max three times a day, max 1 hour at a time. Must reposition in chair every 30 minutes while up. -Must be seated on pressure offloading cushion when up in chair. is not found on the care plan. Additionally, no interventions were added following R40's wound infection in August 2024.) R40's Care Card, posted in R40's bathroom, indicates: Skin/Pressure Reductions: . -Float heels with heels up cushion -Pressure guard reduction mattress on bed. Pump setting may be titrated per resident comfort. -Pressure reduction cushion in W/C. (Of note: Care Card does not contain information regarding physician orders for repositioning.) On 2/7/25, an Office Visit Note was written by an outside facility Nurse Practitioner that states, in part: . Pertient Wound History -Location of wound: left hip -Date of wound onset: October 2023 . Was admitted to [Hospital Name] 12/29-1/9/23 for left hip wound with infected bursitis with acute encephalopathy (any disease or disorder that affects the brain's function or structure and can have various causes including infection). She underwent IR (Interventional Radiology) aspiration of the overlying abscess on 12/30/23 . Etiology of wound: pressure . Bed/Wheelchair: -Mattress: low air loss mattress and hospital bed -Wheelchair/cushion: has a thick cushion on her wheelchair, believes it is a Roho . Assessment/Plan . Offloading -Patient spends the majority of her day sitting in a chair and avoids pressure to her hip -Continue to offload and keep pressure away from wound -Do not lay on your left hip while in bed . On 5/1/25 at 10:46 AM, Surveyor observed R40 being assisted from an off-unit activity back to her room by a staff member. R40 made a statement to the staff member that she can't sit up for too long. Staff member left R40 in her room without repositioning her. At 11:05 AM, the facility's speech therapist entered R40's room to complete a speech therapy session. R40 has yet to be repositioned. At 11:35, R40 was taken to lunch by a CNA and was not repositioned beforehand. R40 remained seated in the dining room without being repositioned. At 11:46 AM, Surveyor noted R40 had been in her wheelchair for at least one hour, had not been repositioned, and was actively eating her lunch. On 5/1/25 at 1:45 PM, Surveyor interviewed CNA G (Certified Nursing Assistant). Surveyor asked CNA G how often R40 needs to be repositioned in her wheelchair and while she is in bed. CNA G indicates she needs to be repositioned every two hours for both. Surveyor asked where this information is located. CNA G indicates she checks the care card in the bathroom before all cares and transfers. Surveyor asked CNA G how long R40 can be in her wheelchair at a time. CNA G indicates, she can be up for 2-4 hours in the wheelchair, because that is standard, but would check the care card to make sure. On 5/1/25 at 1:57 PM, Surveyor interviewed CNA Z. Surveyor asked CNA Z how often R40 needs to be repositioned in her wheelchair and while she is in bed. CNA Z indicates R40 can almost reposition herself, but that she should be repositioned when she is in the wheelchair twice a shift, and doesn't know how often she should be repositioned when in bed. Surveyor asked CNA Z how long R40 can stay up in her wheelchair. CNA Z indicates R40 stays up in her wheelchair for around 12 hours and likes to be up in her wheelchair. CNA Z also indicates she checks the care card in the resident rooms for all of the information regarding resident cares. On 5/1/25 at 2:51 PM, Surveyor interviewed CNA AA. Surveyor asked CNA AA how often R40 needs to be repositioned in her wheelchair and while she is in bed. CNA AA indicates R40 needs to be repositioned every two hours in her wheelchair and in bed because staff need to keep R40 off of her wound. Surveyor asked where this information is located. CNA AA indicates she checks the care card in the resident's room or the binder at the nurses' station. On 5/5/25 at 2:01 PM, Surveyor interviewed DON B (Director of Nursing). Surveyor asked DON B if physician orders should be followed as they are ordered. DON B indicates, yes. Surveyor asked DON B what her expectation is for staff when caring for a resident with a repositioning schedule. DON B indicates she expects the resident to be repositioned according to their schedule. Surveyor asked DON B if she knows how long R40 should be up in her chair for at a time. DON B indicates she is not sure. Surveyor asked DON B where staff can find this information. DON B indicates it should be in the physician order, wound note, and in the care plan. Surveyor asked DON B if the order for repositioning should be in the care plan. DON B indicates, not necessarily, only if outside the standard which is every 2 hours. Surveyor asked DON B if R40 lays on her left hip while in bed. DON B indicates, she does not believe R40 favors a side while sleeping. Surveyor asked DON B if not laying on her left hip should be on her care plan if it came from a physician order. DON B indicates, she would have expected staff to notify Interdisciplinary Team staff that she is consistently lying on her left hip. R40's care plan has not been updated and R40 is not being repositioned per physician orders.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0697 (Tag F0697)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility did not ensure that pain management was provided to residents who require suc...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility did not ensure that pain management was provided to residents who require such services, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the resident's goals and preferences for 1 of 5 residents (R31) reviewed for pain. R31 was admitted to the facility with chronic pain that became exacerbated with the use of the EZ stand lift. The facility did not address her pain needs or seek alternative transfer options. Evidenced by: The facility policy titled Pain Management, dated 2/8/25, states in part, The facility must ensure that pain management is provided to residents who require such services, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents goals and preferences . Recognition: . In order to help a resident attain or maintain his/her highest practicable level pf physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being and to prevent or manage pain, the facility will: a. Recognize when the resident is experiencing pain and identify circumstances when the pain can be anticipated. b. Evaluate the resident for pain and the cause(s) upon admission, during ongoing scheduled assessments, and when a significant change in condition occurs ( . new pain or an exacerbation of pain) . c. Manage or prevent pain, consistent with the comprehensive assessment and plan of care, current professional standards of practice e, and the resident's goals and preferences. 2. Facility staff will observe for nonverbal indicators which may indicate the presence of pain. These indicators include but are not limited to: . f. Behaviors such as: . depressed mood . h. Difficulty sleeping (insomnia) . i. Negative vocalizations (e.g. groaning, crying .), .Pain Assessment: . 2. Based on professional standards of practice, an assessment or evaluation of pain by the appropriate members of the interdisciplinary team (e.g. nurses, practitioner, pharmacists and anyone else with direct contact with the resident) may necessitate gathering the following information, as applicable to the resident . g. Identifying activities, resident care or treatment that precipitate or exacerbate pain and those that reduce or eliminate pain .Pain Management and Treatment: . 1.Based on the evaluation, the facility in collaboration with the attending physician/prescriber, other health care professionals and the resident and/or the resident's representative will develop, implement, monitor and revise as necessary interventions to prevent or manage each individual resident's pain . 8. Monitoring, Reassessment and Care Plan Revision. a. Facility staff will reassess resident's pain management at established intervals for effectiveness and/or adverse consequences, such as: i. Tolerance . vii. Depression . R31 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that include Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, Hemiplegia and Hemiparesis following Cerebral Infarction (complete or partial weakness/paralysis due to stroke), Adjustment Disorder with Depressed Mood, Unilateral Primary Osteoarthritis, Other Chronic Pain, Pain in Right Shoulder, Low Back Pain, unspecified, Muscle Weakness, generalized, and Other Cervical Disk Degeneration, (a painful condition caused by weakened spinal disks that may bulge outward into the spinal canal). R31's Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment, dated 3/28/25 indicates that R31 has a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of 15 out of 15, indicating that R31 is cognitively intact. R31's Care Plan states, in part: Focus: Impaired Coping related Mood Disorders (adjustment disorder with depressed mood). [Resident Name] had planned to be at the care center for short term stay; however, she plateaued in therapy and did not progress to the level that would allow her to discharge home. [Resident Name] can become agitated and frustrated with herself and her current health status. She will express her frustration with reacting to small situations in her plan of care with larger reactions such as anger, frustration or tearfulness. [Resident Name] is frustrated and when there are changes, she struggles. Date Initiated: 3/19/25 Revision on: 3/19/25. Intervention: Evaluate pain management treatment plan for effectiveness. Date Initiated: 3/19/25. Focus: Mood/Behavior. At risk and/or potential for complications with mood/behavior. Date Initiated: 6/21/23. Revision on: 6/21/23. Intervention: Check for comfort levels - pain, thirst, hunger, temperature - offering comfort as accepted. Date Initiated: 6/21/23. Focus: Pain. At risk and/or potential for complications with pain R/T (related to) current medical/physical status. Has dx (diagnosis) that can/may affect pain status. Date Initiated: 6/21/23. Revision on: 6/21/23. Intervention: Meds/Labs/Tx (treatments) as ordered. Observe meds (medications) for effectiveness. If ineffective after following MD orders, need to review sx's (symptoms) with MD (Medical Director) for recommendations. Date Initiated: 6/21/23. Focus: ADL (Activities of Daily Living): At risk and/or potential for complications with deficits with ADL's R/T current medical/physical status. Has meds/tx that can/may affect ADLs/ Date Initiated: 63/21/23. Revision on: 6/21/23. Intervention: Transfers with EZ stand and 1 assist. Date Initiated: 6/28/23. Revision on: 2/28/25. R31's Physician Orders include the following pain medications: -Diclofenac Sodium External Gel 1% (Diclofenac Sodium Topical). Apply to both upper arms. Start Date: 5/1/25 -Lidocaine External Patch 4 % (Lidocaine). Apply to L knee & both shoulders topically in the morning for arthritis. On for 12 hours off for 12 hours and remove per schedule. Start Date 4/3/25 -HYDROcodone-Acetaminophen Oral Tablet 5-325 MG (Hydrocodone-Acetaminophen). Give 1 tablet by mouth two times a day for Pain. Start Date 7/31/25 -HYDROcodone-Acetaminophen Oral Tablet 5-325 MG (Hydrocodone-Acetaminophen). Give 1 tablet by mouth as needed for Pain. May take THREE TIMES daily (TID) PRN. Start Date 9/23/24 -Acetaminophen Oral Tablet 500 MG (Acetaminophen). Give 500 mg by mouth three times a day for Pain. Start Date 8/2/24 R31's January 2025 Medication Administration Record (MAR) documents numerical pain ratings from 0 to 7 out of 10. PRN (as needed) Hydrocodone-Acetaminophen Oral Tablet 5-325 MG tablet was administered 16 times in addition to the scheduled Hydrocodone-Acetaminophen and Acetaminophen Oral Tablet. R31's February 2025 MAR documents numerical pain ratings from 0 to 7 out of 10. PRN (as needed) Hydrocodone-Acetaminophen Oral Tablet 5-325 MG tablet was administered 15 times in addition to the scheduled Hydrocodone-Acetaminophen and Acetaminophen Oral Tablet. R31's March 2025 MAR documents numerical pain ratings from 0 to 7 out of 10. PRN (as needed) Hydrocodone-Acetaminophen Oral Tablet 5-325 MG tablet was administered 6 times in addition to the scheduled Hydrocodone-Acetaminophen and Acetaminophen Oral Tablet. R31's April 2025 MAR documents numerical pain ratings from 0 to 7 out of 10. PRN (as needed) Hydrocodone-Acetaminophen Oral Tablet 5-325 MG tablet was administered 13 times in addition to the scheduled Hydrocodone-Acetaminophen and Acetaminophen Oral Tablet. R31's Physician Notes indicate the following: Encounter Date 7/31/24: [Resident Name] seen today for pain complaints per nursing staff. RN (Registered Nurse) assessment states pain all over and unaddressed . Pain is everywhere - it is different every day - excruciating at times - when asked for specifics she reports: 1 - low back pain from sitting - comes and goes - tries to reposition self. Up in chair a good share of the day. Leg tire by the end of the day. 2 - both shoulders - can't use arms to propel w/c (wheelchair) or raise arms up - worse pain 9. Radiates across her back - variable timing - hurts with transfers to bed and staff being rushed and rough. 3- Right knee - just feels funny - its not pain - above knee cap - variable - has a pain patch that helps sometimes. She is transferred with EZ stand. Tylenol is ineffective . Encounter Date 8/15/24: She continues to have significant bilateral shoulder pain and left knee pain. States scheduled hydrocodone bid (twice daily) has been helpful. Chronic bilateral shoulder pain due to osteoarthritis. Continue hydrocodone 5/325 one tab bid for pain. Encounter Date 11/21/24: She states her left hip pain is less frequent and less severe. She is most bothered by left knee pain and right shoulder pain. her pain did lessen after steroid injection but remains uncomfortable. Chronic bilateral shoulder pain due to osteoarthritis/rotator cuff pathology. Received steroid injection to both shoulders on 10/8/24. Recommend continue lidocaine patch to right shoulder, acetaminophen 500 mg tid (three times a day), and hydrocodone 5/325 one tablet bid for pain. A facility Grievance Form dated 3/11/25, completed by SW K (Social Worker), states the following in part: [Resident Name] expressed some feelings regarding her physical ability and transfer status . [Resident Name] is frustrated because she is no longer in therapy and struggling with understanding her current plan of care. [Resident Name] was provided with time to voice her feelings and frustrations . R31's Progress Notes indicate the following: Nursing Note dated 4/3/25: Patient expressed concern to have lidocaine patch applied to both shoulders. Call placed to (name) NP (Nurse Practitioner) and received phone order to apply three patches for pain. Social Service Note dated 4/14/25: . At this time, [Resident Name] uses the EZ stand for her transfers, and this is a source of frustration for her. [Resident Name} has asked about other methods of transfer and has asked the staff to let her try other transfer methods . On 4/28/25 at 2:54 PM, Surveyor interviewed R31 who stated that she has pain all the time from using the EZ stand. R31 indicated that she has torn rotator cuffs in both shoulders and that she is of the age where the doctors are unable to do surgery. Surveyor asked R31 what her current pain level was. R31 stated it was currently a 5 and that she is getting pain pills and using heating pads, which seemed to help, but that the EZ stand causes so much pain that she cries multiple times a day with each transfer. R31 indicated that she has asked therapy over and over to be re-evaluated to transfer with a stand-pivot so that her shoulders would not hurt so bad from using the EZ stand. R31 stated that she has talked to DON B (Director of Nursing), NHA A (Nursing Home Administrator) and SW K about the pain and being evaluated to transfer a different way, but she has heard nothing back since the end of February. On 4/30/25 at 1:07 PM, Surveyor interviewed CNA I (Certified Nursing Assistant) about R31's pain and transfer status. CNA I stated that yes, R31 was having some pain with transfers and the EZ stand. CNA I stated that when R31 says she is in pain she offers to stop, but that can be difficult if she is mid-transfer. CNA I indicated that she reported R31's complaints of pain to RN C (Registered Nurse). On 5/1/25 at 11:25 AM, Surveyor interviewed RN C about R31's pain and transfer status. RN C stated that R31 does have pain in both shoulders and left knee, and that they had been using lidocaine patches in these areas to reduce the pain. RN C indicated that he felt that R31's scheduled medication regimen of Tylenol and Hydrocodone was efficient at managing her pain. RN C stated that the EZ stand hurt R31's shoulders when it was put up all the way. Surveyor asked RN C approximately how many times a day R31 is using the EZ stand for transfers. RN C stated R31 is using the EZ stand approximately 3-4 times a shift. Surveyor asked RN C if R31 was in pain 3-4 times a shift during the transfers. RN C stated yes, because the EZ stand hurts R31's shoulders. On 5/1/25 at 11:36 AM, Surveyor interviewed CNA F and asked her about R31's pain during transfers. CNA F stated that R31 keeps on crying every time she is transferred with the EZ stand. CNA F stated that R31 uses a pain patch to help reduce the pain, but that she cries several times a day during the transfers. Surveyor asked if she had told anyone about how much pain R31 was in every day. CNA F stated that everybody knows about R31's pain. On 5/1/25 at 11:42 AM, Surveyor interviewed SW K and asked her about R31's pain and transfer status. SW K stated that she had had a couple of conversations with R31 about the EZ stand lift and her pain. SW K indicated that R31 gets very frustrated when there is new staff and how they are using the lift because she only likes to come up a little ways because it hurts her shoulders. SW K stated that she lets R31 vent her frustrations and let her talk about the EZ stand. SW K stated that R31 had asked some staff to transfer her without the EZ stand and they educated her that is not safe and she needs to continue to use the EZ stand. Surveyor asked SW K what alternatives were being offered to R31 in light of her continued daily pain with the use of the EZ stand. SW K indicated that R31 had plateaued in therapy so there was nothing more they can do. Surveyor asked SW K how long she has known about R31's daily pain. SW K stated the last she talked to R31 about her pain was a month ago. On 5/1/25 at 1:53 PM, Surveyor interviewed DON B about R31's pain. DON B stated that R31 doesn't like the EZ stand so they've put her on therapy several times to try to see if there were alternatives to safely transfer but she just doesn't like the lift. DON B stated most of the aides know to only go halfway up, but sometimes they may have to lift R31 up higher which causes R31 more pain. DON B stated that the EZ stand stretches her arms too much and hurts her shoulders. Surveyor asked DON B if she was aware that R31 was experiencing a significant amount of daily pain due to continued use of the EZ stand. DON B stated that she had not had a chance to look at her pain assessments or talk to the nurse about it. Surveyor asked DON B how the aides are to be made aware not to lift R31 all the way up on the EZ stand, which causes her greater shoulder pain. DON B stated that they just know, and that she was not sure if this information was on R31's care card. Surveyor asked DON B what her expectation was regarding resident's pain management? DON B indicated that for residents that were experiencing pain they would increase the pain assessments daily for 3-4 days then the IDT (Interdisciplinary team) will meet see what the intervention was, update the care plan, and contact the MD. After that they would continue with pain reassessment and interview the resident to see if it was effective. Surveyor asked if this had been completed for R31. DON B stated that she was not aware that it had been done yet. The facility failed to provide adequate pain management for a resident with chronic daily pain needs. The facility did not reassess the resident's pain or develop and implement new approaches to transferring. The facility did not update the resident's care plan or notify front line staff of her preferences regarding transfers, resulting in continued daily pain.
CONCERN (E)

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

Resident Rights (Tag F0550)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure that every resident was treated with respect and...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure that every resident was treated with respect and dignity for 2 of 2 sampled Residents (R71 & R146) and 2 of 2 supplemental Residents (R13 & R67) reviewed for Resident rights. R13, R67, R71, and R146 expressed concerns about R82 wandering into their private rooms uninvited. This is evidenced by: The facility policy titled Promoting/Maintaining Resident Self-Determination dated 4/22/25 states: It is the practice of this facility to protect and promote resident rights by facilitating resident self-determination through support of resident choice. The facility will ensure that each resident has the opportunity to exercise his/her autonomy regarding those things that are important in his/her life such as food, interests, and preferences. Example 1 R13 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that include: vascular dementia, hypertension (high blood pressure), chronic kidney disease, congestive heart failure, and intervertebral disc degeneration (breakdown of discs that separate the bones of the spine). R13's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] indicates R13 scored 15 out of 15 on her Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS), indicating she is cognitively intact. On 4/30/25 at 9:52 AM, Surveyors observed R82 enter R13's room without knocking on the door. R82 proceeded into the room and sat in R13's wheelchair while R82 was resting in her recliner. One surveyor stayed with R13 and R82 while another Surveyor alerted LPN X (Licensed Practical Nurse), who was the nearest staff member. LPN X escorted R82 out of R13's room. On 4/30/25 at 9:56 AM, Surveyors interviewed R13. R13 stated R82 comes into her room uninvited all the time. Surveyor asked R13, when R82 comes into your room what does she do. R13 stated, When she comes in, she sits down. Sometimes she touches me. I don't like it. They should take care of her so she doesn't come in here. I don't like it. Surveyor asked R13 if she feels safe. R13 stated she feels safe. R13 added, I don't want her around here; she's crazy. R13 was unable to specify where R82 touches her. On 4/30/25 at 10:30 AM, Surveyors spoke with LPN X. Surveyor asked LPN X, are there residents that wander into other residents' rooms uninvited. LPN X stated, R82. LPN X stated, R82 will wander the whole unit as well as the other units (within the Memory Care Units). Surveyor asked LPN X, are there any residents that get upset by R82 wandering into their room uninvited. LPN X stated, no, they know the routine and say oh there she (R82) is again. Surveyor asked LPN X, what is the facility doing to prevent R82 from wandering into other resident rooms uninvited. LPN X stated, staff will redirect R82. Surveyor asked LPN X, does R82 become aggressive, LPN X stated, no, not usually. Surveyor asked LPN X, what does R82 do when she wanders into other residents' room. LPN X stated, R82 is looking for something familiar, is bored or lost. LPN X stated, R82 has no intent she's just wandering and confused. Surveyor asked LPN X, is it acceptable for a resident to go into another resident's room uninvited. LPN X stated, no. LPN X added, if she was a resident she would not want a resident coming in her room either. Example 2 R67 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that include: post-concussion syndrome (symptoms that persist after a concussion has occurred), dysphagia (difficulty swallowing), anxiety disorder, history of ischemic attack (TIA - mini stroke) and cerebral infarction (stroke). R67's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] indicates R67 scored 3 out of 15 on her Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS), indicating she is severely cognitively impaired. On 4/30/25 at 4:22 PM, Surveyor interviewed R67. Surveyor observed R67's room is directly across from R82's room. R67 stated R82 often comes into her room uninvited, and said it bothers her because she shouldn't do that, but said that R82 seems to like when R67 talks to her. R67 said staff grabs R82's arm and pull her away and tell her to sit down when they find her in R67's room. R67 stated she feels safe in the facility. Example 3 R71 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that include spinal stenosis (spinal narrowing), major depressive disorder, type 2 diabetes, dementia, generalized anxiety disorder, insomnia (difficulty falling or staying asleep), hypertensive chronic kidney disease (kidney disease caused by high blood pressure), and repeated falls. R71's Significant Change Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] indicates R71 scored 6 out of 15 on his Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS), indicating he is severely cognitively impaired. On 4/30/25 at 8:10 AM, Surveyor interviewed R71 while R82 was sitting nearby in the common area. R71 indicated R82 comes into his room when he is in the bathroom on the toilet and at the sink. R71 stated R82 will sit on his bed while he is in bed. R71 stated, See? She's checking me out. Wherever I go she's there. She's like a bad dream. R71 stated, R82 usually comes in his room uninvited two (2) times a day. R71 stated, he has expressed concerns to multiple staff members regarding his concern with R82 wandering into his room uninvited. On 5/5/25 at 8:57 AM, Surveyors spoke with SW CC (Social Worker). Surveyor asked SW CC, can you tell us about R82 wandering into other residents' rooms uninvited and what is being done to prevent it. SW CC indicated, she can't recall off the top of her head. Surveyor asked SW CC, are any residents upset by R82 wandering into their rooms uninvited. SW CC stated, R71. SW CC added, we have a grievance open about this. SW CC stated, she does not know when it happened. SW CC stated, R71 expressed to her that he is frustrated that R82 comes in his room. SW CC stated, she has had conversations with R71 that R82 doesn't mean any harm but validated that it is frustrating to him. On 5/5/25 at approximately 9:15 AM, SW CC shared the grievance R71 filed on 4/30/25 with Surveyors. The grievance indicates R71 is frustrated with R82 wandering into his room. SW CC has talked with R71 regarding this concern. As of 5/5/25, the grievance was still open. Example 4 R146 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that include aftercare following joint replacement surgery, presence of left artificial knee joint, infection and inflammatory reaction due to internal left knee prosthesis (artificial joint), arthritis due to other bacteria - left knee, hypertension (high blood pressure), dementia, and chronic kidney disease. R71's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] indicates R146 scored 8 out of 15 on her Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS), indicating she is moderately cognitively impaired. On 4/29/25 at 8:12 AM, Surveyors interviewed R146. R146 stated, on 4/28/25, her first night at the facility, R82 walked into her room uninvited behind a nurse and sat on her legs. R146 added, she just had surgery on her left knee. R146 stated, That shock and that pain I will never forget. R146 stated, of course it shocked the person she followed in and it shocked me more. R146 stated, staff apologized profusely, but it still happened. On 4/28/25 at 11:45 PM, R146's Progress Notes document the following: The resident is adjusting well. At bedtime, the resident was about to sleep when another resident entered her room and sat on her new surgery Knee. The medical doctor was notified and instructed me to monitor the resident. If the pain became unbearable we were to send the resident to the hospital . On 4/30/25 at 3:00 PM, Surveyor spoke with RN H (Registered Nurse). RN H stated, on the evening of 4/28/25, she was at the nurses' station when the CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant) notified her that R82 sat on R146's surgical knee. RN H stated, the CNA got R146 an ice pack, and she called the physician to report it. RN H stated, the physician stated to monitor R146's pain level and if it is still painful in the morning to call to call the orthopedic physician. RN H stated, she checked on R146 in the morning. RN H stated, R146 was shaken up but okay. RN H stated, she reported this off to other nurses. RN H stated, R82 has Alzheimer's disease and cognitive challenges. RN H stated, the only solution is 1:1 which challenging with staff. RN H stated, the facility implemented 1:1 quite a while ago. RN H stated, R82 likes to enter other residents' room. RN H stated, R71 gets upset when R82 wanders into his room uninvited. RN H stated, staff will take R82's hand and guide her out of the room which can be challenging. RN H stated, she will need to point to help R82 to understand what is being communicated. RN H stated, R82's family member would be a good resource. Surveyor asked RN H, is it acceptable for a resident to wander into other residents' rooms uninvited. RN H stated, no, it's not. RN H added, it's challenging with R82. RN H added, staff have tried games, coloring and other activities. RN H added, however, R82's attention span is short. RN H reiterated, 1:1 may be the only solution. On 4/30/25 at 10:12 AM, Surveyors spoke with CNA Y. Surveyor asked CNA Y, are there any residents that wander into other resident rooms uninvited. CNA Y stated, yes, R82. CNA Y added, on 4/28/25 R82 wandered into other resident rooms uninvited all day and night but it depends on the day. CNA Y stated, R82 will lay on other residents' beds, get into the beds, sit on couches and chairs in other residents' rooms. CNA Y stated, taking R82 back to her room does not work and she will get combative with staff. Surveyor asked CNA Y, is R82 able to open closed doors. CNA Y stated, yes. CNA Y added, R82 wanders onto other units as well (within the Memory Care Units). CNA Y stated, R82 will speak multiple words in her native language. Surveyor asked CNA Y, does the facility use any alarm or stop signs for R82. CNA Y stated no, she is unsure if the facility has tried these interventions. On 5/2/25, R82's Progress Notes document the following: Resident continues to wander into other resident's room and bed while residents are asleep. Writer was able to take resident for walk around the building and this was not effective. Resident showed physical aggression to staff during cares. Staff reports that resident hitting, kicked and scratched them during Pm cares. Resident was able to be redirected but continued with wandering shortly after. Staff have to take turns sitting with resident to prevent her from entering another resident room while they're asleep. resident is currently resting in recliner near burses [sic] station with eyes closed. On 5/5/25 at 8:20 AM, Surveyors spoke with DON B (Director of Nursing). Surveyor asked DON B, is it acceptable for a resident to wander into other residents' rooms uninvited. DON B stated, it's memory care so we definitely work hard to redirect wandering residents. DON B added, the residents have care plans due to their behaviors. Surveyor asked DON B, are you aware that R82 wanders into other residents' rooms uninvited. DON B stated, R82 used to have these behaviors (wandering) which slowed down a bit and now they are resurfacing. DON B added, it has been a challenge over the last week or two. Surveyor asked DON B, do other residents gets upset with R82 wandering into their rooms uninvited. DON B stated, R146. DON B added, she thinks that was the only wandering into a resident's room. DON B stated, R82 does go to activities and sometimes she just paces in a circle. Surveyor shared observations on 4/30/25 of R82 being checked on twice in 1 hour and then wandering into R13's room uninvited. Surveyor shared that R82 sat in R13's wheelchair while R13 remained silent in her recliner. Surveyor shared additional resident concerns from R67, R71 and R146 regarding R82 wandering into their rooms uninvited, sitting on their bed, sitting on their legs, entering their bathroom while they are on the toilet. Surveyor asked DON B, what has been done to address R82's wandering. DON B stated, we offered R146 a different room and staff redirect R82. R146 stated she does not want a different room. DON B stated, we offer to walk with R82, offer snacks/fluids, redirect her to the chair in her room. DON B stated, staff walk with R82 around the building. DON B stated, On 5/2/25 staff were taking turns sitting with R82. DON B added, she did not look at the care plan but instead looked at recent documented events. Surveyor asked DON B, why is it important that R82 (or other residents) do not wander in other residents' rooms. DON B stated, it can be uncomfortable for the other residents and put R82 at risk as well. Surveyor asked DON B, has the facility tried STOP signs (velcro signs that go across a doorway). DON B stated, she thinks the facility tried that and it was not effective. DON B stated, she had a history of wandering at home and would wander at night. Surveyor asked DON B, how often do you expect staff to check on R82. DON B stated, every one - two (1-2) hours. DON B stated, R82 is either right there into everything or relaxed and settled. On 5/5/25 at 2:30 PM. Surveyors spoke with NHA A (Nursing Home Administrator). Surveyors asked NHA A to tell us about R82 wandering into other residents' rooms and what is being done to address it. NHA A stated, historically the facility trialed 1:1 with R82. NHA A stated, R82 worked as a schoolteacher. NHA A stated, in the dining room we sometimes will see unmet needs or tendencies from her past when she will reach out and pat other residents' heads while in the dining room. When R82 was at high risk of falls we did 1:1. NHA A stated, we found 1:1 made her more agitated especially at night. NHA A stated, the facility did trial STOP signs with her wandering and that was more of a reason for her to enter a room when curiosity took over. NHA A added, it wasn't effective. The facility was aware that R82 is wandering into other residents' rooms uninvited. The facility did not implement interventions to prevent this from occurring. R13, R67, R71, and R146 voiced they do not want R82 wandering into their rooms uninvited. Cross reference F689
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0761 (Tag F0761)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure drugs and biological's used in the facility were stored and labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional p...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure drugs and biological's used in the facility were stored and labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional practices and include the expiration date when applicable for 1 of 3 medication carts reviewed for compliance. Surveyor observed the following: R36's fluticasone propionate nasal spray did not have an open date and R36's Systane Ultra Ophthalmic Solution 0.4- 0.3% eye drops had an open date of 3/15/25. R45's PRN (as needed) Hydralazine card expired on 2/22/25. R32's PRN Chest Congestion Relief card expired 2/27/24 and PRN ondansetron card expired on 2/22/25. R48's PRN stimulant laxative card expired on 2/27/24. R194's PRN calcium antacid card expired on 2/25/24. R16's PRN ondansetron card expired on 2/22/25. Evidenced by: The facility's policy titled Medication Storage dated 2/28/25 states in part .4. Unused Medications: All medication rooms are routinely inspected by the consultant pharmacist for discontinued, defective, or deteriorated medications with worn, illegible, or missing labels. On 4/28/25 at 11:55 AM, Surveyor observed medication cart #1 with LPN N (Licensed Practical Nurse). Surveyor found R36's fluticasone propionate nasal spray did not have an open date and R36's Systane Ultra Ophthalmic Solution 0.4- 0.3% eye drops had an open date of 3/15/25. Surveyor found R45's PRN Hydralazine card expired on 2/22/25. Surveyor found R32's PRN Chest Congestion Relief card expired 2/27/24 and PRN ondansetron card expired on 2/22/25. Surveyor found R48's PRN stimulant laxative card expired on 2/27/24. Surveyor found R194's PRN calcium antacid card expired on 2/25/24. Surveyor found R16's PRN ondansetron card expired on 2/22/25. On 4/28/25 at 12:04 PM, Surveyor interviewed LPN N. Surveyor reviewed the expired medications, nasal spray, and eye drops with LPN N. Surveyor asked how long eye drops are good for after being opened, LPN N reported 28 days. Surveyor asked LPN N if nasal sprays should have an open date, LPN N stated yes. Surveyor asked LPN N what the process is for checking the medication carts for expired medications, LPN N stated that the cards should be checked every time the medications is being administered. Surveyor asked LPN N what the process is for checking PRN medications for expired medications, LPN N stated that they should be checked before they are given. Surveyor asked LPN N if the expired medications should have been discarded, LPN N stated yes. On 5/1/25 at 2:05 PM, Surveyor interviewed DON B (Director of Nursing). Surveyor asked DON B what the process is for ensuring that expired medications are removed from the medication carts and medication rooms, DON B stated that the pharmacist is supposed to come and audit the carts and room, and expired medications should be taken out and sent back to the pharmacy. Surveyor asked DON B how often the carts and rooms should be checked, DON B stated that she thought is was monthly, but that she has to call and schedule it ahead of time.
CONCERN (F)

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

Food Safety (Tag F0812)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. This has the pote...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. This has the potential to affect all 94 residents who reside at the facility. Surveyor observed staff taking temperatures of food during lunch meal. Staff did not take temperatures of all foods on steam table. Surveyor observed staff taking temperatures of food during lunch meal. Staff did not allow time for thermometer to dry after using alcohol wipe and placed directly into food. Evidenced by: The facility policy, Record of Food Temperatures, dated, 2/25, states, in part; .6. Measure and record the temperatures for each food product and milk at all meals. Record temperature on temperature log. 7. When holding hot foods for service, food temperature should be measured when placing it on the steam table line .14. Food temperatures will be verified using a thermometer which is both clean, sanitized and calibrated to ensure accuracy . On 4/30/25 at 11:03 AM, Surveyor observed DA Q (Dietary Aide) taking the temperature of the food being placed into steam table. DA Q was observed cleaning thermometer with alcohol wipe and placing directly into food, not allowing time for thermometer to dry. DA Q was observed doing this with all foods being temped. DA Q failed to take the temperature of ground and pureed food items in steam table. Surveyor asked DA Q if DA Q was going to temp all the food. DA Q indicated DA Q only temps the foods that are important. On 5/1/25 at 9:12 AM, DM P (Dietary Manager) indicated all food temps should be taken at every meal. DM P indicated thermometer should be dry before placing it into the next food. DM P indicated understanding of the above concerns. The facility did not store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety.
Mar 2025 3 deficiencies 1 Harm
SERIOUS (G) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures

Accident Prevention (Tag F0689)

A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview, record review, and policy review the facility failed to ensure that the facility was free of accident hazard...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview, record review, and policy review the facility failed to ensure that the facility was free of accident hazards in 1 of 7 residents R9 reviewed for accident hazards of 14 sample residents. The facility failed to prevent a fall for R9 Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Fall Prevention Program, dated 02/28/25, indicated Policy: Each resident will be assessed for fall risk and will receive care and services in accordance with their individualized level of risk to minimize the likelihood of falls. Definitions: A fall is an event in which an individual unintentionally comes to rest on the ground, floor or other level, but not as result of an overwhelming external force .Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines: 1. The facility utilizes a standardized risk assessment for determining a resident's fall risk. A. The risk assessment categorizes resident according to low, moderate, or high risk .5. Low/Moderate Risk Protocols: a. Implement universal environmental interventions that decrease the risk of resident falling .b. Implement routine rounding schedule. C. Monitor for changes in resident's cognition, gait, ability to rise/sit and balance .g. Complete a fall risk assessment every 90 days and as indicated when resident's condition changes .8. Each resident's risk factors and environmental hazards will be evaluated when developing the resident's comprehensive plan of care . Review of the facility's policy titled, Elopements and Wandering Residents, dated 02/28/25, indicated Policy: This facility ensures that residents who exhibit wandering behavior and/or risk for elopement receive adequate supervision to prevent accidents and receive care in accordance with their person-centered plan of care addressing the unique factors contributing to wandering or elopement risk. Definitions .Elopement occurs when a resident leaves the premises or a safe area without authorization .and or any necessary supervision to do so. Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines: 1. The facility shall establish and utilize a systemic approach to monitoring and managing residents at risk for elopement or unsafe wandering, including identification and assessment of risks, evaluation and analysis of hazards and risks, implementing interventions to reduce hazards and risks, and monitoring for effectiveness and modifying interventions when necessary. 2. Monitoring and Managing Residents at Risk for Elopement or Unsafe Wandering. A Residents will be assessed for risk of elopement and unsafe wandering upon admission and throughout their stay by the interdisciplinary care plan team .Procedure Post-Elopement a. A nurse will perform a physical assessment, document and report findings to physician .d. The resident and family/authorized representative will be included in the plan of care. E. Staff may be educated on the reasons for elopement and possible strategies for avoiding such behavior .g. Documentation in the medical record: findings from nursing and social service assessments, physician/family notification, care plan discussion . Example 1 Review of R9's Face Sheet located under the Profile tab of the electronic medical record (EMR) revealed R9 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of anemia, history of falling, age related osteoporosis, major depression disorder, and dementia. Review of R9's significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 02/24/25, located under the Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) tab indicated R9 was substantial/ maximum assistance for eating; partial/ moderate assistance for oral hygiene; dependent on toileting hygiene, dressing, transfers, and personal hygiene; and substantial/ maximum assistance to dependent for bed mobility. The MDS revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of 13 out of 15 indicating R9 was cognitively intact. Review of R9's Progress Notes under the Progress Note tab of the EMR, dated 10/24/24 Note Text: CNA reported resident noted sliding out of recliner. Writer immediately assessed resident and noted resident sitting in recliner with legs sliding off recliner. No fall. Writer and 2 CNA's repositioned resident into recliner appropriately with BLE's elevated. Writer called Therapy department to request non slip gripper for recliner or recommendations to prevent a fall and therapy recommended green Posey non-slip matting available in med room to prevent fall. Writer updated ADON and states will update care plan. Resident in no apparent distress, in good spirits. Resident denies pain or discomfort. Will continue to monitor until end of shift. Review of R9's Progress Notes under the Progress Note tab of the EMR, dated 11/05/24, indicated Resident noted on the floor, on her back with feet towards the door and head towards recliner. Remote to recliner in resident's hand and recliner noted tilted in the highest position. Resident assessed at this time. She denies any pain or discomfort. Tylenol administered as scheduled. No new injuries or bruises noted at this time. Neuros WNL [within normal limits]. ROM [range of motion] WNL for resident. Resident stated, she does not know why she held button until falling out of it. VSS [vital signs stable]. -New intervention: Unplug recliner due to resident's lack of safety awareness. CP [care plan] and [NAME] updated. Charge nurse, nurse manager .NP [Nurse Practitioner], and POA [power of attorney] notified. R9's plan of care states in part; Complications with or falls related to current medical physical status. Goal: Reduced risk with falls with interventions through next review date. Interventions: Unplug recliner due to resident lack of safety awareness, initiated date: 11/5/24. Resolved date: 11/6/24. Reinforce nonskid strips in front of recliner intiated date: 11/6/24. It should be noted R9's lift chair was plugged back in allowing R9 to use the lift function, the facility did not have evidence of assessing R9's safety to utilize the lift chair safely prior to plugging the lift chair back in. It should be noted R9 had a fall out of the lift chair on 1/20/25 due to lifting the chair in upright position this resulted in a femur fracture, Review of R9's Progress Notes under the Progress Note tab of the EMR, dated 01/20/25, indicated writer found resident in her room on the floor around 8pm. Resident had used electric control for recliner and put the chair all the way up causing her to fall out on her left side. Fully clothed with shoes on, her head was toward the bed and feet next to the recliner and throw blanket was under her. All needed items were on table next to chair with call button on her neck. Stated she did not hit her head. Review of R9's Progress Notes under the Progress Note tab of the EMR, dated 01/21/25, indicated IDT [Interdisciplinary Team] NOTE . The recliner chair was observed all the way up at the time of occurrence. Most likely she used the electric control and put the recliner all the way up causing her to fall out onto her left side. Increased rounding after dinner provided. Upon return from hospital therapy to eval for recliner safety and therapy needs s/p [status post] left femur fracture with ORIF (open reduction internal fixation) .Will monitor the effectiveness of the interventions and modify as necessary. Review of R9's Progress Notes under the Progress Note tab of the EMR, dated 01/24/25, indicated SW [Social Worker] contact .Son to inform, recliner has been removed due to non-usage and inability to safely operate furniture . Review of R9's Fall Risk Screening Tool under the Assessments tab of the EMR indicated the following completed screenings: 09/28/24 no falls; 11/05/24 - three to no falls, resident was incontinent, had cognitive impairment, resident did not always use call light appropriately, problem with cognition, judgement, memory and safety awareness; unsteady with gait, patient alert to self; 01/04/25 quarterly no falls, was resident at risk for falls - no. During an interview on 03/28/25 at 3:24 PM, the Administrator stated we really do not have fall prevention education for staff that is specific at orientation but when CNAs go to floor fall prevention is covered when they review the [NAME]. Said no specific fall prevention training for staff in past 6 months. Explained that they have a charge nurse that is over building each shift and that nurse attends stand up and stand down meeting where falls and new interventions would be discussed and then brought to unit staff and [NAME] changed. Surveyor inquired about R9's falls from the lift chair. Administrator stated he could not locate a document or discussion between Therapy and Nursing regarding why R9's recliner control was plugged back in. The Administrator explained the therapy group is no longer employed by the facility and documentation for R9 is not been located. The Administrator stated Therapy/Nursing discussion about recliner and plugging back in was done between staff and will try to locate something about decision. Said have one PT that is still here that may have knowledge. No further information is provided. The facility failed to assess R9's ability to safely operate a lift chair. R9 was found sliding out of the lift chair on 10/24/24, had a fall out of the lift chair on 11/5/24 when R9 raised the chair in the upright position and slid out of the chair on to the floor. The facility is unable to produce evidence they assessed R9's ability to safely use the lift chair. R9 had a second fall out of the lift chair when R9 lifted the chair in the upright position R9 fell out of the lift chair and was found with a femur fracture. The facility completed a performance improvement plan related to the fall with fracture however there the facility was unable to provide evidence of staff education regarding the changes in recliner/lift chair process.
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 F0805 (Tag F0805)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, record review, interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to follow the prescribed easy to chew d...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, record review, interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to follow the prescribed easy to chew diet for 1 of 1 resident (R6) reviewed for proper diet texture out of 14 sampled residents. R6's diet orders stated Level & easy to chew. R6 had several snacks in R6's room that did not follow this diet order. The facility failed to have an order in R6's medical record indicating exceptions to the diet order or a risk and benefit to consume items outside the diet order. Findings include: Review of the undated document provided by the facility titled: Level 7: Easy to Chew revealed: This diet is for individuals who have difficulty chewing and/or swallowing regular textured foods. This diet requires the ability to bite soft foods and chew and orally process food for long enough that the person forms a soft cohesive - bolus that is swallow ready. Tongue force and control is required to move the food for chewing and to keep it within the mouth during chewing, and tongue force is required to move the bolus for swallowing: Individuals who may benefit from this diet include those who find hard and/or chewy foods difficult or painful to chew and swallow. This diet can be eaten with a fork, spoon, or chopsticks. It can be mashed/broken down with pressure from a fork, spoon, or chopsticks. A knife is not required to cut this food, but may be used to help loading a fork or spoon. Chewing is required before swallowing. The food is soft, tender, and moist throughout but with no separate thin liquid. Size is not restricted at level 7, therefore, foods may be a range of sizes. Individual menu modifications may be made in the residents' Geri Menu Profile and stated on tickets. Foods to avoid .Dry, tough or crusty bread, crackers, etc. dry cereals or such as shredded wheat, bran cereal or granola, any broken apart into smaller pieces with the side of a with nuts or seeds if not tolerated. Review of facility's policy titled, Therapeutic Diet Orders, implemented 10/24 and reviewed 01/25, revealed: Policy: The facility provides all residents with foods in the appropriate form and/or the appropriate nutritive content as prescribed by a physician, and/or assessed by the interdisciplinary team to support the resident's treatment/plan of care, in accordance with his/her goals and preferences . 5. Dietary and nursing staff are responsible for providing therapeutic diets in the appropriate form and/or the appropriate nutritive content as prescribed . Review of R6's annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) located in the MDS tab of the electronic medical record (EMR) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 02/02/25 revealed R6 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included Parkinson's disease without dyskinesia, parkinsonism, generalized muscle weakness, reduced mobility, adult failure to thrive, and dysphagia. R6 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 12 out of 15, which indicated R6 was moderately cognitively impaired. The MDS further revealed that R6 had broken or loosely fitting full or partial denture and was on a mechanically altered diet. Review of R6's nutrition/hydration care plan located on the Care Plan tab of the EMR initiated 10/14/24 and revised 02/28/25, revealed Diet Type: General/Standard Diet - Texture: Level 7: Easy to chew . Review of R6's orders located under the Orders tab of the EMR revealed dietary order, dated 11/27/24, General diet, [Name]-Level 7: Easy to chew texture, Thin Liquids consistency for updated diet. During an observation on 03/27/25 at 12:57 PM, an open, clear bag of cheese crackers was observed on R6's bedside table. During an observation on 03/27/25 at 1:10 PM, in the dining room it was revealed that R6 was in a wheelchair, eating independently. Lunch consisted of soft, easy-to-chew diet with ice cream for dessert. During an interview on 03/27/25 at 1:11 PM, Certified Nursing Assistant 2 (CNA) stated R6's diet was soft chewable. When asked why R6 had a bag of cheese crackers in her room, CNA2 stated R6 could have Cheetos, chips, and crackers. CNA2 stated she had heard the speech therapist say it was ok for R6 to have Cheez-its. During an interview on 03/27/25 at 12:56 PM the Speech Therapist and Language Pathologist (ST) stated R6's diet was level seven, easy to chew. The ST stated she allowed the resident to have snacks for quality of life. The ST stated R6 liked Cheetos, and she could have them. ST stated R6 still had teeth, and upper dentures and she could handle the texture of allowed snacks. When asked if the crackers, Cheetos, and other such snacks were within the residents' diet restrictions, the ST stated she did not embrace an all or nothing stance when it came to dietary restrictions and permitted R6 to enjoy some snacks because R6 would be unhappy without her snacks. The ST stated R6's family also brought her snacks and that there have been no bad outcomes, that it was not a swallowing issue, and that she would discuss a risk and benefit analysis with the resident. The ST stated she made exceptions to certain diets for quality-of-life issues. When asked if those exceptions had been communicated in writing to the interdisciplinary team and reflected in the resident's care plan, she said no. During a telephone interview on 03/28/25 at 1:34 PM, CNA3 stated R6 was labeled a level six, but got chips, root beer, and Cheez-it's for snacks. CNA3 stated R6 loved potato chips the best. When asked if those snacks were in compliance with R6's diet, CNA3 stated it was not, but if R6 did not get her snacks she got mad and so did R6's family. When asked if dietary services were aware of R6's snack preferences, CNA3 stated we don't tell dietary. CNA3 stated the snacks came from the pantry in the household. CNA3 confirmed that facility staff obtained the snacks from the facility to give to R6. During an interview on 03/27/25 at 2:49 PM the Registered Dietician (RD) stated Cheetos and Cheez-its were not in compliance with a level seven diet. When told, the ST had said it was ok for R6 to have crackers and other snacks that were not in line with R6's diet. The RD stated quality of life exceptions to diets needed to be in the resident's care plan and she was unaware of the ST's recommendation as they were not documented in R6's medical record. The RD acknowledged the ST's exception to R6's diet was not in the current care plan and that she was unaware of the ST's dietary exceptions for R6. During an interview on 03/28/25 at 4:13 PM, R6 stated she liked Cheetos, but they were hard. R6 stated she liked cheese puffs because they were melt-in-your-mouth. R6 stated she liked potato chips but sometimes they did not have them. R6 stated she did not have any problem with eating her snacks and she loved them. R6 stated staff provided her with her snacks. During an interview on 03/28/25 at 4:13 PM, Family Member 2 (FM) stated the facility staff and family all provided chips and other snacks for R6 in line with R6's preferences and that she eats pretty much whatever she likes. During an interview on 03/27/25 at 2:49 PM, the Director of Nursing (DON) acknowledged the ST did not document that R6's diet would not be followed strictly and that this was also not in R6's care plan.
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

Medical Records (Tag F0842)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure medical records were complete and accurate ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure medical records were complete and accurate for 1 out of 14 sample residents (R5) reviewed for medical records. R5's plan of care had confliciting information regarding R5's ability to self-administer medication. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Comprehensive Care Plans, dated 02/28/25, revealed It is the policy of this facility to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, consistent with resident rights, that includes measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs and ALL services that are identified in the resident's comprehensive assessment and meet professional standards of quality .5. The comprehensive care plan will be reviewed and revised by the interdisciplinary team after each comprehensive and quarterly MDS assessment. Review of R5's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) located in the MDS tab of the electronic medical record (EMR) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 01/09/25 revealed R5 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with latest admission on [DATE] and diagnoses that included malignant neoplasm of ileum, urinary tract infection, sepsis due to Escherichia coli, acute respiratory failure with hypoxia, diabetes mellitus, depression, mild cognitive impairment, and insomnia. R5 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 13 out of 15 which indicated R5 was cognitively intact. Review of R5's care plan located on the Care Plan tab of the EMR revealed an undated notation on the first page as follows: Medications Given: Whole, may self-administer scheduled oral meds after set-up . Further review of the care plan located under the Care Plan tab of the EMR, revealed the following intervention, dated 05/02/24, under the activities of daily living (ADL) section as follows: May not self-administer medications and must be observed that medications are taken. Review of the care plan located under the Care Plan tab of the EMR, revealed a focus item titled Self-Administration: Oral medications, initiated on 01/02/25. The goal of the care plan was that R5 Will be safe in self-administration of medications through next review date. During an interview on 03/28/25 at 3:19 PM, Licensed Practical Nurse 2 (LPN) stated she was familiar with R5 and had given her medications before. LPN2 stated R5 had orders to self-medicate. LPN2 stated that a banner with special instructions popped up on the screen in the EMR and was also in the resident's care plan. When told that R5's care plan stated both that the resident could, and could not self-medicate, LPN2 stated she did not know that, but that she was aware LPN2 could self-medicate. When asked if there was an order stating R5 could self-medicate, LPN2 stated she followed the special order banner in the EMR. Review of R5's orders located under the orders tab of the EMR failed to reveal an order that R5 could self-medicate. During an interview on 03/28/25 at 6:15 PM the Director of Nursing (DON) acknowledged there were two conflicting items on R5's care plan about R5's self-medication status.
Nov 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

Accident Prevention (Tag F0689)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility did not ensure that each resident environment remains as free of accident haz...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility did not ensure that each resident environment remains as free of accident hazards as is possible for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for accidents (R1). R1 fell out of bed due to facility staff''s failure to follow R1's plan of care and the facility did not ensure all staff were trained to help ensure a similar event did not occur. Findings include. R1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) includes a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, indicating R1 is cognitively intact. Her care plan states she is an assist of 2 with bed mobility due to potential for complications with deficits with Activities of Daily Living (ADLs). Her [NAME] states, Bed mobility - 2 assist. Roll slowly. Quarter bedrails on left and right sides of bed. Additionally, her [NAME] states she requires a Hoyer lift and 2 staff for transfers. On 10/27/24, the facility documented the following incident for R1: Around 10:50 AM, writer was charting at the nurses station when a CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant) yelled from the end of the hallway for writer to come and help. Writer raced to resident's room and found resident partially on her knees on the opposite side of the bed by the window. Resident's head was caught in between her bed and the side rail whilst the rest of her body was on the floor. Per CNA, she was assisting resident with toileting, so she rolled resident on her left side but somehow as she lifted her right leg to support with the rolling, resident slid. CNA said she managed to support resident's upper body and resident went down on her knees. Resident said she slid on the floor from her bed during cares. R1 was transported to the hospital after the incident where x-rays were negative. A facility interview with R1 on 10/29/24 indicated that R1's upper body had been stuck between her bed and the wall, and was not entangled, entrapped, or stuck in her side rail. The facility's Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) met on 10/30/24 and noted, IDT met to review fall. Root cause analysis completed. Root cause identified as inadequate amount of assistance used for bed mobility. Immediate intervention related root cause: CNA was educated on reviewing the [NAME]. Plan of care ongoing. The facility provided education and competency exams for some staff related to following resident care plans and [NAME]. On 11/11/24 at 11:15 AM, Surveyor interviewed R1 who stated that she had not been trapped in her siderail on 10/27/24, and that her head was lower than the siderail and she had been wedged between the wall and the mattress. R1 stated that on 10/27/24 the CNA rolled her away towards the wall very hard and she rolled too far and into the space between the bed and the wall. R1 stated that because 2 staff are supposed to be assisting her, they leave her bed about a foot from the wall so that a second staff can fit between her bed and the wall to assist with cares. R1 stated that staff often transfer her and move her around in bed by themselves (only 1 staff). R1 stated this happens multiple times per week and that she often has to wait for hours as some of the CNAs have to wait for additional staff to be available to help with transfers and cares. R1 stated that she has been very afraid of falling out of bed again since 10/27/24 and has had to remind staff frequently who enter her room by themselves to find an additional staff member as she requires 2 assist. R1 stated that the previous weekend (Saturday, 11/9/24 and Sunday, 11/10/24), CNA D worked with her and did her cares in bed and transfers by himself. R1 stated that CNA D is a great CNA which is why she did not remind him to get an additional staff. Facility records indicate CNA D worked the AM and PM shift on R1's unit on both 11/9/24 and 11/10/24. It should be noted that CNA D was not on the list of educated staff that the facility provided to Surveyors. Additionally, according to the facility's current agency and in-house nursing staff, 8 additional staff who had been hired prior to R1's 10/27/24 fall and had worked on R1's unit since her fall had yet to receive any education or competency testing in accordance with the facility's post-event action plan. On 11/11/24 at 2:31 PM, Surveyor interviewed NHA A (Nursing Home Administrator) who stated that he had talked to R1 about the 10/27/24 fall shortly after it happened. NHA A stated that he did not ask R1 about how often she is assisted by only 1 staff and was unaware that it is happening frequently. NHA A stated that since the fall, the facility has been trying to get staff educated on following the [NAME] but has some staff yet to educate. The facility was aware that staff were not following R1's care plan, resulting in a fall from her bed and did not ensure all staff were educated and CNA D had been performing cares by himself as recently as 11/9/24 and 11/10/24.
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Deficiency F0700 (Tag F0700)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure correct installation, use, and maintenance of ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure correct installation, use, and maintenance of bed rails for 4 of 5 (R3, R6, R7, and R8) residents reviewed. R3, R6, R7, and R8's bedrails were installed without a Bed System Measurement Device Test ompleted to ensure proper installation to reduce the risk of entrapment. Findings Include: The Facility policy, Bed Devices and Device Assessment, date of issue, March 21, 2024, indicates, in part: Policy .2.Physical devices will be reviewed for safety and used according to manufacturer's recommendations. 5.Physical devices include, but are not limited to, side rails (half or full); grab bars, halo bars, positioning poles . The Facility policy, Bed Inspection, date of issue, March 21, 2024, indicates, in part: Policy - It is the policy of this facility to conduct bed inspections to prevent entrapment and other safety hazards associated with bed rails, frames, and mattresses .The facility will conduct regular bed inspections, utilizing an interdisciplinary approach .to risk identification and prevention .Procedure - 1. Education: a. Facility staff will receive education as follows: .v. Procedure for inspection and maintenance of equipment .2. Equipment Management and Maintenance: .b. The Maintenance Department will conduct inspection of all bed frames, mattresses, and bedrails, as part of a regular maintenance program to identify areas of possible entrapment at least every 90 days . Example 1 R3 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that include, in part: Multiple Sclerosis, Age-related Osteoporosis, and Restless Legs Syndrome. On 11/7/24 at 1:52 PM, Surveyor went to R3's room. R3's door was open, however, R3 was not present. Surveyor noted one bed rail on the upper (head) side of the bed not facing the wall. Surveyor observed the head of the bed being elevated and the mattress pushed over at the top creating a gap between the bed rail and the mattress. On 11/7/24 at 3:00 PM, Surveyor interviewed MS C (Maintenance Supervisor) who indicated maintenance performs the installations of bedrails for the facility and receives the order from therapy for the installation. MS C indicated when he installs them, they have a measurement device to test for possible entrapment points and he performs this test at the time of installation. MS C indicated he has recently hired another employee that has not been trained on use of the measurement device for testing but is installing bed rails. Surveyor asked MS C if a staff member should be installing bed rails if they have not been trained to use the testing device. MS C indicated his plan was to test a batch together at the end of the month. Surveyor asked MS C if the bed rails should be tested on installation. MS C indicated he was not sure. MS C indicated he is aware of 6 to 7 installations in the last two weeks that have not been tested. Surveyor asked MS C how he knows what the measurements should be. MS C indicated they have a tool, and they follow the instructions for testing. Surveyor requested that MS C accompany Surveyor to R3's room to perform the measurement testing on R3's bedrail. During the observation MS C indicated a failed test and that the mattress is movable on the frame. MS C indicated that housekeeping comes in and moves the beds around and then the mattress can move. MS C indicated this is an issue with beds that have only one bedrail. MS C indicated when the bed is up against the wall the mattress doesn't move. On 11/7/24 at 4:04 PM, Surveyor interviewed MS C and asked if he know if R3's bedrail had been tested on installation. MS C indicated he didn't know MS C stated he believed it was recently installed and probably wasn't tested. The facility document labeled Residents with Side-Rails Present indicates an order date for R3 of 10/25/24. A Bed System Measurement Device Test for R3 dated 11/8/24 was provided by the facility. No previous Testing documentation was provided by the facility for R3. There is no evidence that R3's bedrail had a Bed System Measurement Device Test prior to 11/7/24 when the surveyor requested this to be completed. Example 2 R6 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that include, in part: Adult Failure to Thrive, Fusion of Spine, Muscle Weakness, and Parkinsonism. The facility document labeled Residents with Side-Rails Present indicates an order date for R6 of 8/7/24. A Bed System Measurement Device Test for R6 dated 11/8/24 was provided by the facility. No previous testing documentation was provided by the facility for R6. There is no evidence that R6's bedrails had a Bed System Measurement Device Test prior to 11/8/24. Example 3 R7 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that include, in part: Fibromyalgia, Chronic Pain, Spondylosis with Radiculopathy, Lumbosacral Region (a condition that occurs when nerve roots in the lumbosacral region are compressed or irritated), and Parkinson's Disease. The facility document labeled Residents with Side-Rails Present indicates an order date for R7 of 10/23/24. A Bed System Measurement Device Test for R7 dated 11/8/24 was provided by the facility. No previous Testing documentation was provided by the facility for R7. There is no evidence that R7's bedrails had a Bed System Measurement Device Test prior to 11/8/24. Example 4 R8 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that include, in part: Hemiplegia and Hemiparesis affecting Left Non-Dominant Side (Complete Paralysis and Partial Weakness), History of Falling, and Muscle Weakness. The facility document labeled Residents with Side-Rails Present indicates an order date for R8 of 9/19/24. A Bed System Measurement Device Test for R8 dated 11/8/24 was provided by the facility. No previous Testing documentation was provided by the facility for R8. There is no evidence that R8's bedrails had a Bed System Measurement Device Test prior to 11/8/24. On 11/11/24 at 8:46 AM, NHA A (Nursing Home Administrator) provided a binder with bedrail information for residents as well as remedies that the facility had begun. The binder contained updated Bed System Measurement Device Test Results that NHA A (Nursing Home Administrator) indicates were completed on 11/7/24 and 11/8/24. The binder also contained the previous test results for residents who had this testing completed. Of note, no previous testing results were located in the binder for R3, R6, R7, and R8. A document titled Residents with Side-Rails Present was also provided to Surveyors. The document contained a sticky note that indicated Installation Dates. On 11/11/24 at 2:48 PM, Surveyor received a requested copy of the Resident side-rail list previously provided. The sticky note was no longer in place and order date was written in the Resident Name column above the handwritten dates present. NHA A indicated they do not have documentation of actual install dates and would go by the order date. On 11/11/24 at 1:20 PM, Surveyor interviewed MS C and asked if the bed rails aren't tested on installation how would they know they passed. MS C indicated there is only one way to install them. The only thing would be if the mattress was not the thickness it should be or if they have one rail with the mattress able to move. Surveyor informed MS C Surveyor was unable to locate any testing documents for R3, R6, R7, and R8 before 11/7/24 in the facility provided binder of information. Surveyor asked MS C if this meant that testing was not done prior to this date. MS C indicated he would have to check. Of note, no further documentation was provided to the Surveyor. On 11/11/24 at 1:28 PM, Surveyor interviewed NHA A who indicated that the bedrails should have the testing completed on installation.
Oct 2024 2 deficiencies 1 Harm
SERIOUS (G) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures

Accident Prevention (Tag F0689)

A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure each resident receives adequate supervision and ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure each resident receives adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents for 1 of 3 residents (R5) reviewed for supervision and accidents. R5 was served coffee while in his bed and dropped the coffee cup in the bed on his right side which pooled up against him. R5 sustained superficial partial thickness burns to right flank and right buttocks, estimated approximately 7% Total Body Surface Area (TBSA). Facility had no process in place regarding safety to residents with hot liquid temping or any type of safety assessment. After the incident occurred, coffee brewers were temped at 185° Fahrenheit. Evidenced by: The facility policy titled Food Safety: Preventing Burns dated 2021, states, in part: Policy: Hot food and beverages will be served at a safe temperature that prevents burns. Procedure: 1. Staff will monitor hot food and beverage temperatures at the point of service . 5. Appropriate supervision to obtain hot beverages and/or reheat foods in a microwave will be provided to any individual demonstrating decreased safety awareness and/or anyone who is at risk for burns or scalds based on clinical assessments . The chart below shows the estimated time for persons to receive second and third degree burns at various temperatures. Water Temperature Time to Receive 2nd Degree Burn Time to Receive 3rd Degree Burn 120°F 8 minutes 10 minutes 124°F 2 minutes 4.2 minutes 131°F 17 seconds 30 seconds 140°F 3 seconds 5 seconds . R5 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and has diagnoses that include traumatic shock, major depressive disorder, and metabolic encephalopathy (a brain dysfunction caused by a chemical imbalance in the blood that affects the brain). R5's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment, dated 8/9/24, shows that R5 has a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, indicating R5 is cognitively intact. Section GG shows that R5 uses a wheelchair for mobility and R5 has no impairment to upper extremities with range of motion and has impairment with range of motion on both lower extremities. R5 requires substantial/maximal assistance with showering/bathing and upper body dressing. R5 is dependent on staff for toileting, transfers, and dressing lower body. R5's Care Plan, dated 11/2/23, states, in part: Focus: Nutrition/Hydration - At risk/and/or Potential for Complications with Nutrition/Hydration d/t (due to) ESRD (End Stage Renal Disease), Lymphedema, quadriplegia and obesity . Date Initiated: 11/2/23. Revision on: 8/1/24 . Interventions: Fluid- Thin/Regular Liquids . Set-up meal per resident request. Honor food requests as able. Date Initiated: 11/2/23. Revision on: 6/21/24 . Focus: Safety/Hot Liquids: Actual/Potential for injury related to spillage of hot liquids. Date Initiated: 10/15/24. Revision on: 10/17/24. Goal: Resolved: Resident will remain free of serious injury related to handling of hot liquids. Date Initiated: 10/15/24. Revision on: 10/17/24. Target Date: 11/1/24. Resolved Date: 10/17/24. Resident will remain free of serious injury related to handling of hot liquids. Date Initiated: 10/13/24. Revision on: 10/17/24. Target Date: 11/1/24. Interventions: - Resolved: Evaluate for the presence of risk factors for spills and potential of injury from hot liquids on admission/readmission/quarterly and/or significant change. Date Initiated: 10/15/24. Revision on: 10/17/24. Resolved Date: 10/17/24. - Evaluate for the presence of risk factors for spills and potential of injury from hot liquids on admission/readmission/quarterly and/or significant change. Date Initiated:10/17/24 . -Resolved: Staff to assist with pouring/serving hot liquids. Date Initiated: 10/15/24. Revision on: 10/17/24. Resolved Date: 10/17/24. -Need to utilize cup with Coban added for texture to assist with grip. Date Initiated: 10/17/24 . R5's Incident Report dated 10/13/24, at 7:00AM, states, in part: . Incident Location: Resident's Room . Incident Description: Nursing Description: I was walking out of the resident in (Resident Room Number) room when CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant) was walking out of the clean linen closet. She yelled for me to come to the resident in (R5's Room Number) room right away. When I entered the resident's room CNA had the resident out of his clothing and in a brief and was changing the bedding. I asked the resident what happened (see resident's description for response). I observed the resident's skin and saw a reddened area and blisters extending from the resident's right thigh to the right abdomen up to the ribcage. I took the resident's vitals and completed a pain assessment. Resident stated he was trying to change hands from the left hand to the right hand holding his coffee thermos when it spilled. Immediate Action Taken: All the bedding and clothing was removed from the resident and bed. After the resident was cared for the coffee pot was emptied and the appropriate people were notified including the on-call physician who gave the order to send the resident to the ER (Emergency Room) for evaluation . Injuries Observed at Time of Incident: Injury Type: Injury Location: Burn 19) Right iliac crest (front) Burn 21) Right iliac crest (rear) Burn 31) Right Buttock Burn 64) Other (Describe) Level of Pain: Numerical: 0 Level of Consciousness: Alert Mobility: Wheelchair bound. Mental Status: -Baseline for individual -Oriented to Place -Oriented to Time -Oriented to Person Predisposing Environmental Factors: -None Predisposing Physiological Factors: -None Predisposing Situation Factors: -None . Email to Medical Director from DON B (Director of Nursing), dated 10/13/24, at 3:54 PM, states, in part: . Updating you that early this morning R5 sustained a significant burn to parts on his torso and buttock after dropped his coffee while in bed. R5 was sent to the ER and has returned with new treatment orders and an order for oxy prn (Oxycodone as needed, A pain medication) . Per R5, he was attempting to transfer his coffee from his good hand (L) to his bad hand (R) when the mug fell. R5 states he will only use his left hand when handling hot beverages from here on out. We are also looking over our process around serving hot beverages/checking temps, and updating for safety . R5's Progress Note dated 10/13/24, at 8:12AM, states, in part: Note Text: At 7 AM writer called to resident's room by CNA. Resident stated he was switching hands he was holding his coffee thermos cup with and spilled. Assessed resident's skin to find reddened area with fluid filled blisters on resident's right upper thigh to right lower abdomen and on resident's back. Resident denied any pain. Vitals taken. Charge nurse notified and On-Call provider notified. Order to send resident to ER (Emergency Room) . R5's Progress Note dated 10/13/24, at 3:01 PM, states: Returned from hospital. New orders received: Oxycodone 5 mg (milligrams) take one tab every 6 hours as needed for pain. Wound Care: Wash wound daily with Dial soap and water. Use a washcloth to scrub the area, cover with bacitracin and place cuticerin on top, cover with dry gauze, wear compression t-shirt to hold dressing in place. Follow up in 1 week. R5's Progress Note dated 10/16/24, at 2:31PM, states, in part: . Late Entry: Note Text: Wound Observation Completed . Wound Location & Description: Type of Wound: Other superficial partial thickness burn (2nd degree) . Wound Base/Bed: Granulation Slough: % Granulation- 50% Slough: 50 Drainage Amount: Heavy Right side of back/buttock 24 x 30 x 0.1cm (centimeters) Right Breast 10 x 8 cm Burn surface is a mixture of yellowish white slough and pink tissue. Drainage Color: Serous Surrounding Tissue: Intact . Pain Associated with wound: Yes, Pain noted with treatment . Treatments: Current Treatment/Dressing: Yes Bacitracin, cuticerin, gauze . R5's Dietary Progress Note dated 10/17/24, at 2:14 PM, states, in part: . Notified by RN (Registered Nurse) that R5 is having fluid losses from his burns. The TBSA is 7%. Due to wounds, he receives Vitamin C 500 mg, ZnSo4 (zinc sulfate) 220 mg, Juven bid (twice a day) to support healing . Hospital Discharge, dated 10/13/24, states, in part: . Date of Service: 10/13/24 9:17AM . S: accidentally spilled coffee on self this morning; does not feel pain, history of cervical injury, also history of poor wound healing on legs requiring VAC and at a skilled nursing facility. O: see picture of approximately 7% TBSA superficial partial thickness to right flank/buttock A/P: 2nd degree thermal burn and patient was history of cervical injury and ongoing wound care concerns and transferred to burn center for debridement and follow-up wound care after discussion with them. Tetanus updated here. Chief Complaint: Burn (coming from (Skilled Nursing Facility Name). Alert and Oriented (A&O) x 4. Spilled coffee on his abdomen, to his back, right upper thigh. Reddened areas and fluid filled blisters . Physical Exam: . Skin: Warm and dry. Superficial partial thickness burn present to right flank and right buttocks approximately 7% TBSA. Neuro: Awake. A&O x 3. Quadriplegic . Medical Decision Making, ED (Emergency Department) Course & Medical Complexity: . Patient with associated superficial partial thickness burn to right flank, right buttocks estimated approximately 7% TBSA . Patient declining any pain, additionally non-sensate to region given chronic quadriplegia. Care discussed with burn consult doctor with recommendations for ED transfer for formal burn consult/local wound debridement. Given no local burn consult, care at (Skilled Nursing Facility Name) will require transfer for higher burn consult. Per burn team, likely need for local wound debridement and discharged home with continued care at patient's current care facility with further burn follow-up without likely need for admission or other complicated cares . Diagnosis: Superficial partial thickness burns of abdominal wall . Emergency Department Notes, dated, 10/13/24, state, in part: . ED: 10/13/24 . Date of Service: 10/13/24 Chief Complaint: Patient presents with Burn. History: Patient with a history of tetraplegia (medical condition that causes partial or total loss of function in the arms, hands, trunk, legs, and pelvic organs) of from previous spinal cord injury who presents to the Emergency Department via EMS (Emergency Medical Services) for evaluation of burn injury. Patient states that earlier this morning he accidentally spilled hot coffee on his right lower flank and lateral hip area. Initially seen at (Hospital Name) Emergency Department where his tetanus status was updated, and the burn surgery team was consulted who recommended transfer to . Emergency Department for further wound evaluation . Physical Exam: Skin: . Findings: Burn present. Superficial partial-thickness burn with blister formation noted over the right lower flank and lateral hip/buttock. No obvious involvement of the inguinal region or penis/scrotum. TBSA about 5% . Medical Decision Making: . On exam he has a superficial partial thickness burn with blister formation noted over the right lower flank and lateral hip/buttock without obvious involvement of the inguinal region or penis/scrotum. TBSA about 5% . Burn surgery resident was consulted and evaluated patient at bedside, wound care was performed while in the ED. The following wound care recommendations were provided: -Pain control with Tylenol and PRN (as needed) ibuprofen. -Premedicate with 5 mg (milligrams) oxycodone. -Wash wound with soap and water. -Wound cares with bacitracin and cuticerin. -Wear a compression t-shirt. Post-discharge wound care: -Wash wound daily with Dial soap and water. -Use a washcloth to scrub the area. -Cover with bacitracin and place cuticerin on top. -Cover with dry gauze. -Wear a compression t-shirt to hold dressings in place. -Follow-up in clinic in 1 week . Impression: -Superficial partial thickness burn of abdominal wall (primary encounter diagnosis) -Superficial partial thickness burn of buttock, initial encounter . R5's Hot Liquids Safety Assessment, dated 10/13/24, at 10:09AM, states, in part: . -R5 has no memory problems and/or mental function. -R5's mood does not vary over course of day/easily agitated. -R5 does not have frequent impulsive acts/short tempered. -R5 does not have tremors in upper extremities. -R5 does have contractures in fingers/hands/wrists/elbows/shoulders. -R5 does have weakness/paresis in upper extremities. -R5 does not have loss of mobility/reduced movement in upper extremities. Care Plan-Hot Liquid Risk: R5 is at risk for hot liquid injury . R5's Hot Liquids Safety Assessment, dated 10/15/24, at 1:26PM, states, in part: . -R5 has no memory problems and/or mental function. -R5's mood does not vary over course of day/easily agitated. -R5 does not have frequent impulsive acts/short tempered. -R5 does not have tremors in upper extremities. -R5 does have contractures in fingers/hands/wrists/elbows/shoulders. -R5 does have weakness/paresis in upper extremities. -R5 does have loss of mobility/reduced movement in upper extremities. Care Plan-Hot Liquid Risk: R5 is at risk for hot liquid injury . Kitchen cart log for hot liquids dated 10/17/24 shows: 10/17/24- breakfast coffee temp - 135* 10/17/24- lunch coffee temp - 132* On 10/17/24 at 10:10 , Surveyor interviewed PT E (Physical Therapist). PT E indicated R5 has quadriparesis (a condition that causes muscle weakness in all four limbs.) R5 can use both arms and legs to propel in wheelchair. R5's sensation is intact. R5 is currently working with OT (occupational therapy) on standing tolerance, sitting balance, shoulder strength, grip strength, shoulder range of motion, and wheelchair propulsion. R5 is currently working with PT (physical therapy) on transfers, ambulation, pain management, and bed mobility. PT E indicated R5 has chronic muscular pain in bilateral thighs. On 10/17/24 at 10:20 AM, Surveyor interviewed R5. R5 indicated every day he drinks coffee in bed with the head of the bed up. CNAs bring coffee in every morning in R5's thermos cup/insulated coffee cup. R5 uses left hand to hold coffee but on 10/13/24, R5 indicated he got cocky and switched coffee to right hand, which is his bad hand. R5 dropped the coffee on the right side of bed alongside of him and the coffee pooled there, and he received burns to right side, back, and his butt. R5 indicated the cup he uses is his personal cup. It is a thermos cup with no handle but has a lid. R5 indicated the lid stayed on when he dropped the cup and the coffee poured out of the drinking area. R5 indicated he yelled out AHHHH!!! and CNA D (Certified Nursing Assistant) entered his room immediately and turned R5 and cleaned him up. RN G (Registered Nurse) came in right away with a couple other nurses. They sent me to the hospital. R5 indicated the burn lady told him he has 2nd degree burns. Surveyor asked R5 approximately how long after he received the coffee did he drop the cup into his bed and R5 indicated maybe 10 minutes after receiving the coffee. On 10/17/24 at 10:35, Surveyor interviewed RN G. Surveyor asked RN G if she could tell Surveyor about the morning R5 spilled his coffee in bed. RN G indicated around 6:55 AM - 7:00 AM, CNA D called for RN G to come to R5's room. When RN G arrived R5 just had a brief on. CNA D removed R5's pants and t-shirt and removed brief and had put a new one on R5. CNA D was in process of changing R5's bedding. R5 indicated he switched from holding his thermos cup of coffee from left hand to his right hand. R5's right hand does not work as well as the left hand. R5 dropped his thermos cup onto the right side of the bed. RN G indicated the thermos cup had a lid on it and the coffee had come out of the drinking portion of the cup and spilled onto R5's right side. R5 was rolled and skin was reddened. The on-call physician was called and R5 was sent to the ER. Surveyor asked how R5 typically gets his coffee and RN G indicated the CNAs get the coffee every morning for R5 in his personal thermos cup. Surveyor asked if R5 was care planned to receive coffee in his room unsupervised and RN G indicated previously no and RN G did not know if R5 was now care planned since incident. Surveyor asked if residents are assessed for safety regarding hot liquids and RN G indicated just meal tickets, but no indication for hot liquid safety for residents. Surveyor asked how would staff know if it is safe for residents to receive hot coffee unsupervised and RN G indicated the staff knows what residents need assistance with meals and if a resident drinks from a sippy cup, we would not give hot liquids unsupervised. Surveyor asked what the process is for serving hot liquids to residents and RN G indicated if residents are independent with meals staff will just give coffee or hot fluids with no assessments. On 10/17/24 at 10:55 AM, Surveyor interviewed LPN C (Licensed Practical Nurse) and asked what the process is for serving residents hot liquids unsupervised. LPN C indicated by the MDS section GG, looking at residents' movements and whether they can move their upper body. Surveyor asked if there were assessments completed for residents to determine safety with hot liquids and LPN C indicated this week we started completing them for all residents. Surveyor asked LPN C how staff know if it is safe to give residents hot fluids in their rooms and LPN C indicated the CNA [NAME] lists the diet orders, but she is not sure. On 10/17/24 at 11:06 AM, Surveyor interviewed CNA H and asked how staff know if a resident is safe to be served hot liquids in their room unsupervised and CNA H indicated if a resident drinks out of a normal cup, we just give it to them. Surveyor asked what the process was prior to incident on 10/13/24 to administer hot liquids/coffee to residents. CNA H indicated prior to 10/13/24 staff would make coffee in the kitchenettes and just pour the coffee in a cup and take it to residents. CNA H indicated now staff must get the coffee from the main kitchen and the kitchen temps the coffee prior to getting it to staff on the floor. CNA H indicated coffee cannot be over 130 degrees Fahrenheit. CNA H indicated some residents want their coffee warmed in microwave and staff can use the microwave, but staff must temp the coffee to be sure it does not exceed 130 degrees. On 10/17/24 at 11:20 AM, Surveyor interviewed VPC F (Vice President of Culinary). Surveyor asked to see the coffee temp log that was on the cart about to leave kitchen going to unit. VPC F had a dietary aide temp it and Surveyor observed temp at 138.7 degrees F. Surveyor asked when temping hot liquids started and VPC F indicated right after the incident with R5 spilling coffee. VPC F indicated prior to the incident the brewers on the units were not being temped. VPC F indicated right after the incident the brewers on the floor were temped and all were at 185 degrees Fahrenheit. VPC F indicated the facility brought in a technician for the brewers to see if they could bring the temperatures down on the brewers. The technician indicated the temps could not be brought down below 185 degrees due to a sanitation issue. VPC F indicated the facility cools the coffee down to 140 degrees or under by adding ice. The brewers upstairs on the units are not being used anymore and the facility is working on getting new brewers. Surveyor asked if residents could get coffee when the kitchen is not open and VPC F indicated the facility does not offer coffee during the night, only when the kitchen is open now. VPC F indicated prior to incident we were not temping the brewers/coffee but now the facility is which started 10/13/24 the day of the incident. On 10/17/24 at 1:00 PM, Surveyor interviewed CNA D and asked CNA D to tell Surveyor about the morning R5 spilled his coffee in bed. CNA D indicated she had taken R5 his coffee in his personal cup with a screw-on lid at 6:50 AM. CNA D indicated she placed the coffee cup in R5's left hand and left room. CNA D got to another room and heard R5 moaning and went back into R5's room. R5 indicated to CNA D that he had spilled his coffee. CNA D indicated telling RN G that R5 spilled coffee and then removed R5's clothes immediately and changed the bedding. CNA D indicated the whole right side of R5 was red and started blistering. R5 indicated to CNA D that he went to put coffee cup into his right hand and spilled the coffee in bed. CNA D indicated R5 is left hand dominant and does better with left hand. CNA D indicated it is normal for R5 to have coffee in his personal cup in his bed in the mornings. Surveyor asked what the process is for staff to serve coffee to residents. CNA D indicated staff gets the coffee from the coffee pot in the kitchenette. CNA or staff on the floor makes the coffee. CNA D indicated staff has never had to temp coffee, it was never a thing. When staff take R5 his coffee we put it in his left hand. Surveyor asked how staff know if a resident is deemed safe for hot liquids and CNA D indicated she assumed the facility coffee pots are safe to give to residents temp wise. Surveyor asked CNA D if care plans indicate safe for hot liquids in rooms unsupervised and CNA D indicated no. CNA D indicated any resident that can have thin liquids she would just give it to them. CNA D indicated the process has changed since the incident. The temps on the coffee pots in the kitchenettes were checked immediately after the incident of R5 spilling his coffee and found to be hotter than they were supposed to be and are now marked out of order. If a resident requests coffee now the kitchen temps it and brings it up for staff on the floor to administer the coffee. CNA D indicated the kitchen now sends pots of coffee up with the meals or if a resident requests a cup and temps it. On 10/17/24 at 1:41 PM, Surveyor interviewed DON B (Director of Nursing). Surveyor asked DON B about the incident on 10/13/24. DON B indicated R5 is a partial quadriplegic. When DON B met with R5, R5 indicated to DON B that he tried to hold his personal coffee cup in his right hand, which is his weaker hand. R5 indicated to DON B that he got cocky and tried to switch hands from left hand to right hand and dropped the coffee cup into his bed on his right side where the fluid pooled alongside him. DON B indicated it was R5's personal insulated coffee cup with no handle, but had a lid. Surveyor asked DON B what the process is for staff to serve coffee to residents in their rooms and DON B indicated with general services if a resident with no precautions such as, no supervision with meals or swallowing difficulties they could have hot fluids in rooms. The facility had nothing in place regarding safety with hot liquids. Unless a resident had something stating they could not have coffee or hot liquids unsupervised they could. Surveyor asked if this were something you would care plan and DON B indicated we have never had hot liquid assessments before but since incident we should have. DON B indicated hot liquids and coffee should be temped for safety. DON B indicated since incident with R5 the facility immediately halted service of hot liquids/soups that day. When hot liquids/soups resumed they were to be in temperature parameters of 140 degrees or below. Thermometers are on the units now. 1:1 on liquid temperatures with nursing staff and dietary and a reminder was put on dashboard in PCC (Point Click Care; the electronic health record). Dietary staff are now responsible to temp hot liquids and bring hot liquids/coffee up from the kitchen to the floor. The brewers upstairs are not in use. DON B indicated after the incident, therapy assessed R5 and ordered a U-drink adaptable holder that goes around cup and hand straps in so if resident lets go of cup it won't slip out of hand. DON B indicated if residents request coffee during times the kitchen is not open, we tell them we are working on it. They are not able to get coffee outside of kitchen hours currently. Surveyor asked DON B about the education and DON B indicated she would get back to Surveyor. On 10/17/24 at 2:30 PM, Surveyor interviewed NHA A (Nursing Home Administrator). Surveyor asked NHA A what facility has done to ensure what happened with R5 does not happen to another resident. NHA A indicated that the brewers on the units are marked Not in Service, and the facility has spoken with the manufacturer of the brewers to find the brewers can't be turned down in temperature because they would be susceptible to bacteria growth. The facility diverted coffee service to the kitchen and the kitchen will be temping coffee temperatures. The kitchen is using the same coffee dispensers but now add ice to the coffee to bring the temperatures down. Dietary staff is now responsible for temping the coffee/hot water or hot chocolate. Surveyor asked if residents request coffee like on night shift or at a time the kitchen is not open could they get coffee. NHA A indicated there has been no formal request for coffee on the night shift, but the assumption would be for nursing to go to the kitchen and make coffee or the staff could get coffee in the break room and whoever brings the coffee to the resident would be responsible to temp the coffee. NHA A indicated education has been started and was focused on identifying residents for hot liquid risk. NHA A indicated residents have had a hot liquid assessment. Surveyor asked if all residents have had the assessment completed and NHA A indicated (the corporate group) is working on them he would get back to Surveyor. OT (Occupational Therapy) evals on any residents deemed at risk for hot liquids completed. Clothing protectors have been ordered. The facility is not sure how to implement those yet. The facility is ordering special coffee lids for facility coffee cups. Surveyor asked NHA A if he would have expected hot liquids to have been temped prior to incident and NHA A indicated yes, he believed they were. The facility failed to ensure they were monitoring temperatures of hot liquids including coffee. R5 was served hot coffee and received secondary burns requiring emergency treatment at the burn unit. As a result of the incident with R5 the facility began education with staff, implemented a new procedure for dietary staff to bring coffee to the units and to temp the coffee/hot liquids. Additionally, the facility completed hot liquid assessments on all residents. At the time of survey not all staff received education and were educated on 10/18/24 after survey had begun.
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

Medication Errors (Tag F0758)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility did not ensure residents (R) receiving a psychotropic medication, were free f...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility did not ensure residents (R) receiving a psychotropic medication, were free from unnecessary medications for 1 of 1 residents (R1). R1 receives psychotropic and antipsychotic medications. The facility is not tracking quantitative measurements during behavior tracking, which is required to measure efficacy of medication therapy, nor are side effects of psychotropic medications being adequately monitored. R1 does not have an appropriate diagnosis for antipsychotic medication. This is evidenced by: Facility policy entitled Unnecessary Medication - Psychotropic Medication, Dated April 1, 2008, with last revision date September 22, 2017, states in part: .A. 2. Antipsychotic drugs should not be used unless the resident's medical record clearly indicates that the resident has one of more of the following specific conditions: . i. Demented illnesses with associated behavioral symptoms . 3. A. Criteria: Since diagnoses alone do not warrant the use of antipsychotic medications, the clinical condition must also meet at least one of the following criteria: . ii. Behavioral symptoms present a danger to the resident or to others . 4. Antipsychotic drugs should not be used if one of more of the following is/are the only indications: . a. Wandering . l. Uncooperativeness . m. Verbal expressions or behaviors that are not listed under indicators which do not represent danger to the resident or others . C. 1. If the resident is admitted or readmitted to the facility with psychotropic medication, the following must be completed: a. Appropriate diagnosis made that meets the criteria for the use of a psychotropic; b. Target behaviors documented for the continued use . D. 4. All target behaviors must be quantitatively and objectively documented in the resident's medical record and/or on the medication administrative record, to monitor the effectiveness or the side effects of the psychotropic medication . Facility policy titled Behavioral Health, dated 11/2016 with last revision date of 10/2022, states in part: . residents who display, or are diagnosed with, dementia will receive appropriate treatment and services to attain or maintain his/her highest practicable, physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being . 5. Residents with behaviors and those on any psychotropic medication will have their behaviors monitored daily. This will be documented on the behavior tracking tool . R1 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that include Alzheimer's Disease, unspecified, Alzheimer's Disease with early onset, Generalized Anxiety Disorder, and Restlessness and Agitation. R1's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] indicates R1 has a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) of 0 out of 15, indicating R1 is severely cognitively impaired. Section B indicates R1 hears with minimal difficulty, has clear speech, usually makes self-understood, and usually understands others. Section E indicates that R1 has not had physical, verbal, or other behavioral symptoms, or rejection of cares in the last 7 days. Impact to Resident and other residents is blank. Section GG indicates R1 is completely dependent on staff for toileting needs, and substantial/maximum assistance with dressing, bathing, and personal hygiene. R1 is completely dependent upon staff for all transfers, and substantial/maximum assist for turning, sitting, and bed mobility. R1's Care Plan states in part: . Mood/Behavior: Actual/At Risk and/or Potential for Complications with Mood/Behavior. Patient experiences episodes of agitation, as evidenced by yelling out. He wanders the unit by self-propelling in his Broda and can become agitated upon redirection. Date initiated: 3/22/23. Revision on: 6/26/24 Interventions: Observe/Monitor/Document behaviors/mood and notify supervisor, SW (Social Worker), and/or MD (Medical Director) as needed. 1. Exit seeking; 2. Wandering; 3. Repetitive questions; 4. Exhibits s/s (signs and symptoms) of depression. Date Initiated: 2/15/25 . Elopement: At risk and/or Potential for Complications with elopement requiring placement on secured unit due to Behavioral Symptoms/Wandering/Elopement Concerns. Date Initiated: 3/22/23. Revision on: 4/12/23 . Interventions: Observe/Monitor/Document behaviors/mood/exit seeking concerns and notify supervisor, SW, and/or MD as needed . Date Initiated: 2/15/23. Revision on: 3/2/23 . Psychotropic Drug Use: At risk for complications R/T (related to) use of Seroquel and Ativan. Date Initiated: 2/15/23. Revision on: 9/26/26 . Interventions: Monitor/Observe/Document medication effectiveness - s/s of mood/behavior/improvement or decline. Observe for lethargy, need for med reduction. Review observations with MD. Date Initiated: 4/12/23 . R1's October 2024 Physician orders indicate: Lorazepam Oral Tablet 0.5 mg Give 0.5 mg by mouth one time a day for Anxiety at bedtime (start date 10/7/24). Lorazepam Oral Tablet 0.5 mg Give 0.5 mg by mouth one time a day for Anxiety at 2:00 PM (start date 10/8/24). Seroquel Oral Tablet 25 mg Give 1 tablet by mouth two times a day for dementia with behaviors of aggression/agitation (start date 3/8/24). R1's most recent informed consent for Seroquel, dated 9/16/24 indicates in part . Reason for Use of Psychotropic Medication and Benefits Expected . Dementia with Behaviors . R1's Treatment Administration Record (TAR) indicates in part: . Anti-Psychotic Monitor for Behavior - Repetitive questions, wandering, exit seeking, s/s (signs and symptoms) of depression. Document 'Y' if behavior is noted during the shift, every shift. Document 'N' if NO behavior noted during the shift . Document TOTAL # of episodes per shift, Non-Pharmacological Interventions. Start Date: 3/2/23 . Side Effect: Monitor for Dry Mouth, Constipation, Blurred Vision, Disorientation/Confusion, Difficulty Urinating, Increased Agitation, Disturbed Gait, Restlessness, EPS (extrapyramidal) Symptoms (tremors, involuntary movement, etc.) Document 'Y' if S/E (side effects) IS noted during the shift 'N' if NO S/E noted during the shift . Start Date: 4/18/23 . Mood: Monitor resident for any changes in mood; 1 - Crying, 2- withdrawn, 3- agitation, 4- hitting, 5- Cursing, 6- Fidgeting, 7- Other every shift for mood monitoring. Start Date: 9/30/24 . R1's Behavior Monitoring in August on the Treatment Administration Record (TAR) indicates an X instead of a number of episodes of behaviors for 72 of 93 observations (once per shift), and N/A (not applicable) was marked twice. R1's TAR indicated an X instead of a Y or N for Behaviors Observed for 73 of 93 observations charted. R1's TAR indicated an X instead of a Y or N for non-pharmacological interventions attempted for 73 of 93 observations charted, and N/A was charted 9 times. R1's TAR indicated an X for outcome for 73 of 93 observations charted, and N/A was charted 9 times. R1's Side Effect Monitoring in August on the TAR indicates a check mark instead of Y' or N 91 of 93 times (once per shift). It not known what the check indicates. R1's Behavior Monitoring in September on the TAR indicates an X instead of a number of episodes of behaviors for 69 of 90 observations (once per shift), and one instance was left blank (not documented). R1's TAR indicated an X instead of a Y or N for Behaviors Observed for 69 of 90 observations charted, and one instance was left blank. R1's TAR indicated an X instead of a Y or N for non-pharmacological interventions attempted for 69 of 90 observations charted, N/A was charted 6 times, and one instance was left blank. R1's TAR indicated an X for outcome for 69 of 90 observations charted, N/A was charted 7 times, and one instance was left blank. R1's Side Effect Monitoring in September on the TAR indicates a check mark instead of Y' or N 82 of 90 times (once per shift), and one instance was left blank (not documented). R1's Behavior Monitoring in October on the TAR indicates an X instead of a number of episodes of behaviors for 48 of 61 observations (once per shift), and N/A was charted once. R1's TAR indicated an X instead of a Y or N for Behaviors Observed for 48 of 61 observations charted. R1's TAR indicated an X instead of a Y or N for non-pharmacological interventions attempted for 48 of 61 observations charted, N/A was charted 9 times. R1's TAR indicated an X for outcome for 48 of 61 observations charted, N/A was charted 9 times, and one instance was left blank. R1's Side Effect Monitoring in October on the TAR indicates a check mark instead of Y' or N 58 of 61 times (once per shift). R1's Mood Monitoring in October on the TAR indicates an X instead of a number for 18 of 61 times (once per shift). On 10/1/24, R1's Behavior Monitoring and Interventions report shows R1 was marked as having the following behaviors: Hitting others, kicking others, Pushing others, and Physically Aggressive towards others. There is no documentation of how many times R1 experienced or exhibited these behaviors or how long the behaviors lasted. On 10/3/24, R1's Behavior Monitoring and Interventions report shows R1 was marked as having the following behaviors: Physically Aggressive Towards Others. There is no documentation of how many times R1 experienced or exhibited these behaviors or how long the behaviors lasted. A Progress Note at 8:23 PM indicates No behaviors this shift. On 10/6/24 at 5:47 PM, R1's Progress note states in part: .Monitoring behaviors, resident sitting at dining room table during dinner yelling out, cursing SOB, and tapping on table with both hands, and pushing table . There is no documentation of how long R1 experienced or exhibited these behaviors or what interventions were attempted. On 10/20/24, R1's Behavior Monitoring and Interventions report shows R1 was marked as having the following behaviors: Elopement and Exit Seeking. There is no documentation of how many times R1 experienced or exhibited these behaviors or how long the behaviors lasted. On 10/17/24 at 9:57 AM, Surveyor interviewed RN I (Registered Nurse) who indicated she had not seen R1 be physically aggressive but that he could be verbally aggressive. RN I stated that R1's behaviors were not harmful to himself or others. On 10/21/24 at 8:23 AM, Surveyor interviewed CNA J (Certified Nursing Assistant) who indicated R1 can get verbally aggressive sometimes, mainly yelling, and that R1's behavior was not harmful to himself or others. CNA J stated that R1 was just confused, and not aggressive at all if approached in a calm manner. On 10/21/24 at 8:25 AM, Surveyor interviewed LPN K (Licensed Practical Nurse) who indicated that R1 does sundown (a neurological phenomenon characterized by a group of symptoms people with Alzheimer's or dementia get in the late afternoon that includes increased confusion, restlessness, and wandering). LPN K stated that R1 is mostly vocal in his aggression. LPN K stated that R1's behaviors are not harmful to himself or others. On 10/21/24 at 8:35 AM, Surveyor interviewed CNA L, who indicated that she had never seen R1 get physically aggressive. CNA L stated that R1 gets confused and frustrated at times, and sometimes yells. CNA L stated that R1's behaviors were not harmful. On 10/21/24 at 9:06 AM, Surveyor interviewed DON B (Director of Nursing) regarding R1's medications and behaviors. DON B indicated R1 does not normally have a lot of behaviors, that he can get agitated by noise and if other residents become too boisterous. DON B stated that R1 can be easily redirected and does well with re-approach. DON B indicated that R1's behaviors were not persistent, and they were not harmful to R1 or others. Surveyor asked DON B if dementia was an appropriate diagnosis for antipsychotic medications. DON B replied no but that R1's behavioral disturbance added to it. On 10/21/24 at 12:17 PM, Surveyor interviewed DON B (regarding R1's behavior charting.) DON B indicated that an X on the TAR meant that staff did not document the number of occurrences of the behaviors. DON B stated that the Behaviors Observed section of the TAR should have a Y or N, not an X or N/A. DON B indicated that an X was not appropriate charting for non-pharmacological interventions or outcome. DON B stated, I see a lot of X's. This should not be charted this way. This is an area where education needs to be done. R1's behaviors are not being quantitatively reviewed to show how many episodes of each behavior R1 experienced in one given shift, day, or week to know if R1's medication or care plan interventions are effective. R1 does not have an appropriate diagnosis for antipsychotic medication, nor are the medication side effects being adequately monitored. There is no documentation to indicate that R1's behaviors are persistent or harmful to himself or others.
Sept 2024 2 deficiencies 1 IJ
CRITICAL (J) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation

Accident Prevention (Tag F0689)

Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure each resident (R) received adequate supervision to prevent a...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure each resident (R) received adequate supervision to prevent accidents for 1 of 3 residents (R2) reviewed for altered diets out of a total sample of 6. R2 has had two choking episodes within a month's time. On 7/27/24, R2 choked on a hot dog. The Heimlich maneuver was performed, and R2 was sent to the emergency room and admitted to the hospital for acute hypoxic respiratory failure, aspiration event/choking on a hot dog, and aspiration pneumonitis. On 8/13/24, R2 was to receive a Level 6: soft and bite sized (no hot dogs), thin liquids consistency diet. CNA G (Certified Nursing Assistant) provided R2 a bowl of chunked honeydew that was not part of a Level 6 soft and bite sized diet with his supper, resulting in an aspiration event and another hospitalization. The facility's failure to supervise R2 and ensure R2 received food items consistent with R2's prescribed diet created a finding of Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) that began on 8/13/24. Surveyor notified NHA A (Nursing Home Administrator) and DON B (Director of Nursing) of the IJ on 9/5/24 at 12:10 PM. The IJ was removed on 9/6/24; however, the deficient practice continues at a scope/severity of a D (potential for more than minimal harm/isolated) as the facility continues to implement its action plan. This is evidenced by: The International Dysphagia Diet Standardization Initiative (2019), or IDDSI, developed the IDDSI Framework which is intended to provide a common terminology for describing food textures and drink thicknesses to improve safety for individuals with swallowing difficulties. The IDDSI framework has a range of 8 levels. Drinks are measured from levels 0 through 4, while foods are measured from levels 3 through 7. Level definitions are as follows . (https://iddsi.org/Framework) Level 5 - Minced and Moist. Can be eaten with a fork or spoon, should be soft and moist with no separate thin liquid. Particles should be easily separated when pressed with a fork. Small lumps - equal to or less than 4mm width (about the gap between the prongs of a standard dinner fork) and no longer than 15mm in length for adults - may be present but should be easy to squash with tongue. Level 6 - Soft & Bite-Sized. Can be eaten with a fork, spoon, or chopsticks and can be mashed or broken down with these utensils. Food should be soft, tender, and moist throughout but with no separate thin liquid. Chewing is required before swallowing. Food piece sizes are designed to minimize choking risk . should be equal to or less than 1.5cm pieces. R2 was admitted to the facility 1/4/23 and has diagnoses that include Pneumonitis (a general term for lung tissue inflammation that's not caused by an infection) due to inhalation of food and vomit, dysphagia (difficulty swallowing), Parkinson's Disease (a disorder of the central nervous system that affects movement, often including tremors) and dementia (a group of thinking and social symptoms that interferes with daily functioning). R2's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], shows that R2 has a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 8 indicating R2 has moderate cognitive impairment. Section K indicates R2 does not have a swallowing disorder and is not on an altered mechanical diet. Section GG indicates R2 requires set up assistance with meals and is dependent on staff for transfers from chair/bed to chair. R2's Care Plan, dated 2/28/23, states: Focus: Nutrition/Hydration: At Risk for Complications with Nutrition/Hydration d/t (due to) aspiration and long-standing dysphagia; tendency to eat/drink too fast. Date Initiated: 2/28/23 Revision: 8/15/24 . Interventions: Set up meal per resident direction and assist with eating as/if needed. Honor food requests as able. Encourage resident to slow down while eating. Date Initiated: 2/28/23 Revision on: 8/15/24. RESOLVED: Serve prescribed diet of regular, regular thin liquids. Date Initiated: 11/29/23. Revision on: 8/1/24. Resolved Date: 8/1/24. Adaptive Equipment: divided plate. Date Initiated: 1/13/24 Revision on: 9/4/24. General Diet, Level 5 texture: moist and minced with divided plate/thin liquids. Resident to eat in doorway of room. Staff cue to slow down . Date Initiated: 8/14/24 Revision on: 9/4/24. Monitor for changes in texture tolerance. Date Initiated: 8/26/24 . Interventions: Eating - supervision. Bring resident to room door threshold to monitor during meals. Date Initiated: 8/14/24. Revision on: 8/16/24 . R2's CNA [NAME] dated 8/1/24 shows R2 is on a General Diet, Level 6 texture: soft and bite sized (no hot dogs), thin liquids. R2's CNA [NAME] dated 8/16/24 shows R2 is on a General Diet, Level 5 texture: moist and minced (no hot dogs) thin liquids. Focus: ADL (activities of daily living) At risk and/or Potential for Complications with Deficits with ADLs R/T (related to) current medical/physical status. Has meds/dx (medication/diagnoses) that can/may affect ADLs. Date Initiated: 2/28/23 Revision on: 4/4/23 . R2's diet initiated 11/29/23, regular thin liquids. R2's Discharge Summary from the hospital dated 7/30/24, states, in part: Date of admission: [DATE] Date of discharge: [DATE] HPI (history of present illness): Patient with schizophrenia, seizures, and dysphagia with recurrent aspiration events who presented to the ED after choking on a hot dog that required the Heimlich maneuver and is admitted with hypoxia . Hospital Course: Acute hypoxic respiratory failure Aspiration event/choking on a hot dog on July 27 Aspiration pneumonitis Chronic dysphagia with the recurrent aspiration events . Patient presented to emergency room after choking on a hot dog which required Heimlich maneuver. He was mildly hypoxic in the emergency room 89% on room air and placed on a 2L of oxygen. Chest x-ray was negative in the ER, he continues to remain afebrile with normal WBC (white blood cell count). Diet was continued since he has a prior episode of aspiration, requested SLP (Speech Language Pathologist) evaluation. He will be at risk for aspiration pneumonia, continue to monitor closely . Your Discharge Diagnosis: Aspiration into airway . R2's signed Physician Telephone orders dated 8/7/24, states, in part: Diet Clarification: Level 6 (Soft and Bite Sized) with bread, no hot dogs. R2's meal ticket dated 8/13/24 shows: - R2's diet: Level 6 Soft Bite - Meal: 8/13/24 Tuesday Supper - Divided Plate - Supper Specials: Fruit, canned (chopped), soup, cream cauliflower (chopped), peas. Sugar snap (chopped) and scalloped potatoes & ham (ground). R2's Incident Report dated 8/13/24, at 5:39PM, states, in part: Incident Description: R2 finished eating dinner and started coughing while brushing his teeth. Resident started coughing, nurse went to check on resident. Resident was audible, but breathing was labored. Emergency code was activated, code team came with crash cart, suctioning started, 8L (Liter) O2 administered via face mask. BP (Blood Pressure) 212/99, O2- 85%, P (Pulse)-101, R (Respirations)-22, T (Temperature)- 97.8. Nurse called on call and got order to send out to hospital via ambulance. Nurse placed order in resident's chart and have copy to charge nurse. POA, PCP (Primary Care Physician), DON notified. Immediate Action Taken: .call 911 transferred to ER (emergency room). POA, PCP, DON notified . Mental Status: Baseline for Individual, Increased Monitoring/Observation . R2's Progress Note dated 8/13/24, at 5:30 PM, states: Resident finished eating dinner and started coughing while brushing his teeth. Resident started coughing, nurse went to check on resident. Resident was audible, but breathing was labored. Emergency code was activated, Code Team came with crash cart, suctioning started, 8L O2 administered via face mask. BP-212/99, O2- 85%, P-101, R-22, T- 97.8. Nurse called on call and got order to send out to hospital via ambulance. Nurse placed order in resident's chart and have copy to charge nurse. POA, PCP, DON notified. R2's Progress Note, dated 8/13/24 at 6:00 PM, states: Call to ER RN (Registered Nurse) regarding choking episode, resident sent to ER by 911. Report given. R2's Discharge Summary from the hospital dated 8/14/24, states, in part: Date of admission: [DATE] Date of discharge: [DATE] Final Diagnosis: Aspiration event, s/p (status/post) laryngoscopy (a procedure that uses a thin tube with a light, lens, and video to examine your larynx (hollow tube in the middle of your neck-voice box) with retrieved foreign body (potato) . Hospital Course: Patient was admitted into the hospital after an aspiration event. He aspirated a potato. Given ketamine in the ER and ENT (Ears, nose, and throat doctor) did laryngoscopy with removal of foreign body . R2's ENT Progress Note dated 8/14/24 at 8:35 AM, states, in part: . .History of Parkinson's disease with dysphagia, currently admitted with aspiration pneumonia .On 8/13/24, he was eating dinner and aspirated mashed potatoes. In ER unresponsive initially, then able to awaken and answer questions. He spoke with difficulty with altered phonation and gurgling, and sounded as though a foreign body were obstructing. Dr. saw patient and multiple attempts were made to dislodge the foreign body with heavier cough, positioning, and Heimlich maneuvers without success. The patient was sedated in the ED (Emergency Department) and a 1 [NAME] blade was used to visualize the area. Initial attempts with the suction did not work. Then a [NAME] forceps was used to remove an approximately 4.5 by 4 cm (centimeter) potato in one piece. Following the procedure, there was some non-obstructive edema of the arytenoids but no other signs of trauma. Patient tolerated the procedure well and was given Decadron in the ED to reduce the risk of delayed laryngeal edema. Of note, the hospital records state a 4.5 x 4 centimeter potato was retrieved. (It was actually a honeydew melon.) This type and size of food was not consistent with the resident's care pakn and his dietary restrictions. RN D's (Registered Nurse) statement, dated 8/13/24, states: R2 was eating in his room. He has a soft bite size diet which is soft foods that can be easily chewed. Raw fruit is not appropriate for this diet. Residents diet is determined by care plan and the dietary ticket that is generated. The server checks the ticket and serves up the appropriate meal. The CNA checks the ticket and meal for appropriateness and serves it to the residents. I did not notice any breathing issues before eating but after he was coughing . CK F's (Cook) statement undated, states: Around 5:30 PM, I was serving food to the resident (gave R2 food that was on the ticket). Staff took the honeydew melon and gave it to R2 with his food . Of note, honeydew melon is not on R2's diet. It was, however, part of the general menu served at supper on 8/13/24. On 9/4/24 at 11:15 AM, Surveyor interviewed CNA I (Certified Nursing Assistant) who indicated CNAs and the dietary aide who dishes up the residents' meals are both responsible that the residents receive the correct diet. Surveyor asked CNA I how CNAs know what diet residents are to receive and CNA I indicated by the meal ticket on the trays. CNA I showed Surveyor the CNA [NAME] that lists the resident's diet in R2's bathroom. On 9/4/24 at 11:25 AM, Surveyor interviewed RN D. RN D stated he came into R2's room with Surveyor and CNA I and indicated after R2's incident on 8/13/24, R2's diet changed to Level 5 texture: moist and minced and R2 eats meals in his doorway. RN D could not recall R2's diet at time of incident. Surveyor asked RN D to tell her about the incident. RN D indicated he was one of the nurses to respond to R2 the evening of the incident on 8/13/24. RN D indicated R2 was in his room coughing and he entered R2's room to check on him. RN D indicated R2 was coughing and getting air. R2 was breathing, Emergency Code was called, and more nurses came to R2's room with the crash cart. RN D indicated it happened after supper. The staff did a mouth sweep and attempted suctioning oral cavity with a Yankauer and only had phlegm return with no food. RN D indicated vital signs were stable at first but as they were waiting for the ambulance to arrive vital signs became unstable. Surveyor asked RN D what led to the incident, and RN D indicated R2 choked on food and aspirated but could not recall what R2 choked on. Surveyor asked RN D who is responsible to check the residents' meal tickets for correct diet to prevent choking or hazards; RN D indicated CNAs and the dietary staff. On 9/4/24 at 12:23 PM, Surveyor interviewed ST C (Speech Therapist) who indicated R2 has a history of dysphagia and a tendency to eat quickly. R2 does not take time to chew. Surveyor asked ST C if she was aware of the incident with R2 on 8/13/24. ST C indicated R2 was to be a Level 6: soft and bite sized at that time. Pieces were to be no bigger than 1.5cm (centimeters). On Level 6 diet, cantaloupe, pineapple, honeydew, melons are not allowed. R2 was given honeydew at supper and should not have had it. R2 ended up going to ER for choking on honeydew. ST C indicated the facility has a lot of agency staff that don't look at the meal tickets and just serve the trays. ST C indicated R2 is now on a Level 5 texture: moist and minced diet, this was a change after 8/13/24. ST C indicated on 9/5/24 the dietician and herself are conducting an in-service to CNAs and dietary staff regarding each level of diets in detail and meal tickets which will be videotaped. Surveyor asked ST C who is responsible for checking that residents are receiving correct diet and ST C indicated it is collaborative between CNAs and dietary aides. ST C indicated in the kitchen there is a binder that lists all the diets with as much detail as possible staff use this if there is a question on what is being served and how to serve it. On 9/4/24 at 1:00 PM, Surveyor interviewed LPN E (Licensed Practical Nurse) who indicated she was another nurse that was there on 8/13/24 when R2's incident occurred. LPN E indicated she was doing her medication pass and RN D was at the nurse station, we both heard R2 trying to clear his throat. We both encouraged coughing and R2 was unable to clear. We called an Emergency Code where the charge nurse and two other nurses responded with the crash cart. His oral cavity was suctioned with only fluid return. There was nothing lodged in his mouth. 911 was called and while waiting for ambulance vital signs were declining. R2's oxygen level was in 80s - we applied oxygen at 6 or 8 L via face mask which brought R2 up into the 90s. R2's BP and P (blood pressure and pulse) were high. He was sent to the ER. Surveyor asked who is responsible for checking the meal tickets with what is served, LPN E indicated the CNAs serve the trays and the kitchen staff sets the tray up with meal ticket. The food is served according to the meal ticket. On 9/4/24 at 3:25 PM, Surveyor interviewed CNA G and asked what he can recall with R2's incident on 8/13/24. CNA G indicated he served R2 his supper tray on 8/13/24. CNA G indicated R2 received the correct diet except for the bowl of honeydew. CNA G indicated he can't remember if the dietary aide handed him the bowl of honey dew or if someone had told CNA G to give a bowl of honeydew melon to R2. CNA G put the bowl of honeydew on R2's tray and served it. Surveyor asked CNA G who checks the meal tickets and CNA G indicated CNAs and dietary check the meal ticket with what is on the tray. Surveyor asked CNA G did R2 eat the honeydew and CNA G stated yes, he ate most of his meal. CNA G indicated R2 is now a pureed diet and eats out of doorway where staff can monitor him, and he is closer to the nurses' station. On 9/4/24 at 3:55 PM, Surveyor interviewed CK F (Cook). Surveyor asked what the process is for obtaining resident meal tickets. CK F indicated the kitchen supervisor prints the meal tickets out. The meal tickets go to each neighborhood. CK F indicated he looks at the meal tickets and serves what is on the meal ticket onto the residents' trays. The CNAs then grab the desserts and put them on the trays before serving to the residents. R2 was supposed to get canned fruit but the CNA gave R2 a bowl of honeydew. CK F indicated R2 was not to have honeydew; R2 was to have canned fruit. CK F indicated R2 had a choking spell after supper and 911 was called. Surveyor asked CK F if he had received any training or education on diets or meal tickets and CK F indicated no, not at all. Following this incident, R2's signed Physician Telephone orders dated 8/15/24, state, in part: Diet Clarification: Level 5 minced and moist. Use divided plate. Have resident sit outside room with room tray. Provide Ensure shakes per request from POA (Power of Attorney). Staff cue to slow down. On 9/5/24 at 9:35 AM, Surveyor interviewed DON B (Director of Nursing) and asked if she would expect residents to receive their ordered diet and DON B indicated yes. Surveyor asked what is the CNAs responsibility regarding serving meal trays and meal tickets? DON B indicated CNAs get the residents' order on the meal ticket from the residents. Dietary aides are responsible for serving all the food. The CNAs should verify the items on the tray are what is on the ticket. The CNAs are not responsible for checking the texture of the food. DON B indicated the facility is working on training with CNAs on diet textures and the meal slips. Surveyor asked DON B what interventions were put into place after the incident on 7/27/24. DON B indicated R2's diet changed on 8/1/24 to a general diet - soft and bite sized consistency and no hot dogs. Surveyor asked DON B what interventions were put into place from the incident on 8/13/24 and DON B indicated R2 is to eat meals in the threshold of his room doorway where staff are to supervise R2, and his diet changed to minced and moist. Surveyor then asked DON B if education was provided to staff on supervision and cueing during meals, and DON B indicated education was assigned to a nurse manager that no longer is employed at facility. DON B indicated she would look and see if it was done. Surveyor asked DON B if she would expect education to have been provided and DON B indicated yes. Surveyor asked DON B if any audits have been completed on meals being served and meal tickets. DON B indicated I don't believe so, but multiple observations were done. Surveyor asked if they had been documented and DON B indicated she would have to look into it. Surveyor asked if DON B would expect audits to be completed and documented and DON B indicated yes. Surveyor asked DON B if any competencies with the nursing staff on the Heimlich maneuver had been completed and DON B indicated no, but all nurses are CPR (cardiopulmonary resuscitation) certified. On 9/5/24 at 10:15 AM, Surveyor interviewed NHA A (Nursing Home Administrator) and asked if it is the expectation that residents receive their ordered diets and NHA A indicated yes. Surveyor asked what the responsibilities of the CNAs and dietary aides regarding meal tickets are and serving the correct diets. NHA A indicated the CNAs get the information from the residents on what they would like to order then the meal ticket goes to the server. The dietary aide/server is to ensure it is the correct diet and plate the food on the trays. The CNA verifies the food to the meal ticket. Surveyor asked NHA A what education was provided to the CNAs and dietary staff. NHA A indicated the dietary staff received verbal education and an in-service by the dietician and speech therapist is scheduled for today. NHA A indicated for the CNAs the nurse manager was to write up a sheet and ensure they received it. That nurse manager is no longer employed by the facility. NHA A indicated she has no documentation to verify it was completed. Surveyor asked NHA A if any audits on serving meals and meal tickets had been completed and NHA A indicated the dietary manager does meal observations. NHA A indicated she asked the dietary manager for a log and no documentation was done. NHA A indicated she would expect audits to have been completed and documented. According to http://www.emedicinehealth.com/choking/article_em.htm, Choking is a blockage of the upper airway by food or other objects, which prevents a person from breathing effectively. Choking can cause a simple coughing fit, but complete blockage of the airway may lead to death. Choking is a true medical emergency that requires fast, appropriate action by anyone available. Emergency medical teams may not arrive in time to save a choking person's life.When someone is choking with a completely blocked airway, no oxygen can enter the lungs. The brain is extremely sensitive to this lack of oxygen and begins to die within four to six minutes. It is during this time that first aid must take place. Irreversible brain death occurs in as little as 10 minutes. According to https://www.webmd.com>Lung Disease & Respiratory Health article, Aspiration is when something you swallow goes down the wrong way and enters your airway (trachea or windpipe) or lungs. It can also happen when something goes back into your throat from your stomach. With aspiration, your airway isn't completely blocked, unlike with choking. People who have a hard time swallowing are more likely to aspirate. Up to 15 million Americans have trouble swallowing, called dysphagia. It can be temporary or part of a more serious condition Aspiration Symptoms . Feel something stuck in your throat, cough while or after you eat or drink, have a gurgling or wet sounding voice . The facility's failure to supervise R2 and ensure r2 received a meal consistent with his care plan and dietary restrictions created a finding of immediate jeopardy. The facility removed the jeopardy on 9/6/24 when it had completed the following: -The facility will complete mock drills and competency tests for all licensed nursing staff including how to support a resident with partial obstructed airway, choking, Heimlich etc. prior to their next working shift. -The facility will educate nursing, culinary and activities staff on altered diets/IDDSI. The training will include how to determine foods/fluids safe to consume on prescribed/altered diets. A competency will be completed following education. -The facility will provide instruction to culinary, activities and nursing staff on where to find a resident's diet prior to working next shift. -The facility has created a system where all meal tray cards for residents on an altered diet will be printed in a different orientation format, so it will be easily recognizable to staff to determine the appropriate diet and food/fluids safe to consume per the prescribed diet. -The facility will ensure that a licensed nurse is assigned to each dining room. -The facility will audit all resident diet orders, tray cards, care plan and [NAME] to ensure correct orders and that orders match and include ST recommendations for residents who have been on ST caseload in the last 90 days. -The facility will complete meal audits to ensure receiving proper diet breakfast, lunch, and dinner in 2 dining rooms each meal. -The facility will audit all employee records for licensed nurses to ensure CPR certification. The facility will ensure a licensed nurse is assigned to each dining room during all meals.
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 F0947 (Tag F0947)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on interview and record review, the facility did not ensure 3 of 5 randomly sampled Certified Nursing Assistants (CNAs), who had been employed at the facility for over a year, had documented per...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview and record review, the facility did not ensure 3 of 5 randomly sampled Certified Nursing Assistants (CNAs), who had been employed at the facility for over a year, had documented performance reviews (CNA J, CNA K, and CNA L). CNA J, CNA K, and CNA L's annual performance evaluations were not conducted yearly. This is evidenced by: The facility's policy titled Competency Assessment and Validation, dated 6/12/2024, states, in part: SSM Health (SSM) will ensure all employees are competent to perform their assigned responsibilities and to establish a consistent and effective process to measure staff competence unique to job classifications, duties and responsibilities .II. Competency Process . B. Validation . 2. Competency should be assessed annually. On 9/12/24, Surveyor reviewed the list of CNAs that had worked for the facility longer than one year. The employment list documented: CNA J was hired on 10/12/2015. CNA K was hired on 6/29/2006. CNA L was hired on 10/27/1999. On 9/12/24, Surveyor reviewed the provided CNA yearly performance review documentation that was provided by the facility. This documentation showed: CNA J's last performance review was conducted on 4/18/2022. CNA K's last performance review was conducted on 4/24/2022. CNA L's last performance review was conducted on 2/27/2022. On 9/12/24 at 3:33 PM, Surveyor interviewed the facility's new NHA, NHA M (Nursing Home Administrator), CEO N (Chief Executive Officer), and RD O (Regional Director). NHA M and CEO N indicate that they have three CNA evaluations from 2022, but that the rest were not due yet. RD O indicates that according to facility policy, CNA evaluations only need to be conducted every three years they do not conduct annual performance evaluations. NHA M, CEO N, and RD O, indicate that they have provided the most recent CNA performance evaluations for the employees requested. No other documentation regarding performance evaluations could be provided.
Jun 2024 8 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

Notification of Changes (Tag F0580)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility did not immediately consult with the resident's physician when there was a ne...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility did not immediately consult with the resident's physician when there was a need to alter treatment for 1 of 4 residents (R5) reviewed for physician notification. The facility did not update R5's physician when a medication was not administered as ordered. This is evidenced by: The facility's policy Notification of Change with a revision date of 11/2022, indicates, in part: Policy - The community will consult the resident's physician, nurse practitioner, or physician assistant and notify the resident representative or an interested family member when there is: .Acute illness or a significant change in the resident's physical, mental, or psychosocial status (i.e., deterioration in health, mental, or psychosocial status in either life-threatening conditions or clinical complications). A need to alter treatment significantly (i.e., a need to discontinue or change an existing form of treatment due to adverse consequences or to commence a new form of treatment) .Nursing judgement is an integral part of the skilled care provided in the community; therefore, such judgment must be applied in a case-by-case basis in keeping with acceptable nursing practice. Criteria: .A need to alter treatment significantly means a need to stop a form of treatment because of adverse consequences (e.g., an adverse drug reaction), or commence a new form of treatment to deal with a problem (e.g., the use of any medical procedure or therapy that has not been used on that resident before). Notification: depending on the nursing assessment, appropriate notification may be immediate to 48 hours. The facility's policy Medication Errors with a revision date of 11/2022, indicates, in part: .Procedure - 1. Report all medication errors to the attending physician and the director of nursing or designee . Example 1 R5 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that include, in part: Vitamin B Deficiency, Multiple Sclerosis, and Muscle Weakness. R5 currently has an order, with a start date of 8/2/23, for Vitamin B Complex-C Oral Capsule (B Complex with C), Give 1 capsule by mouth one time a day for Supplement. On 6/26/24, Surveyors reviewed the facility medication error reports provided by the facility. A report was present for R5 with a date of 6/20/24 indicating the person preparing the report was RN F (Registered Nurse) and Incident Location: Medication Error. The report includes, in part: Incident Description: Nursing Description: Resident has not had this medication Vitamin B Complex with C since 6/13/24. Pharmacy notified multiple times. This medication is not available in contingency. Pharmacy was providing it initially, but it suddenly stopped because they said it is over the counter however, facility does not have this in house stock. Immediate Action Taken: Description: ADON (Assistant Director of Nursing) (ADON G) notified x 2 . Agencies/People Notified: No Notifications Found R5's Medication Administration Record (MAR) documentation is coded as 13 for the following dates: 6/14/24, 6/18/24 thru 6/24/24, and 6/26/24 Per the Chart Codes on the MAR, 13=Med Not Available (F/U (follow-up) required). (A total of 9 doses) R5's MAR documentation is coded as 14 for the following dates: 6/11/24, 6/13/24, 6/15/24 thru 6/17/24, 6/25/24, and 6/27/24. Per the Chart Codes on the MAR, 14 = Med not Available (F/U NOT required). (A total of 7 doses) On 6/26/24 at 2:50 PM, Surveyor interviewed RN F regarding R5's Vitamin B Complex-C Oral Capsule. RN F indicated they were getting the medication from their pharmacy and then it stopped because the facility was to provide over-the-counter medications. However, if it is an over-the counter medication that the facility cannot provide, then pharmacy is to provide it. RN F indicated they haven't had the medication since 6/13/24. RN F indicated she completed the medication error paperwork, reported it to her nurse manager and to ADON G (Assistant Director of Nursing). RN F indicated they still do not have the medication and the MAR indicates it is unavailable. On 6/27/24 at 7:05 AM, Surveyor interviewed ADON G and asked what information he had regarding R5 not receiving his Vitamin B Complex-C medication. ADON G indicated he informed DON B (Director of Nursing) the day after RN F reported it. ADON G indicated the pharmacy was contacted and they said they did not have an order for it. DON B received a form saying she needed to approve it, she signed it and sent it to pharmacy, and we still do not have the medication. ADON G indicated he did not inform the physician that the facility did not have the medication and that R5 had not been receiving it and should have. ADON G indicated he would notify the physician today. On 6/27/24 at 10:48 AM, Surveyor interviewed DON B and asked what her expectations would be if a medication is not given because it is not available. DON B indicated she would have expected the physician to be notified and that the medication would have been obtained within 48 hours or that a hold order would have been obtained from the physician.
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

Grievances (Tag F0585)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility did not ensure prompt resolution of all grievances for 1 of 4 reviewed (R8) o...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility did not ensure prompt resolution of all grievances for 1 of 4 reviewed (R8) out of a sample size of 8 residents. R8 said that R8's recent concern was not followed up on. R8 indicated about a week ago an agency CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant) became frustrated with R8 because R8 needs help with setting up her meal. R8 stated the CNA was frustrated and left R8 sitting in bedroom unable to eat her meal. Evidenced by The facility policy, Grievance Process, dated 11/22, states, in part; .It is the policy to support each resident's right to voice grievances and to assure that after receiving a complaint or grievance to seek a resolution and keep the resident appraised of progress. Prompt reporting is encouraged so that constructive action can be taken. It is the goal of the community to resolve grievances as quickly as possible to the satisfaction of the resident and/or person initiating the grievance . R8 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnoses including diabetes, heart failure, age related macular degeneration, muscle weakness, reduced mobility, and depression. R8's most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) with Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 4/24/24, indicates R8 has a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 indicating R8 is cognitively intact. R8's comprehensive care plan states, in part; .EATING- Set up. Use regular plate unless patient requests divided plate .2/15/23 . On 6/27/24 at 9:30 AM, R8 indicated last week she had a run in with an agency CNA. R8 indicated she eats meals in her room and needs help with set up. R8 indicated once staff set her up, she eats independently. R8 indicated last week a CNA refused to set up her meal and the CNA left her in her room unable to eat. R8 stated she told the CNA that she needed something else done before she could eat independently, and the CNA was frustrated and left R8's room without assisting R8. R8 indicated she reported the incident the same evening and told the charge nurse. Surveyor asked R8 how the incident made R8 feel, R8 stated, I feel really sad because I can't take care of myself. They make such a big deal of taking care of me, that's what they are here for. I feel vulnerable. Who is going to come take care of me? If she (the CNA) comes back, what is her attitude going to be? On 6/27/24 at 1:50 PM, RN C (Registered Nurse) indicated he was the charge nurse when R8 voiced concern with her meal. RN C indicated around dinner time on 6/17/24, CNA D reported to RN C that R8 was upset because staff was frustrated and left R8 sitting in her room, and she was unable to eat her meal. RN C indicated he followed up with both CNA's and R8. RN C indicated he made sure that R8's meal was set up and that she was able to eat. RN C stated he did the best he could with the situation and reported it to DON B (Director of Nursing). RN C indicated he sent DON B a text message. On 6/27/24 at 2:00 PM, CNA D indicated she remembers the incident on 6/17/24. CNA D indicated it was during dinner time and she answered R8's call light. R8 was upset because CNA E left her room without setting up her meal completely so R8 was unable to eat. CNA D indicated R8 asked CNA D to get RN C because R8 wanted to report the concern. CNA D indicated she assisted R8 in setting up her meal and that R8 has problems with her hands and arms, so she needs assistance with setting up all of her meals. CNA D indicated she talked to CNA E and CNA E reported that R8 had called her a bitch as she was walking out of the room. CNA D indicated that she told CNA E that she would assist R8 the rest of the night and that CNA E didn't need to go and assist R8 anymore that shift. CNA D indicated she reported the concern to RN C immediately. On 6/27/24 at 2:15 PM, CNA E indicated she brought R8 her dinner on 6/17/24. CNA E indicated she had forgotten to bring a clothing protector in the room. CNA E indicated she was walking out of the room to grab one and R8 called her a bitch. CNA E indicated she did not say anything more to R8. CNA E indicated CNA D then approached her and asked what happened and told her that she (CNA D) would assist R8 the rest of the evening. On 6/27/24 at 3:06 PM, DON B (Director of Nursing) indicated she did receive a text from RN C on 6/17/24. DON B indicated the text said that R8 called CNA E a bitch and that R8 had concerns with the interaction she had with CNA E and meal set up. DON B indicated she did not follow up on the incident and it should have been filed as a grievance.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Report Alleged Abuse (Tag F0609)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that all alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, exploitation, or mistreatment are reported to the administrator and other offi...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that all alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, exploitation, or mistreatment are reported to the administrator and other officials in accordance with State law through established procedures for 1 of 5 residents (R1) reviewed for abuse of a total sample of 8. R1's daughter emailed NHA A (Nursing Home Administrator) a verbal abuse allegation that the facility did not report to the State Agency. This is evidenced by: The Facility's Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Policy and Procedure, dated November 2023, documents in part: .It is also the policy of this community to take appropriate steps to ensure that all alleged violations of federal or state laws which involve mistreatment, neglect, abuse, injuries of unknown source, and misappropriation of resident property (alleged violations) are reported immediately to the administrator of the community .it must be reported to the State agency immediately but no later than two hours after forming the suspicion per State and Federal regulation . Per Facility's Grievance Log the following was documented: Date: 6/5/24- Person filing grievance: R1's daughter- Grievance: CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant) yelling at her mother- Assigned to: NHA- Result: NHA emailed R1's daughter for additional details of the event: Date, Time who and who witnessed event. R1's daughter never responded. Grievance closed due to lack of information from reporter- Resolution date: 6/6/24. On 6/27/24 at 3:44 PM, Surveyor interviewed NHA A. Surveyor asked NHA A to explain grievance dated 6/5/24, NHA A explained she got an email from R1's daughter that a CNA was yelling at my Mom; NHA A went on to state she responded via email and asked when, who, who witnessed, date, time, how do you know, who reported this to you, etc. but she never responded so I closed it. Surveyor asked NHA A if yelling was an allegation of abuse, NHA A stated yes, verbal abuse. Surveyor asked NHA A if this allegation should've been reported, NHA A stated yes.
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

Investigate Abuse (Tag F0610)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to thoroughly investigate accusations of abuse for 2 of 5 residents (R...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to thoroughly investigate accusations of abuse for 2 of 5 residents (R1 and R2) reviewed for abuse. On 6/6/24, the facility became aware of an allegation of neglect involving R2 and a thorough investigation was not completed. R1 did not have a thorough investigation completed for a reported verbal abuse allegation. This is evidenced by: The Facility policy titled Caregiver Misconduct, Patient Abuse, Neglect, Misappropriation of Property, and Harassment, revised 11/17/23, indicates in part: Outcome Statement: To ensure timely and thorough investigations and reporting of all incidents in a healthcare setting where patients are abused, neglected, harassed, or where their property is misappropriated. To ensure compliance with Federal and State laws and regulations .Definitions: .II. Abuse is defined as the willful infliction of injury, unreasonable confinement, intimidation, or punishment, with resulting physical harm, pain, mental anguish, or death. This includes staff neglect or indifference to the infliction of injury or intimidation of one patient by another. III. Neglect: Neglect, for this requirement, is considered a form of abuse and is defined as the failure to provide goods and services necessary to avoid physical harm, mental anguish, mental illness, or death .Process: .VI. Investigation: A. All incidents of possible caregiver abuse should be initiated within one (1) business day of identification and be given high priority by those individuals needed to participate in the investigation. B. The investigation of all incidents of alleged caregiver misconduct/abuse must be completed within seven (7) calendar days of the date that Risk Management first becomes aware of the incident. C. Risk Management and Human Resources will oversee the investigation, which should include: 1. Collect and preserve any physical and documentary evidence; 2. Interview alleged victims, witnesses, and, if deemed appropriate, those alleged to have committed acts of abuse. 3. Collect other corroborating or disproving evidence; 4. Involve other regulatory authorities (e.g. local law enforcement); 5. Document each step taken during the internal investigation .XIV. Training/Information: A. The Facility will provide training and information to all staff (meaning employees, contractors and volunteers) on the content, procedures and requirements outlined in this policy . R2 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that include, in part: Polyosteoarthritis (arthritis in five or more joints at the same time), Hemiplegia and Hemiparesis (weakness/paralysis); Weakness; Muscle Wasting and Atrophy, and Pain in Right Shoulder. On 6/26/24, Surveyors reviewed a facility self-report involving R2. According to the Facility reported incident, the facility was made aware of an allegation of neglect for R2 on 6/6/24 that included, in part: .cares were not performed or checked on during Noc (night) shift on 6/5/24 and .R2 was soaked with urine when AM shift arrived . Surveyors were provided documentation of interviews with R2 and his roommate/spouse R4, the night shift nurse and two night shift CNA's. Surveyors did not note interviews with day shift staff, other residents or information regarding what investigative procedure(s) were completed for non-interviewable residents. Surveyors requested all investigation documentation from the facility. On 6/27/24 at 10:55 AM, Surveyor interviewed DON B (Director of Nursing) regarding the investigation into the allegation of neglect for R2. Surveyor asked DON B if other residents were interviewed to discern if anyone else had concerns with needs being met. DON B indicated she did not personally but would expect this to be done and would check to see if anyone had. Surveyor asked if staff on day shift were interviewed to see if any other residents were noted to be soaked or if staff noted signs concerning for cares not being provided when they came on shift. DON B indicated that day shift staff should have been interviewed. Surveyor asked DON B what was done to investigate for concerns with non-interviewable residents. DON B indicated she would need to check on this but agreed that skin checks would be a reasonable expectation. Surveyor reviewed education that was provided that is dated 6/13/24. Surveyor asked DON B if she knew why there was a delay in the start of staff education. DON B indicated she would need to check on this. Surveyor reviewed the education sign off sheet for CNA H (Certified Nursing Assistant) with DON B. CNA H was one of the night shift CNA's working on 6/5/24 and who was provided a Notice of Corrective Action in regard to this allegation per documentation provided by the facility. CNA H has a date of 6/13/24 on the education sign off sheet and per the schedule was working a night shift on 6/10/24. DON B reached out to the facility scheduler, during the interview, and confirmed that CNA H was called in by a charge nurse for the 6/10/24 shift even though the scheduling program had her assigned as on administrative leave. DON B indicated CNA H should not have been allowed to work until the education was completed. Surveyor asked DON B, given the above information, if a thorough investigation had been completed and DON B indicated it had not. On 6/27/24 at 1:34 PM, Surveyor interviewed NHA A (Nursing Home Administrator) regarding the investigation into the allegation of neglect involving R2. Surveyor reviewed concerns with NHA A that were noted in the above DON B interview. Surveyor also reviewed the education information that was provided by the facility with NHA A. Surveyor confirmed with NHA A that there were staff working that had not received the education and the majority of the education dates were listed as 6/26/24 and 6/27/24. NHA A agreed that staff should not have been working unless they had received the education, the education should have been started right away, and a thorough investigation was not completed. Example 2 Per Facility's Grievance Log the following was documented: Date: 6/5/24- Person filing grievance: R1's daughter- Grievance: CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant) yelling at her mother- Assigned to: NHA (Nursing Home Administrator)- Result: NHA emailed R1's daughter for additional details of the event: Date, Time who and who witnessed event. R1's daughter never responded. Grievance closed due to lack of information from reporter- Resolution date: 6/6/24. On 6/27/24 at 3:44 PM, Surveyor interviewed NHA A. Surveyor asked NHA A to explain grievance dated 6/5/24, NHA A explained she got an email from R1's daughter that a CNA was yelling at my Mom; NHA A went on to state she responded via email and asked when, who, who witnessed, date, time, how do you know, who reported this to you, etc. but she never responded so I closed it. Surveyor asked NHA A if yelling was an allegation of abuse, NHA A stated yes, verbal abuse. Surveyor asked NHA A what was done to investigate this concern, NHA A stated that she asked staff if they heard anyone yelling, R1 was asked if anyone yelled at her. Surveyor asked NHA A if there was documentation of this investigation, NHA A said she would have to look. Surveyor asked NHA A if all allegations of abuse should be investigated, NHA A stated yes. On 6/27/24 at 4:43 PM, Surveyor interviewed NHA A. Upon locating documentation of follow up to grievance log, NHA A stated, I need to update the grievance log, we did do investigation. Surveyor asked NHA A to explain what she had found; NHA A explained 6/3/24 was the first email report of CNA yelling at R1; On 6/4/24 R1's daughter finally gave the name of a staff member; she was agency. The CNA never returned my calls, and she has never returned to the building. Surveyor reviewed documentation of investigation, which included staff interviews and interview with R1. It is important to note that there were no other residents interviewed or any type of follow up for residents' that can't voice their concerns. On 6/27/24 at 5:35 PM, Surveyor interviewed NHA A. Surveyor asked NHA A if other residents should have been interviewed, NHA agreed.
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

Pressure Ulcer Prevention (Tag F0686)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not implement professional standards of practice to promote...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not implement professional standards of practice to promote healing, prevent infection, and prevent pressure injury (PI) development for 1 of 3 residents (R3) reviewed for pressure injury out of a sample of 8 residents. R3 is at risk for PI. The facility did not implement PI interventions to prevent PI development. R3 developed an avoidable PI to her left foot bunion (a bony bump that forms on the joint at the base of the big toe). R3's PI became infected requiring oral antibiotics. Evidenced by: The facility policy, titled Pressure Injury/Skin Integrity with a revision date of 5/24, states in part: It is the policy of this facility to enable nursing staff to manage wounds and select appropriate interventions according to the National Pressure Injury Advisory Panel (NPUAP). Based on the comprehensive assessment of a resident, (facility) will ensure .A resident receives care, consistent with professional standards of practice, to prevent pressure injuries and does not develop pressure injuries unless the individual's clinical condition demonstrates that they were unavoidable; and a resident with pressure injuries receives necessary treatment and services, consistent with professional standards of practice, to promote healing, prevent infection and prevent new ulcers from developing. Routine ongoing documentation should be conducted related to the resident's skin condition and the resident's response to the care and treatment of the skin .potential areas of skin breakdown over boney prominences or skin folds, and areas potentially affected by devices will be identified .the goal for wound care is to prevent or manage the cause .avoid further trauma .Interventions will be implemented to mitigate the risk for skin breakdown, based on individual risk factors .Interventions should be documented in the residents' medical record, including in the residents individualized resident-centered plan of care .Identification of factors that may have influence development of the wound, the potential for development of additional wounds, or for the deterioration of the pressure ulcer(s) should be recognized . Example 1 R3 admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and pressure ulcer of right hip. On 5/22/24 R3's Minimum Data Set (MDS) indicates a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 13, indicating R3 is cognitively intact. On 5/16/24 R3's Braden Scale Screening Tool has a score of 17 indicating R3 is at risk for pressure injury. R3's Physician Orders do not include an order for daily diabetic foot checks. On 5/16/24 R3's care plan states, in part: Focus: Skin integrity: at risk and/or potential for complications with impaired skin integrity including skin tears, bruising and/or pressure .Goal: Will be free of serious complications r/t (Related To) current skin status .Interventions: .follow community skin protocol. On 6/3/24 at 18:29 (6:29PM) R3's Weekly Skin Check Tool states, in part: .bunion is red, blanchable, skin intact . On 6/11/24 at 23:04 (11:04PM) R3's Weekly Skin Check Tool states, in part: .application of dressings to feet . On 6/17/24 at 21:45 (9:45PM) R3's Weekly Skin Check Tool states, in part: .Patient did not want a mail [sic] for skin assessment so assessment was done by Nurse aide. On 6/24/24 at 17:32 (5:32PM) R3's Incident Audit Report states, in part: .bleeding noted to left sock, sock removed, left medial upper foot callous, partially covered with band aid .band aid removed, area washed with soap and water, covered with new bandage. GNP (Geriatric Nurse Practitioner) called .other information tight fitting shoes. On 6/24/24 at 17:52 (5:52PM) R3's progress note states: Resident was leaving for tour of an ALF (Assisted Living Facility), when she reported bleeding to her foot. Sock removed from Left foot and noted an old partial band aid in place. Band aid removed and resident reported some pain to area, area was washed with soap and water, bandage applied. Resident left for her outing. Charge nurse was update, GNP called and VM (Voicemail) left to call back, family member .was called and left VM to call back. On 6/25/24 at 11:15 (11:15AM) R3's progress note states: GNP . notified of superficial open area 1.5 x 0.5 cm to left bunion. Rinse wound, pat dry and apply Mepilex (foam bandage), Change 2x/week (two times a week) until resolves. On 6/26/24 at 09:10 (9:10AM) R3's progress note states: Communication with GNP regarding presentation of left bunion wound; concern for infectious process at site. GNP in house and will assess area. On 6/26/24 at 09:20 (9:20AM) R3's progress note states, in part: wound documentation .status: acquired .Type of wound: Pressure wound. Location .left bunion .Length = 1.5, Width = 1.5, Depth = 0.1 .1 cm diameter of erythema (skin redness) .Order written today for Medi honey (ointment used for wounds) and Mepilex border 3x/wk. (three times a week) .Resident will wear slipper socks (no shoes) until area has healed . On 6/26/24 R3's Physician Orders include Keflex (antibiotic) oral capsule 500 mg. Give 500 mg by mouth three times a day for pressure wound infection for 15 administrations. On 6/27/24, R3's care plan was updated with new intervention of Gripper socks for footwear until pressure injury resolves. On 6/26/24 at 2:44PM, Survey interviewed R3. R3 indicated she had a sore on her bunion and the physician came in and saw her. On 6/27/24 at 5:12AM, Surveyor interviewed RN J (Registered Nurse) regarding PI interventions, RN J indicated an intervention should be put in place immediately for someone at risk for a PI. On 6/27/24 at 9:00AM, Surveyor interviewed RN K. RN K indicated the cause for reddened skin should be identified and interventions put in place to prevent PI. RN K indicated an intervention should have been initiated on 6/3/24 for R3's reddened bunion since R3 was at risk for developing a PI. On 6/27/24 at 8:43 AM, Surveyor interviewed RN M. RN M indicated a bunion is a potential area for PI. RN M indicated on 6/24/24 R3 reported bleeding to her foot. RN M indicated she removed the old band aid, cleansed the foot, and applied a new dressing. RN M indicated she knew the cause of the open area was R3's shoes. RN M indicated she should have put an intervention in place immediately but did not put in an intervention. On 6/27/24 at 11:20 AM, Surveyor interviewed DON B (Director of Nursing). DON B indicated interventions should have been in place to prevent PI including assessing R3's footwear. R3 is a diabetic and at risk for developing PI. On 6/3/24, R3 had a reddened area to her bunion. On 6/11/24 and 6/17/24, it was documented R3 had a dressing applied to her foot. The facility did not complete daily diabetic foot checks. The facility did not assess the cause of the red area and did not assess R3's footwear. The facility did not put interventions in place to prevent a PI from developing. Subsequently, R3 acquired a PI to her left foot bunion that became infected requiring oral antibiotics.
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 F0687 (Tag F0687)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility did not ensure residents (R) received treatment and care in accordance with p...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility did not ensure residents (R) received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice for diabetic foot care for 1 of 3 (R3) residents reviewed for diabetic foot out of a sample of 8 residents. The facility did not provide diabetic foot checks to R3 daily in accordance with the current standards of practice. Evidenced by: Facility policy, titled Foot Care - Diabetic with a revision date of 10/22, states, in part: The community will ensure that residents receive proper treatment and care to maintain mobility and good foot health. For those residents with the diagnosis of diabetes: .2. Provide foot care daily . The current standard of practice per the American Diabetes Association copyright 1995-2024, https://diabetes.org, includes, in part: .1. Check your feet daily for sores, cuts, cracks, blisters, or redness . Example 1 R3 admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that include Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus. R3's Physician Orders for June 2024 does not contain an order for daily diabetic foot checks. On 6/27/24 at 10:19 AM, Surveyor interviewed RN L (Registered Nurse). RN L indicated diabetic foot checks are completed if the order shows up on the TAR (Treatment Administration Record). On 6/27/24 at 10:22 AM, Surveyor interviewed RN M. RN M indicated diabetic foot checks are completed and documented if the order shows up on the TAR. RN M indicated she does not do foot checks because they are usually an evening shift task. Of note, for an order to show up on the TAR, the order must first be placed in the Physician Orders. R3 did not have a physician order for daily diabetic foot checks, therefore the TAR did not indicate to the nurses to complete daily diabetic foot checks for R3. On 6/27/24 at 1:46 PM, Surveyor interviewed DON B (Director of Nursing). DON B indicated diabetic foot checks were completed weekly with the residents' routine skin checks on their shower days. Surveyor and DON B reviewed the facility policy titled Foot Care - Diabetic. DON B indicated she thought it was unrealistic to expect the nurses to complete daily diabetic foot checks and would look for a different policy. DON B was unable to provide surveyor with a different policy.
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

Accident Prevention (Tag F0689)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure adequate supervision and safety to prevent accid...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure adequate supervision and safety to prevent accidents from occurring for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for accidents/supervision (R6). R6 had a fall on 6/27/24 and staff failed to maintain 1:1 supervision that had been implemented for safety concerns. Evidenced by: The facility policy, Accidents/Falls ., with a review date of November 2023, indicates, in part: Policy - The facility strives to promote safety, dignity, and overall quality of life for its residents by providing an environment that is free from any hazards for which the facility has control and by providing appropriate supervision and interventions to prevent avoidable accidents . R6 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that include, in part: Other Frontotemporal neurocognitive disorder, Muscle Weakness, Other Reduced Mobility, and Muscle Weakness. R6's Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], indicates a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) should not be completed as resident is rarely/never understood. R6's Progress Notes include the following, in part: 6/26/24 8:20 PM Type: Nurse Progress Note: Note Text: Resident was admitted to care center following a short term stay in the hospital .Resident is pleasant but confused upon arrival .Resident continues to wander around the unit and into other residents rooms, a 1:1 staff member was assigned for safety concerns . Of note, R6's care plan did not include information about 1:1 supervision. On 6/27/24 at 4:46 AM, Surveyor was interviewing RN I (Registered Nurse) on the 300 neighborhood of the Memory Care Unit at the medication cart. Surveyor was interviewing RN I regarding general staffing and nursing protocols. During the interview RN I indicated there was a resident on the unit that was 1:1 that just returned from an inpatient hospital stay to help with getting medications adjusted due to behaviors. RN I indicated the resident was R6 and that they have had an aide specifically for the 1:1 and that CNA H (Certified Nursing Assistant) was currently with R6. During the interview a noise was heard and Surveyor and RN I looked over and a resident was on the floor in the hallway near the door labeled pantry. RN I immediately went to the resident and began her assessment. RN I indicated the resident was R6. A CNA then came around the corner. RN I indicated it was CNA H and that she was supposed to be 1:1 with R6, she never reported to RN I that she was leaving and should not have left R6. RN I indicated before the CNA leaves they are supposed to tell her so she can make sure and get someone else to come and sit with the resident. On 6/27/24 at approximately 5:15 AM, Surveyor interviewed CNA H. Prior to any questions being asked, CNA H stated to Surveyor that her shift was done at 5:00 AM. Surveyor asked CNA H if she should leave a resident who is 1:1 supervision if no one has come to replace her. CNA H indicated there was another CNA on the unit and she was going to find her and tell her. CNA H indicated if there is no one there to replace her she will go to the phone to call someone or find another worker to let them know she is heading out. Surveyor asked CNA H what it means when you are assigned to be 1:1 with a resident. CNA H indicated it means you should stay with the resident. Surveyor asked CNA H if she should have left R6 alone. CNA H indicated, no. On 6/27/24 at approximately 11:00 AM, Surveyor interviewed DON B (Director of Nursing) and asked if R6 was to be on 1:1 supervision. DON B indicated the 1:1 for R6 was discontinued when she went out to the hospital. DON B indicated that even when R6 was on the 1:1 it was in regard to wandering not falls. Surveyor reviewed the 6/26/24 8:20PM Nursing Progress Note referenced above with DON B. Surveyor asked if staff can make the decision to place a resident on 1:1 supervision in real time if they have concerns for safety. DON B indicated, yes. Surveyor asked DON B if given the information in the note was R6 considered 1:1 supervision. DON B indicated, yes. Surveyor asked DON B, regardless of the reason a resident is placed on 1:1 supervision, should staff leave the resident alone. DON B indicated, no. Surveyor reviewed the observation referenced above with DON B. DON B indicated CNA H should not have left R6.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Pharmacy Services (Tag F0755)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility did not provide pharmaceutical services including procedures that assure the ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility did not provide pharmaceutical services including procedures that assure the accurate acquiring, receiving, dispensing, and administering of all drugs and biological's to meet the needs of each resident for 1 of 4 residents reviewed (R5). R5 had a physician order for Vitamin B Complex-C Oral Capsule (B Complex with C) and the facility did not ensure this medication was available for administration. This is evidenced by: Facility policy titled, Pharmacy Services (General) with a reviewed date of May 2020, includes in part: The community pharmacy provides routine and emergency drugs and biologicals to the residents .The community provides pharmaceutical services (including procedures that assure the accurate acquisition, receipt, dispensing, and administering of all drugs and biologicals) to meet the needs of each resident. The community obtains the services of a licensed pharmacist who: 1. Provides consultation on all aspects of the provisions of pharmacy services in the community . R5 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that include, in part: Vitamin B Deficiency, Multiple Sclerosis, and Muscle Weakness. R5 currently has an order, with a start date of 8/2/23, for Vitamin B Complex-C Oral Capsule (B Complex with C), Give 1 capsule by mouth one time a day for Supplement. R5's Medication Administration Record (MAR) was reviewed and indicates R5 did not receive the ordered Vitamin B Complex-C on 6/11/24 and from 6/13/24 thru 6/27/24. On 6/26/24 at 2:50 PM, Surveyor interviewed RN F (Registered Nurse) regarding R5's Vitamin B Complex-C Oral Capsule. RN F indicated they were getting the medication from their pharmacy and then it stopped because the facility was to provide over-the-counter medications. However, if it is an over-the counter medication that the facility cannot provide, then pharmacy is to provide it. RN F indicated they haven't had the medication since 6/13/24. RN F indicated she reported this to the nurse manager and ADON G. On 6/27/24 at 7:05 AM Surveyor interviewed ADON G (Assistant Director of Nursing) and asked what information he had regarding R5 not receiving his Vitamin B Complex-C medication. ADON G indicated a medication error report was completed. Surveyor reviewed this with ADON G who indicated it was the correct report and dated 6/20/24. ADON G indicated the pharmacy was contacted and they said they did not have an order for it. Surveyor asked ADON G if they had an order for it prior to this. ADON G indicated, they did, and that the new pharmacy has been an adjustment. ADON G indicated DON B (Director of Nursing) received a form to sign for the medication and it was sent off; however, they still do not have the medication. On 6/27/24 at 10:48 AM, Surveyor interviewed DON B and asked what information she had regarding R5 not receiving his Vitamin B Complex-C. DON B indicated she received a sheet from pharmacy and had sent it to them twice and then a third time today. DON B indicated her documentation noted the pharmacy was notified on 6/13, 6/14, and 6/15, and indicated they would send the medication. DON B indicated they should have contacted the pharmacy again when the medication was not received.
May 2024 14 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

Report Alleged Abuse (Tag F0609)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Example 2 R41 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses, in part, pain in right knee, other congenital malformations...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Example 2 R41 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses, in part, pain in right knee, other congenital malformations, and unspecified convulsions. R41's most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] documents a score of 10 on her Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS), which indicates she has a moderate cognitive impairment. On 4/30/24 at 11:20 AM, Surveyors reviewed R41's nurses notes. A note on 4/17/24 at 8:15 AM included the following, in part: .Call placed to provider regarding patch. Patch not present this morning .New orders received and noted. Replace patch this morning .Nurse Manager updated. On 5/1/24 at 11:00 AM, Surveyors interviewed RN K (Registered Nurse) regarding the above nurse's note she authored. RN K indicated she noted R41's patch was not there at the beginning of her shift that morning. RN K contacted the provider and reported it to LPN/IP D (Licensed Practical Nurse/Infection Preventionist) who RN K indicates was the nurse manager on duty. RN K verified the patch referenced in her note was R41's Buprenorphine Transdermal Patch, which is classified as a narcotic pain reliever. On 5/2/24 at 11:46 AM, Surveyors interviewed LPN/IP D regarding R41's missing narcotic patch. LPN/IP D indicated she did not recall RN K reporting this to her. RN K indicated if someone reported this to her, she would follow protocol and let DON B (Director of Nursing) know. On 5/2/24 at 2:03 PM, Surveyors interviewed DON B. DON B indicated she did not recall anyone reporting this to her. DON B indicated if a narcotic patch cannot be found it should be reported up the chain and she should at least be notified. DON B indicated this could be a potential misappropriation and/or diversion and should be reported. On 5/2/24 at approximately 3:40 PM, Surveyors reviewed the above information with NHA A (Nursing Home Administrator) who indicated understanding of the concern with this not being reported. Of note, the facility did not report R41's missing Buprenorphine Transdermal Patch. Of note, during the exit conference the facility indicated they had submitted a report to the state agency regarding this incident. Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that all alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, exploitation, or mistreatment are reported to the administrator and other officials, and that the residents are protected during the facilities investigation for 2 of 3 abuse investigations reviewed (R43 and R41) of a total sample of 27 residents. During R43's investigation, the alleged staff member named in allegation was not suspended per the facility's Abuse Policy and Procedure. On 4/17/24 the facility became aware that R41's narcotic pain patch was unable to be located and this was not reported to the administrator. This is evidenced by: The Facilities Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Policy and Procedure, dated November 2023, documents in part: .It is also the policy of this community to take appropriate steps to ensure that all alleged violations of federal or state laws which involve mistreatment, neglect, abuse, injuries of unknown source, and misappropriation of resident property (alleged violations) are reported immediately to the administrator of the community .it must be reported to the State agency immediately but no later than two hours after forming the suspicion per State and Federal regulation .If the suspected perpetrator is .An employee, family, friend, or visitor, THEN .The Administrator places the employee on immediate investigatory suspension while completing the investigation . Example 1 R43 is a long-term resident of the facility. R43 has the following diagnoses multiple sclerosis, dementia, fibromyalgia, muscle weakness, and dependence on wheelchair. R43's most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] documents a score of 13 on her Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS), which indicates that she is cognitively intact. On 4/30/24 at 3:08 PM, Surveyor interviewed R43. Surveyor asked R43 if she had any concerns with the staff or their treatment of her, R43 said she had no concerns with staff, that she didn't need them much. Surveyor reviewed a Facility Reported Incident (FRI) dated 4/22/24, it documents the following: DON B (Director of Nursing) returned call to the Complainant and was told that the staff were teasing and blaming R43, two staff had entered R43's room and were laughing at R43, a nurse called Complainant to report R43 was refusing to go to bed, refusing cares, and refusing her CPAP (Continuous Positive Airway Pressure- machine that uses mild air pressure to keep breathing airways open while you sleep), but she was on toilet at the time of this, all of this is abuse, she stated. Reported to Police and State Agency. Interviewed R43, other residents, and staff with no concerns voiced. Education provided on abuse to staff. Investigation completed, unsubstantiated. On 5/1/24 at 3:32 PM, Surveyor interviewed DON B (Director of Nursing). Surveyor asked DON B if the CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant) that was named in this investigation had been suspended, DON B replied, I believe so, I'll check with NHA A (Nursing Home Administrator). On 5/1/24 at 4:45 PM, Surveyor interviewed DON B and NHA A. DON B reported to Surveyor that the named CNA was not suspended. DON B went on to explain that the reason she was not suspended was because it appeared as a customer service issue, rather than abuse; NHA A then stated the only reason it was submitted as an allegation of abuse is because the Complainant used the verbiage abuse. DON B went on to explain that when she interviewed the staff, it did not appear as abuse. DON B explained that when she interviewed the accused CNA, she and the staff that accompanied her into room stated that she only smiled, did not laugh, and was then asking DON B if she shouldn't smile. On 5/2/24 at 8:21 AM, Surveyor interviewed LPN F (Licensed Practical Nurse). Surveyor asked LPN F when there is an allegation of abuse, what do you do if there is a staff person named, LPN F stated contact the abuse coordinator or DON immediately. On 5/2/24 at 1:19 PM, Surveyor interviewed NHA A. Surveyor asked NHA A how the facility protected the residents if the named CNA was not removed from work, NHA A stated the CNA was removed from R43's care. Surveyor asked NHA A what the named CNA did during investigation, NHA A said she continued to work that shift, just not with R43. Surveyor asked NHA A how she ensured protection of the residents, NHA A replied when this was brought to my attention, it was not a concern of abuse (shame, laughing) but we had to determine if it was abuse or customer service concern. Surveyor asked NHA A if shaming or laughing at a resident could that be an allegation of abuse, NHA A stated yes it could.
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

Investigate Abuse (Tag F0610)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to investigate a potential misappropriation of a narcotic medication f...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to investigate a potential misappropriation of a narcotic medication for 1 of 2 residents (R41) reviewed for abuse. On 4/17/24 the facility became aware of a potential misappropriation involving R41's narcotic pain patch and this was not reported to the Nursing Home Administrator so that an investigation could be completed. This is evidenced by: The Facility Policy, titled Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation, with a reviewed date of November 2023, indicates, in part: Policy: it is the policy of this community to take appropriate steps to prevent the occurrence of Abuse, Neglect, Misappropriation of resident property .The community investigates each such alleged violation thoroughly .Procedure: .Investigation: a. Any person who knows or has reasonable cause to suspect that a resident has been or is being abused, neglected, or exploited shall immediately report such knowledge or suspicion to the administrator .c. Allegations of abuse, neglect, or exploitation will be thoroughly investigated. The investigation will be initiated upon receipt of the allegation. The administrator, or designee, will complete the investigation process . R41 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses, in part: pain in right knee, other congenital malformations and unspecified convulsions. R41's most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] documents a score of 10 on her Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS), which indicates she has a moderate cognitive impairment. On 4/30/24 at 11:20 AM, Surveyors reviewed R41's nurses notes. A note on 4/17/24 at 8:15 AM included the following, in part: .Call placed to provider regarding patch. Patch not present this morning . On 5/1/24 at 11:00 AM, Surveyors interviewed RN K (Registered Nurse) regarding the above nurse's note she authored. RN K indicated she noted R41's patch was not there at the beginning of her shift that morning. RN K verified the patch referenced in her note was R41's Buprenorphine Transdermal Patch, which is classified as a narcotic. On 5/2/24 at 2:03 PM, Surveyors interviewed DON B (Director of Nursing) and asked if a narcotic pain patch cannot be found if it should be investigated as a potential misappropriation and/or diversion. DON B indicated it should have been investigated and was not. On 5/2/24 at approximately 3:40 PM, Surveyors reviewed the above information with NHA A (Nursing Home Administrator) who indicated understanding of the concern with this not being investigated. Of note, the facility did not complete an investigation into R41's missing Buprenorphine Transdermal Patch. Of note, during the exit conference the facility indicated they had submitted a report to the state agency regarding this incident.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Comprehensive Assessments (Tag F0636)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview, the facility did not ensure comprehensive assessments were completed as required for 1 of ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview, the facility did not ensure comprehensive assessments were completed as required for 1 of 3 closed records reviewed for Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments (R12). R12 passed away on [DATE] and the facility failed to complete a discharge MDS assessment. Evidenced by: Facility policy, entitled MDS (Minimum Data Set) Timing, dated [DATE], includes It is the policy of this community to follow the guidance for the RAI (Resident Assessment Instrument) Manual when determining the timing of MDS assessments. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services' RAI Version 2.0 Manual, includes: Factors Impacting the Skilled Nursing Facility Medicare Assessment Schedule: . Resident expires or transfers .If a resident dies or is discharged . whatever portions of the RAI that have been completed must be maintained in the resident's discharge record . A discharge- return not anticipated is completed when it is determined that the resident is being discharged with no expectations of return . A discharge with return not anticipated can be a formal discharge to home, to another facility, or when a resident dies. R12 admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Alzheimer's disease. R12 was receiving end of life care by the facility and a hospice agency. R12's Nurse Notes, dated [DATE], include Hospice RN (Registered Nurse) . came into the facility and formally pronounced the resident as deceased as well as reached out to the family and funeral home . On [DATE] at 2:00 PM, Surveyor reviewed R12's medical record noting there was no discharge MDS completed upon R12's passing. On [DATE] at 2:29 PM, DON B (Director of Nursing) indicated R12's medical record should have a discharge MDS and does not. DON B indicated the facility contracts with a company who completes the MDS assessments, and she would have to call and ask them to complete it.
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

Assessment Accuracy (Tag F0641)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that the assessments must accurately reflect the resident's ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that the assessments must accurately reflect the resident's status for 1 of 1 (R43) Minimum Data Set reviewed for accuracy of a total sample of 27. R43's MDS dated [DATE] does not have her Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP; machine that uses mild air pressure to keep breathing airways open while you sleep) coded correctly. This is evidenced by: The Facility does not have a Policy and Procedure for MDS accuracy. The Facility follows the Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) manual. Long-Term Care Facility Resident Assessment Instrument 3.0 User's Manual dated 10/23, documents the following, in part: .The RAI process has multiple regulatory requirements. Federal regulations at 42 CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) 483.20 (b)(1)(xviii), (g), and (h) require that (1) the assessment accurately reflects the resident's status . R43's Physician Orders include: - CPAP orders start 6/16/22 R43's MDS dated [DATE] documents the following, in part: .Section O . G1. Non-invasive Mechanical Ventilator CPAP . marked .NO . On 5/2/24 at 3:08 PM, Surveyor interviewed MDSC H (MDS Coordinator). Surveyor asked MDSC H if R43's MDS dated [DATE] has her CPAP coded accurately, MDSC H stated she needed to review R43's orders and administration record; after that, MDSC H stated no it was not coded correctly. Surveyor asked MDSC H what it should be coded as, MDSC H said it should be coded as yes. Surveyor asked MDSC H what needs to occur now for it to be correct, MDSC H stated a modification would need to be done. On 5/2/24 at 3:26 PM, Surveyor interviewed NHA A (Nursing Home Administrator). Surveyor asked NHA A would you expect MDS's to be completed accurately, NHA A stated yes.
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

Quality of Care (Tag F0684)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, staff interviews, and record review, the facility did not ensure treatment and care in accordance with pro...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, staff interviews, and record review, the facility did not ensure treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice for 1 of 1 resident's reviewed for wound out of a total sample of 27 residents (R85). R85 does not have weekly measurements documented for left stump wound. This is evidenced by: Facility policy titled Pressure Ulcer/Skin Integrity with a reviewed date of 4/2022 contains, in part: Policy .A resident receives care, consistent with professional standards of practice . Procedure: 6. Documentation a. Routine ongoing documentation should be conducted related to the resident's skin condition and the resident's response to the care and treatment of the skin. The frequency of documentation shall be determined based on the resident's individual needs in accordance with accepted standards of practice. b. Wound documentation is more detailed than routine skin documentation and shall include information related to the wound based on a clinical assessment. Of note, the facility policy does not indicate defined parameters of the clinical assessment of the wound, i.e., wound measurements, wound bed description, peri-wound assessment, etc. R85 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the following diagnoses, in part: Acquired Absence of Left Leg, Peripheral Vascular Disease, and Multiple Sclerosis. R85's most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] documents a score of 14 on his Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) which indicates he is cognitively intact. Surveyor reviewed Weekly Skin Check Tool documentation for R85's wound to left stump. Documentation from section I. Body Audit . c. Additional information contains, in part: 2/8/24 - .Old scabbing area to left stump came off, open area noted . 2/15/24, 2/22/24, 2/29/24, 3/7/24 all state - .Mepilex (dressing) applied to stump on left leg. Area is open . 3/14/24 - .Mepilex applied to stump on left leg, Area is scabbing . 3/21/24 - .Mepilex on left lower leg stump . 3/28/24, 4/4/24, 4/11/24 - no information regarding stump wound documented in this section. 4/18/24, 4/25/24 - .Open area on left kneecap, treated as ordered . Surveyor reviewed nursing progress notes regarding R85's wound to left stump. Documentation from the progress notes contains, in part: 2/11/24 - Left stump is red and blanchable. There is an area 0.4 x 0.4 at end of stump . 3/20/24 - Open area to left stump 1 x1 x 0.1 cm . 4/17/24 - .Wound measures 0.05 x 0.5 x 0.1 cm . On 5/2/24 at 4:06PM Surveyors interviewed RN E (Registered Nurse). RN E indicated she is the wound nurse and is wound care certified. RN E indicated she does not follow R85 for wounds. RN E indicates there should be weekly wound measurements on any open wound. On 5/2/24 at 2:08PM Surveyors interviewed DON B (Director of Nursing) regarding weekly wound measurements. DON B indicated that yes weekly measurements should be done if there is an open wound. On 5/2/24 at 3:29PM Surveyors interviewed DON B who indicated the area on the left stump first opened on 2/8/24. DON B indicated we do not have weekly measurements and we should. It is important to note from 2/8/24 through 5/2/24 there should have been 12 weekly wound measurements for R85's stump wound, and the facility could only provide 3.
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 F0760 (Tag F0760)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility did not ensure that residents are free of significant medication errors for 1...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility did not ensure that residents are free of significant medication errors for 1 of 1 supplemental resident's (R19) reviewed for medication errors. R19 was not administered two doses of an antipsychotic medication in April as directed by the physician order. This is evidenced by: The facility policy entitled, Medication Administration, dated 1/23, states, in part: . Policy: Medications are administered as prescribed in accordance with manufacturers' specifications, good nursing principles and practices and only by persons legally authorized to do so. Personnel authorized to administer medications do so only after they have familiarized themselves with the medication. Procedures: Medication Preparation: .3. Prior to administration, review and confirm medication orders for each individual resident on the Medication Administration Record . Medication Administration: 1. Medications are administered in accordance with written orders of the prescriber . Documentation: .2. If a dose of regularly scheduled medication is withheld, refused, or given at other than the scheduled time (for example, the resident is not in the nursing care center at scheduled dose time, or a starter dose of antibiotic is needed), the space provided on the front of the MAR for that dosage administration is initiated and circled .If two consecutive doses of a vital medication are withheld or refused, the physician is notified . R19 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that include, in part: Schizophrenia, Major Depressive Disorder, and Insomnia. R19 has a physician order, with a start date of 2/1/23, for Pimozide 5mg by mouth one time a day related to Schizophrenia. Of note, Pimozide is classified as an antipsychotic medication. On 4/30/23, Surveyors reviewed the facility medication error log provided by the facility, R19's Medication Administration Record (MAR), and Nursing Progress Notes. The medication error log contains three columns for Resident Name, Date and Time, and Immediate Action Taken. The entry for R19 indicates a Date and Time of 4/29/24 at 10:04PM and Immediate Action Taken indicates, in part: Nurse Manager and Provider were updated about resident missing medication. R19's MAR for 4/28 and 4/29 contain initials and the code 13. Per the Chart Codes on the MAR, 13=Med Not Available (F/U (follow-up) required). R19's Nursing Progress Notes contain, in part: 4/29/24 9:59PM .Resident did not have her medication Pimozide 5mg tablet two days in a row. Medication re-ordered and call placed to pharmacy today. Medication still not available. Call placed to pharmacy this morning .Nurse Manager updated . and provider updated about resident missing medication. 4/29/24 9:55 PM electronic Medication Administration Record (eMAR) .Note Text: Pimozide Oral Tablet Give 5 mg by mouth one time a day related to Schizophrenia .Medication still not available. Call placed to Pharmacy this morning but medication still unavailable . 4/28/2024 5:27 PM eMAR .Note Text: Pimozide Oral Tablet Give 5 mg by mouth one time a day related to Schizophrenia .medication unavailable. 4/28/2024 5:24PM eMAR .Note Text: Pimozide Oral Tablet Give 5 mg by mouth one time a day related to Schizophrenia .Medication not available on cart and not available in contingency. Pharmacy is closed on Sundays. Med was re-ordered on 4/22 and only a partial dose was delivered on 4/23. medication re-ordered on 4/28. On 5/2/24 at 3:42 PM, Surveyors interviewed RN K (Registered Nurse) regarding the note documented on 4/29/24 at 9:59 PM. RN K indicated she contacted the pharmacy who informed her they could not fill the medication due to an insurance issue and she reported this to the nurse manager. RN K indicated the facility protocol is if the first dose is missed to call the pharmacy. If there is a second missed dose call the pharmacy, the nurse manager, and the provider. On 5/2/24 at 3:57 PM, Surveyors interviewed ADON S (Assistant Director of Nursing) and asked what would be considered a medication error. ADON S indicated anything that is against the physician order including if a medication is not given. On 5/1/24 at 3:03 PM, Surveyors interviewed DON B (Director of Nursing) regarding the two missed doses for R19. DON B indicated if staff do not have a medication, they need for a resident they should check to see if it was delivered or is it in the med room or in the bottom drawer of the cart and just hasn't been put away yet. If not there, look in contingency. If not there, call pharmacy and depending on the time of day if they can get it and give it then that could be it. If it is not going to get here in time, they should be calling the provider for direction. Since the facility has started with the new pharmacy the new policy states to call them day 1 and call the provider day 2, but best practice is to notify the doctor if they can't get the medication the same day.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0804 (Tag F0804)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation and interview, the facility did not ensure that food and drink that is palatable, attractive, and at a safe...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation and interview, the facility did not ensure that food and drink that is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature for 1 of 27 residents observed during dining (R7). R7 was given cold food. Findings include R7 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and has diagnoses that include dementia. Her most recent Minimum Dat Set (MDS), dated [DATE], did not include a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score as she is rarely understood. Additionally, this MDS indicates R7 requires moderate assistance for eating and is able to perform less than half the task herself. On 4/29/24 at 11:42 AM, Surveyor observed R7 sitting at a dining room table, asleep in her wheelchair with a plate of food in front of her. Surveyor continuously observed this plate of food sit in front of R7 until 12:16 PM at which time CNA C (Certified Nursing Assistant) sat next to R7 and began feeding her a portion of the lasagna on her plate. R7's eyes remained closed and only slightly moved her lips to accept the food. At this time, Surveyor asked if staff would gather the temperature of the lasagna on R7's plate. Facility staff agreed and used a clean thermometer and the temperature read 113 degrees fahrenheit. Facility staff then replaced R7's food.
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 F0883 (Tag F0883)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility must develop policies and procedures to ensure that residents and/or the resi...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility must develop policies and procedures to ensure that residents and/or the resident's responsible party receives education regarding the benefits and potential side effects of the immunization prior to offering the immunization and documentation is noted in the medical record on whether the resident received or declined the immunization. This affected 3 of 5 residents (R41, R63, and R102) reviewed for pneumococcal immunizations. R41's medical record contained a consent form titled Pneumococcal Vaccine (Prevnar 20) Consent/Declination without evidence of administration. R63 and R102's medical records did not contain evidence of a declination, consent, or administration of Pneumococcal Vaccinations. This evidenced by: The facility policy titled, Immunization: Pneumococcal with a review date of 4/4/2024 indicates, in part: Policy: All residents are encouraged to obtain all pneumococcal vaccines for which they are eligible unless contraindicated. There is a system to assure that all eligible residents are offered pneumococcal vaccines at the time of admission. 1. After admission immunization history will be obtained, consideration will be given to PCV7 (Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine), PCV13, PCV 15, PPSV23 (Pneumococcal Polysaccharide Vaccine) or other applicable pneumonia vaccines .3. Prior to administering immunizations, the resident or resident's legal representative will receive education regarding the benefits and risks related to the immunization, such as the current Vaccination Information Statement (VIS) from the CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention). https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/hcp/vis/current-vis.html. 4. The medical record will be updated to reflect: a. Immunizations provided. b. Education provided. c. Refusal of immunizations offered. d. Immunizations not provided due to being medically contraindicated. Example 1 R41 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that include, in part: other pulmonary embolism (blood clot that has traveled to the lungs and caused a blockage), Hypoxemia (low oxygen), Personal history of COVID-19. On 5/2/24 at 3:30 PM, Surveyors reviewed the immunization history in R41's electronic medical record as part of the infection control task. R41's immunization documentation indicates a Prevnar 20 Consent was signed without documentation of administration. Surveyors Requested documentation of pneumococcal immunization information from the facility for R41. On 5/2/24 at 4:24 PM, Surveyor interviewed LPN/IP D (Licensed Practical Nurse/Infection Preventionist) regarding the signed Prevnar 20 consent for R41 dated 3/15/24. During this interview LPN/IP D indicated the immunization should have been given as the consent was signed and she could not locate evidence it was administered. Example 2 R63 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that include, in part: Anemia, High Blood Pressure, Arthritis, and Peripheral Vascular Disease. On 5/2/24 at 3:30 PM, Surveyors reviewed the immunization history in R63's electronic medical record as part of the infection control task. No pneumococcal immunization administration dates or consent/declination were noted in the records. Surveyors requested documentation of pneumococcal immunization information from the facility for R63. On 5/2/24 at 4:24 PM Surveyor interviewed LPN/IP D after the facility provided a Wisconsin Immunization Registry (WIR) documents for R63 and R102. The WIR document for R63 does not contain any pneumococcal vaccination dates under the history information. Under Vaccines Recommended by Selected Tracking Schedule, it indicates that the Pneumo-poly vaccination has a recommended and overdue date of 3/15/1997. During this interview LPN/IP D indicated that she was unable to find any information regarding R63's pneumococcal vaccination administration or consent/declination. Example 3 R102 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that include, in part: Pleural Effusion (water on the lungs), Anemia, High Blood Pressure, Anxiety, and Depression. On 5/2/24 at 3:30 PM, Surveyors reviewed the immunization history in R63 and R102's electronic medical record as part of the infection control task. No pneumococcal immunization administration dates or consent/declination were noted in the records. Surveyors requested documentation of pneumococcal immunization information from the facility for R63 and R102. On 5/2/24 at 4:24PM Surveyor interviewed LPN/IP D after the facility provided a WIR (Wisconsin Immunization Registry) documents for R102. The WIR document for R102 contains a Prevnar 13 administration date of 5/5/15. The Vaccines Recommended by Selected Tracking Schedule, indicates that the Pneumo-poly - Pneumococcal 23 vaccination has a recommended date of 5/5/16 and an overdue date of 5/5/20. During this interview LPN/IP D indicated that she had sent out consents to R102's Power of Attorney with a return envelope and did not receive anything back. LPN/IP D indicated she does not recall when this was completed and does not have documentation of this. LPN/IP D indicated she should have followed-up again with the Power of Attorney regarding the pneumococcal vaccinations for R102. The facility did not have complete documentation in R41, R63, and R102's electronic medical records regarding administration, consent and/or declination of pneumococcal vaccines prior to Surveyor's inquiry.
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Deficiency F0645 (Tag F0645)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview, the facility did not complete the Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) Leve...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview, the facility did not complete the Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) Level II when it was realized that a resident would reside in the facility for more than 30 days. This affected 2 of 2 sampled residents reviewed for PASARR out of a total sample of 27 (R89, R41) and 2 supplemental residents (R36, R103). R89, R41, R36, and R103 stayed longer than 30 days in the facility and required a PASARR Level II screen, but the facility failed to complete. Evidenced by: Facility policy, entitled Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR), revised 1/2017, includes: . Complete a PASARR Level I screen on all new admissions . Those residents whose attending physician has certified, before admission to the community that the individual is likely to require less than 30 days of nursing facility services, do not require a PASARR (Level 2 screen) to be completed. Example 1 R41 admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Generalized Anxiety Disorder, unspecified convulsions, symptomatic epilepsy and epileptic syndromes with complex partial seizures, symptoms and signs involving cognitive functions and awareness, and Depression. R41's Physician Orders, dated May 2024, indicate R41 takes the following antipsychotic medication: Risperidone. R41's PASARR level I screen, dated 7/31/23, includes: The resident is suspected of having a serious mental illness. The resident has not displayed any of the following symptoms that may suggest the presence of a major mental illness: suicidal statements, hallucinations, delusions, severe and extraordinary thoughts, or mood disorders. There is a diagnosis or history of intellectual disabilities. There is a diagnosis of . epilepsy . that results in impairment of general intellectual functioning or adaptive behavior similar to that of intellectually disabled persons and requires treatment or services similar to those requires for these persons and was manifested before the person was age [AGE]. Hospital Discharge Exemption/30 days Maximum: Is this person entering the nursing facility from a hospital for the purpose of convalescing from a medical problem for 30 days or less? Yes. It is important to note the facility did not provide evidence of a PASARR level II screen being completed once R41 exceeded the 30-day exemption. Example 2 R89 admitted to the facility on [DATE]. She has diagnoses including Major Depressive Disorder and Anxiety Disorder. R89's Physician Orders, dated May 2024, indicate R89 takes the follow psychotropic medications: Duloxetine. R89's PASARR level I screen, dated 10/27/23, includes: The resident is suspected of having a serious mental illness. Does the person have a serious mental disorder .: Yes . Within the past six months, has this person received psychotropic medications: Yes, Duloxetine . Has the person displayed any of the following symptoms: No . Is there a diagnosis or history of intellectual disabilities: Yes . Hospital Discharge Exemption/30 days Maximum: Is this person entering the nursing facility from a hospital for the purpose of convalescing from a medical problem for 30 days or less? Yes. It is important to note the facility did not provide evidence of a PASARR level II screen being completed after the resident exceeded the 30-day exemption. Example 3 R36 admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the following diagnoses: traumatic shock, metabolic encephalopathy, and Major Depressive Disorder. R36's Physician Orders, dated May 2024, indicate R36 is on the following psychotropic medication: Lexapro. R36's PASARR level I screen, dated 2/8/24, includes the resident is suspected of having a serious mental illness. Does the person have a serious mental disorder . Yes . Within the past six months, has this person received psychotropic medications: Yes. Has the person displayed any of the following symptoms: No . Is there a diagnosis or history of intellectual disabilities: No . Hospital Discharge Exemption/30 days Maximum: Is this person entering the nursing facility from a hospital for the purpose of convalescing from a medical problem for 30 days or less? Yes. It is important to note the facility did not provide evidence of a PASARR level II screen being completed after R36's exceeded the 30-day exemption. Example 4 R103 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including bipolar disorder and anxiety disorder. R103's Physician Orders, dated April 2024, indicated R103 was on the following psychotropic medication: Alprazolam, Divalproex Sodium, Lamotrigine, and Quetiapine. R103's PASARR level I screen, dated 2/23/24, includes Does the person have a major mental disorder: Yes. Has the person displayed symptoms that may suggest the presence of a major mental disorder: Yes. Has the person received psychotropic medications to treat symptoms or behaviors of a major mental disorder: Yes . Hospital Discharge Exemption/30 days Maximum: Is this person entering the nursing facility from a hospital for the purpose of convalescing from a medical problem for 30 days or less? Yes. It is important to note the facility did not provide evidence of a PASARR level II screen being completed after R103 exceeded the 30-day exemption. On 5/1/24 at 3:32 PM, DON B (Director of Nursing) indicated there was a change in who was responsible for completing PASARR assessments so R103's, R36's, R89's, and R41's were missed. On 5/2/24 at 11:05 AM, NHA A (Nursing Home Administrator) stated, We don't have the PASARRs. We are in between social workers. I will do a house-wide audit and complete those. These were not completed and should have been.
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Deficiency F0679 (Tag F0679)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not provide an ongoing program of activities designed to me...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not provide an ongoing program of activities designed to meet the interests and the physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident. This affects 3 of 3 sampled residents (R41, R79, R24) reviewed for activities out of a total sample of 27 and 4 supplemental residents (R42, R53, R22, and R59). R41, R79, R24, R42, R53, R22, and R59 voiced concerns during Resident Council of the facility's activity program. Evidenced by: (It is important to note the facility has two separate resident neighborhoods, one is called long term care and the other is a semi-locked unit called memory care.) The facility policy, entitled Activities, issued February 2021, includes, in part: . Policy: To provide each resident with activities and lifestyle choices that are appropriate, stimulating, and promote the physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of the residents . Procedure: The program provides appropriate activities for each resident, Activities reflect individual differences in age, health status, sensory deficits, lifestyle, ethnic and cultural beliefs, religious beliefs, values, experiences, needs, interests, abilities, and skills that have meaning and purpose for the resident. The resident's interests are considered when the written plan for activities is developed for the upcoming month to include planned activities for all days of the week, including weekends and evenings. Activities are planned to support the residents care plan and are consistent with the program statement and occupancy policies. A written calendar of activities is developed at least monthly . a variety of individualized and group activities as scheduled as an opportunity for stimulation, socialization, the chance to maintain physical endurance and alertness ., as well as the opportunity for outings and activities outside of the community . R79 admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS), with Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 2/2/24, indicates R79's cognition is intact with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 out of 15. R41 admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her most recent MDS, with ARD of 2/6/24, indicates R41's cognition is moderately impaired with a BIMS score of 10 out of 15. R24 admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her most recent MDS, with ARD of 2/1/24, indicated R24's cognition is intact with a BIMS score of 15 out of 15. R42 admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her most recent MDS, with ARD of 3/25/24, indicates R42's cognition is intact with a BIMS score of 14 out of 15. R53 admitted to the facility on [DATE]. His most recent MDS, with ARD of 3/9/24, indicates R53's cognition is moderately impaired with a BIMS score of 10 out of 15. R22 admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her most recent MDS, with ARD of 2/8/24, indicates R22's cognition is intact with a BIMS score of 15 out of 15. R59 admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her most recent MDS, with ARD of 2/20/24, indicates R59's cognition is intact with a BIMS score of 14 out of 15. Resident Council Meeting Minutes, dated 2/19/24, include: R53 wants more activities at all times of the day .(Staff member named) went on to say she is always looking for volunteers to help lead programs during the evenings and weekends but has not found someone as of yet . R42 wants weekend activities . (Staff member named) brought up looking for volunteers to run weekend programming . will explain further that activity team needs to be here during the week for care conferences and other meetings . On 5/2/24 at 10:29 AM, Surveyors conducted a Resident Council Meeting. R41, R79, R42, R24, R53, R22, and R59 voiced concerns with only having facility led activities for about one hour on Saturdays around 10:00 AM and nothing on Sundays. Surveyor asked what residents would like to do for activities on Saturdays and Sundays. R41, R70, R42, R24, R53, R22, and R59 indicated they used to wake up Sunday mornings and attend a church service with their family and this is what they would like to do. R41 indicated she can't wait for the weekends to be over because it is so boring with no activities, and she does not have a lot of company/visitors. The facility Long Term Care (LTC) Upcoming Activities weekly schedules, 1/26/24-5/5/24, include: Saturday activities: 2/3 10:00 AM Guess five letter word, 11:00 AM (Proper Name) on piano 2/10 10:00 AM Give a penny/Take a penny game. 2/17 10:00 AM Pic Wits Board Game 2/24 10:00 AM Dice Game 3/2 10:00 AM Word Ladders 3/9 10:00 AM Large Dice Toss Game 3/17 10:00 AM Feeling Lucky Game 3/23 10:00 AM Ace in the Hole Card Game 3/30 10:00 AM Easter Family Feud Game 4/6 10:00 AM Five Second Game 4/13 10:00 AM Guess the 6-letter word. 4/20 10:00 AM [NAME] Dice Game 4/27 10:00 AM Earth Day Bingo, 11:00 AM Piano Music with (Proper Name) 5/4 10:00 AM Kentucky [NAME] Horse Racing Game and Mock Mint Juleps Sunday activities: 10/31 10:45 AM Easter Sunday Service The facility LTC monthly calendar, includes in part: February Saturdays: 2/3 10:00 AM Guess the Five Letter Word, 11:00 AM (Proper Name) on Piano 2/10 10:00 AM Give a penny/Take a penny game. 2/17 10:00 AM Pic Wits Board Game 2/24 10:00 AM Dice Game Sundays: None listed. March Saturdays: 3/2 10:00 AM Word Ladders 3/9 10:00 AM Large Dice Toss 3/16 10:00 AM Feeling Lucky St. Patrick's Day Game 3/23 10:00 AM Ace in the Hole Game 3/30 10:00 AM Easter Family Feud Game Sundays: 3/31 10:45 AM Easter Sunday Service April Saturdays: 4/6 10:00 AM Five Second Rule Game 4/13 10:00 AM Guess the 6-letter word. 4/20 10:00 AM [NAME] Dice Game 4/27 10:00 AM Earth Day Bingo, 11:00 AM Piano with (Proper Name) Sundays: None listed. May Saturdays: 5/4 10:00 AM Kentucky [NAME] Horse Racing Game and Mock Mint Juleps 5/11 10:00 AM Word Bingo 5/18 10:00 AM Blank Slate Board Game 5/25 Memorial Day Themed Games Sundays: None listed. On 5/2/24 at 3:11 PM, during an interview AA L (Activity Aide) indicated she is a full-time employee in the activity department. AA L indicated there is one group activity planned on Saturdays at 10:00 AM and once a month there is a piano player here at 11:00 AM on Saturdays. AA L indicated she chooses activities for the residents based on what has worked in the past, what season we are in, and requests coming from Resident Council. AA L indicated she also tries to introduce new activities to the residents when she comes up with them. AA L indicated there are no other activities on the weekends and no activities on the evenings pass 4:30 PM usually. On 5/2/24 at 3:29 PM, AD M (Activity Director) indicated there is no one scheduled to run activities on the LTC side of the home in the evenings. AD M indicated on the weekends there are no activities on Sundays and there is one activity scheduled on Saturdays at 10:00 AM and then once a month there is piano music at 11:00 AM on Saturdays. AD M indicated she has heard residents voice concerns related to having little to no activities on the weekends and not having evening activities. AD M indicated she is looking for a volunteer to do more activities on the weekends and she does not know how she can schedule her staff to work weekends as this would cause them to miss a day during the week. AD M indicated the facility has a Pastoral Team, but they do not work on Sundays as of now. On 5/2/24 at 4:02 PM, during an interview NHA A (Nursing Home Administrator) indicated she was aware LTC residents have voiced concerns regarding no evening and little to no weekend activities during Resident Council Meetings. NHA A indicated activity staff should be offering activities for LTC residents in the evenings and on the weekends if this is what they are asking for. NHA A indicated the pastoral team could have church on Sundays or they could play it on a TV in the chapel for residents to gather. On 5/2/24 at 4:15 PM, AA N indicated she is a full-time employee on the Memory Care Unit. AA N indicated LTC residents do not participate in activities on the Memory Care Unit, and they have their own calendar of activities that are available to them. AA N indicated there is one scheduled group activity on Saturdays at 10:00 AM and sometimes there is a piano program that follows. AA N indicated there are no scheduled activities on the evenings or on Sundays for LTC residents.
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Deficiency F0761 (Tag F0761)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility were stored and labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional pr...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility were stored and labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional practices and include the expiration date when applicable in 1 of 2 medication rooms and 4 of 7 medication carts reviewed for compliance. Surveyor observed the following: --undated, open stock medication in medication room. --medications that should be refrigerated were in the medication carts and not refrigerated. --undated, open eye drops in a medication cart. --different medication administration routes co-mingled in the same bag. --unlabeled medications in medication carts. --expired medications in medication carts. --medications with illegible expiration dates in medication cart. This is evidenced by: Surveyor reviewed the facility Medication Storage policy with a reviewed date of 1/24. Policy, in part, Medications and biologicals are store properly, following manufacturer's or provider pharmacy recommendations, to keep their integrity and to support safe, effective drug administration . Procedures, in part,4. Medications should be stored so that various routes of administration are separated .6. Eye medications are stored separately from ear medications and inhalers, etc. Steroidal Ophthalmic suspensions must be stored upright. 7. Medications for oral inhalation are stored in the dispensed containers following manufacturer guidelines for positioning and priming. 8. Medications for nasal inhalation are stored in the dispensed containers following manufacturer guidelines for positioning and priming .a. Calcitonin bottles should be stored in the upright position in the medication cart .11. Medications requiring refrigeration or temperatures between 2? (36?) and 8? (46?) are kept in a refrigerator with a thermometer to allow temperature monitoring. Medications requiring storage in a cool place may be refrigerated unless otherwise directed on the label as cool temperature are those between 8? (46?) and 15? (59?) . 12. Insulin products should be stored in the refrigerator until open. Note the date on the label for insulin vials and pens when first used. The open insulin vial may be stored in refrigerator or at room temperature. Open insulin pens should be stored at room temperature. Do not freeze insulin. If insulin has been frozen, do not use. (Refer to section 9.10 - Medications with Shortened Expiration Dates) Example 1 On 5/1/24 at 2:13 PM, Surveyor observed medication room on the 400 unit with RN P (Registered Nurse). Surveyor observed an open vial of Tuberculin purified protein with no date open documented. Surveyor interviewed RN P. RN P indicated the vial should have a date when it is open and if it is not dated it should be discarded. RN P was unable to state how long the vial has been open. Surveyor interviewed DON B who indicated the vial should be labeled with a date when open and discarded after 30 days. Manufacturer recommendation states a vial of Tuberculin purified protein which has been entered and in use for 30 days should be discarded. Example 2 On 5/1/24 at 2:25 PM, Surveyor observed the 600-wing medication cart with RN Q. Surveyor observed a bottle of Florajen in the medication cart. The Florajen bottle has no open date and no date indicating when the bottle was removed from the refrigerator. RN Q indicated they thought the medication was good for 25 to 30 days after being removed from the refrigerator and thought the bottle had been open about 10 days. Manufacturer recommendation for Florajen states Florajen should be refrigerated for maximum freshness and potency, and it can be stored at room temperature for up to two weeks and still maintain effectiveness. Surveyor interviewed DON B who indicated she would expect a date on the bottle when the medication was removed from the refrigerator. Example 3 On 5/1/24 at 2:39 PM, Surveyor observed the 500-wing medication cart with RN R. Surveyor observed R45's bottle of gericare (artificial tears) with the instructions to instill 1 drop in both eyes daily in a bag. The bottle was not labeled with a date open. The bottle was dispensed on 3/8/24. RN R indicated the medication should be disposed of after 30 days. Surveyor observed R45's bottle of Azelastine hcl (nasal spray) dated with an open date of 3/25/24. There was no resident label or instructions on the bottle of medication for usage. R45's eye drop bottle and nasal spray bottler were in the same bag. RN R indicated without a label she would not know who the nasal spray belonged to. RN R also indicated that nasal spray and eye drops should not be stored together in the same bag. Example 4 Surveyor observed R101's Latanoprost 0.005% (eye drops for glaucoma) bottle with instructions to instill 1 drop in left eye daily was not labeled with a date open. The medication was dispensed on 2/7/24. RN R indicated the medication should have been discarded on 3/5/24. Manufacturer recommendation states once a bottle is opened for use, it may be stored at room temperature .for 6 weeks. The discard date should have been 3/20/24. Example 5 Surveyor observed R8's Fluticasone nasal spray with instructions to use 2 sprays in each nostril once a day for 1 week then as needed. The expiration date on the bottle was not legible. The label was worn off. RN R indicated she was not able to read the expiration date and therefore would not be able to say when it expired. Example 6 Surveyor observed R5's Advair diskus 250/50 (fluticasone propionate and salmeterol inhalation powder, inhaler) without a label. It was not labeled with a resident name and did not contain directions or instructions of use. There was no open date and no dispense date on the diskus. RN R indicated without a label or open date on the diskus she would not know who the medication belonged to or when it would expire. Manufacturer recommendation states to discard the diskus 1 month after removing from foil. Example 7 Surveyor observed an open foil package of Ipratropium bromide 0.5mg and albuterol sulfate 3mg vials (liquid medication used in a breathing machine for inhalation). There were 5 vials left. The vials were not contained in the original package to know when they were dispensed. There was no label indicating who the medication belonged to. There was no open date. Manufacturer recommendations indicate the vials should remain stored in the protective foil at all times to protect the medication from light and once removed from the foil package, the individual vials should be used within one week. RN R indicated she thought she had opened the package sometime last week but could not say for certain what day. Example 8 Surveyor observed R19's Promethegan 25mg suppository with instructions to insert 1 suppository rectally every 6 hours as needed for nausea. The label said refrigerate and the medication was in the cart. RN R indicated the medication should be in the refrigerator and was unable to say if the medication was still effective after being stored in the cart. Example 9 On 5/2/24 at 8:59 AM, Surveyor observed the 300-wing medication cart with RN T. Surveyor observed R82's tube of nighttime lubricant ointment with instructions to apply ointment in both eyes twice daily for ectropion (a condition which the eyelid turns outward leaving the inner eyelid exposed and prone to irritation). The ointment had a dispense date of 3/21/24. There was no open date on the bag or tube. RN T indicated she did not know if the medication had been open for greater than 30 days. Manufacturer recommendations states to discard after 30 days of being opened. Example 10 Surveyor observed R52's tube of genteal eye gel in a bag. There was no label and no open date. RN T indicated it was a stock medication that the nurse puts in a bag and writes the room number and resident initials on. RN T indicated there is not an open date and there should be. Example 11 Surveyor observed R34's bottle of Latanoprost 0.005% eye drops with instructions to instill 1 drop in left eye daily for secondary glaucoma (a condition of the eye). The bottle had no open date. The dispensed date was 2/7/24. RN T indicated she did not know when the bottle was open. Manufacturer recommendation states once a bottle is opened for use, it may be stored at room temperature .for 6 weeks. The discard date should have been 3/20/24. Surveyor observed R34's bottle of Dorzolamide hcl & Timolol Maleate opth (eye) soln (solution) 22.3mg/6.8mg. There was no label on the bottle, no resident name, and no open date. RN T indicated the medication bottle should have a label, it should contain the residents name and it should have an open date. Example 12 Surveyor observed R51's Fluticasone nasal spray in the same bag that contained eye drops. RN T indicated the medications should be kept in separate bags. Example 13 On 5/2/24 at 9:48 AM, Surveyor observed the 200-wing medication cart with RN P. Surveyor observed R81's had 2 Lantus insulin vials in the medication cart. One vial had an open date of 3/24/24 with instructions to inject 65 Units at bedtime. The second vial had no label and no open date. RN P indicated without a label he is unable to say who the medication belongs to and with no open date unable to determine if the medication is still effective. Manufacturer recommendation states the product expires 28 days after first use or removal from refrigerator, whichever comes first. On 5/2/24 at 1:10 PM, Surveyor interviewed DON B regarding the observations made in the medication room and on the medication carts. DON B indicated the eye drops should be discarded after 28 days, all medications should be labeled with a date open, nasal sprays should not be co-mingled with eye drops, medications should have labels on them, labels should have a readable expiration date on them, and if a medication has a refrigerate label then it should be stored in the refrigerator.
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

Antibiotic Stewardship (Tag F0881)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Example 4 R80 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that include Quadriplegia (the paralysis of both arms and legs due to variou...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Example 4 R80 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that include Quadriplegia (the paralysis of both arms and legs due to various conditions), neuromuscular dysfunction of bladder (condition that affects bladder function due to nervous system injury or disease), retention of urine, calculus of kidney, long term use of antibiotics, personal history of urinary tract infections. On 4/30/24 at 11:02 AM, Surveyor noted the following Physician's Order: Penicillin V give 500 mg (milligrams) by mouth two times a day for streptococcal skin/soft tissue suppression. Take in morning and bedtime. It is important to note that the start date on the order is listed as 11/29/23, date of R80's admission to the facility, and there is no duration listed for the medication and the medication was currently being administered. Surveyor asked the facility for additional information at this time. On 5/1/24 at 10:13 AM, a fax from R80's Physician states in part: .I inherited this patient with these antibiotics already being prescribed .He can stop the penicillin . On 5/2/24 at 9:45 AM, Surveyor interviewed RN E (Registered Nurse) about antibiotic stewardship. Surveyor asked what the protocol is when a resident is admitted to the facility on an antibiotic. RN E stated that the medication is reviewed and clarified, as necessary. RN E stated that in regard to R80, there was documentation in the hospital discharge that stated the reason for the antibiotic and there was no need for further clarification. (Of note: RN E did not provide the documentation from R80's hospital stay.) R80 has been receiving this medication since November 2023 to current. On 5/2/24 at 10:58 AM, Surveyor interviewed LPN/IP D (Licensed Practical Nurse/Infection Preventionist) regarding antibiotic stewardship. IP D stated that upon admission to the facility, medications are reviewed for complete orders. IP D stated that the hospital records are reviewed to determine why they are on an antibiotic, how long the resident will be on the medication, and to determine if they met McGeer's Criteria (guidelines for identifying infection). Surveyor asked if there was a duration listed for the antibiotic ordered for R80. LPN/IP D stated no. Surveyor asked if LPN/IP D would expect staff to clarify the duration of an ordered antibiotic. LPN/IP D stated yes, LPN/IP D would expect that staff would reach out to the physician for clarification. On 5/2/24 at 11:35 AM, Surveyor interviewed DON B (Director of Nursing) regarding antibiotic stewardship. DON B stated that she would expect nurses to follow up with the physician on admission orders and clarify duration of medications. Surveyor requested additional documentation from R80's admission regarding reason for continued antibiotic use and/or clarification of duration. On 5/2/24 at 1:44 PM, Surveyor spoke with NHA A (Nursing Home Administrator). NHA A stated that there is no additional information regarding R80's antibiotic order at time of admission. NHA A stated there was no clarification completed. Based on interview and record review, the facility did not ensure they followed their antibiotic stewardship program that includes antibiotic use protocols and a system to monitor antibiotic use for 3 of 5 (R24, R80, and R83) of 27 sampled residents and 1 of 1 (R70) supplemental resident's reviewed for antibiotic stewardship. R24 continued an antibiotic for 3 days without an appropriate indication. R70 was ordered and took an antibiotic without an appropriate indication. R83 was given an antibiotic before test results were returned and continued to take it after results despite lack of appropriate indications for its use. R80 received a prophylactic antibiotic from November until May without a rationale to why it was being given and no end date indicated. This is evidenced by: The facility policy titled Infection Prevention and Control Program (General), with a review date of 2/2024, includes, in part: Policy: The community will maintain an organized, effective community-wide program designed to systematically identify and reduce the risk of acquiring and transmitting infections among residents, visitors, and team members .Antibiotic Stewardship Program. The antibiotic stewardship program includes protocols to monitor antibiotic use and resistance including Optimizing the treatment of infections by ensuring that residents who require an antibiotic, are prescribed the appropriate antibiotic. Reducing the risk of adverse events, including the development of antibiotic-resistant organisms from unnecessary or inappropriate antibiotic use, and Implementing [sic] a facility-wide system to monitor the use of antibiotics. Example 1 R24 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE] from the hospital. Hospital documentation indicates the following: --1/23/24 at 6:02AM R24 had a urinalysis completed. Urinalysis culture results indicated >10,000 CFU/ml Escherichia coli and >10,000 CFU/ml aerococcus urinae. At that time, R24 was started on ceftriazone (antibiotic) for UTI (Urinary Tract Infection). --1/26/24 discharge summary indicates Leukocytosis: etiology unclear, afebrile, [sic] Due to above resolved. --Hospital discharge orders dated 1/26/24 indicate to start taking cefprozil (antibiotic) 500 mg 1 tab by mouth 2 times daily for 3 days. Surveyors reviewed the facility Monthly Infection Control Log (Line List) for January 2024. R24 was listed on the log for UTI. The log indicated R24 was taking cefprozil and date resolved was 1/29/24. The column Infection Definition Met? is marked N indicating infection definition was not met. On 5/2/24 at 11:51 AM, Surveyors interviewed LPN/IP D (Licensed Practical Nurse/Infection Preventionist) regarding the above information related to R24's prescribed antibiotic on hospital discharge. LPN/IP D indicated when a resident comes from the hospital, she uses McGeer criteria to ensure they meet the infection definition. She gathers the hospital documentation, labs, including culture and sensitivity and enters the resident on the line list. If they do not meet, she contacts the provider to discuss and asks the provider to provide rationale in a note. LPN/IP D stated she does not always document her discussions with the provider. LPN/IP D indicated R24 did not meet McGeer's criteria for a UTI and she did not contact the provider regarding this and should have. Example 2 R70 was admitted to facility on 1/21/19. On 4/18/24, R70 had a urine culture completed with results indicating 10,000-50,000 CFU/ml Mixed normal urogenital flora. On 4/19/24 R70's provider ordered Augmentin (antibiotic) 500 mg PO (by mouth) BID (twice a day) UTI (Urinary Tract Infection) x (for) 7 days. R70's medication administration record indicates he received Augmentin for 7 days for UTI between 4/19/24 through 4/26/24. Surveyors reviewed the facility Monthly Infection Control Log (Line List) for April 2024. R70 was listed on the log for UTI. The log indicated R70 was taking Augmentin and date resolved was 4/26/24. The column Infection Definition Met? is marked N indicating infection definition was not met. On 5/2/24 at 2:20 PM, Surveyors interviewed LPN/IP D regarding R70. LPN/IP D indicated R70 did not meet infection criteria and she requested the physician add the rationale for starting an antibiotic when R70 did not meet criteria to the physician note. LPN/IP D stated she does not always document her discussions with the provider. On 5/2/24 at 2:42 PM, LPN/IP D provided the physician note from 4/19/24. Surveyor reviewed note with LPN/IP D and the physician note does not include documentation of a discussion with LPN/IP D regarding R70 not meeting criteria, nor does it provide an indication for continuing the antibiotic based on current standards of practice. Example 3 R83 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. On 2/14/24, R83's Nurse Practitioner (NP) ordered a urinalysis due to dysuria with urination. Records indicate the urinalysis was collected on 2/14/24 at 7:50 PM. A nursing home visit note, dated 2/15/24, states, .Ampicillin 500 QID started--culture still pending . Results returned on 2/16/24 at 10:14 AM that stated, >=100,000 CFU/mL mixed gram-positive flora. No further workup performed .suggest recollection if clinically indicated. R83's NP again visited him on 2/19/24 with the NP noting, Patient treated for UTI due to gross hematuria and positive UTI, culture showed mixed morphology. Plan to stop treatment--he will have had a 5 day plus one tablet coarse. Continue to monitor. Facility Medication Administration Record (MAR) for R83 indicates the Ampicillin order was 4 times per day for 10 days, starting 2/15/24. R83 took this antibiotic three times on 2/15/24, four times on 2/16/24--2/19/24, and once on 2/20/24. On 5/2/24 at 9:45 AM, Surveyor interviewed DON B (Director of Nursing) who stated that due to the mixed flora of R83's culture, the lab does not run a sensitivity. DON B stated that typically if there is an indication that symptoms are continuing, provider may plan to keep resident on antibiotic and that R83's NP regularly orders antibiotics for residents before sensitivity reports come back. Additionally, DON B stated that residents should never be put on an antibiotic until the sensitivity results come back. DON B stated that the NP was educated on facility expectations for antibiotic stewardship on 4/2/24; however, DON B stated that she did not receive any notice from nursing staff regarding R83's use of the antibiotic without the appropriate sensitivity and did not know why R83 had received the Ampicillin on 2/20/24.
CONCERN (F) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Infection Control (Tag F0880)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Example 5 On 5/2/24 at 8:31 AM, Surveyor observed CNA G (Certified Nursing Assistant) assisting R80 with catheter care. During t...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Example 5 On 5/2/24 at 8:31 AM, Surveyor observed CNA G (Certified Nursing Assistant) assisting R80 with catheter care. During this observation, CNA G went into R80's bathroom and gathered a urinal and alcohol wipes to be used for emptying the catheter drainage bag. CNA G walked towards R80's bed, then sat the urinal down on R80's bedside table, next to his drinking water glass. CNA G then went back to the bathroom to gather additional supplies. CNA G returned to bedside, took the urinal from the bedside table, and proceeded to empty the catheter bag. Surveyor interviewed CNA G regarding cross contamination. CNA G stated that she should not have placed the urinal on the bedside table. CNA G stated that she should have wiped down the table with disinfectant after setting the urinal on the table. On 5/2/24 at 8:59 AM, Surveyor interviewed LPN F (Licensed Practical Nurse). Surveyor asked if a urinal should be placed on a resident's bedside table. LPN F stated absolutely not. LPN F stated that the table should be disinfected due to the risk of cross contamination and there should be education for the staff. On 5/2/24 at 9:42 AM, Surveyor interviewed LPN/IP D (Licensed Practical Nurse/Infection Preventionist). Surveyor asked if a urinal should be placed on a resident's bedside table. LPN/IP D stated, no, that causes cross contamination, especially next to the water glass. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility has not established 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. This has the potential to affect all 106 residents (R) in the facility. The facility did not ensure daily infection control surveillance for staff. The facility's infection control line lists for staff and residents are incomplete. The facility's monthly infection control rates were not calculated according to current standards of practice. The facility's March 2024 COVID outbreak summary was incomplete and inaccurate. CNA G did not disinfect R80's bedside table after placing a urinal on it without a barrier in place. This is evidenced by: The facility policy titled, Infection Prevention and Control Program (General), with a reviewed/revised date of 2/2024, includes, in part: Policy: The community will maintain an organized, effective community-wide program designed to systematically identify and reduce the risk of acquiring and transmitting infections among residents, visitors, and team members. This program involves the collaboration of many programs and services within the community and is designed to meet the intent of regulatory and accrediting agencies . Surveillance for facility-Associated infections: Facility wide surveillance will be performed to identify opportunities to prevent and/or reduce the rate of infection in our residents, employees, and visitors. Our surveillance system includes use of a data collection tool and standardized definition of infection (McGeer and/or NHSN) for long-term care facilities. Data will be: Collected by concurrent and/or retrospective chart review, review of microbiological reports, reports from resident care providers and review of other documents, as appropriate. Collected by review of employee health logs. Trended internally for historical comparison . Surveillance priorities: 1. Symptomatic Urinary Tract Infections: .2. Respiratory Tract Infections .3.Eye, Ear, Nose and Mouth Infections. 4. Skin infection. 5. Gastrointestinal tract infection .Rates are calculated using the number of infections as the numerator and resident days as the denominator and reported per 1000 resident days . Outbreak investigation: An outbreak investigation may be required when there is a cluster of infections above expected levels (endemic vs epidemic) or when an unusual or an epidemiologically significant pathogen is identified or as defined by the State Public Health Department. The medical director, in collaboration with administration, and the IP will: Facilitate the outbreak investigation and will report activities to the administration and others as appropriate. Document follow-up activity in response to important surveillance findings (e.g., outbreaks). Notify the local county health department and adhere to their recommendations . Employee/Resident Health: .Policies and procedures include: Screening all staff for exposure and/or immunity to communicable disease .Educated on work restrictions due to illness. In the event a resident is exposed to a communicable disease they will be provided with or referred for assessment, testing, immunization, prophylaxis/treatment, or counseling. A log of all incidents of infection and communicable disease of all staff (resident care, nonresident care, employees, and volunteers) will be maintained . The facility policy titled, Infection Prevention and Control - Addendum COVID 19 General Policy, with a review date of 4/5/24, included, in part: .Employee Management of Suspected or Confirmed COVID 19 infection. 1. Employees should not report to work AND should immediately notify the Director of Nursing and Community Infection Preventionist if any of these criteria are met: a. A positive viral test for SARS-CoV-2 (COVID 19). b. Symptoms of COVID 19. c. A high-risk exposure of COVID 19 .3. Employees with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 infection may return to work per the most up to date guidance from Center for Disease Control for Healthcare workers . .Outbreak Management. When performing an outbreak response to a known case, communities should always defer to the recommendations of the jurisdiction's public health authority. A single new case of SARS-CoV-2 infection in any HCP (health care professional) or resident should be evaluated to determine if others in the community could have been exposed .Testing is recommended immediately (but not earlier than 24 hours after the exposure) and, if negative, again 48 hours after the first negative test and, if negative, again 48 hours after the second negative test. This will typically be at day 1 (where day of exposure is day 0), day 3, and day 5 . Example 1 On 5/02/24 at 8:25 AM, Surveyors completed the infection control interview with LPN/IP D (Licensed Practical Nurse/Infection Preventionist) and RN I (Regional Nurse) with RNC J (Regional Nurse Consultant) via telephone. LPN/IP D indicated the facility does not have documentation of daily surveillance for staff and she was unsure when this was last completed. LPN/IP D provided Surveyors with a staff call in log, however it does not always indicate symptomology. Surveyors reviewed staff call in logs for February 2024, March 2024, April 2024 provided by the facility. The logs contain four columns: Name, Occurrence Date, Shift, Comments. February log: 4 occurrence dates that indicate sick under the comments section. 1 occurrence date that is either blank or indicates no reason listed. March log: 12 occurrence dates that indicate sick under the comments section. 23 occurrence date that is either blank or indicates no reason listed. April log: 6 occurrence dates that indicate sick under the comments section. 17 occurrence date that is either blank or indicates no reason listed. LPN/IP D indicated if staff are symptomatic, they inform their supervisor, the supervisor then contacts her. If it's a weekend LPN/IP D follows up with the staff on Monday. LPN/IP D indicated she does not have documentation of phone calls or follow up with staff. Of note, without daily surveillance of staff, the facility would not be able to ensure correct exclusionary criteria, return to work dates, and prevent, identify, report, investigate and control infections and communicable diseases. Example 2 Surveyors reviewed infection control line lists for January 2024 through April 2024 provided by the facility. On 4/30/24 at 1:10 PM, Surveyors were approached by RNC J (Regional Nurse Consultant) who indicated the following the facility identified in January 2024 that line lists for Residents and staff were not being completed except for COVID. Rates were not correct. Only Urinary Tract Infections (UTIs) and Catheter Associated Urinary Tract Infections (CAUTIs) were being reported in Quality Assurance Process Improvement (QAPI). RNC J stated the facility reviewed documentation to recreate line lists back to October 2023 as part of a QAPI initiative. The facility is unable to determine the last time line lists were being completed in real time prior to this being identified in January 2024. Review of line lists include the following: Resident LTC (Long Term Care) Respiratory Surveillance Line List with a date of 12/13/23 (Handwritten note at top of page indicates COVID Line List [DATE]-[DATE]) indicates the following: --R85 --Symptom onset date of 1/9/24. --Type of specimen collected NP (nasopharyngeal) swab. --Type of test ordered is blank. --Pathogen detected is blank. --Symptom resolution is blank. --Hospitalization is blank. Facility provided test results for R85 that indicate he was tested for COVID, influenza A, influenza B and RSV (Respiratory Syncytial Virus) on 1/9/24 and R85 was positive for RSV and negative for the other tests. On 5/2/24 at 8:25 AM, Surveyors reviewed R85's 1/9/24 lab result indicating RSV positive and COVID negative and the entry for R85 on the COVID Line List with LPN/IP D. LPN/IP D indicated R85 should not have been on the COVID Line List. Of note, due to this discrepancy, it is unclear if there are other types of respiratory infections on the COVID line list as the facility indicated to Surveyors, they were only supposed to contain COVID positive cases. Staff LTC (Long Term Care) Respiratory Surveillance Line List with a date of 12/13/23 (Handwritten note at top of page indicates Staff Dec-Feb) indicates the following: January dates: --Contains 4 staff member. --4 of 4 staff do not have date last worked recorded and there is no place to record this on the line list. --4 of 4 staff do not have what organism is being tested. --4 of 4 staff do not have pathogen detected documented. --1 of 4 staff does not have symptom resolution date documented. --4 of 4 staff do not have return to work date recorded and there is no place to record this on the line list. February dates indicate the following: --Contains 1 staff member. --Date last worked is not recorded and there is no place to record this on the line list. --Type of test ordered is blank. --Pathogen detected is blank. --No return-to-work date is recorded and there is no place to record this on the line list. Resident LTC (Long Term Care) Respiratory Surveillance Line List with a date of 3/9/24 (Handwritten note at top of page indicates COVID Line List March 24) indicates: --Contains 10 residents. --10 of 10 residents do not have what organism is being tested. --10 of 10 resident do not have pathogen detected documented. --9 of 10 residents do not have symptom resolution dates documented. Staff LTC (Long Term Care) Respiratory Surveillance Line List with a date of 2/24/24 (Handwritten note at top of page indicates Staff March) indicates: March dates indicate the following: --Contains 8 staff members. --8 of 8 staff do not have date last worked is not recorded and there is no place to record this on the line list. --8 of 8 staff do not have what organism is being tested. --8 of 8 staff do not have pathogen detected recorded and there is no place to record this on the line list. --8 of 8 staff do not have symptom resolution dates. --8 of 8 staff do not have return to work dates recorded. On 5/2/24 at 8:25 AM, Surveyors completed the infection control interview with LPN/IP D (Licensed Practical Nurse/Infection Preventionist) and RN I (Regional Nurse) with RNC J (Regional Nurse Consultant) via telephone. During this interview, LPN/IP D indicated the COVID staff line lists are related to positive COVID cases only and other infection types were not being tracked. Resident COVID line lists were for COVID positive cases only. LPN/IP D stated she agrees staff and resident line list are incomplete and should contain the last date worked (staff), test completed, results, symptom resolution dates and return to work dates for staff. Example 2 Surveyors reviewed the document titled March 2024 COVID Outbreak Summary and compared it to the March 2024 line list information. Surveyors noted a discrepancy on the line list vs. the outbreak summary. The staff line list contains 6 staff members that are not identified in the outbreak summary. Therefore, outbreak management (i.e., contact tracing, mitigation, and source control) surrounding these staff members are not available in the summary. On 5/2/24 at 8:25 AM, Surveyors completed the infection control interview with LPN/IP D (Licensed Practical Nurse/Infection Preventionist) and RN I (Regional Nurse) with RNC J (Regional Nurse Consultant) via telephone and reviewed March 2024 COVID Outbreak Summary and March Line list. LPN/IP D indicated the March 2024 COVID Outbreak Summary was not complete. Example 3 On 5/2/24 at 8:25AM Surveyors completed the infection control interview with LPN/IP D (Licensed Practical Nurse/Infection Preventionist) and RN I (Regional Nurse) with RNC J (Regional Nurse Consultant) via telephone. During this interview, LPN/IP D indicated she had not been calculating monthly infection control rates before April. In April, a total overall infection rate was calculated but rates were not calculated per type of infection. LPN/IP D indicated this should be completed by infection type and be completed monthly. Of note, the facility presented information from their QAPI initiative as documented above, however, had not followed through on the entirety of their action plan.
MINOR (C) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact

Staffing Information (Tag F0732)

Minor procedural issue · This affected most or all residents

Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure the nurse staffing posting was accurate and posted in an accessible area which has the potential to affect the census of...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure the nurse staffing posting was accurate and posted in an accessible area which has the potential to affect the census of 106. Multiple daily staff postings did not reflect the actual hours of the nursing staff. The posting was posted up high on the wall with small text making it difficult to read. Findings include: On 5/2/24, Surveyor observed the posted nurse staffing (utilized to communicate to residents and the public daily staffing levels per census) dated 4/17/24, 4/18/24, 4/19/24, and 4/27/24 did not reflect the actual hours of the nursing staff. The Daily Census/ Staffing document reflects the first shift of each day begins at 6:00 AM to 2:30 PM, the second shift is 2:00 PM to 10:30 PM and the night shift is from 10:00 PM to 6:30 AM. On 5/2/24, Surveyor reviewed nurse staffing postings dated 4/17/24, 4/18/24, 4/19/24, and 4/27/24 and cross-referenced actual hours worked per the facility schedule and noted the following: On 4/17/24, the Daily Staff Roster (schedule) did not reflect that LPN D (Licensed Practical Nurse) was scheduled as the nurse manager for day shift. The Daily Staff Roster shows 2 PM LPN's scheduled; however, the Daily Census/ Staffing document indicates that there are no LPN's scheduled for PM shift. The night Daily Staff Roster shows that there is one LPN scheduled for night shift, but the Daily Census/ Staffing document shows that there are 2 LPN's scheduled for the night shift. On 4/18/2024, the Daily Staffing Roster does not reflect that LPN D was scheduled as the second nurse manager for day shift. The Daily Staffing Roster shows that there are 12 CNAs on the schedule however, the Daily Census/ Staffing document has 14 CNAs listed as working the day shift. On 4/19, 2024 the Daily Staffing Roster does not reflect that LPN D was scheduled as the second nurse manager for day shift. The Daily Staffing Roster has 14 CNAs scheduled but the Daily Census/Staffing document shows 12 CNAs are scheduled for day shift. On 4/27/24 the Daily Staffing Roster had 3 LPNs scheduled and the Daily Census/Staffing reflected the 2 LPNs were working. On 5/2/24 at 9:34 AM, Surveyor interviewed Scheduler O. Surveyor asked Scheduler O to observe the daily census/staffing posting and noted the posting was posted up high on a bulletin board near the elevator. Surveyor asked Scheduler O if Residents would be able to read it from wheelchair height, Scheduler O replied not as good as they could. Surveyor asked Scheduler O regarding the process for daily postings. Scheduler O indicated staff that are scheduled to work go on the sheet, if there is inadequate number of staff Scheduler O attempts to find staff to fill in or pick up any holes they may have. Scheduler O indicated the census posting is created the day before and sent to the night nurse. The charge nurses can update the daily posting and is updated by 2 PM on the day of the posting. Surveyor asked why a Nurse manager was listed on the schedules for the weekend and not on the postings. Scheduler O indicated that the Nurse manager is always on the schedule, and the posting would say zero if he/she wasn't here. Scheduler O indicated the posting should reflect what is on the schedules and be updated to match. Scheduler O indicated on April 27th day shift there were 3 LPNs working and the posting should reflect 3 LPNs instead of 2. Scheduler O indicated for April 19th there were 2 RN managers on the posting and only 1 listed on schedule, she believes LPN D was filling in and this date should have been updated to reflect the posting. Scheduler O indicated for Day shift the CNAs should reflect 11 working instead of 12 listed on the posting. Scheduler O indicated for April 17th that LPN D should be on the schedule as the Nurse Manager. The PM shift should reflect 2 LPNs for pm shift not zero, the 2 should have been down a line. Night shift had 2 LPNs, and we did not update the posting we must have had a call in. On 5/2/24 at 10:51 AM, Surveyor asked R68 and R15 if they could read the daily staff posting. R15 indicated she was not able to read the posting that's posted on the bulletin board due to location and lettering is too small to read. R68 indicated the lettering was too small to read and it's never correct anyways.
Apr 2024 6 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

Resident Rights (Tag F0550)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure that each resident was treated with dignity and ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure that each resident was treated with dignity and respect for 1 of 6 sampled residents (R1). R1's APOAHC (Activated Power of Attorney for Health Care) has chosen for R1 to see physicians outside of the facility. The facility failed to provide a support person to assist R1 so that she may attend medically necessary physician appointments. As evidenced by The facility's admission Resident Rights, undated, indicates the following: The resident has the right to be free of interference, coercion, discrimination, and reprisal from the facility in exercising his or her rights to be supported by the facility in the exercise of his or her rights. The resident representative has the right to exercise the resident's rights to the extent those rights are delegated to the resident representative. The facility has no policy and procedure regarding appointments, transportation, and supervision while at appointments. R1 was admitted to the facility 6/16/22 with diagnoses including, but not limited to dementia without behavioral disturbance, multiple sclerosis, fibromyalgia, polyosteoarthritis, cauda equina syndrome, muscle weakness, and optic neuritis. R1's Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date of 2/12/24 indicates a Brief Interview of Mental Status score of 13 indicating she is cognitively intact. R1 was incapacitated 8/6/21 and has an APOAHC (Activated Power of Attorney for Health Care). R1's APOAHC lives out of the country. R1's [NAME], dated 4/9/24, states in part, as follows: Toilet use: Suprapubic catheter 16 fr (french), continent of bowel, assist as needed with peri care. Transfers: 1 assist when/if resident allows staff to assist. The Appointments schedule on 2/13/24 indicate the following for R1: Ophthalmology Appointment 1:40 PM and Pickup Time: 1:00 PM On 2/13/24 R1 had a scheduled Ophthalmology (eye) appointment at 1:40 PM. On 2/13/2024 at 1:00 PM, R1's Progress Note indicates the following: Called to front entrance to observe resident going out the door to wait for cab. This writer attempted to redirect resident unsuccessfully. Activities aide attempted to redirect resident unsuccessfully. Resident rolled wheelchair under canopy requesting to be left alone. Activities aide sat with her for a few moments as an attempt to redirect. With each attempt to redirect by staff resident voice became louder and jaws clenched. Resident began yelling profanities, and flailing arms. Resident informed appointment was canceled because someone has to be present with her for appointments. She cursed and threw her envelope to the ground and continued to flail her arms. Assigned CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant) attempted to redirect resident. Resident continues to be upset about appointment, continued to curse, and hit wheelchair with arms and fist. Pastoral care involved and successfully redirected resident to return to building. Resident continues to voice concerns about cancellation of appointment. Return to room with assigned CNA. On 4/8/23 at 11:13 AM, Surveyor spoke with R1's APOAHC, FM D (Family Member). FM D stated the facility does not like that R1 goes out for medical appointments. FM D stated, They (facility) is harassing me. FM D stated, the facility has threatened to contact APS (Adult Protective Services) if she does not provide a person (supervision) to go to appointments with R1. FM D stated, this is greatly upsetting, and she wants to support R1 to the best of her ability given that she resides out of the country. On 3/26/24 at 11:33 AM, NHA A sent the following email to FM D, DON B (Director of Nursing), RDOO E (Regional Director of Operations) and VPCS F (Vice President of Clinical Services). NHA A writes: I will continue to reach out to HCPOA (Health Care Power of Attorney), FM D, to inquire what the plan is for a support person. I have removed (physician name) from this thread. This is not a new enforcement, and this is a service that SMCC (St. Mary's Care Center/facility) simply does not provide for any resident. All other residents families or friends, support their loved ones while out of the facility at medical appointments, should they decide to go to outside providers, should they have an activated healthcare power of attorney/are deemed incapacitated. I cannot speak to why this policy was not enforced when R1 first moved in, and I apologize for that. This has not been new knowledge, as we have been continually communicating with FM D, for over a month, regarding R1's need to have support while she is out of the facility. R1 has displayed an inability to safely do tasks independently, including go to medical appointments independently, as evidenced by wandering into another resident's bathroom and locking herself in a staff restroom. Therefore, we discussed this concern with FM D, who included R1's physician. Our goal is to keep R1 safe, always, and we are working very hard to act in her best interest to ensure she has someone with her while out of the facility. We have providers that come to the facility for PCP (Primary Care Providers), dental, audiology, therapy, optometry services, and we are glad to help get her set up on these services, as they are a great way to prevent her from having to leave the facility and require family or friends to support her while out of the facility at numerous medical appointments. Through these numerous discussions, we have involved many parties who care for and provide service to R1, including managed care organization, physician, legal, State of Wisconsin Ombudsman, Wisconsin Medicaid Consortium and DHS (Department of Health Services), all of whom agree that R1 should have support when out of the facility. She needs to have a support person provided by her HCPOA by 5/1/2024. (Note, this date is in bold.) I have been instructed that a case with APS (Adult Protective Services) will be opened if there is not a plan in place. (Note, this sentence is in bold.) On 3/26/24 at 12:00 PM, R1's Physician documented the following notes during a telephone visit: . The patient (R1) needs a support person who is in charge of her safety The Physician added, in my opinion the person needs to be able to help transport a patient from one point to another and be aware enough to help seek help when needed. A family member or any lay person that the HCPOA trusts should be able to do this with these requirements. It is basically a person who can be an adult sitter to monitor R1 and make sure that if she does have something happen (fall out of her wheelchair) that they can seek help to get her back in. Not necessarily that they have to get her in it. If she states she has chest pain or needs to go the bathroom that they can seek out help to get that for her. Someone to be in charge of her to ensure she gets to where she is going. Medical background is not needed. On 4/9/24 at 1:45 PM, Surveyor spoke with NHA A (Nursing Home Administrator). Surveyor asked NHA A, how does the facility determine when resident needs a support person to go with them to appointments. NHA A stated, the facility looks at the resident's cognition, activation status, and history of wandering. Surveyor asked NHA A, does R1 require supervision while out at appointments. NHA A stated, yes, after a recent situation somebody needs to go with R1 to appointments. Surveyor asked NHA A, what situation occurred. NHA A stated, R1 went into the public restroom and was yelling at staff outside the door. NHA A stated, we told R1 her appointment was canceled when she was in the bathroom. NHA A stated, R1 continued to go outside. NHA A stated R1 said she was waiting (outside) to go to her appointment. Surveyor asked NHA A, who goes to R1's appointments with her. NHA A stated, we've been having to send staff because her family does not go with her. NHA A stated, she told FM D as of 5/1/24 the facility cannot provide someone to go with R1. NHA A stated, R1 is not safe to go alone, and she hasn't given us someone to go with her. Surveyor asked NHA A, have facility staff accompanied R1 to appointments before. NHA A stated, No, because it's not done with anyone else. Surveyor asked NHA A, do any other residents/families have concerns regarding having to provide a support person for appointments. NHA A stated, no. NHA A stated, R1's MCO (Managed Care Organization) stated R1 does not have that benefit (support person) under her plan. Surveyor asked NHA A, if the family is communicating, they are unable to go to appointments with R1, are you aware it is the facility's responsibility to ensure R1 is able to go to her appointments. NHA A stated, she was not aware. Surveyor shared with NHA A, the facility is ultimately responsible for R1's safety whether she is at the facility or out an appointment. If R1's family is unable to provide a support person to go with R1, the facility is ultimately responsible to honor the wishes of R1 and FM D in their choice of physicians and to ensure R1's safety while she out of the facility.
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

Grievances (Tag F0585)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on interview and record review, the facility did not make prompt efforts to resolve resident grievances for 1 resident (R1) out of 7 residents reviewed for grievances, out of a total sample of 2...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview and record review, the facility did not make prompt efforts to resolve resident grievances for 1 resident (R1) out of 7 residents reviewed for grievances, out of a total sample of 24 Residents. R1's APOAHC (Activated Power of Attorney for Healthcare) expressed concerns to the previous DON (Director of Nursing) regarding the way CNA C (Certified Nursing Assistant) treated R1. The facility did not record details regarding the grievance, has no documentation that the grievance was investigated, or any details regarding the allegation. This is evidenced by: The facility Policy and Procedure, Grievance Process, with a revised date of 11/2022, includes, in part: Residents have the right to voice grievances to the community or other agency or entity that hears grievances without discrimination or reprisal and without fear of discrimination or reprisal. Such grievances include those with respect to care and treatment which has been furnished, as well as that which has not been furnished, the behavior of staff and of other residents and other concerns regarding their stay in the community. The community will make prompt efforts to resolve grievances the resident may have. The community will take immediate action to prevent further potential violations of any resident right while the alleged violation is being investigated. The Executive Director (Also known as the Nursing Home Administrator) is the grievance officer and responsible for overseeing the grievance process, receiving, and tracking grievances through to their conclusion, leading investigations by the community .including written grievance decisions to the resident if requested, and coordinating when applicable state and federal agencies. Grievance record including evidence demonstrating the results of all grievances will be maintained for three years from the issuance of the grievance decision. It is the policy to support each resident's right to voice grievances and to assure that after receiving a complaint or grievance to seek a resolution and keep the resident appraised of progress. Surveyor reviewed the facility's Grievance Log. Surveyor observed there was no grievance documented regarding R1 for the month of October 2023. The facility did not record details regarding the grievance, has no documentation that the grievance was investigated, or any details regarding the allegation. R1 was admitted to the facility 6/16/22 with diagnoses including, but not limited to dementia without behavioral disturbance, multiple sclerosis, fibromyalgia, polyosteoarthritis, cauda equina syndrome, muscle weakness, and optic neuritis. R1's Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date of 2/12/24 indicates a Brief Interview of Mental Status score of 13 indicating she is cognitively intact. R1 was incapacitated 8/6/21 and has an APOAHC (Activated Power of Attorney for Health Care). On 10/6/23 at 4:11 PM, R1's Progress Notes documented by the previous DON (Director of Nursing) indicate the following: Late entry for 10/5/23 at 10:30 AM. Res family member, FM D (Family Member), called me and wanted to follow up on the investigation I had completed looking into a staffing/care concern for this resident. She also wanted a complete copy of my findings. I explained to FM G that staff had been spoken with, statements collected, and the investigation completed. She presented follow up questions that were discussed and documented. I told FM G I would get back to her later in the day with my results and new findings. (Note, R1 was experiencing UTI (urinary tract infection) symptoms that day and no further information or detail is documented.) The accused CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant) is no longer employed at the facility. On 4/10/24 an approximately 1:30 PM, Surveyor spoke with RN M (Registered Nurse) who was working at the time of the allegation. RN M did not recall any grievance or allegation. On 4/9/24 at 10:35 AM, Surveyor spoke with R1. R1 does not recall any concern. On 4/10 at 2:10 PM, Surveyor spoke with NHA A (Nursing Home Administrator). Surveyor shared the R1's Progress Notes for 10/6/23. Surveyor asked NHA A if the facility was able to locate the grievance, investigation, statements, or any documentation regarding this grievance. NHA A stated they have been looking for information for most of the day and were unable to find any investigation, statements or documentation related to this complaint. Surveyor asked NHA A, should this grievance regarding staffing/care concern have been documented and thoroughly investigated. NHA A stated, yes.
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 F0657 (Tag F0657)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure care plans were reviewed and revised for 1 (R1) of 20 sampled residents. Facility staff did not revise R1's care plan to...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure care plans were reviewed and revised for 1 (R1) of 20 sampled residents. Facility staff did not revise R1's care plan to address her need for a support person while out of the facility at appointments. Findings include: R1 was admitted to the facility 6/16/22 with diagnoses including, but not limited to dementia without behavioral disturbance, multiple sclerosis, fibromyalgia, polyosteoarthritis, cauda equina syndrome, muscle weakness, and optic neuritis. R1's Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date of 2/12/24 indicates a Brief Interview of Mental Status score of 13 indicating she is cognitively intact. R1 was incapacitated 8/6/21 and has an APOAHC (Activated Power of Attorney for Health Care). R1's APOAHC lives out of the country. On 2/13/2024 at 1:00 PM, R1's Progress Note indicates the following: Called to front entrance to observe resident going out the door to wait for cab. This writer attempted to redirect resident unsuccessfully. Activities aide attempted to redirect resident unsuccessfully. Resident rolled wheelchair under canopy requesting to be left alone. Activities aide sat with her for a few moments as an attempt to redirect. Resident continues to be upset about appointment, continued to curse, and hit wheelchair with arms and fist. Pastoral care involved and successfully redirected resident to return to building. Resident continues to voice concerns about cancellation of appointment. Return to room with assigned CNA. The facility has determined that R1 needs a support person when going out of the facility or appointments. R1's care plan was not updated to include the need for a support person. On 4/10/24 at 2:10 PM, Surveyor spoke with NHA A (Nursing Home Administrator). Surveyor asked NHA A, when did the facility determine R1 needs a support person when she goes out for appointments. NHA A stated on 2/13/23. Note, R1 has been incapacitated since 8/6/21 and a resident at the facility since 6/16/22. Surveyor asked NHA A, should R1's care plan include her need for a support person when out of the facility at appointment. NHA A stated, yes. Cross Reference F550
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

ADL Care (Tag F0677)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure that residents who are unable to carry out Activ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure that residents who are unable to carry out Activities of Daily Living (ADLs) received the necessary services for assistance with incontinent cares for 3 of 6 residents (R16, R23, & R24) reviewed for ADLs. R16 indicates she has double briefs on almost every night due to being a heavy wetter. R23 indicated she has a blue liner and a pullup on due to being a heavy wetter. Surveyor observed a blue liner and pullup placed on R23 during am cares. R24 indicates she gets double briefed at times due to being a heavy wetter. This is evidenced by: Facility unable to provide policy on incontinence products. Example 1 R16 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and has diagnoses that include hemiplegia (paralysis of one side of the body) and hemiparesis (another term for hemiplegia), urinary incontinence (loss of bladder control), history of urinary tract infections (an illness in any part of the urinary tract, usually starts when bacteria get into the tube through which urine leaves the body, the urethra) and overactive bladder (a problem with bladder function that causes the sudden need to urinate). R16's Minimum Data Set (MDS) Quarterly Assessment, dated 1/29/24, shows R16 has a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 indicating R16 is cognitively intact. R16's certified nursing assistant (CNA) [NAME], dated 4/10/24, states, in part: . ADL: Toilet Use- 2 person EZ stand (Mechanical Lift) Toileting- Raised toilet seat with handles. Bladder/Bowel: Toilet upon arising, between meals, at Hour of Sleep (HS) and as needed. She will ask for care as well . R16's Care Plan, dated 3/22/23, states, in part: . Focus: Skin Integrity- At risk/ and/or Potential for Complications with impaired skin integrity including skin tears, bruising and/or pressure related to (r/t) current medical/physical status. Has meds/diagnoses (dx) that can/may affect skin integrity. Date Initiated: 3/22/23 Revision: 2/8/24. Goal: Will be free of serious complications r/t current skin status through next review date. Date Initiated: 7/26/23 Target Date: 5/8/24. Interventions: . -Incontinence care with incontinent brief changes. Date Initiated: 3/22/23. -Observe skin care with AM/PM cares and with toileting for redness, rashes, open areas, pain, swelling and report them to team leader .Date Initiated: 3/22/23 . On 4/10/24, at 9:05AM, Surveyor interviewed R16 and asked R16 if staff ever uses double incontinence briefs on her and R16 indicated yes. R16 indicated every night she has double incontinence briefs on due to being a heavy wetter. R16 indicated she had double briefs on last night. Example 2 R23 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and has diagnoses that include functional urinary incontinence (can't get to or use a toilet in time to urinate) and urge incontinence (loss of bladder control, varying from a slight loss of urine after sneezing, coughing, or laughing to complete inability to control urination). R23's MDS Quarterly Assessment, dated 1/29/24, shows R16 has a BIMS score of 15 indicating R16 is cognitively intact. R23's CNA [NAME], dated 4/10/24, states, in part: . ADL: . -Toilet Use- 1 assist Wears overnight briefs at bedtime . Toileting: -Check and change every 2 hours at night (NOC) and as needed (PRN) -Incontinence Supplies include: Small/Medium pull up during daytime. Large brief at NOC. Bladder/Bowel: -Toilet upon rising, between meals, at HS and as needed . R23's Care Plan, dated 3/22/23, states, in part: . Focus: Skin Integrity- At risk/ and/or Potential for Complications with impaired skin integrity including skin tears, bruising and/or pressure r/t current medical/physical status. Has meds/dx that can/may affect skin integrity. Date Initiated: 3/22/23 Revision: 6/20/23. Goal: Will have clean, dry, intact skin through next review date. Date Initiated: 3/22/23 Revision: 2/14/24 Target Date: 5/20/24. Interventions: - Incontinence care with incontinent brief changes. Date Initiated: 3/22/23. -Observe skin care with AM/PM cares and with toileting for redness, rashes, open areas, pain, swelling and report them to team leader .Date Initiated: 3/22/23 . Focus: Bowel/Bladder Actual/At Risk and/or Potential for Complications with B&B (Bowel & Bladder) r/t current medical/physical status. Goal: Will be clean and dry with incontinence cares provided as needed through review date. Date Initiated: 3/22/23. Interventions: . -Incontinence supplies include: small/medium pull up during daytime. Large brief at NOC. Date Initiated: 3/22/23 Revision: 3/31/23 . -Toilet upon arising, between meals, at HS and as needed. Date Initiated: 3/22/23. -Check and change every two hours at NOC and as needed. Date Initiated: 3/22/23. On 4/10/24, at 8:15 AM, Surveyor observed CNA G perform AM cares on R23. CNA G placed big blue liner inside a pull up on R23. CNA G indicated to Surveyor most residents that are heavy wetters like to have a blue liner and pullup on at the same time. Surveyor asked CNA G if R23 was care planned for two incontinence products and CNA G indicated no. CNA G indicated the staff are told not to use two incontinence products at the same time, but residents request them. Surveyor asked the reason for using two incontinence products at the same time and CNA G indicated heavy wetters. R23 indicated staff will put two incontinence products on her and R23 wants and likes two on her or she leaks urine. Example 3 R24 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and has diagnoses that include urge incontinence and dementia (a condition characterized by progressive or persistent loss of intellectual functioning, especially with impairment of memory and abstract thinking, and often with personality change, resulting from organic disease of the brain). R24's MDS Quarterly Assessment, dated 2/20/24, shows R16 has a BIMS score of 14 indicating R24 is cognitively intact. R24's Care Plan, dated 2/14/23, states, in part: . Focus: Bowel/Bladder: Focus: Actual/At Risk and/or Potential for Complications with B&B (Bowel & Bladder) r/t current medical/physical status. Has meds/dx that can/may affect B&B status. Date Initiated: 2/14/23 Revision: 3/30/23. Goal: Will be clean and dry with incontinence cares provided as needed through review date. Date Initiated: 2/14/23 Revision on: 1/12/24 Target Date: 5/20/24. Interventions: -Incontinence supplies include: Large brief Date Initiated: 2/14/23 Revision on: 3/30/23 -Toileting upon arising, between meals, at HS and as needed. Date Initiated: 2/14/23. -Check and change every 2 hours at NOC and PRN. Date Initiated: 2/14/23 Revision on: 1/12/24 . On 4/10/24, at 8:37 AM, Surveyor interviewed R24 at time of AM cares and R24 indicated she requests for double briefs because she is a heavy wetter, and staff will put them on her. CNA H indicated staff are not supposed to put double briefs on but if the residents request some do put double briefs on. CNA H indicated she will not double brief. On 4/9/24, at 4:30 PM, Surveyor interviewed CNA I who indicated he has seen double briefs on residents R23 and R24. On 4/9/24, at 4:31, Surveyor interviewed CNA J and asked if staff ever uses double briefs on residents and CNA J indicated yes. Surveyor asked CNA J who staff will double brief and CNA J indicated R16 per resident request. CNA J indicated yesterday they double briefed R16. Surveyor asked the reason for double briefing and CNA J indicated because resident is a heavy wetter. Surveyor asked if resident is care planned for a double brief and CNA J indicated no. On 4/9/24, at 4:36 PM, Surveyor interviewed CNA K and asked if staff uses double briefs on residents. CNA K indicated yes, she has seen double briefs on residents and R24 is one she can recall. CNA K indicated some staff will use double briefs on residents that are heavy wetters and that request double briefs. CNA K indicated the double briefs are usually applied on residents for the night shift. Surveyor asked if residents are care planned for double briefs and CNA K indicated not knowing. On 4/10/24 at 11:20AM, Surveyor interviewed DON B (Director of Nursing) and asked what the facility policy indicates about double briefing and DON B indicated it is not allowed. Surveyor informed DON B about the observation with R23 with blue liner and pullup being placed this am and about staff and resident interviews that double briefing is occurring. Surveyor asked what DON B's expectation is regarding incontinence products and double briefing. DON B indicated if residents are requesting for double briefs staff are to come to DON B and she will educate residents and care plan after doing a risk and benefit. DON B indicated using double briefs are not standard of practice. Surveyor asked DON B if a resident is considered a heavy wetter would she expect those residents to be toileted more often and care planned such and DON B indicated yes. Surveyor asked DON B if it is acceptable to double brief and DON B indicated no.
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

Unnecessary Medications (Tag F0759)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure that it was free of medication error rates of 5%...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure that it was free of medication error rates of 5% or greater. There was 1 error in 12 opportunities that affected 1 out of 2 residents (R21) included in the medication pass task, which resulted in an error rate of 8.3%. R21 received the wrong dose of Venlafaxine. This is evidenced by: The facility policy entitled, Medication Administration, dated 1/23, states, in part: . Policy: Medications are administered as prescribed in accordance with manufacturers' specifications, good nursing principles and practices and only by persons legally authorized to do so. Personnel authorized to administer medications do so only after they have familiarized themselves with the medication. Procedures: Medication Preparation: . 3. Prior to administration, review and confirm medication orders for each individual resident on the Medication Administration Record (MAR). Compare the medication and dosage schedule on the resident's MAR with the medication label . Medication Administration: 1. Medications are administered in accordance with written orders of the prescriber . R21 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and has diagnoses that include bipolar disorder (A disorder associated with episodes of mood swings ranging from depressive lows to manic highs). R21's Minimum Data Set (MDS) admission assessment dated [DATE], shows R21 has a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14 indicating R21 is cognitively intact. R21's Physician's Orders dated4/10/24, states, in part Venlafaxine Hydrochloride (HCI) Extended-Release 24- Give 300 milligrams (mg) by mouth in the morning for Major Depressive Disorder . Order Date: 2/23/24 Start Date: 2/23/24 . R21's Medication Administration Record (MAR) for 4/1/24 - 4/30/24, states, in part: . Venlafaxine HCI ER Oral Tablet Extended Release 24 Hour (Venlafaxine HCI) Give 300 mg by mouth in the morning for Major Depressive Disorder Start Date: 2/24/24 7:30 AM . On 4/9/24, at 8:25 AM, Surveyor observed MA L (Medication Aide) administer Venlafaxine HCI ER 150 mg 1 tablet to R21. R21 should have received two tablets to equal 300 mgs. On 4/9/24, at 2:00 PM, Surveyor interviewed MA L and DON B (Director of Nursing). Surveyor asked MA L to pull up R21's Venlafaxine order. Surveyor, MA L and DON B observed the order was for 300 mg. Surveyor then asked MA L to pull Venlafaxine card from drawer and MA L then indicated she gave 150 mg this morning and it was an error. MA L indicated the order is for 300 mg and she administered 150 mg. Surveyor asked DON B if this was a medication error and DON B indicated yes.
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

Pharmacy Services (Tag F0755)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Example 4 R5 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and has diagnoses that include diastolic (congestive) heart failure (a cond...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Example 4 R5 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and has diagnoses that include diastolic (congestive) heart failure (a condition in which your heart's main pumping chamber (left ventricle) becomes stiff and unable to fill properly) and hypertensive heart (refers to heart problems that occur because of high blood pressure that is present over a long time) and chronic kidney disease with heart failure (heart has to pump harder to get blood to the kidneys and can lead to heart disease). R5's Medication Administration Record (MAR) for February 2024 for Furosemide Oral Tablet 20 milligrams (mg)- Give 1 tablet by mouth one time a day for give in addition to 40 mg. Total dose= 60 mg daily for 3 days. Start Date: 2/27/24 8:00AM shows on 2/28/24 R5 did not receive the ordered dose by showing an empty box where the medication should have been signed out it that it was administered. R5's Care Plan shows: Focus- Heart Circulation: Actual/At Risk/ and/or Potential for Complications with Heart/Circulation. Concern of- Atrial Fibrillation Congested Heart Failure Date Initiated: 4/10/24 (printed date) Goal: Will be free of serious complications related to (r/t) diagnosis and/or medication use through next review date. Interventions: Meds/Labs/Treatments as ordered/accepted. Example 5 R13 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and has diagnoses that include hypomagnesemia (a condition in which the amount of magnesium in the blood is lower than normal), insomnia (a sleep disorder where you may have trouble falling asleep, staying asleep, or getting good quality sleep), and osteoporosis (a condition in which bones become weak and brittle). R13's February 2024 MAR shows for: - Acetaminophen Oral Tablet 325 mg Give 2 tablets by mouth one time a day for pain. Take at the end of PM shift Start Date: 2/1/24 8:30PM- was not administered on 2/21/24 indicated by an empty box where the medication should have been signed out that it was administered. - Claritin Oral Tablet 10 mg (Loratadine) Give 1 tablet by mouth at bedtime for allergies SIDE EFFECTS: Somnolence Start Date: 2/1/23 8:30PM- was not administered on 2/21/24 indicated by an empty box where the medication should have been signed out that it was administered. - Melatonin Oral Tablet (Melatonin) Give 7 mg by mouth at bedtime related to INSOMNIA, UNSPECIFIED (G47.00) Start Date: 2/1/23 8:30PM- was not administered on 2/21/24 indicated by an empty box where the medication should have been signed out that it was administered. - Trazodone Hydrochloride (HCI) 100 mg Give 1 tablet by mouth at bedtime every Tue, Wed, Thu, Fri, Sat, Sun r/t INSOMNIA, UNSPECIFIED (G47.00); DEPRESSION, UNSPECIFIED (F32.A) .Start Date: 11/21/23 8:30PM- was not administered on 2/21/24 indicated by an empty box where the medication should have been signed out that it was administered. R13's March 2024 MAR shows for: -Calcium Carbonate- Vitamin D Oral Tablet 500-5 mg-mcg (micrograms) (Calcium Carbonate-Vitamin D) Give 1 tablet by mouth two times a day related to Age-Related Osteoporosis without current pathological fracture . Start Date: 2/1/23 7:30AM Discontinue (D/C) 3/5/24 11:44AM- was not administered on 3/2/24 by indicating a (9-Other/See Nurse Notes) in the box to be signed the medication was administered and on 3/5/24 by indicating a (13-Med Not Available) in the box to be signed the medication was administered. Of Note: No indication in the nurse progress notes why medication was not administered and what was done in attempt to administer the medications. -Magnesium Oxide Oral Tablet 400 mg Give 1 tablet by mouth three times a day relayed to HYPOMAGNESEMI . Start Date: 2/1/23 7:30AM- was not administered on 3/25/24 by indicating a (13-Med Not Available) in the box to be signed the medication was administered, on 3/26/24 by indicating a (9-Other/See Nurse Notes) in the box to be signed the medication was administered, and on 3/30/24 by indicating a (13-Med Not Available) in the box to be signed the medication was administered. Of Note: No indication in the nurse progress notes why medication was not administered and what was done in attempt to administer the medications. Example 6 R21 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and has diagnoses that include bipolar disorder (a disorder associated with episodes of mood swings ranging from depressive lows to manic highs). R21's March 2024 MAR shows for: -lamotrigine oral tablet Give 100 mg by mouth in the morning for Manic-Depression Start Date: 2/24/24 7:30AM- was not administered on 3/8/24 by indicating a (9-Other/See Nurse Notes) in the box to be signed the medication was administered. Of Note: No indication in the nurse progress notes why medication was not administered and what was done in attempt to administer the medications. -Quetiapine Fumarate Oral Tablet Give 200 mg by mouth at bedtime for Manic- Depression Start Date:2/23/24 8:30PM D/C Date: 3/8/24 10:44AM- was not administered on 3/4/24 by indicating a (13-Med Not Available) in the box to be signed the medication was administered. Of Note: No indication in the nurse progress notes why medication was not administered and what was done in attempt to administer the medications. R21's Care Plan, dated 2/23/24, states, in part: . Focus: Mood/Behavior: Actual Complications with Mood/Behavior. Date Initiated: 2/23/24 Revision: 3/5/24. Goal: Mood/Behavior will not interfere with activities of daily living (ADL) status through next review. Date Initiated: 2/23/24 Target Date: 5/23/24. Interventions: . -Meds/Labs/Treatments as Ordered Date Initiated: 2/23/24 . Focus: Psychotropic Drug Use: At risk for complications r/t use of alprazolam, divalproex, lamotrigine, quetiapine, venlafaxine ER . Goal: Will be free of serious complications r/t psychotropic medication use through next review date. Date Initiated: 2/232/24 Target Date: 5/23/24. Interventions: - Meds/Labs/Treatments as ordered/accepted. Date initiated: 2/23/24. - Monitor/Observe/Document medication effectiveness- symptoms of mood/behavior improvement or decline. Observe for lethargy, need for med reduction. Review observations with MD. Date Initiated: 2/23/24 . On 4/10/24, at 10:48AM, Surveyor interviewed VPCS F (Vice President of Clinical Services) and asked what the expectation is if a medication is not available, and VPCS F indicated the nurse is to go to contingency first and check for the medication there. If medication is not there the nurse is to call the pharmacy, and then call the physician and responsible party. On 4/10/24, at 11:20AM, Surveyor interviewed DON B (Director of Nursing) and asked what the process is if a medication is not available and DON B indicated the nurse is to check the contingency for the medication, and if not there call the pharmacy. DON B indicated there is two back up pharmacies the facility uses for medications when not available. DON B indicated if those fail the nurse is to call the physician for a hold order for that medication not available. Surveyor asked is marking a medication unavailable acceptable to not administer a medication and DON B indicated if the process is followed the medication should be administered. Based on interview and record review the facility did not provide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident for 6 of 15 (R4, R5, R7, R13, R18 and R21) residents reviewed for medications. R4, R7, R18 and R21 did not receive their medications as ordered. R5 did not receive her scheduled Lasix on 2/28/24. R13 did not receive her scheduled Tylenol Claritin, melatonin, and trazodone on 2/21/24. R13 did not receive her scheduled calcium on 3/2/24 and 3/5/24. R13 did not receive her scheduled magnesium on 3/25/24, 3/26/24, and 3/30/24. R21 did not receive scheduled Seroquel on 3/4/24 and did not receive scheduled lamotrigine on 3/8/24. Evidenced by: Findings include: The facility policy entitled, Medication Administration, dated 1/23, states, in part: . Policy: Medications are administered as prescribed in accordance with manufacturers' specifications, good nursing principles and practices and only by persons legally authorized to do so. Personnel authorized to administer medications do so only after they have familiarized themselves with the medication. Procedures: Medication Preparation: . 3. Prior to administration, review and confirm medication orders for each individual resident on the Medication Administration Record . Medication Administration: 1. Medications are administered in accordance with written orders of the prescriber . Documentation: . 2. If a dose of regularly scheduled medication is withheld, refused, or given at other than the scheduled time (for example, the resident is not in the nursing care center at scheduled dose time, or a starter dose of antibiotic is needed), the space provided on the front of the MAR for that dosage administration is initiated and circled .If two consecutive doses of a vital medication are withheld or refused, the physician is notified . Example 1 R4 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. On 3/11/24, R4 was given orders for Cefprozil 500 mg twice daily for 2 days for COVID-19. According to R4's MAR (Medication Administration Report), this medication was not given once on 3/12/24. Example 2 R7 was admitted to facility on 11/29/23. He has orders that include Simethicone 180 mg four times daily. This order was made on 11/29/23. It was not given to R7 for any of the four doses on 2/29/24. Additionally, R7 has orders, dated 11/30/23, for Calcium Carbonate once daily. This was not given on 2/28/24. Documentation states these medications were unavailable. Example 3 R18 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and has orders, dated 2/1/23, for Senna 8.6 mg twice daily. This was not given once on 2/28/24. Facility documentation states, med not here. On 4/10/24 at 11:05 AM, VPCS F (Vice President of Clinical Services) stated that the facility was transitioning from an in house pharmacy to an outside pharmacy on 2/28/24 and there was to be a stock of over-the-counter (OTC) medications available, however, there was a misunderstanding and none of the OTC medications were available for medication passes on 2/28/24 and 2/29/24. According to VPCS F, facility attempted to go to a local drug store for the OTC medications, but they were unable to get them in a timely manner. VPCS F also stated that the facility identified this failure to get the medications but did not follow-up with residents or their families. In the case of R4, VPCS F stated she was not sure why the medication was not given and did not have any documentation as to why it was not given or documented on. On 4/10/24 at 11:30 AM, DON B (Director of Nursing) stated to Surveyors that she did not consider the undispensed medications to be a medication error and that the facility has multiple channels to ensure any medications not in house are received and given in a timely manner, however, these channels did not come through on 2/28/24 and 2/29/24.
Jan 2024 2 deficiencies 1 Harm
SERIOUS (G) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures

Accident Prevention (Tag F0689)

A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The following example is cited at a isolated/potential for harm. Example 2 R7 indicated on 1/5/24 R7 had her call light on for ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The following example is cited at a isolated/potential for harm. Example 2 R7 indicated on 1/5/24 R7 had her call light on for over an hour before receiving assistance off commode. R7 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnoses including: diabetes, congestive heart failure, muscle weakness, kidney failure, and other reduced mobility. R7's most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) with Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 10/13/23, indicates R7 has a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 indicating R7 is cognitively intact. R7 is own person. R7's Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) Care Card states, in part; ADL .TRANSFERS: 2 assist bariatric mechanical stand. On 1/8/24, R7 indicated that R7 sat on commode for two hours. R7 indicated that R7's call light was not on the entire time. R7 indicated call light was on for over an hour and then R7 began yelling for assistance. R7 voiced concerns with the assistance R7 received with transfer, CNA's overall attitude, and the long call light wait time. R7 indicated R7 has voiced concerns with long call light wait times in the past. R7 indicated that R7 utilizes an EZ stand and that R7 requires 2 staff assistance for transfer. R7 indicated filing a grievance regarding the concerns with the transfer. Surveyor reviewed call light wait times for R7 on 1/5/24. Call light wait times, states, in part; .event time 10:43 .Clear time .11:52 .Response time .1:09:15 On 1/8/24 at 5:00 PM, RNC C (Regional Nurse Consultant) indicated the goal is for call lights to be answered within 20 minutes. RNC C indicated over an hour is too long of a wait time. NHA A (Nursing Home Administrator) indicated NHA A has concerns with this call light wait time as well. RNC C indicated a person left on a commode for this amount of time would be at greater risk for falls. NHA A and RNC C indicated the facility is now running call light audits daily and reviewing documentation. UNCORRECTED AT VERIFICATION VISIT. See SOD for Event ID OC8I11. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure adequate supervision or fall interventions were in place for residents who required increased supervision to prevent accidents/hazards from occurring for 2 of 5 sampled Residents (R5 and R7). R5 did not have fall interventions in place. R5's care plan documents: Do not leave unattended in the Bathroom. R5 ambulated independently to the bathroom and her alarm was sounding. CNA N (Certified Nursing Assistant) heard the alarm sounding and identified that R5 ambulated independently to the toilet. CNA N turned the alarm off, exited the room, and shut the door leaving R5 unattended in the bathroom. CNA N did not assist R5 or alert other staff that she had self-transferred on the toilet. CNA N is aware that R5 is not to be left alone in the bathroom and does not use her call light for assistance. Ten (10) minutes later R5 ambulated independently from the bathroom and fell sustaining multiple right pelvic fractures. The facility did not speak with CNA N or identify that CNA N turned off R5's alarm and did not assist her. Surveyor observed staff leave R5 unattended in the bathroom. The facility has no policy for alarms and no process to monitor alarm implementation dates, expiration dates, and function to ensure safety. This is evidenced by: The facility policy, Accidents/Falls, revised October 2022, documents, in part: The facility strives to promote safety, dignity, and overall quality of life for its residents by providing an environment that is free from any hazards for which the facility has control and by providing appropriate supervision and interventions to prevent avoidable accidents. All fall is defined as an occurrence characterized by the failure to maintain an appropriate lying, sitting, or standing position resulting in an individual's abrupt, undesired relocation to the ground. The definition of a fall extends to include the following factors: .When a resident is found on the floor, a fall is considered to have occurred Resident care plans should be evaluated and updated with each fall with a new and applicable intervention based on root cause. The focus is to be on prevention and maintaining a safe environment. Each incident/accident or fall must be investigated and/or assessed to determine the root cause of the episode to prevent any further injury. Witness statements should be obtained as applicable. The administrator and Director of Nursing/Wellness should have knowledge of all reports. The interdisciplinary team will review all incidents/accidents. The resident's individualized care plan is to be updated with any changes or new interventions post fall/incident/accident, communicated to appropriate staff, and implemented. R5 was admitted to the facility 12/7/22 with diagnoses including, but not limited to: Alzheimer's disease, history of falls, displaced trimalleolar fracture of left lower leg open fracture with routine healing, Methicilin-resistant Staphylococcus aureaus (MRSA; a type of bacteria that can cause serious infections) removal of internal fixation device chronic multifocal osteomyelitis left ankle and foot, spinal stenosis, muscle weakness, and reduced mobility. R5's most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] documents the following: R5 is severely cognitively impaired. R5 has had 1 fall since admission and no falls with major injury. R5's Visual/Bedside [NAME] Report, dated 1/3/24, indicates, in part, the following interventions: ADL (Activities of Daily Living): Ambulation: Therapy only at this time; Bathing: 1 assist; Bed Mobility: 1 assist; Daily Routine: Assist resident to activities, enjoys crossword puzzles, word games and trivia, loves to talk, seat with other residents that will engage; Resident has a neck pendant call light (note, she does not use her neck pendant). Dressing: 1 assist; Eating: Set up; Hygiene: 1 assist; Locomotion: Wheelchair self-propel; Toilet use: 1 assist; Transfers: 1 assist ex stand may be used for increased weakness or fatigue. Bladder/Bowel: Toilet upon rising, between meals, at HS (bedtime) and as needed. Cognition Break tasks into subtasks, providing simple one-step instructions. Remind/redirect and/or reassure as needed. Resident has a call pendant but is not using it. Anticipate needs. Round throughout shift. Safety-Fall Interventions: 12/8/23 Fall intervention: Staff will ask resident is she is tired after she returns from activity and offer her to rest in recliner chair after toileting resident. Bed/Chair sensor at all times. Check for unmet needs: pain, toileting, hunger, thirst. Do not leave unattended in the Bathroom. If resident refuses cares, re-attempt in 30 minutes. Keep bathroom door shut at all times. Low bed. Floor mat. R5's comprehensive Care Plan indicates the following: Safety/Falls Focus: Actual potential for complications with OR fall R/T (related to) current medical/physical status. 5/14/23 12/8/23 unwitnessed fall in room; Goal: Will be free of falls, but if does, will be free from serious injuries r/t (related to) falls through next review date. Interventions: 12/8/23 Fall intervention: Staff will ask resident is she is tired after she return from activity and offer her to rest is recliner chair after toileting resident. 5/22/23 Complete rounds per standards of care to ensure needs are met, before leaving the room ask if there is anything else needed or would like assistance with. 5/22/23 If resident refuses cares, re-attempt in 30 minutes. 4/16/23 low bed 4/16/23 floor mat 3/7/23 Bed/Chair sensor at all times 2/27/23 Call light positioned for easy access. 2/27/23 Check for unmet needs: pain, toileting, hunger, thirst, temperature *3/7/23 Do not leave unattended in the Bathroom. R5's Fall risk assessments indicate she is at risk for falls. R5 fell on [DATE] at 4:11 PM. R5's fall report documents the following: Incident Description: Nursing Description: Pharm Tech J (Pharmacy Technician) heard somebody knocking on the door entered the resident room and found the resident sitting on the floor in the doorway. Writer found the resident sitting on the floor with her leg extended out, her back resting on the wall. Resident reported pain in her right ankle and knee. Resident alert oriented x1 has a short memory problem dementia and she stated that she was trying to perform self-transfer but tripped on her feet and fell, but she couldn't give more detail. Resident Description: Resident reported pain in her right ankle and knee. Resident alert oriented x1 has a short memory problem dementia and she stated that she was trying to perform self-transfer but tripped her feet and fell, but she couldn't give more details. Description of action taken: NP (Nurse Practitioner) notified, POA (Power of Attorney) contacted, care plan was updated. RN Charge Nurse M (Registered Nurse/Charge Nurse) documented the following Progress Note: Fall - Unwitnessed Incident Description: Pharm Tech J (Pharmacy Technician) heard somebody knocking on the door entered the resident room and found the resident siting on the floor in the doorway. Writer found the resident sitting on the floor with her leg extended out, her back resting on the wall. Resident reported pain in her right ankle and knee. Resident alert oriented x1 has a short memory problem dementia and she stated that she was trying to perform self-transfer but tripped on her feet and fell, but she couldn't give details. During the assessment writer found no changes in resident condition compared to her baseline. No changes in skin color or swelling. No lumps or skin discoloration on the scalp/head were noted during assessment. Vital signs BP (blood pressure) 110/67, P (pulse) 65, )2 sat (oxygen saturation) 93% RA (room air), temp (temperature) 97.1. After the resident was assessed and no sign of injury was found she was transferred back to the bed with mechanical lift with no sign of pain during transfer. In 10 minutes, writer reassessed the patient in the bed in the lying position and noted that resident reported pain in right inner thigh. According [SIC] staff resident was watching TV concert in the west atrium with activity department till 3:30 PM. Resident Description: Resident reported pain her right ankle and knee. Resident Alert x1 has a short memory problem dementia and she stated that she was trying to perform self-transfer but tripped her feet and fell, but she couldn't give more details. Immediate Action Taken: Notified provider extender, POA (Power of Attorney) contacted. Care plan was updated. Injury Observed at Time of Incident: Fracture - right trochanter (hip) Mental Status: Oriented to Situation Injuries Reported Post Incident: Bruise right shoulder (rear) Predisposing Psychological Factors: Impaired memory Predisposing Situation Factors: Other (see description - self transfer) R5's Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) documents the following Post Fall Review, in part: Date and time fall occurred: 12/8/23 4:11 PM Location: resident's (R5's) room What was the resident doing prior to the fall, if known: sitting WC (wheelchair) watching TV. Did the resident sustain an injury? If yes, describe yes, mons pubis fracture. Fall History: 1-3 falls in 3 months. Underlying Disease or Conditions: Cardiac diagnosis or pacemaker, Orthopedic/joint/arthritis, Medications: Psychotropics, Antihypertensives Sensory, Cognitive, Psychological Status: Does the resident have problems with cognition, judgement, memory, and safety awareness? (Indicates yes). Is the resident able to communicate their needs? (Indicates yes), Does the resident express pain, have signs of any pain, or take pain medications? (Indicates yes). Environmental Status/Equipment Factors: Are there any environmental factors that may have contributed to the fall? Yes Review of Post Fall Findings: Summarize the post-fall findings: IDT review of root cause analysis determined resident is impulsive and noncompliant with using call light and waiting for assistance to toilet. Describe new fall prevention interventions to be implemented as a result of the assessment: Resident to be toileted after activity then provided the option to rest in her recliner. List suggestions of referrals to be made as a result of the fall: Therapy. R5 was sent to the emergency department. The hospital report documents, in part, as follows: Chief Complaint: Pain Hip and Fall (Patient fell when transferring back to her bed. Pt report her right leg gave out, now having severe right hip pain. No deformity noted. Denies hitting head. Not anticoagulated. Chest x-ray is personally interpreted with right-sided pubic rami fractures noted without further acute fracture or other acute abnormality such as pneumothorax. Discharge Diagnosis: Fall, initial encounter. Closed fracture of multiple pubic rami, right, initial encounter. R1 was discharged and returned to the facility that evening. Pharm Tech J's (Pharmacy Technician) statement documents the following: This is a written statement of my finding on Friday 12/8/23. I, Pharm Tech J, was delivering medications to Wingra, the 200 unit, somewhere between 4:15 PM and 4:20 PM. I placed the medications in the nurses medication cart and was walking back to the pharmacy when I heard a loud bang (knock) on R5's room. I stopped and knocked on her door which was closed, and I opened it saying R5's name as I opened the door, she was lying against the wall with feet out straight with her back propped up against the wall. I found her about 2 or 3 feet from her door. I immediately popped my head out of her door and hollered down to the nurses station where I saw RN K and CNA L sitting and said, We have a resident who fell and is on the floor. I then talked to R5 to reassure her that help was on the way. She told me that she fell out of her chair. I also did not hear any alarms going off as I entered the room. Once medical staff came, R5 said I am glad you heard me knocking on the door. CNA N's statement documents the following: *1. What did you last note the resident doing prior to fall? on the toilet. *2. What time was cares last given or resident visualized? she isn't my resident today, so I don't know. 3. Was resident continent or incontinent when located on the floor? Continent *4. Last time toileted? 10 mins (minutes) prior to fall *5. What care plan or safety measure were in place? I'm not sure. 6. How do you think the fall could have been prevented? I'm not sure. 7. What was determined the immediate intervention by nurse/CNA? Tell patient to call for help. Document staff education given if needed and by which nurse: RN Charge Nurse M CNA L's statement documents the following: R5 as in room after the musical busy time preparing dinner. Nurse asked was R5 out in kitchen. I told her no she comes down, but I have to go get her to remind her after 4:15 PM. I usually get her she doesn't like to come down to [SIC] early. Sometimes she is playing cards in kitchen. Resident transfers herself constantly. Turns off call light. Sometimes she calls or comes out the room when she needs to toilet. Today she did neither and self-transfer and Pharm Tech J said she was down on floor as she walked by. RN K's statement 1. What did you last note the resident doing prior to fall? I did not see resident prior to the fall. 2. What time was cares last given or resident visualized? No idea 3. Was resident continent or incontinent when located on the floor? RN Charge Nurse M did assessment, No idea 4. Last time toileted? No idea, assessment done by RN Charge Nurse M 5. What care plan or safety measure were in place? N/A (not applicable) 6. How do you think the fall could have been prevented? N/A 7. What was determined the immediate intervention by nurse/CNA? N/A sent to ER (emergency room) Document staff education given if needed and by which nurse: N/A On 1/4/24 at 8:39 AM, Surveyor observed R5's empty wheelchair in her room and the bathroom door closed. Surveyor observed CNA O walk from the end of the hallway to R5's room. Surveyor entered R5's room and R5 agreed to Surveyor observing cares. Surveyor observed R5 in the bathroom sitting on the toilet while connected to the stand lift. CNA O left R5 in the bathroom unattended. Surveyor observed R5's [NAME] posted on the cabinet in the bathroom which indicates Do not leave unattended in the Bathroom. CNA provided cares to R5, and Surveyor spoke with R5 prior to CNA O transporting her to breakfast. On 1/4/24 at 8:51 AM, CNA O left R5's room and Surveyor spoke with R5. Surveyor spoke with R5. Surveyor asked R5 if the staff take good care of her. R5 stated, Always. Surveyor asked R5 if she gets help when she needs it. R5 stated, I don't need much help, I do pretty well by myself. Surveyor asked R5 if she could show me her call light/pendant. R5 pointed to the call pendant around her neck. (Care Plan indicates she does not utilize this.) Surveyor asked R5, have you had any falls recently. R5 stated, No. Surveyor asked R5 have you broken any bones recently. R5 stated, Not since I was young. Surveyor asked R5, do you feel safe here. R5 stated, Perfectly safe. Surveyor asked R5 if she currently has any pain. R5 stated, No. On 1/4/24 at 8:53 AM, CNA O returned to R5's room. Surveyor asked CNA O, should staff stay with R5 while she is in the bathroom. CNA O stated, sometimes R5 transfers herself and forgets she needs assistance to the toilet. CNA O stated, R5 tries to transfer frequently and doesn't think she needs help. Surveyor asked CNA O to read R5's [NAME] and pointed out the intervention: Do not leave unattended in the Bathroom. Surveyor asked CNA O, should you have stayed with R5 while she was in the bathroom on the toilet. CNA O stated, Yes, I should have. On 1/4/24 at 9:54 AM, Surveyor spoke with Pharm Tech J (Pharmacy Technician). Surveyor asked Pharm Tech J to describe what she witnessed on 12/8/23 when she discovered R5 on the floor. Pharm Tech J stated around 4:15 - 4:20 PM she was delivering medications to the 200 unit. Pharm Tech J stated, when she is walking down the hall, she heard a knock. Pharm Tech J stated she knocked on R5's door before entering and saw R5 on the floor. Pharm Tech J stated she was leaning against the wall with the nightlight (Surveyor observed this to be the wall next to the door and just around the corner from R5's bathroom). Pharm Tech J stated, R5 said, Help me up. Pharm Tech J told R5 she needed to get help and opened the door and asked for help and saw the CNA L and RN K sitting at the desk. Pharm Tech J stated CNA L and a tall male CNA (identified as CNA N) asked if R5 was ok and if she was hurt. Pharm Tech J stated, R5 said her ankle hurt. Pharm Tech J stated RN-Charge Nurse M came in to assess R5. Pharm Tech J stated, No alarms sounded. Pharm Tech J stated, R5 stated she fell out of her chair and added she was unsure if it was her wheelchair or stationary chair. Pharm Tech J stated, CNA N told R5, you need to call and not get up. On 1/4/24 at 10:05 AM, Surveyor spoke with RN K. Surveyor asked RN K to describe what he witnessed on 12/8/23 when R5 fell. RN K stated, she thinks she was passing medications when Pharm Tech J brought her medications and then yelled to me that a resident is on the floor with her legs stretched out. RN K stated, she went to R5's room and saw RN Charge Nurse M. RN K stated, she had medications in her hand and RN Charge Nurse M took over. Surveyor asked RN K, was R5's alarm sounding. RN K stated, I don't think so. On 1/4/24 at 10:46 AM, Surveyor spoke with CNA N. Surveyor asked CNA N to describe what he witnessed on 12/8/23 when R5 fell. CNA N stated, I heard an alarm going off, she (R5) was already on the toilet. CNA N stated, R5 transferred independently onto the toilet and no lift was in use. CNA N stated, he turned off the alarm, exited the room, closed the door, and did not assist R5 as she was not his resident. Surveyor asked CNA N, did you return to R5's room to assist her. CNA N stated, No. Surveyor asked CNA N, did you tell anybody R5 was on the toilet and transferred independently. CNA N stated, No, I didn't let anybody know. Surveyor asked CNA N, are your familiar with R5's care plan. CNA N stated, Yes. Surveyor asked CNA N, does R5 self-transfer often. CNA N stated, Yes, every day. Surveyor asked CNA N, if you see a resident self-transfer what do you do. CNA N stated, If she was my patient, I would help her. Surveyor asked CNA N, if a resident that is not on your assigned wing that needs assistance would you help them. CNA N stated, I would if I had time, I saw she was safe and left the room. (Note, her wheelchair was not within reach and Care Plan indicates Do not leave unattended in the Bathroom.) Surveyor asked CNA N, is it okay to leave R5 unattended in the bathroom. CNA N stated, No. Surveyor asked CNA N, if this same situation presented itself again what would you do differently. CNA N stated, I would stay with her, assist her back to her chair and turn her alarm on. Surveyor asked CNA N, did anybody provide education to you following this fall. CNA N stated, RN Charge Nurse M and the previous DON (Director of Nursing) provided education to him. Surveyor requested documentation of education to CNA N. Regional Nurse Consultant C stated there is no documented education to CNA N regarding this incident. On 1/4/24 at 11:41 AM, RN Charge Nurse M was out of the country on vacation and unavailable for interview. On 1/4/24 at 11:45 AM, RN P toileted R5. When R5 was in the bathroom Surveyor observed her chair and bed alarms. Surveyor observed R5's chair alarm, Posey TLC Posey Total Location Coverage. First Use Date and Expiration Date were both blank. The alarm documents: Warranty: This product is warrantied for thirty (30) days from date of first use. CAUTION: Sensor pad beyond expiration date is out of warranty and may not function properly causing false alarm or no alarm. Surveyor observed R5's bed alarm, Posey Single Patient Use Bed Sensor Pad (30-day). Warranty: This product is warranted for thirty (30) days from date of first use. It is important to note the facility has no policy or process for alarms and labeling First Use Date and Expiration Date. The facility also has no system nor documentation in place to monitor the function of the alarms. Surveyor asked RN P, how long an alarm is good for upon being implemented. RN P stated, I have absolutely no idea, it has always been on there (R5's chair and bed). Surveyor asked RN P, does the facility document the function of the alarms. RN P stated, I don't believe so. RN P stated, it would be the right thing to check it, but I don't know if we document it. Surveyor asked RN P, should R5's alarms be dated with the First Use Date and Expiration Date. RN P stated, If that's what the manufacturer instruction indicate then yes. On 1/4/24 at 12:49 PM, Surveyor spoke with RN Q. Surveyor asked RN Q, does the facility document, and check the function of resident alarms. RN Q stated, no, there is no schedule nor documentation to check the function of alarms. RN Q stated the extra alarms are in the Medication Rooms and there is no process when implementing or replacing an alarm. On 1/4/24 at 1:09 PM, Surveyor spoke with CS R (Central Supply). Surveyor asked CS R, is there a process for resident alarms. CS R stated, there is a supply in her office and in the medication rooms. CS R stated, there is no sign out sheet for alarms or tracking. On 1/4/24 at 4:08 PM, Surveyor spoke with NHA A (Nursing Home Administrator). Surveyor asked NHA A to tell me regarding R5's fall on 12/8/23. NHA A stated R5 resides on MCU (Memory Care Unit), she is very impulsive, transfers by herself and didn't use the call light. NHA A stated, I think she transferred to the bathroom independently. NHA stated, Pharmacy Tech J found her on the floor and got nursing to assist her. NHA A stated, at first, they were going to get a mobile X-ray; however, a few minutes after the fall she was complaining of further pain, and we sent her to the ER (emergency room). NHA A stated, CNA N was not assigned to R5. NHA A added, I know he saw her on the floor. Surveyor asked NHA A, are you aware that CNA N turned off R5's alarm after he observed her on the toilet and was aware that she transferred independently and then exited R5 without assisting her or notifying other staff. NHA A stated, CNA N turned off R5's alarm? NHA A added, That's news to me. NHA A stated, she is of the mindset of not having alarms and is working to reduce the usage of alarms in the facility. NHA A stated, staff have told her that R1 will turn off her alarm. NHA A stated, it's not effective if the resident can turn the alarm off. NHA A stated, R5's alarm is in place because family want her to have it. Surveyor asked NHA A, are you aware that CNA N saw that R5 self-transferred herself onto the toilet. NHA A stated, No. NHA A stated, she did not realize the transfer was not complete. Surveyor asked NHA A, what would you expect CNA N to have done in this situation. NHA A stated, either stay with her or call for additional help since she was not his assigned resident. NHA A stated, we've been doing a lot of education since another resident fell and passed away because of injuries. Surveyor asked NHA A, would you expect staff to stay with R5 and follow her care plan. NHA A stated, Yes. Surveyor shared observation (above) of CNA O leaving R5 unattended on the toilet in the bathroom this morning while hooked up to the sit to stand lift. Surveyor asked NHA A, would you expect staff to not leave R5 unattended in the bathroom per her care plan. NHA A stated, Yes. Surveyor asked NHA A, would you expect CNA O to be aware of R5's care plan interventions. NHA A stated, Yes. Surveyor asked NHA A, Surveyor shared with NHA A, that the facility has no process to check resident alarms for function. Surveyor asked NHA A, should the facility be checking alarms for function. NHA A stated, Yes. Surveyor asked NHA A, were you aware there's not facility policy/procedure regarding checking alarms for function. NHA A stated, Not that I know of. Surveyor asked NHA A, are you aware that pad alarms expire. NHA A stated, she was not aware.
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 F0919 (Tag F0919)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure all residents have a means of directly contacting caregivers w...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure all residents have a means of directly contacting caregivers while in their room for 1 (R6) out of 11 sampled residents. The facility failed to ensure R6 had call light pendent in working condition and near R6 while in R6 was in his room. Evidenced by: The facility policy, titled, Resident Call System, dated 5/20, states, in part; .All residents have call system access while in bed or while sitting at their bedside or in the bathroom. Residents who are unable to use their call system, due to decreased physical or mental ability, are so identified with needs anticipated to best of abilities. All staff responds promptly when the call system is activated. R6 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including: paranoid schizophrenia, presence of intraocular lens, glaucoma secondary to other eye disorders, weakness, restless legs syndrome, respiratory failure, altered mental status, displaced fracture of base of neck of right femur, history of falling, and blindness. R6 most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) with Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 11/2/23, indicates R6 has a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 08 indicating R6 is moderately cognitively impaired. R6 has an activated power of attorney. R6's comprehensive care plan states, in part; Cognition: .Resident uses call pendant .Safety/Falls: .Will be free of falls, but if does, will be free of serious injuries r/t (related to) falls through next review date .7-19-23 Call light positioned for easy access .Reinforce need to use the call light to request assistance . On 1/3/24 at 11:10 AM, R6 asked Surveyor if Surveyor was going to fix R6's call light pendant. Surveyor observed R6 sitting in broda chair by a folding table in his room. Surveyor observed R6 to have no call light within reach. Surveyor asked R6 where R6's call light was. R6 indicated R6 has a call light pendant that is a watch, and it has been broken for a couple weeks. Surveyor asked R6 how R6 is able to contact staff if he needs something and needs assistance. R6 indicated he is not able to do that. Surveyor found call light pendant on nightstand under items. Surveyor observed call light pendant working, but the plastic piece and band were broken. R6 indicated R6 prefers the call light to be a watch that is worn around his wrist. On 1/3/24 at 11:20 AM, Surveyor interviewed RN D (Registered Nurse), RN D indicated R6 is legally blind and unable to utilize call light that was on nightstand. RN D indicated R6 usually has his call light pendant around his wrist. RN D indicated she was unsure how long the watch piece has been broken for. On 1/3/24 at 12:05 PM, Facility Maintenance E indicated the maintenance department is responsible for fixing call lights and replacing pieces of the call light watch. Facility Maintenance E indicated nursing staff notifies maintenance if call light isn't working and/or if a new band or plastic piece is needed. Facility Maintenance E indicated they were not aware of R6's call light pendant needing replacement. On 1/3/24 at 12:30 PM, CNA F (Certified Nursing Assistant) indicated R6 now has call light near R6. CNA F indicated she was unsure how long the watch piece for the call light has been broken for. On 1/3/24 at 4:00 PM, CNA G indicated R6 doesn't have any concerns wearing the call light pendant watch. CNA G indicated R6 asks if he has the call light on his wrist since he is blind. CNA G indicated it is important for R6 that he knows call light is near and on wrist. On 1/4/24 at 11:09 AM, CNA H indicated she was not aware that R6's call light pendant was broken. CNA H indicated R6 doesn't like removing the call light from his wrist and that it's important to him that he knows it on his wrist since he is blind. On 1/4/24 at 4:30 PM, Regional Nurse Consultant C indicated she would expect call light to be in place and near the person.
Dec 2023 3 deficiencies 1 IJ
CRITICAL (J) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation

Accident Prevention (Tag F0689)

Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility did not ensure that each staff implemented proper safety interventions as dir...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility did not ensure that each staff implemented proper safety interventions as directed by a resident's plan of care and did not ensure residents were free from accidents and hazards for 1 of 3 residents (R1) reviewed for falls. On [DATE], a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) attempted to provide care to R1 without maintaining the proper safety interventions as directed in R1's care plan. R1 rolled off the bed and fell approximately 2 feet to the floor, hitting her head. R1 suffered multiple fractures and a subarachnoid hemorrhage (bleeding in the space surrounding the brain), resulting in death. This created a finding of immediate jeopardy that began on [DATE]. The facility's failure to to ensure all staff follow proper safety interventions to prevent accidents created a finding of Immediate Jeopardy that began on [DATE]. Surveyor notified the NHA A (Interim Nursing Home Administrator) of the Immediate Jeopardy on [DATE] at 1:30 PM. The Immediate Jeopardy was removed on [DATE], however the deficient practice continues at a scope/severity of a D (potential for more than minimal harm/isolated) as the facility continues to implement its action plan. This is evidenced by: According to the Center for Disease Control (CDC,) Twenty to thirty percent of people who fall suffer moderate to severe injuries such as lacerations, hip fractures, or head traumas. According to the CDC, falls are the most common cause of traumatic brain injuries; traumatic brain injury accounts for 46% of fatal falls among older adults (those 65 or older). Among older adults, falls are the leading cause of injury death and are the most common cause of nonfatal injuries and hospital admissions for trauma. The CDC notes that in 2008, over 19,700 older adults died from unintentional fall injuries. (http://www.cdc.gov/homeandrecreationalsafety/falls/adultfalls.html) The facility's mechanical lift policy states the following: *Type of lift will be included on resident care plan as well as CNA care sheet. *Staff of 1-2 person will depend on individual resident's need as indicated on residents care plan and CNA care sheet. *Full body lifts (Hoyer) require 2 staff members at all times. R1 was a [AGE] year-old resident who was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had diagnoses that included Alzheimer's disease. Her Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] shows a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) was not conducted, indicating her low cognition level renders her as rarely or never understood. R1's [DATE], [DATE], and [DATE] MDS indicate she is a 1 person assist for bed mobility and a 2 person assist for transfers. Her [DATE] MDS shows that R1 requires a helper due to all the effort in transferring her from bed to her wheelchair. R1's care plan stated, Mood/Behavior: .resident is physically abusive, other residents or staff were hit, shoved, scratched .resident resists care .Safety/Falls: bed in low position with floor mat .Ambulation: non-ambulatory .Bed mobility: 1 assist .Transfers: 2 assist mechanical lift. The facility submitted a self-report on [DATE] describing an incident that occurred on the morning of [DATE] at approximately 6:45 AM in which R1 fell from her bed. In the incident, CNA H was performing cares on R1 while R1 was in bed. CNA H removed R1's fall mat from near the bed and turned her back from R1, at which time R1 rolled out of bed and onto the floor. CNA H alerted her floor nurse who then alerted the charge nurse. Upon assessment by the charge nurse, R1 was lying on her right side on the floor with blood around her head. The facility got orders from R1's physician to send her to the hospital. Emergency Medical Service (EMS) records show R1 arrived at the hospital at 7:24 AM. The hospital conducted x-rays and a CT scan (medical imaging) with results showing a pelvis fracture, femoral neck fracture, and a subarachnoid hemorrhage (bleeding in the space between the brain and the surrounding membrane.) R1 expired at the hospital at 12:10 PM. On [DATE] at 10:27 AM, Surveyor interviewed CNA H, who stated that she had worked third shift the night before, on [DATE], and had stayed into the first shift of [DATE] to help get residents up and out of bed. CNA H stated that she had gotten R1 dressed and was walking around the room back and forth getting toiletries and other items to prepare R1 for the day and she kept tripping on R1's fall mat, so she (CNA H) picked it up to move it to the other side of the room and when she got to the other side of the room, she heard R1 fall to the floor. CNA H stated R1 was on her left side in her bed before she fell and when she (CNA H) turned around to see R1 on the floor, R1 was lying on the floor on her right side. Before turning her back to R1, CNA H stated the bed was at about knee height. CNA H stated that she was not sure how close to the edge of the bed she left R1 but did not think she was close enough to fall. Additionally, CNA H stated that R1 had been somewhat restless the night before, asking all sorts of questions in the middle of the night like, Is it time to get up? CNA H also stated that R1 could be fidgety and would kick her legs and stated she thinks R1 kicked her legs in a way that rolled her off the bed. CNA H stated that she had not received any education from the time the incident occurred until yesterday ([DATE]) before she started her evening shift. CNA H stated that at that time ([DATE]), she was educated on proper positioning in bed before transfers, not turning her back to residents, not moving fall mats until the time of transfer and making sure a resident's bed is in its lowest position before leaving a resident to get a lift. Surveyor again asked CNA H if she had received any of this education or any similar education the morning of the incident or any time while she was off work pending the investigation, to which she replied, No. On [DATE] at 9:49 AM, Surveyor interviewed LD I (Lead Detective,) who headed the local police department's investigation into the incident. LD I stated that when the police arrived on [DATE] after 7:00 PM they measured the height of R1's bed to be 25 off the ground. LD I did not have any additional information for Surveyors that the facility did not already have in their internal investigation, nor was the local police department able to find any criminal misconduct. On [DATE], RN P (at 11:12 AM) and CNA K (at 11:18 AM) demonstrated for Surveyors what low bed meant. In both demonstrations, these staff employed a current resident's bed and lowered the bed to its lowest point via the bed remote until the bed stopped moving. On [DATE] at 11:21 AM, CNA L demonstrated low bed in R1's room, which is now vacant. CNA L lowered the bed until it would not lower any further. In each demonstration, staff stated the bed was approximately 10-12 off the ground. Additionally, on [DATE] Surveyors interviewed CNA G at 10:05 AM and LPN N at 11:28 AM and CNA M on [DATE] at 10:20 AM. All 3 stated that low bed means the bed is lowered to the ground until it cannot go any further. Surveyor gathered the following additional interviews: *[DATE] at 3:00 PM, RN O stated that CNA H should not have turned her back to R1 when providing cares without the fall mat or bed in the low position. RN O was the charge nurse on the night of the incident. *[DATE] at 3:55 PM, RN Q stated the bed in R1's room at the time of the incident was about 2 feet off the ground and was not at its lowest position. RN Q was the floor nurse who responded to CNA H's request for help on the morning of [DATE]. *[DATE] at 4:38 PM, DON B (Director of Nursing) stated that low bed is different depending on the resident. DON B provided Surveyor with documentation the next morning, *[DATE] at 11:21 AM, CNA L stated she regularly worked with R1 and that R1 would grab out at times and could move her legs. CNA L also stated that R1 could absolutely have rolled out of bed if she were lying on her side if she kicked her legs the way she (CNA L) had seen her do in the past. Not following R1's care plan by removing her fall mat, leaving her bed at a height greater than lowest position without supervision resulted in R1 falling, resulting in death. The facility removed the jeopardy on [DATE] when it had completed the following: The facility conducted an investigation following the event and did the following: *Immediately suspended CNA H *Contacted local law enforcement *Interviewed residents and staff *Educated staff The education included a review of the facility's mechanical lift policy with the following additional information: *Before leaving room, ensure bed is in low position and resident has call light. *Hoyer lifts always require two people. *Do not move fall mat until Hoyer lift is in room and ready to be put in place. *If you need to walk away from a resident to go get a lift, you must ensure the resident is positioned safely in their bed or recliner. The facility educated CNAs, Licensed Practical Nurses (LPN,) and Registered Nurses (RN.) Staff signatures were captured on a number of sign-in sheets to indicate staff had received the training. CNA H's signature was not found on any of the education forms or sign-ins. On [DATE] at 4:31 PM, Surveyor interviewed NHA A (Nursing Home Administrator) regarding CNA H's education after the incident. NHA A stated that she did talk with CNA H after the incident, but did not have anything documented or written down. NHA A then brought an undated, handwritten note to Surveyor that stated she had talked with a CNA (name was not that of CNA H) stating, .educated on not removing fall mat prior to transfer and not leaving resident with back turned on edge of bed. The facility provided the following documentation to Surveyors on [DATE] showing CNA H had received education on [DATE]. The education included the following: *Position resident in center of bed prior to beginning and after transfers. *Do not ever turn back on a resident if they are not positioned completely centered. *Residents with fall mats cannot have the mat removed until ready to complete transfer. *If going to get a lift, ensure bed is in lowest possible position. *Hoyer sling should not be placed under resident until transfer is ready to begin. According to facility records and timesheets, between [DATE] when the incident occurred and [DATE] when Surveyors identified the absence of CNA H's education, CNA H worked 15 shifts on 14 days. The facility's removal plan indicated it had or would be completing the following: *Follow-up was done by NHA on the incident on [DATE] to ensure completeness. Staff assigned to R1 were interviewed by NHA on [DATE]-[DATE]. Local law enforcement was notified [DATE] by NHA. *NHA/ DON will review all falls with injury on [DATE] to ensure no other education requirements are identified. Any negative findings will be properly investigated and reported as required. Negative findings will be reported to the QAPI team. *Education began on team members on Hoyer lift procedures, removing fall mats, resident positioning safety and the turning back on resident by nurse manager on [DATE]. *Education began on team members on bed in low position and breaks locked by DON on [DATE]. *Education from (RDO) Regional Director of Operations and Regional Director of Clinical Operations to Administrator on investigation requirements, what to do when completing and making corrections during investigations and educational requirements, was completed on [DATE]. Education with CNA H was completed by NHA and RN House Supervisor on [DATE] with direct how to with repeat back and in person training with positioning, fall mat use, low bed to be in low position when resident in bed. *Education continues with team members on low bed, mechanical lifts, removing fall mats, resident positioning safety in bed and the turning back on resident, and Resident Abuse/Reporting by NHA/DON on [DATE]. Clinical staff will be educated prior to working. *Incident Reports to be reviewed for thoroughness prior to final submission by RDO or RDQCS to ensure staff discipline, witness statements, staff interviews, resident interviews have been completed and followed up on. 5x a week x 3 months. *All falls with major injury will be followed up on, investigated and reported as required by regulations daily ongoing by NHA/DON. Any negative findings will be properly investigated and reported as required. Negative findings will be reported to the QAPI team. Audits to include: 1) Beds in lowest position when in bed 5x a week x 2 weeks, 3 x a week x 2 weeks and 1 x week x 2 months and 2) Fall mats in place until time of transfer 5x a week x 2 weeks, 3 x a week x 2 weeks and weekly x 2 months. Results of Audits will be reported to QAPI.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Report Alleged Abuse (Tag F0609)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility did not ensure all allegations of abuse were reported timely to the state sur...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility did not ensure all allegations of abuse were reported timely to the state survey agency (SSA) for 1 resident (R3) of 8 sampled residents. The facility failed to timely report to the SSA when an allegation of abuse was reported to administration. Evidenced by: The facility policy titled, Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation, revision date 1-23, states, in part: .It is also the policy of this community to take appropriate steps to ensure that all alleged violations of federal or state laws which involve mistreatment, neglect, abuse, injuries of unknown source, and misappropriation of resident property are reported immediately to the administrator of the community. If the events that caused the allegation involve abuse or serious bodily injury, it must be reported to the State agency immediately but no later than two hours after forming the suspicion per State and Federal regulation. Events that do not involve abuse and/or do not result in serious bodily injury must be reported to the State agency no later than 24 hours as per State and Federal regulations . R3 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. R3's most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) with Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 9/27/23, indicates R3 has a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 indicating R3 is cognitively intact. R3's most recent MDS GG functional abilities indicates R3 requires toileting hygiene: the ability to maintain perineal hygiene, adjust clothes before and after using the toilet, commode, bedpan, or urinal 02, substantial/maximal assistance - helper does more than half the effort. Facility self report to state agency, states, in part .Date occurred 10/14/23 Time occurred 10:36AM Date discovered 10/18/23. Briefly describe the incident .Management received an email on 10/16/23 from C.N.A. outlining a long call light time resulting in needs not being met. Management discussed at morning meeting and reviewed the call light report. The call light report did not show an extensive call light time, and R3 is alert and oriented x3. R3 and daughter have a very good relationship with management and SW. Upon investigation, management discovered that R3 sat in feces for a total of 3 hours with two C.N.A.s knowing this, ultimately neglecting her care. Management immediately suspended the two staff members pending the results of the investigation . Describe the effect .A full body assessment was completed 10/18/23 and 10/20/23, with no skin issues noted. Additionally R3 did not have any psycho-social signs of distress, no change in mood, behavior, food/fluid intake, activity attendance, no decline in ADLs (activities of daily living). The SW will continue to check in daily Explain what steps .Termination of both employees. The care plan was reviewed by the IDT (interdisciplinary team) and modified accordingly. Surveyor reviewed facility investigation regarding incident on 10/14/23. Incident was reported to administration through an email from a nursing staff. The email, states, in part; sent: Sunday, October 15, 2023 10:03PM Hello, When I came in for my Saturday pm shift, Room [#'s] call light was going off. I got report went to answer it and the resident was very upset saying she had been sitting in her BM since 10:45am. I immediately went to grab [staff name] the CNA that had [room #] in her group. She told me [room #] had to poop but the other aide was on break at the time and she couldn't do her alone. Then I asked why she wasn't changed when the aide came back. She said because they had to get ready to serve lunch. I reminded her lunch was at 11:30. [room #] sat from 10:45 until 2:00 that's over 3 hours. She got upset and really rude saying it wasn't her fault and that she was busy. I went to get the AM nurse [staff name] worked with and she said she wasn't aware that [room #] had been waiting so long sitting in her BM, but could have assisted if [staff name] needed help. I asked if [staff name] could please change [room #] and she kept coming up with excuses and blaming others on why [room #] didn't get changed. The nurse literally had to get stern with [staff name] to get her to get [room #] cleaned up before she left. When she left [room #] called and told me [staff name] was kind of rude and told [room #], she had 10 mins to get her changed so they had to be quick. [room #] said she was really itchy and wanted to be washed thoroughly with wash cloths and [staff name] told her she only had 10 minutes and couldn't do all of that. This is totally unacceptable! [staff name] could have grabbed a nurse. If the nurse wasn't available she could have called charge. When the other aide came back from lunch, they could have done her together while the nurse served. There are so many things that could have been differently. There is absolutely no excuse why this happened. I feel like someone during this shift should have done something. This means that for over three hours no one checked on [room #]. Nurse or aide! I was so shocked at the behavior from [staff name] when this unfolded. She took no responsibility, showed no remorse at all and was very rude. Please follow up on this. This is one of the saddest cases of neglect I've ever witnessed here! . DON B (Director of Nursing) replied back to email on Monday, October 16, 2023, 4:57 PM, .I did just look at the report. [room #'s] light was on 48 minutes total, but still way too long .the nursing staff that reported allegation replied back on Monday, October 16, 2023, 6:14 PM, .[resident name] knows how to turn her own call light off. She turned it off after she told [staff name] she had to have a bm. The call light was not on the whole time she was waiting. But I'm glad you all are looking into it! Have a good evening . It is important to note the incident occurred on 10/14/23 and the investigation did not start, nor was it reported to the SSA until 10/18/23. On 11/20/23 at 11:48 AM, Surveyor interviewed R3. R3 indicated staff are usually quick to respond to her call light; however, there was one time recently that she had a bowel movement and sat for three hours. R3 indicated it did not feel good sitting on a bowel movement for three hours and that she didn't want to make a mess for the staff. R3 indicated she feels the facility has now followed up on this concern, but that it took a few days for them to investigate it. R3 indicated R3 will turn off and on her call light if needed. R3 indicated if staff come in and turn off her call light, and they didn't assist her, R3 will wait 10 minutes or so and turn on her call light again. On 11/20/23 at 3:10 PM, DON B indicated she was the management staff that followed up on the incident from 10/14/23 with R3. DON B indicated a nurse reported the incident on 10/15/23 by sending an email to administration. DON B indicated the facility practice is that staff should immediately call administration or the on call staff to report an allegation of possible abuse. DON B indicated it is not acceptable to send an email and that the nursing staff and all staff were educated on the importance of reporting. DON B provided Surveyor the memo and staff signature sheet regarding education provided after 10/14/23 incident. DON B indicated DON B did not start an investigation immediately because when she first read the email she felt it didn't seem urgent and was merely a call light concern. DON B indicated the next day (Tuesday, 10/17/23) or the following (Wednesday, 10/18/23) she was thinking about the incident, and something felt off. DON B indicated she cannot remember what felt off, but she then started an investigation at that point. Surveyor questioned, was the investigation started on 10/18/23, and reported to state agency at that time? DON B indicated yes. On 11/21/23 at 8:15 AM, DON B indicated an investigation should have been started immediately after the incident on 10/14/23 with R3. DON B indicated she was new to her position at that time and looking back she should have started the investigation and reported it to state agency prior to 10/18/23.
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

Investigate Abuse (Tag F0610)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Example 4 R3 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. R3's most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) with Assessment Reference Date (ARD...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Example 4 R3 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. R3's most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) with Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 9/27/23, indicates R3 has a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 indicating R3 is cognitively intact. R3's most recent MDS GG functional abilities indicates R3 requires toileting hygiene: the ability to maintain perineal hygiene, adjust clothes before and after using the toilet, commode, bedpan, or urinal 02, substantial/maximal assistance- helper does more than half the effort. Facility self report to state agency, states, in part .Date occurred 10/14/23 Time occurred 10:36AM Date discovered 10/18/23. Briefly describe the incident .Management received an email on 10/16/23 from C.N.A. outlining a long call light time resulting in needs not being met. Management discussed at morning meeting and reviewed the call light report. The call light report did not show an extensive call light time, and R3 is alert and oriented x3. R3 and daughter have a very good relationship with management and SW. Upon investigation, management discovered that R3 sat in feces for a total of 3 hours with two C.N.A.s knowing this, ultimately neglecting her care. Management immediately suspended the two staff members pending the results of the investigation . Describe the effect .A full body assessment was completed 10/18/23 and 10/20/23, with no skin issues noted. Additionally R3 did not have any psycho-social signs of distress, no change in mood, behavior, food/fluid intake, activity attendance, no decline in ADLs. The SW will continue to check in daily Explain what steps .Termination of both employees. The care plan was reviewed by the IDT and modified accordingly. Surveyor reviewed facility investigation regarding incident on 10/14/23. Incident was reported to administration through an email from a nursing staff. The email, states, in part; sent: Sunday, October 15, 2023, 10:03 PM Hello, When I came in for my Saturday pm shift, (R3's Room# )call light was going off. I got report went to answer it and the resident was very upset saying she had been sitting in her BM since 10:45am. I immediately went to grab the CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant) that had resident in her group. She told me the resident had to poop but the other aide was on break at the time and she couldn't do her alone. Then I asked why she wasn't changed when the aide came back. She said because they had to get ready to serve lunch. I reminded her lunch was at 11:30. The resident sat from 10:45 until 2:00 that's over 3 hours. She got upset and really rude saying it wasn't her fault and that she was busy. I went to get the AM nurse the CNA worked with and she said she wasn't aware that the resident had been waiting so long sitting in her BM, but could have assisted if the CNA needed help. I asked if CNA could please change (R3) and she kept coming up with excuses and blaming others on why (R3) didn't get changed. The nurse literally had to get stern with the CNA J to get her to get R3 cleaned up before she left. When she left R3 called and told me CNA J was kind of rude and told R3, she had 10 mins to get her changed so they had to be quick. R3 said she was really itchy and wanted to be washed thoroughly with wash cloths and CNA J told her she only had 10 minutes and couldn't do all of that. This is totally unacceptable! CNA J could have grabbed a nurse. If the nurse wasn't available she could have called charge. When the other aide came back from lunch, they could have done her together while the nurse served. There are so many things that could have been differently. There is absolutely no excuse why this happened. I feel like someone during this shift should have done something. This means that for over three hours no one checked on R3. Nurse or aide! I was so shocked at the behavior from CNA J when this unfolded. She took no responsibility, showed no remorse at all and was very rude. Please follow up on this. This is one of the saddest cases of neglect I've ever witnessed here! . DON B (Director of Nursing) replied back to email on Monday, October 16, 2023, 4:57 PM, .I did just look at the report. R3's light was on 48 minutes total, but still way too long .the nursing staff that reported allegation replied back on Monday, October 16, 2023, 6:14 PM, .R3 knows how to turn her own call light off. She turned it off after she told CNA J she had to have a bm. The call light was not on the whole time she was waiting. But I'm glad you all are looking into it! Have a good evening. It is important to note the incident occurred on 10/14/23 and the investigation was not started until 10/18/23. On 11/20/23 at 11:48 AM, R3 indicated staff are usually quick to respond to her call light; however, there was one time recently that she had a bowel movement and sat for three hours. R3 indicated it did not feel good sitting on a bowel movement for three hours and that she didn't want to make a mess for the staff. R3 indicated she feels the facility has now followed up on this concern, but that it took a few days for them to investigate it. R3 indicated R3 will turn off and on her call light if needed. R3 indicated if staff come in and turn off her call light, and they didn't assist her, R3 will wait 10 minutes or so and turn on her call light again. Surveyor reviewed time sheets for the two accused CNA's. One of the accused CNA's worked 10/15/23 and 10/16/23. On 11/20/23 at 3:10 PM, DON B indicated she was the management staff that followed up on the incident from 10/14/23 with R3. DON B indicated a nurse reported the incident on 10/15/23 by sending an email to administration. DON B indicated the facility practice is that staff should immediately call administration or the on call staff to report an allegation of possible abuse. DON B indicated it is not acceptable to send an email and that the nursing staff and all staff were education on the importance of reporting. DON B provided Surveyor the memo and staff signature sheet regarding education provided after 10/14/23 incident. DON B indicated DON B did not start an investigation immediately because when she first read the email she felt it didn't seem urgent and was a call light concern. DON B indicated the next day (Tuesday, 10/17/23) or the following (Wednesday, 10/18/23) she was thinking about the incident, and something felt off. DON B indicated she can not remember what felt off, but she then started an investigation at that point. Surveyor questioned, was the investigation started on 10/18/23? DON B indicated yes. Surveyor asked when were the two accused CNA's put on administrative leave? DON B and NHA A (Nursing Home Administrator) reviewed CNA's time punches. DON B and NHA A indicated they were put on leave once the investigation was started on 10/18/23. Surveyor asked did one of the accused CNA's work 10/15/23 and 10/16/23? DON B indicated yes. On 11/21/23 at 8:15AM, DON B indicated an investigation should have been started immediately after the incident on 10/14/23 with R3. DON B indicated she was new to her position at that time and looking back she should have started the investigation and put accused CNA's on administrative leave immediately. Based on interview and record review, the facility did not have evidence that all alleged violations are thoroughly investigated for 4 of 7 sampled residents (R2, R3, R5, R7). R2's self report, dated 10/22/23, was not thoroughly investigated. The facility did not ensure residents were protected when an allegation of abuse was reported for R3. R5 did not have thorough follow-up after responding to interview questions. R7 did not have thorough follow-up after responding to interview questions. Evidenced by: The facility policy, Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation, dated 1-2023, states, in part; .c. Allegations of abuse, neglect, or exploitation will be thoroughly investigated. The investigation will be initiated upon receipt of the allegation. The administrator, or designee, will complete the investigation process. d. The investigation can include, but is not limited to: i. The name(s) of the resident(s) involved ii. The date and time the incident occurred iii. The circumstances surrounding the incident iv. Where the incident took place v. The names of any witnesses vi. The name of the person(s) alleged with committing the act 6. Resident Protection: Residents are protected from harm during an investigation Example 1 R2 is a long-term resident of the facility. R2's most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], documents a score of 15 on the Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) which indicates R2 is cognitively intact. The facility submitted a self-report, dated 10/22/23, regarding R2 feeling unsafe and neglected. Based off the documentation provided, the facility was able to conclude that there was no intent for R2 to have been neglected; however, throughout this investigation there were other concerns that arose that required follow up. For this investigation, it is noted that the staff that were working on the date of this incident (10/22/23) were not interviewed except for the Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) that reported the incident and the CNA that the incident was reported about. On 11/20/23 at 1:49 PM, Surveyor interviewed CNA C. Surveyor asked CNA C if he recalled the incident 10/22/23 with R2, CNA C said yes. Surveyor asked CNA C to explain what happened, CNA C explained that he was scheduled to come in at 7 AM; however, he had overslept because he had been working doubles prior to this date, he actually was woke up by a co-worker at his door; CNA C went on to explain that he got to the facility at 10 AM and at that time, he was not scheduled on R2's unit but that was his regular assignment and he did note that her call light was on so he answered it. CNA C stated that when he entered R2's room she began to yell at him about why no one had been in by her yet, that she hadn't had breakfast, and that she hadn't been changed. Surveyor asked CNA C if normally those tasks would have been completed, CNA C said yes, and he noted that she was still in the position that she is in for bed at night. Surveyor asked CNA C to continue; CNA C then stated he made R2 breakfast and served it to her and told her he would be back in a while to get her out of bed, changed, and dressed. Surveyor asked CNA C if there were any issues after that, CNA C said no. Surveyor asked CNA C what he thought might have happened, CNA C said there were call ins and I'm guessing the staff that was here didn't plan and she was overlooked. On 11/20/23 at 3:12 PM, Surveyor interviewed RN D (Registered Nurse). Surveyor asked RN D to explain what occurs as far as assignments when call ins happen, RN D explained that the charge nurse is responsible for making new assignments, that is relayed to the floor nurse, and the floor nurse to the CNA's. Surveyor asked RN D if she recalled this specific date 10/22/23, RN D said she couldn't remember everything but what she could recall was that she was to be the charge nurse but then a nurse called in, so she filled in on a unit, a CNA had also called in, and CNA C came in at 10 AM, late. Surveyor asked RN D if she recalled speaking with the floor nurse that day about the plan, RN D said yes as she stated that she was assisting with answering call lights as well, and that CNA C was moved to a different unit that had less residents on it so they figured the 1 CNA down there until he arrived would be okay. It is important to note that Surveyor attempted to interview the other CNA and LPN (Licensed Practical Nurse) that were scheduled that date without success; however, based off these 2 interviews it is indicative that the call ins and re-assignment of residents didn't go well and R2 was inadvertently missed. The facility then provided education on neglect reporting regarding this incident. There were no specifics of this incident with R2 in the education. While R2 did indicate that she felt neglected, the root cause of this incident seemed to be the call in and re-assignment procedure, which was not educated on. Staff interviews regarding education noted the following: On 11/20/23 at 11:53 AM, Surveyor interviewed MA E (Medication Aide). Surveyor asked MA E if she recalled receiving education in late October regarding R2, MA E described some medication specific education. Surveyor asked MA E if she recalled any education about neglect or call in/re-assignment procedure, MA E said no. CNA F was present at this time and said they (herself and MA E) are regulars on R2's hall. On 11/20/23 at 11:56 AM, Surveyor asked CNA F if she recalled receiving education in late October regarding R2, CNA F said she heard about the incident but didn't work that day. Surveyor asked CNA F if she recalled any education about neglect or call in/re-assignment procedure, CNA F said no. On 11/20/23 at 12:00 PM, Surveyor interviewed CNA G. Surveyor asked CNA G if she recalled receiving education in late October regarding R2, CNA G said yes that R2's call light should not exceed 10 minutes before being answered. Surveyor asked CNA G if she recalled any education about neglect or call in/re-assignment procedure, CNA G said no. It is important to note, 1) CNA F who is a consistent CNA on R2's unit was not listed as receiving the education and 2) MA E and CNA G were listed on the neglect education but did not recall that it was in relation to R2. The two resident interviews that were part of this investigation responded to interview questions in a manner that required follow up and that follow up was not done until 11/20/23 when Surveyor asked about it. On 11/20/23 at 3:43 PM, Surveyor interviewed NHA A (Nursing Home Administrator). Surveyor asked NHA A if she could explain what transpired on 10/22/23 with R2; NHA A explained that CNA C was scheduled to be in at 7 AM, CNA C had texted her that R2 said she had been neglected all morning, but he was there now, and would take care of R2. NHA A went on to say she spoke with R2 and her husband over the phone and interviewed R2 again the next morning. NHA A said she contacted the Police, that she was told R2 had been check and changed around 5:30 AM; NHA A said R2 told her she awoke to someone saying the time loudly in the hall, R2 said she could tell someone had been there, in her room because her pills were at bedside. NHA A said R2 told her she felt unsafe like they had forgotten her but didn't believe it to be intentional. Surveyor asked NHA A how she determined which staff to interview, NHA A stated she chose the staff based on consistency of work assignment on R2's hallway. Surveyor asked NHA A if she considered speaking with the staff that was working on that date to see if they could get to the root cause of the issue, NHA A said that was partly why R2 hadn't been checked on. NHA A stated there was a lot going on that day with other matters as well. Surveyor asked NHA A if it is possible that the communication about re-assignments from call ins contributed, NHA A said yes. Surveyor asked NHA A if she had any follow up for R5 or R7 after their responses to the interview questions, NHA A said she would have to look. Surveyor asked NHA A if she feels like neglect reporting was the appropriate education for this incident with R2, NHA A replied that R2 indicated she felt neglected, so she started there and she feels that she over educates on abuse/neglect but sees that the staffing situation caused confusion and potentially miscommunication. Example 2 R5 is a long-term resident of the facility. Her most recent MDS dated [DATE] documents a score of 15 on her BIMS, which indicates that she is cognitively intact. R5 was interviewed as part of the self-report investigation for R2 on 10/22/23. The questions asked and her responses were as follows: 1) Overall, do you feel safe in the community? R5's documented response was sometimes. 2) Do you feel that staff treat you with respect/dignity? R5's documented response was sometimes. R5's Nurse's Notes from 10/22/23-10/31/23 were reviewed, there was no documentation present in relation to follow-up from interview questions. R5 had a grievance on 10/25/23 regarding call lights. On 11/20/23 at 3:43 PM, Surveyor interviewed NHA A. Surveyor asked NHA A if she had any follow up for R5 or R7 after their responses to the interview questions, NHA A said she would have to look. On 11/21/23 at 7:40 AM, Surveyor was provided via email from NHA A with a screenshot of a Nurse's Note dated 10/31/23 that documents call light response from a recent grievance. There was a note from NHA A documenting the following: Here is a screenshot after my follow-up with R5. She did not feel neglect or abuse, and felt safe . Surveyor emailed NHA A back and requested a full copy of R5's Nurse's Note so that the name of resident could be identified and asked if there was specific documentation for R5 and R7 in relation to the interview questions asked. It is important to note that this additional email documentation reads like it is follow up to the grievance. On 11/21/23 at 11:40 AM, Surveyor was provided with additional documentation via email from NHA A. This handwritten documentation included: R5 (written out first name only) #1 follow up: Sometimes I worry when there isn't enough staff, but nothing has happened specifically. #2 follow up: If they are rude, I address it right away and tell staff. It is important to note that this document is not thorough; the residents' full name is not present, date or time, questions asked nor the name of the interviewer. On 11/21/23 at 1:45PM, R5 indicated no one ever followed back up with her after she voiced that she doesn't always feel safe and doesn't always feel she is treated with respect and dignity. R5 indicated NHA came and talked to her yesterday, 11/20/23, but never before that. On 11/21/23 at 12:55PM, Surveyor asked NHA A, if a resident is asked Overall, do you feel safe in the community? And their response is sometimes, what should happen next? NHA A indicated the staff asking this question should ask more questions to determine next steps. Surveyor asked NHA A, if a resident is asked Do you feel that staff treat you with respect/dignity? And their response is sometimes, what should happen next? NHA A indicated that NHA A would ask more questions and try to better understand the resident and his/her concerns. NHA A indicated when she interviews residents during investigations it is more of a conversation between her and the resident, and it can be difficult documenting the questions and conversations while it is happening. NHA A indicated she realizes NHA A documentation needs to be more detailed and include follow up, resident full names, date, time, and who interviewer is. Example 3 R7 is a long-term resident of the facility. R7 was interviewed as part of the self-report investigation for R2 on 10/22/23. The questions asked and her responses were as follows: 2) Do you feel that staff treat you with respect/dignity? R5's documented response was sometimes, don't know how to do their job R7's Nurse's Notes from 10/22/23-10/31/23 were reviewed, there was no documentation present in relation to follow-up from interview questions. On 11/20/23 at 3:43 PM, Surveyor interviewed NHA A. Surveyor asked NHA A if she had any follow up for R5 or R7 after their responses to the interview questions, NHA A said she would have to look. On 11/21/23 at 7:40 AM, Surveyor was provided via email from NHA A with a screenshot of Nurse's Notes that document call light response from a recent grievance. There was a note from NHA A documenting the following: Here is a screenshot after my follow-up with R5. She did not feel neglect or abuse and felt safe .My follow-up with R7 was similar. She went on to explain that sometimes she gets a caregiver that doesn't know her routine, so she thinks they don't know her job. She did not feel neglect or abuse and felt safe. Surveyor emailed NHA A back and asked if there was specific documentation for R5 and R7 in relation to the interview questions asked. On 11/21/23 at 11:40 AM, Surveyor was provided with additional documentation via email from NHA A. This handwritten documentation included: R7 (Written out first name and first letter of last name only) #2 follow-up: Some staff aren't as personable and don't know the routine, so they don't know their job. It is important to note that this document is not thorough; the residents' full name is not present, date or time, questions asked nor the name of the interviewer. of the facility. R2's most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] documents a score of 15 on the Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) which indicates R2 is cognitively intact. The facility submitted a self-report dated 10/22/23 regarding R2 feeling unsafe and neglected. Based off of the documentation provided, the facility was able to conclude that there was no intent for R2 to have been neglected however throughout this investigation there were other concerns that arose that required follow up. For this investigation it is noted that the staff that were working on the date of this incident (10/22/23) were not interviewed except for the CNA that reported the incident and the CNA that the incident was reported about.
Oct 2023 3 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

Report Alleged Abuse (Tag F0609)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Example 2 The facility noted R28 had an unknown injury on her inner thigh and did not report the injury to the state agency. R28...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Example 2 The facility noted R28 had an unknown injury on her inner thigh and did not report the injury to the state agency. R28 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and has diagnoses that include Alzheimer's Disease. Her most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) includes a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 99, indicating R28 was unable to complete the BIMS. Additionally, R28's MDS states she has both short-term and long-term memory loss and is severely cognitively impaired in relation to daily decision making. A facility progress note for R28, dated 9/27/23 at 9:12 PM, states, ADON (Assistant Director of Nursing) called regarding scattered bruises to waistline and left inner thigh. No additional investigative or assessment notes were found regarding the bruising. On 10/9/23, Surveyors conducted the following interviews: *10:41 AM: CNA E (Certified Nursing Assistant) stated to Surveyor that she worked with R28, frequently providing cares and did not notice any bruising until 9/27/23. Additionally, CNA E stated R28 was not able to communicate regularly with staff and was not a good historian. *10:47 AM: LPN C (Licensed Practical Nurse) stated to Surveyor that she was summoned to R28's room on 9/27/23 to look at some bruising on R28, which was around her waistline and on the inner thigh. LPN C then contacted her charge nurse at the time, RN D (Registered Nurse). LPN C stated that she only worked the unit where R28 resided and provided cares for her daily, which included frequent trips to the bathroom as R28 frequently tried to stand up from her wheelchair. LPN C stated she did not see the inner thigh bruising until 9/27/23. LPN C stated that she felt the location of the injury warranted reporting to the charge nurse. *11:18 AM: RN D, who wrote the 9/27/23 progress note, stated she was called by LPN C regarding some bruising to the inner thigh of R28, which RN D forwarded on to the ADON, who is currently DON B (Director of Nursing). *1:48 PM: DON B stated she was contacted by RN D on 9/27/23 regarding the bruising on R28, but told RN D that she (DON B) had taken care of it. DON B stated that she realized on 10/2/23 that she had mistaken R28 for another resident and had not actually looked into R28's bruising. DON B then started the investigative process at that time, but still did not believe the inner thigh bruising to be suspicious in location. DON B stated it was unknown how the bruises appeared and due to her lack of cognition R28 was unable to explain how the bruises appeared. DON B also stated that in her years of experience in providing cares, the bruising most likely came from repositioning the resident. DON B stated she understood how someone would think the inner thigh would be a sensitive and unusual area to bruise and would consider it as such moving forward. Staff observed bruising on R28's inner thigh and felt the need to report the injury, but the facility did not report the injury of unknown origin to the state agency. Based on observations, record reviews, and interviews, it was determined the facility failed to report a resident's missing pain patch, as outlined in their abuse policies related to the misappropriation of residents' property, for 1 (R11) out of 4 residents prescribed Fentanyl patches for pain. This failure placed R11 and other residents requiring the use of a pain patch at risk of breakthrough pain and for the unlawful use of the residents' property without their permission. Note: Fentanyl is a schedule II pain medication that is unlawful to use without a physician's prescription and the facility did not ensure that all alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, mistreatment, and including injuries of unknown source are reported to the State Survey Agency for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for abuse (R28). Findings include: A review of the facility's ''Abuse - Prevention of Including Misappropriation of Property'' policy, dated October 2010 defined ''Misappropriation of Resident Property .'' as ''The deliberate misplacement, exploitation, or wrongful, temporary, or permanent use of a resident's belongings or money without the resident's consent.'' According to the facility's policy titled ''Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation . ,' revised May 2020, ''It is the policy of this community to take appropriate steps to prevent the occurrence of . Misappropriation of resident property . Events that do not involve abuse and/or do not result in serious bodily injury must be reported to the State agency no later than 24 hours as per State and Federal regulations .'' Under the section titled ''7. Reporting: a. Any employee who suspects an alleged violation immediately notifies the administrator. The administrator notifies the appropriate state agency immediately in accordance with state law .'' It is the policy of this community to take appropriate steps to ensure that all alleged violations of federal or state laws which involve mistreatment, neglect, abuse, injuries of unknown source, and misappropriation are reported immediately to the administrator of the community. If the events that caused the allegation involve abuse or serious bodily injury, it must be reported to the state agency immediately but no later than 2 hours after forming the suspicion per state and federal regulation. Events that do not involve abuse and/or do not result in serious bodily injury must be reported to the state agency no later than 24 hours as per state and federal regulations. The community investigates each such alleged violation thoroughly and reports the results of all investigations to the administrator, as well as to state agencies and adult protective services, as required by state and federal law. An injury of unknown source is one that was not witnessed by staff, could not be explained by the resident; and The injury is suspicious because of the extent of the injury or the location of the injury (e.g., the injury is located in an area not generally vulnerable to trauma.) Example 1 Record review of the facility provided ''Incident Audit Report,'' dated 10/02/23, revealed on 06/13/23 at 12:30 PM, Registered Nurse (RN) 1 documented in the progress note that the R11's Fentanyl Patch, which was placed on 06/11/23 at 6:00 AM to the left mid thoracic back, was missing. When checking on 06/13/23 at 2:41 PM, along with the off-going nurse, to verify the patch was in place, it was determined the patch could not be found. During an interview on 10/02/23 at 4:29 PM, the Administrator reported there was not a report to the State for R11's missing Fentanyl patch. The Administrator said R11 had received a shower and bed linen change that day, and they were sure they would find the patch in the shower or laundry. The Administrator confirmed the patch was never found. The Administrator further shared her understanding that since the facility felt pretty sure the patch fell off during the day, she did not have to report it to the state. During an interview on 10/03/23 at 2:36 PM, RN1 recalled checking R11's patch with the off- going nurse and could not find the patch. The progress note documented that management was notified the patch was missing. A review of the facility ''Incident Audit Report'' further noted the prior shift had documented the patch was in place until such time as the charge nurse went to look at the patch and it was not there. According to RN1, R11 had received a bath that day and the staff searched the room, bathroom, and laundry but never located the patch. RN1 confirmed he notified the nursing manager that the patch was missing.
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

Investigate Abuse (Tag F0610)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observations, record reviews, and interviews, it was determined the facility failed to investigate a resident's missing pain patch, as outlined in their abuse policies related to the misappro...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observations, record reviews, and interviews, it was determined the facility failed to investigate a resident's missing pain patch, as outlined in their abuse policies related to the misappropriation of residents' property, for one out of four residents Resident (R11) prescribed Fentanyl patches for pain. This failure placed R11 and other residents requiring the use of a pain patch at risk of breakthrough pain and for the unlawful use of the residents' property without their permission. Note: Fentanyl is a schedule II drug that is unlawful to use without a physician's prescription. Findings include: A review of the facility's ''Abuse - Prevention of Including Misappropriation of Property'' policy, dated October 2010 defined ''Misappropriation of Resident Property.'' as ''The deliberate misplacement, exploitation, or wrongful, temporary, or permanent use of a resident's belongings or money without the resident's consent.'' The facility's ''Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation'' policy, dated revised January 2023, noted '' . c. Allegations of abuse, neglect, or exploitation will be thoroughly investigated. The investigation will be initiated upon receipt of the allegation. The administrator, or designee, will complete the investigation process.'' Record review of the facility provided ''Incident Audit Report,'' dated 10/02/23, revealed on 06/13/23 at 12:30 PM, Registered Nurse (RN) 1 documented in the progress note that the R11's Fentanyl Patch, which was placed on 06/11/23 at 6:00 AM, to the left mid thoracic back, was missing. When checking on 06/13/23 at 2:41 PM, along with the off-going nurse, to verify the patch was in place, it was determined the patch could not be found. During an interview on 10/02/2023 at 4:29 PM, the Administrator reported there was not an investigation for R11's missing Fentanyl patch. The Administrator stated R11 had received a shower and bed linen change that day, and they were sure they would find the patch in the shower or laundry. The Administrator confirmed the patch was never found. The Administrator further shared her understanding that since the facility felt pretty sure the patch fell off during the day, she did not have to investigate it. During an interview on 10/03/23 at 2:36 PM, RN1 recalled checking R11's patch with the off- going nurse and could not find the patch. The progress note documented management was notified the patch was missing. A review of the facility ''Incident Audit Report'' further noted the prior shift had documented the patch was in place until such time as the charge nurse went to look at the patch and it was not there. According to RN1, R11 had received a bath that day and the staff searched the room, bathroom, and laundry but never located the patch. RN1 confirmed he notified the nursing manager that the patch was missing. He could not recall if an investigation or drug testing was conducted. During an interview on 10/03/23 at 6:34 PM, RN2 confirmed the facility's documentation process for residents with Fentanyl patches. RN2 revealed that during the narcotic count at the change of shift, the two nurses check each resident who has a Fentanyl patch for the location of the patch and to confirm in PCC (the clinical software system used for charting and medication administration) that the two nurses saw the patch on the resident. Additionally, a form is completed at each shift to include the signature of the two nurses who witnessed the patch on the resident. This results in six checks a day to confirm the patch is in place for each resident. The unused Fentanyl patches are also included in the narcotic count each shift.
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

Quality of Care (Tag F0684)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on record review, interviews, and policy review it was determined the facility failed to ensure that physicians' orders were accurately implemented for 5 out of 8 residents Resident (R23, R6, R2...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review, interviews, and policy review it was determined the facility failed to ensure that physicians' orders were accurately implemented for 5 out of 8 residents Resident (R23, R6, R22, R24, R21) reviewed for medication errors. A review of the facility's Incident Audit report indicated at least five residents were administered medications incorrectly by facility staff. This failure placed these residents and potentially other residents at risk of harm. Findings include: According to the facility's ''Physician/GNP [Gerontologic Nurse Practitioner] Orders'' policy, revised 02/06/19, ''Outcome Statement: Physician/Gnp orders will be taken only by an SMCC [facility name] licensed nurse (RN [Registered Nurse] or LPN [Licensed Practical Nurse]) or pharmacist. It is the responsibility of the licensed nurse signing and noting the order (beneath the physician's signature) to ensure that all steps in this policy and procedure have been completed. The following medication orders require a second nurse verify that the order has been entered into the electronic medical record [a clinical software system for charting and medication administration] correctly: 1. Coumadin/Anti-coagulants, 2. Insulin, 3. Narcotics, 4. Intravenous medication or fluid . Procedure: . 2. Repeat the order back to MD [Medical Doctor]/GNP to verify accuracy . 4. The Unit Coordinator if available, or nurse will transcribe the orders to the MAR/TAR [Medication Administration Record/Treatment Administration Record], checking each order as completed and initials box labeled, ''Physician Order'' on the telephone order . 8. The nurse will check orders on the electronic MAR/TAR against the original MD order to verify it is correct and will initial the box labeled ''Med/Tx [Medication/Treatment] on the telephone order slip. 9. The nurse will chart MD orders and follow up in ECS and initial box labeled 'Nurses Notes' on the telephone order slip . Essential Points: . If you are uncertain how to process an order, leave the chart with the red flag pulled up and call the Unit Coordinator or your supervisor . If Coumadin or Enoxaparin (lovenox) are ordered, ensure any follow up labs that are needed, are ordered .'' The facility's ''Monthly Order Process'' policy, revised August 2019, ''Outcome Statement: All residents' physicians orders will be reviewed on a monthly basis by the Nurse manager or designee. The purpose is to ensure accuracy and completeness as well as facilitate reconciliation.'' During an interview on 10/02/23 at 10:00 AM, the Administrator believed the facility started utilizing the current electronic medical record system (EMR) in February 2023. The Administrator shared she had started with the facility in June 2023 and the Director of Nursing (DON) had only recently been appointed within the last few weeks. The Administrator was asked to provide the facility's pharmacy policy related to medications. The Administrator was also asked to provide evidence of any medication errors for the past six months. The Administrator provided the ''Incident Audit Report,'' for April through September 2023. The following five medication errors were identified by the report provided by the Administrator. Example 1 Review of the Incident Audit Report revealed, ''Medication order for Ferrous Sulfate [iron supplement] copied from [previous EMR] to [current EMR] incorrectly. Correct order is for Ferrous Sulfate 325 mg to be given every other day at supper [;] order was incorrectly copied to be given every day at supper. No adverse effects to [R23] noted .'' Record review of R23's MAR located in the EMR Orders tab for February 2023 and March 2023 revealed R23 received ferrous sulfate daily instead of every other day for 59 days. There was no indication, from review of the resident's Nurse Progress Notes, located in the EMR under the ''Progress Notes'' tab, for February and March, that the resident experienced any adverse effects. Example 2 Review of the Incident Audit Report revealed on 05/13/23 at 8:00 AM R6 was ''. inadvertently given non-prescribed medications: Calcium, Vitamin D, Senna [a stool softener], Metoprolol [beta blocker, used to treat high blood pressure], and Zyprexa [antipsychotic medication]. Medications were intended for [another resident named] .'' Record review of the nurse's progress note, located in R6's EMR under the ''Progress Note'' tab, revealed the nurse notified the resident's physician that the medication error had occurred. The note continued that the physician ordered the nurse to monitor the resident's pulse every three hours for 12 hours and update the physician if pulse below 40 beats per minute (BPM). A review of R6's vital signs for 05/13/23, located in the resident's EMR under the ''Vital Signs'' tab, revealed the nurses followed the physician's order. The resident's pulse readings were documented and indicated they were within the appropriate range. Included in the ''Incident Audit Report,'' was a note from the facility's director of nursing (DON) at that time. The note indicated the nurse making the error was educated and no adverse reaction was noted from the error. Example 3 Review of the Incident Audit Report revealed on 05/16/23 at 9:19 AM, R22's ''Order for Coumadin was noted to be not fully transcribed and entered into [new EMR]. It is estimated that the dose of this medication was missed x [time] 6 days.'' The entry on the report further noted that the physician was notified and a stat [immediately] order to obtain a PT[Prothrombin]/INR [international normalized ratio, measure of how long it takes blood to clot, coumadin increases this ratio]. The note further documented R22's Coumadin should be restarted and ''no critical results r/t [related to] labs.'' Record review of R22's clinical record, under the ''Diagnosis'' tab, revealed the resident was being treated for after care following joint replacement surgery, and major joint replacement. Record review of R22's INR lab results, dated 05/10/23, located in the EMR under the ''Results'' tab, revealed on 05/03/23 the resident's INR was 2.4, which according to the comments on the report was a high number for ''non-anticoagulated range.'' The note written in the report revealed the AC [Anticoagulation] clinic was updated with the lab results. Record review of R22's INR lab results, dated 05/16/23 at 5:00 PM, revealed the resident's INR was 1.3. The comments section of the report documented a range of 2.0 - 3.0 for typical warfarin [Coumadin] therapeutic range. According to the nurse's progress note, dated 05/16/23 at 5:21 PM, found in the resident's EMR under the ''Progress Notes'' tab, ''Call placed to AC to report INR result of 1.3. The note further stated that a message was left regarding the INR results and that a call back was expected 05/17/23 during the AC clinic hours. Example 4 Review of the Incident Audit Report revealed on 08/27/23, an incident was identified related to R24's order written on 08/22/23 by the nurse practitioner for Macrobid [antibiotic] 100 milligrams (mg) twice a day for five days due to the resident's urinary tract infection (UTI). The note documented the order was transcribed incorrectly and entered to be given every five days. The note continued that R24 did not receive multiple doses. Record review of R24's Medication Administration Record (MAR) located in the EMR under the ''Orders'' tab revealed the order was started on 08/22/23 at 8:30 PM. The order on the MAR read ''Macrobid Oral Capsule 100 MG . Give 1 capsule by mouth two times a day every 5 day(s) for Infection related to URGE INCONTINENCE. '' The documented administration and times confirmed R24 received the Macrobid 100 mg at bedtime on 08/23/23 and did not receive another dose until 08/27/23 during the MID and HS administration times. According to the undated information provided by the facility med pass times are as follows: . MID [10:30 AM-1:30PM] . HS [7:30 PM - 10:30 PM] .'' This indicated R24 missed at least eight doses of the antibiotic. Record review of R24's nurse progress notes from 08/22/23 to 08/27/23, indicated there were no signs of worsening UTI, such as pain or increase of blood in the resident's urine. Example 5 Review of the Incident Audit Report revealed R21 had an order for scheduled nine units Humalog (a rapid acting insulin) with meals and Humalog sliding scale. On 09/04/23, the evening shift gave Novolog (a rapid acting insulin) 17 units (9 units and 8 units ss (sliding scale). Resident has order for schedule 9 units Humalog with meals and Humalog sliding scale. On 09/04/23, evening shift gave Novolog 17 units (9 units and 8 units ss.) Record review of the resident's September 2023 MAR, found in the EMR under the ''Orders'' tab, revealed R21's Humalog Kwik Pen Subcutaneous Solution Pen-Injector 100 Unit/ML [milliliter] (Insulin Lispro) order for 9 units twice a day and a sliding scale which indicated for 301- 350 eight (8) units of Humalog was to be administered. R21 should have been administered 17 units of Humalog instead of 17 units of Novolog. After receiving the errored insulin dosage on 09/04/23, R21's blood sugar did not drop below 109. The MAR further indicated R21's morning blood sugar for 09/05/23 was 78. The order on the MAR indicated the physician or the nurse practitioner were to be ''Updated'' for blood glucose less than 70. During an interview with the Health Information Services (HIS) staff, on 10/04/23 at 1:41 PM, it was revealed that she did oversight over the input of physicians' orders. She revealed that either the nurses and/or the assigned Unit Coordinator input the orders as they come in. She said it depended on the unit. The HIS said she also would help out occasionally. She said the team nurse would check the orders to confirm them. She said every day she took all of the previous day's telephone orders to the Unit Managers, who then reviewed them to assure they were correctly entered into their EMR system. She said for the east side units, the Unit Coordinator (UC) inputs most of the orders. If the east side UC is busy, the nurses help. In addition, on the last day of the month there is a review of all orders in the chart by the Nurse Managers. She said they should be reviewing the MARs and TARs (Treatment Administration Record). According to the DON, on 10/04/23 at 4:00 PM, who had only in recent days become the director, when a nurse enters an order, the UC makes a copy of the order to forward to the Unit Manager, for a second check.
Feb 2023 11 deficiencies 1 Harm
SERIOUS (G) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures

Pressure Ulcer Prevention (Tag F0686)

A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not implement professional standards of practice to prevent...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not implement professional standards of practice to prevent pressure injuries (PI) from worsening for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for PIs, out of a sample of 34 residents (R104). The facility did not ensure weekly measurements/assessments and treatments were being completed to R104's sacral PI. MD (Medical Doctor) notifications were not done when changes were noted to the wound. R104 was admitted to the facility with a stage 2 PI which progressed into a stage 4 PI causing R104's PI to become infected and R104 was placed on antibiotics. This is evidenced by: The facility's policy, entitled Pressure Injuries (Management/Treatment,) with a revision date of 12/22, states, in part: The purpose of the policy is to help assure residents with pressure injuries prompt assessment, treatment, and services by the Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) to promote healing, prevent infections and prevent new injuries from developing while maintaining optimal quality of life and functional ability .Definitions: *Pressure Injury: A pressure injury is localized damage to the skin and underlying soft tissue usually over a bony prominence or related to a medical device. The injury can present as intact skin or an open ulcer and may be painful. The injury occurs as a result of intense and/or prolonged pressure or pressure in combination with shear. The tolerance of soft tissue for pressure and shear may also be affected by microclimate, nutrition, perfusion, co-morbidities, and condition of the soft tissue . *Stage 2 Pressure Injury: Partial- thickness skin loss with exposed dermis . *Stage 4 Pressure Injury: Full-thickness skin and tissue loss. Full-thickness skin and tissue loss with exposed or directly palpable fascia, muscle, tendon, ligament, cartilage, or bone in the ulcer . *Unstageable Pressure Injury: Obscured full-thickness skin and tissue loss. Full-thickness skin and tissue loss in which the extent of tissue damage within the ulcer cannot be confirmed because it is obscured by slough or eschar . PROCESS: I. Pressure injuries will be reported to the MD/Provider as indicated, and orders will be obtained for treatment as indicated . The course of treatment will be documented until the pressure injury is resolved . II. Wound assessment and measurements will be completed for pressure injuries at least weekly . A. Pressure Injury Assessment: .2. Assess and measure wounds weekly: (Measure the injury length (head to toe), width (side to side), and depth . Indicate condition of peri-wound; tissue surrounding the wound or macerated/denuded skin. Note condition of wound edges. Document percentage of tissue type such as slough (yellow/white fibrous tissue) or granulation (red, healthy tissue). If tunneling is present, document location (using face of clock) and depth. Document undermining (edge of wound opening underneath parameter) if present. Note scar tissue. Note any warmth or induration, (hard, thickened tissue). i. Measure wound size, (in centimeters (cm)) length, width and depth, location ii. Tunneling or undermining iii. Drainage: type, amount iv. Infection-color, odor, heat, inflammation v. Wound bed: color, presence of granulation, slough, or necrotic tissue vi. Wound edges: color and condition vii. Peri-wound: maceration, induration, edema, excoriation, erythema viii. Wound Progress: improvement, deterioration, healed ix. Presence or absence of pain 3. With each dressing change observe for developments that indicate a need for change in treatment (e.g., deterioration, sign of infection or complications). If change in treatment is warranted update MD/Provider, plan of care and treatment plan. VII. Methods for monitoring healing: . B. Licensed nurse will re-evaluate the pressure injury, the plan of care and the resident's status if the pressure injury does not show progress of healing. C. Report signs of deterioration in pressure injury to MD/Provider. D. Assessment and Treatment of Infections: 1. Assess for the following which may indicate the presence of infection: i. Presence of erythema ii. Edema iii. Induration iv. Heat/fever v. Foul odor (after cleansing) purulent drainage vi. Streaking vii. Increased pain in the wound viii. Increasing wound size x. Crepitus . XII. Healed Pressure Injuries: . B. Continue to provide daily skin observations and weekly skin assessments . The facility policy, entitled Skin/Hydration Assessment, with a revision date of 12/22, states, in part: Skin and Hydration assessments will be completed and documented on all residents on admission, weekly, and as needed. Weekly skin/hydration assessments will take place on residents' individual shower/bath day . PROCESS - SKIN ASSESSMENT: . V. Once a pressure injury has been identified, it will be: . B. Assessed, measured, and documented on by the Wound Nurse, or Nurse Manager in his/her absence, weekly. This includes: 1. Stage 1-4 Pressure Injuries 2. Unstageable Pressure Injuries . D. MD/GNP (Adult Gerontology Nurse Practitioner) will be notified if: 1. Pressure injury worsens or enlarges. 2. It shows signs of infection. 3. No improvement is noted in 2 weeks. 4. Improved and/or alternative treatment options are available . Example 1 R104 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and has diagnoses that include Pressure Ulcer of Sacral Region, Non-Pressure chronic ulcer of unspecified part of right lower leg and left lower leg, and Morbid Obesity due to excess calories. R104's MDS (Minimum Data Set) admission Assessment, dated 9/7/22, indicated that R104 has a BIMS (Brief Interview of Mental Status) score of 9 indicating moderate cognitive impairment. Section G indicates R104 is totally dependent with two assists for bed mobility, transferring, and toilet use. R104 requires total dependence of one staff for locomotion on and off unit. R104's Care Plan, dated 9/1/22, states, in part: Problem: Impaired Skin Integrity .Manifested by: Stage 1 Pressure Ulcer to coccyx, Surgical wounds Goal: No sign or symptom of infection Goal Time: 12/1/22 Nurse Aide: Skin Care: Apply barrier cream as delegated by nurse. Keep skin clean and dry. Assist with hygiene and general skin care. Report worsening skin condition to nurse immediately. Nurse Aide: Positioning Device: Use draw sheet when repositioning to prevent shearing. Nurse Aide: Bed Positioning: Turn and reposition every two hours to prevent skin breakdown .Nurse Aide: MATTRESS: PressureGuard Custom Care Convertible with Pump .Nurses: Develop and monitor turning schedule . Nurses: Weekly skin assessment. Nurses: Implement and initiate weekly wound assessment and documentation per facility protocol . R104's Braden Scale, dated 9/1/22, shows a score of 14 indicating R104 is at moderate risk for skin breakdown. R104's Braden Scale, dated 9/8/22, shows a score of 16 indicating R104 is at mild risk for skin breakdown. R104's Braden Scale, dated 9/15/22, shows a score of 16 indicating R104 is at mild risk for skin breakdown. R104's Braden Scale, dated 9/22/22, shows a score of 18 indicating R104 is at mild risk for skin breakdown. R104's Mini Nutritional Assessment, dated 10/27/22, shows a score of 7 indicating R104 is malnourished. R104's skin assessments show the following: 9/2/22: Type of Wound: Pressure Ulcer Origination: Upon Admission Stage Of Pressure Injury: Stage 2 Location: Sacrum Peri-wound Description: Red, blanching Edges: Red Length (Head to toe): 7cm (centimeters) Width (left to right): 10 cm Wound Bed: Non Blanchable redness with subtle blistering noted to areas of wound bed Odor Present: No Drainage: None Progress: Initial Assessment Pain related to treatment: No Recommendations: Apply sacral mepilex after cleansing skin, change weekly on shower day and prn (as needed) if soiled. RN J (Registered Nurse) R104's Physician's Orders for sacral PI are as follows: 9/2/22 - Treatment to Sacral Stage 2: 1 time per week Tuesday 1x/Day EVES 1. Cleanse skin and dry 2. Apply sacral Mepilex Dressing Discontinued 11/15/22 9/10/22: Type of Wound: Pressure Ulcer Origination: Upon Admission Stage Of Pressure Injury: Stage 2 Location: Sacrum Peri-wound Description: Healthy Edges: Pink Length (Head to toe): 7.5 cm Width (left to right): 12 cm Depth: 0.1 cm Wound Bed: 2 distinct open areas within measurements with pink wound beds, the rest of the skin involved is red and non-blanching Odor Present: No Drainage: Type: Serosanguinous Amount: Small Progress: Affected areas has opened as anticipated. No s/sx of infection noted. Pain Related to Treatment: Yes, Explain: Tender to touch Recommendations: Continue treatment as ordered. RN J 9/16/22: Type of Wound: Pressure Ulcer Origination: Upon Admission Stage of Pressure Injury: Stage 2 Location: Sacrum Peri-Wound Description: Healthy Edges: Pink Length (Head to toe): 5 cm Width (left to right): 9 cm Depth: 0.1 cm Wound Bed: Pink Odor Present: No Drainage: Type: Serosanguinous Amount: Small Progress: Improved: measuring smaller Recommendations: Continue treatment as ordered Assessed by: RN J 9/25/22: Type of Wound: Pressure Late Entry for 9/24/22 Ulcer Origination: Upon Admission Stage of Pressure Injury: Stage 2 Location: Sacrum Peri-Wound Description: Healthy Edges: Pink Length (Head to toe): 0.5 cm Width (left to right): 0.5 cm Depth: 0.1cm Wound Bed: Pink Granulation: 100% Odor Present: No Drainage: Type: Serosanguinous Amount: Scant Progress: Improved: Only a small open area remains, the rest of the wound has healed and epithelialized and presents as pink scar tissue Pain Related to Treatment: No Recommendations: Continue treatment as ordered Assessed by: RN J 9/30/22: Type of Wound: Pressure Ulcer Origination: Upon Admission Stage of Pressure Injury: Stage 2 Location: Sacrum Peri-Wound Description: Healthy Edges: Pink Length (Head to toe): 0.5 cm Width (left to right): 0.5 cm Depth: 0.1 cm Wound Bed: Bleeding Odor Present: No Drainage: Type: Sanguineous Amount: Small Progress: No significant changes. A small open area remains present. Pain related to treatment: No Recommendations: Continue treatment as ordered Assessed by: RN J R104's eTAR (Electronic Treatment Administration Record) for September shows: Entry Date: 9/7/22 - Turn and reposition every 2 hours. Repositioning Schedule: 12am-2am (Left side), 2am-4am (right side), 4am-6am (left side), 6am-8am (right side), 8am-10am (left side), 10am-12pm (right side), 12pm-2pm (left side), 2pm-4pm (right side), 4pm-6pm (left side), 6pm-8pm (right side), 8pm-10pm (left side), 10pm-12am (right side) (sacral pressure injury): The following times were left blank on eTAR for September: 9/10/22- 4am, 9/20/22- 8am,10am, noon, 2pm, 9/28/22- 12am 9/29/22- 12am, 8am, 4pm, 6pm, 8pm, 10pm. (Please note there is no documentation of the PI after 9/30/22 until 10/25/22. Additionally, the PI was not measured from 9/30/22 - 11/17/22.) R104's eTAR (Electronic Treatment Administration Record) for October 2022 shows: Entry Date: 9/2/22 Treatment to Sacral Stage 2: 1 time per week Tuesday 1x/Day EVES 1. Cleanse skin and dry. 2. Apply sacral mepilex Dressing The following dates were left blank on eTAR for October: 10/18/22 The following entries show changes: 10/25/22- Type of Wound: Pressure Stage of Pressure Injury: Stage 2 Location: Sacrum Odor Present: No Drainage: None Procedure Done: open area noted. Wound bed yellow with dark spots, no signs of infection (Note: change noted to R104's wound bed including yellow wound bed with dark spots and no MD notification) R104's eTAR (Electronic Treatment Administration Record) for October 2022 shows: Entry Date: 9/7/22 - Turn and reposition every 2 hours. Repositioning Schedule: 12am-2am (Left side), 2am-4am (right side), 4am-6am (left side), 6am-8am (right side), 8am-10am (left side), 10am-12pm (right side), 12pm-2pm (left side), 2pm-4pm (right side), 4pm-6pm (left side), 6pm-8pm (right side), 8pm-10pm (left side), 10pm-12am (right side) (sacral pressure injury): The following times were left blank on eTAR for October: 10/1/22- 10pm 10/2/22- 4am, 6pm, 8pm, 10pm 10/3/22- 4pm, 6pm, 8pm, 10pm 10/5/22- 6pm, 8pm, 10pm 10/6/22- 4pm, 6pm, 8pm, 10pm 10/9/22- 10am, noon, 2pm, 4pm, 6pm, 8pm, 10pm 10/16/22- 8am, 10am, noon 10/17/22- 4pm, 6pm, 8pm, 10pm 10/18/22- 4pm, 6pm, 8pm, 10pm 10/19/22- 10pm 10/26/22- 4pm, 6pm, 8pm, 10pm 11/1/22 - Type of Wound: Pressure Stage of Pressure Injury: Stage 2 Location: Sacrum Odor Present: No Drainage: None Procedure Done: open area noted. Wound bed yellow with dark spots, no signs of infection. (Note: 2nd week with changes noted to R104's wound bed, no measurements, and no MD notification indicated) 11/5/22 - Type of Wound: Pressure Stage of Pressure Injury: Stage 2 Location: Sacrum Odor Present: no odor from pressure area but foul odor from dressing, could be due to soiling Drainage: no active drainage noted from pressure area, but noted moderate darkish discoloration on old dressing 11/9/22 - Type of Wound: Pressure Late Entry for 11/8/22 Stage of Pressure Injury: Stage 2 Location: Sacrum Odor Present: yes Drainage: dressing wet, wound bed soft yellow tissue treated as ordered and notified Hospice of odor and increased drainage noted with dressing change 11/11/22 - Stage 2 noted upon admission was essentially healed with a 0.5 x 0.5 cm open area remaining, wound subsequently deteriorated and is currently presenting as an unstageable slough covered wound. Location: Sacrum Peri-wound Description: Erythema (redness) Edges: Bright Red Length (Head to toe): 4 cm Width (left to right): 3 cm Wound Bed: Slough (dead skin tissue) Slough: 100% Slough Color: Yellow- green Slough Characteristic: Adherent Odor Present: Yes- Strong pungent smell Drainage: Type: Purulent Amount: Large Progress: Deteriorated: As noted above, presentation today concerning for infectious process at site Pain related to treatment: Yes, Explain: tender to touch Recommendations: MD/GNP notified. Suggest oral antibiotic course and treatment change as follows: Irrigate wound thoroughly with normal saline, dry. Apply Santyl. Cover with foam border type dressing supplied by Hospice daily until healed. R104's progress note, dated 11/11/22, at 11:58am, states: Conversation with: NP (Nurse Practitioner) Regarding: Presentation of sacral wound Result: New orders received and noted: (Specify briefly) Wound culture and sensitivity. RN J Physician Orders dated 11/11/22 - Wound culture and sensitivity. Physician Orders dated 11/11/22 - Clindamycin 300mg (milligrams) by mouth every 8 hours 3x/Day 3pm 11pm 7am x 7 days (wound infection) Discontinued on 11/16/22 11/15/22 - Type of Wound: Pressure Stage of Pressure Injury: Stage 2 Location: Sacrum Odor Present: Yes Drainage: None Procedure Done: Dressing in place, Hospice nurse in today, also GNP (Geriatric Nurse Practitioner)/wound nurse new orders tx (treatment) written for wound, continues with oral abx (antibiotic) for infection, (Please note this wound should be indicated as an unstageable and not a stage 2.) Physician orders dated 11/15/22 - Treatment to Sacral Wound: 1x/Day until healed 1. Irrigate thoroughly with Normal Saline and dry 2. Apply Medihoney to wound bed 3. Cover with foam border dressing **Supplies to be supplied by Hospice** Discontinued 12/2/22 Physician orders dated 11/16/22 Cefprozil 500 mg by mouth 2x/day Breakfast: HS (hour of sleep) x 14 days (sacral wound infection) Discontinued 11/30/22. 11/17/22 - Late entry for 11/16/22 Type of Wound: Pressure Ulcer Origination: Upon Admission Stage of Pressure Injury: Initially a stage 2 now presenting as unstageable Location: Sacrum Peri-Wound Description: Reddened 2 cm circumference to peri-wound Edges: Pink Length (Head to toe): 4.5 cm Width (left to right): 4.5 cm Depth: 1.5 cm Wound Bed: Slough Slough Color: Yellow Slough Characteristic: Adherent Odor Present: Yes Drainage: Purulent Amount: Large Progress: Remains on oral antibiotics for wound infection. Presentation today consistent with ongoing infectious process at site. Pain related treatment: Yes Explain: Tender to touch Recommendations: Continue tx as ordered Assessed by: RN J R104's eTAR for November 2022 shows: Entry Date: 11/15/22 Treatment to Sacral Wound: 1x/Day until healed 1. Irrigate thoroughly with Normal Saline and dry 2. Apply Medihoney to wound bed 3. Cover with foam border dressing **Supplies to be supplied by Hospice** The following times were left blank on eTAR for November 2022: 11/19/22 & 11/23/22 11/30/22 - Late Entry for 11/23/22 Type of Wound: Pressure Ulcer Origination: Upon Admission Stage of Pressure Injury: Initially a stage 2 now presenting as unstageable Location: Sacrum Peri-Wound Description: Reddened 2 cm circumference to peri-wound Edges: Pink Length (Head to toe): 4.5 cm Width (left to right): 4.5 cm Depth: 1.5 cm Wound Bed: Slough Slough Color: Yellow Slough Characteristic: Adherent Odor Present: Yes Drainage: Purulent Amount: Moderate Progress: Remains on oral antibiotics for wound infection. Less drainage noted today, less odorous as well. Pain related to treatment: Yes Explain: Tender to touch Recommendations: Continue treatment as ordered Assessed: RN J R104's eTAR (Electronic Treatment Administration Record) for November 2022 shows: Entry Date: 9/7/22 - Turn and reposition every 2 hours. Repositioning Schedule: 12am-2am (Left side), 2am-4am (right side), 4am-6am (left side), 6am-8am (right side), 8am-10am (left side), 10am-12pm (right side), 12pm-2pm (left side), 2pm-4pm (right side), 4pm-6pm (left side), 6pm-8pm (right side), 8pm-10pm (left side), 10pm-12am (right side) (sacral pressure injury): The following times were left blank on eTAR for November: 11/1/22- 10am, noon 11/3/22- 4am 11/5/22- 8am, 10am, noon, 2pm 11/6/22- 8am, 10am, noon, 2pm 11/8/22- 4pm, 6pm, 8pm, 10pm 11/11/22- 4pm, 6pm, 8pm, 10pm 11/12/22- 6pm, 8pm, 10pm 11/13/22- 10pm 11/15/22- 2am, 4am 11/17/22- 8pm, 10pm 11/19/22- 4pm 11/27/22- 10pm 11/29/22- 4pm, 10pm Physician Orders dated 12/2/22 - Treatment to Sacral Wound (per Hospice recommendations) 1x/Day until healed 1. Cleanse with normal saline or wound cleanser and pat dry. 2. Apply AG Rope (supplied by Hospice) to wound bed. 3. Apply skin prep to peri-wound. 4. Dress with mepilex border. Discontinued 12/9/22. 12/9/22 - Type of Wound: Pressure Ulcer Origination: Upon admission Stage 2 at admission, now stage 4 Location: Sacrum Peri-Wound Description: Denuded (loss of the epidermal skin layer) Edges: Pink Length (Head to toe): 4.5 cm Width (left to right): 4.5 cm Depth: 2 cm Wound Bed: 25% slough from 10 - 1 o'clock, 75% exposed muscle fascia Slough: 25% Slough Color: Yellow green Slough Characteristic: Tacky Odor Present: Yes Drainage: Type: Purulent Amount: Moderate Progress: 14-day antibiotic course of cefprozil and flagyl completed on 11/30/22. Since last week's assessment the peri-wound has deteriorated with areas of denuded skin and what appears to be areas of further deep tissue injury around the 10 o'clock and 6 o'clock peri wound regions. The drainage has returned to being purulent and malodorous and has increased as well. Medihoney continues to debride slough well but overall, the wound and peri-wound are concerning for unresolved/returning infectious process at site. Pain related to treatment: Yes, Explain: Tender to touch Recommendations: Changes recommended: Restart oral antibiotics, may need maintenance antibiotics for duration of wound. Also concern for c-diff infection post antibiotic course, resident had loose mucousy stool present during dressing change today. Topical treatment remains appropriate. MD/GNP notified. Assessed by: RN J R104's eTAR for December 2022 shows: Entry Date: 12/2/22 - Treatment to Sacral Wound (per Hospice recommendations) 1x/Day until healed 1. Cleanse with normal saline or wound cleanser and pat dry. 2. Apply AG Rope (supplied by Hospice) to wound bed. 3. Apply skin prep to peri-wound. 4. Dress with mepilex border. The following date was left blank on eTAR for December 2022: 12/4/22 Physician orders dated 12/9/22 - Treatment to Sacral Wound: (per Hospice recommendations) 1x/Day until healed 1. Cleanse with normal saline or wound cleanser and pat dry. 2. Apply non-sting barrier spray to peri-wound 3. Apply medihoney to slough. 4. Gently pack AG Rope (supplied by Hospice) to wound bed. 5. Cover with sacral mepilex border or Hospice supplied foam dressing that is large enough to cover wound and peri wound. 12/14/22 - Type of Wound: Pressure Ulcer Origination: Upon Admission Stage of Pressure Injury: Initially a stage 2 upon admission, now presenting as stage 4 Location: Sacrum Peri- wound Description: Denuded Edges: Pink Length (Head to toe): 4.5 cm Width (left to right): 4.5 cm Depth: 2 cm Undermining: 2 cm from 9 o'clock to 3 o'clock Wound Bed: 90% exposed muscle fascia, 10% slough from 10 o'clock to 12 o'clock, with slough noted to be superficially attached to wound and not extending the depth of the wound Slough Color: Yellow- green Slough Characteristic: Tacky Odor Present: No Drainage: Type: Yellowish, greenish, reddish Amount: Moderate Progress: No odor noted today. Less slough noted. No s/sx (signs/symptoms) of infection noted. Pain related to treatment: Yes Explain: Tender to touch, tolerable per resident report, subsides immediately after touch as complete Recommendations: Continue treatment as ordered
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

Grievances (Tag F0585)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility did not make prompt efforts to resolve resident grievances for 1 of 26 reside...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility did not make prompt efforts to resolve resident grievances for 1 of 26 residents (R265) reviewed for grievances out of a total sample of 34 Residents. R265's family voiced a concern to the facility staff regarding R265's hearing aid being lost. The facility did not file a grievance or follow-up with the family to resolve these concerns. This is evidenced by: The Facility's grievance policy, titled, Grievance Process, with most recent revision dates of 3/2018 and 11/2022, includes, in part: Policy: Residents have the right to voice grievances to the community or other agency or entity that hears grievances without discrimination or reprisal and without fear of discrimination or reprisal. Such grievances include those with respect to care and treatment .and other concerns regarding their stay in the community. The community will make prompt efforts to resolve grievances the resident may have .The Executive Director is the grievance officer and is responsible for overseeing the grievance process, receiving and tracking grievances through their conclusion, leading investigations by the community .issuing written grievance decisions to the resident if requested .Grievance records including evidence demonstrating the results of all grievances will be maintained for three years from the issuance of the grievance decision .It is the goal of the community to resolve grievances as quickly as possible to the satisfaction of the resident and/or person initiating the grievance. Procedure: 1. Staff member receiving the grievance form reviews for potential abuse, exploitation, misappropriation, or neglect suspicion or allegation .If not abuse or neglect, forward the grievance form to the executive director. 2. Executive director or designee will contact the complainant promptly to initiate the investigation .3. Investigations and resolution of grievances will be completed as soon as possible, but no later than five working days after the submission of the grievance form. If a grievance cannot be brought to resolution within five working days, this is communicated to the person who initiated the grievance, along with the reason for the delay. 4. The executive director or designee investigates and resolves the grievance . R265 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that include, in part: Alzheimer's disease; Unspecified hearing loss; Other recurrent depressive disorders On 2/21/23 at 11:52 AM Surveyor reviewed the facility grievance logs for May and June of 2022. There was no evidence of a grievance in relation to R265's hearing aid. On the afternoon of 2/21/23 surveyor requested an admission inventory list for R265. On 2/21/23 at 4:33 PM, surveyor received a List of Possessions for R265, dated 5/25/22. The item list included, in part: Left hearing aid. The form was signed by R265's representative and SW G (Social Worker) with both signature dates noted as 5/25/22. On 2/21/23 at 4:46 PM, Surveyor interviewed SW G and asked what she recalled about R265's hearing aid. SW G indicated, I remember they were very upset because it was missing. I sent out an email to everyone in the facility and let everyone know it was missing and where it was last seen. It happened relatively early on in his admission. We searched his room, sent out an email, talked to the nurse that saw it last that evening before it was missing. We looked in laundry several times and never found anything. Surveyor asked SW G, when you realized you couldn't find it, who did you go to. SW G indicated, I talked to my supervisor at that time, she is no longer here, and went to the previous NHA (Nursing Home Administrator). I don't remember why we didn't replace it. I know the family continued to be upset and so I passed that on. SW G indicated she would try to locate some notes regarding the lost hearing aid. Surveyor asked SW G if she completed a grievance for the lost hearing aid. SW G indicated, no. Surveyor asked SW G if she knew why a grievance was not completed. SW G indicated, I don't really remember, that was my mistake, why I didn't write that up or write why we didn't replace it. On 2/21/22 at approximately 5:05 PM, SW G returned with paperwork regarding R265's hearing aide. This included an email, dated May 31, 2022, that was sent out to all staff with the following information: R265 .is missing his left and only hearing aid since Thursday. It was stored on the med cart, but is not to be found. Room has been searched. Please inform .once found. A Social Services note, dated 6/17/22, that includes, in part: Writer received a message from R265's family after he returned home .she asked what about the hearing aid. [sic] .Left message for primary social worker to touch base when she returns . On 2/22/23 at 3:10 PM, Surveyor interviewed NHA A (Nursing Home Administrator) and asked what the process for grievances is. NHA A indicated, the organization uses an electronic platform for storage of all grievances. We print them as they are completed and place in the binder you have. Anyone can initiate that process. Typically what would happen is if a complaint goes into a leader in the facility they put in an OFI (Opportunity for Improvement) and I automatically get alerted that their is a grievance. The system allows the person putting it in to assign it to someone, but I always get alerted. For example, if a CNA puts in a complaint for cold eggs, they can assign it to dietary and then I get alerted to make sure that it is being done. Then I review them and they aren't officially closed until I close them out. I do the closing out and I actually do a lot of the investigation. On the OFI form there is a notification piece and it just says the date it was closed. Sometimes people say you don't need to follow up and then I may or may not put anything in. If there is follow up then I may put that in the body of the concern, who I followed-up with. The Nurse Managers and Social Workers for the East and [NAME] side coordinate as to who is going to reach out. A lot of times they will do interviews and sometimes contacting for follow up. We coordinate depending on who has the time to complete. We also base it on if there is a care conference, we may need to talk about it then, or if we have family that has a set visiting time, we may talk to them when they come in. We talk about grievances in stand up as well. Surveyor asked NHA A if he would expect a lost hearing aid to be put on a grievance. NHA A indicated, it would depend on what was determined. Surveyor reviewed the information regarding R265's lost hearing aid and asked NHA A if he would have expected a grievance to be completed and resolution given to the family. NHA A indicated, he would.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0604 (Tag F0604)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility did not ensure each resident's right to be free from physical re...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility did not ensure each resident's right to be free from physical restraints for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for restraints (R97) out of a total sample of 34 residents. The facility employed a full body-length pillow on the edge of R97's bed without an assessment for its use. Findings include The facility's restraint policy states the following: *A restraint is defined as any manual method or physical mechanical device, material or equipment attached or adjacent to the resident's body that the individual cannot easily remove and restricts movement or normal access to one's body. *Before a resident is restrained, the facility must determine that the resident has specific medical symptom that cannot be addressed by another less restrictive intervention and a restraint is required to treat a medical symptom, protect the residents' safety and help resident maintain his or her highest level of physical and psychological well-being. *There must be a ling between the restraint use and how it benefits the resident by addressing the medial symptom. Medical symptoms that warrant the use of restraints must be documented in the resident's medical record. *Ongoing assessments and care plans must reflect appropriate need for the restraint. *Physician orders must reflect the medical symptom being treated that requires implementation of a restraint. *During the use of the restraint, residents need to be evaluated on an ongoing basis to assure that all personal needs are being met. R97 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and has diagnoses that include Parkinson's Disease and Down Syndrome. Her most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], shows the facility did not conduct a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS), reflecting R97 is rarely/never understood. R97's care plan states, Safety/falls: Actual/At Risk/ and/or Potential for complications with OR falls related to current medical/physical status. Has medications/diagnoses that can/may affect fall risk .Interventions: Bed in low position with floor mat . On 2/16/23 at 11:48 AM, Surveyor observed R97 in her room in bed sleeping with a body pillow on edge of her bed against her body. The pillow extended approximately the length of the bed. The bed was at floor level and a fall mat was on the floor next to the bed. On 2/21/23 at 3:01 PM, Surveyor interviewed LPN C (Licensed Practical Nurse) who stated that she was not sure why the body pillow was in R97's bed. LPN C stated, I'm guessing it is so she does not fall out of bed. On 2/21/23 at 3:21 PM, Surveyor interviewed CNA F (Certified Nursing Assistant) who stated that she believed R97 has the body pillow so she doesn't fall out of bed as she has spastic type movements. On 2/22/23 at 7:41 AM, Surveyor interviewed NHA A (Nursing Home Administrator), who stated the body pillow for R97 was not a restraint, but stated the facility did not have any documentation as to why the pillow was not a restraint or how R97 moves in conjunction with the pillow. NHA A later stated that the facility did not have restraint assessments for body pillows, but would do an assessment for R97 immediately. R97 was documented as being at risk for falls and the facility implemented a low bed and fall mat to prevent injury from any potential fall. The facility also employed a body pillow at the edge of R97's bed with no assessment, physician's order or care plan for its use.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Incontinence Care (Tag F0690)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Example 2 R104 was admitted to facility on 9/1/22, and has diagnoses that include Retention of Urine, Pressure Ulcer to Sacral R...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Example 2 R104 was admitted to facility on 9/1/22, and has diagnoses that include Retention of Urine, Pressure Ulcer to Sacral Region, Non-Pressure Chronic Ulcer of Right and Left Lower Extremities, and Morbid Obesity. R104's admission MDS (minimum data set) Assessment, dated 9/7/22 shows R104 has a BIMS (Brief interview of mental status) score of 9 indicating R104 has moderate cognitive impairment. On 2/22/23, at 10:24AM, Surveyor observed CNA L perform catheter care on R104. CNA L performed hand hygiene and applied gloves prior to care. CNA L used peri wipes and performed peri care appropriately and discarded the wipes into the garbage. CNA L grabbed another wipe from package without hand hygiene and application of new gloves. CNA L then cleansed the catheter from meatus up approximately 5 inches. CNA L discarded wipe into the garbage and then tucked the dirty brief under R104 and rolled R104 onto her left side. CNA L reached into the wipe package for another wipe and cleansed R104's bottom. CNA L opened clean brief with the same gloves on and removed dirty brief and placed new brief under resident. CNA L then removed gloves and performed hand hygiene. On 2/22/23, at 10:46 AM, Surveyor interviewed CNA L and asked when hand hygiene should be performed during peri/catheter care and CNA L indicated before and after. Surveyor asked CNA L if hand hygiene should be performed in between going from a dirty area to a clean area CNA L indicated yes. Surveyor asked if she did perform hand hygiene from dirty to clean and CNA L indicated no. On 2/27/23, at 2:46PM, Surveyor interviewed DON B and informed DON B of the catheter care observation with CNA L with no hand hygiene throughout procedure. Surveyor asked DON B when he would expect hand hygiene to be performed during catheter/peri care and DON B indicated before and after and from going from contaminated area to clean area. Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility did not ensure that residents with an indwelling catheter received the appropriate care and services to prevent a urinary tract infection (UTI) for 1 of 2 sampled residents (R104) and 1 of 1 supplemental resident's (R14) reviewed for catheters out of a total sample of 34 Residents. Surveyor observed R14's catheter bag uncovered and in direct contact with the floor. CNA L (Certified Nursing Assistant) did not perform proper hand hygiene during catheter/peri care on R104. Evidenced by: Facility policy & procedure entitled Catheter/Urinary Daily Care, undated, does not contain any information, approaches, and interventions for infection control. Example 1 R4 admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including, but not limited to, multiple sclerosis, neuromuscular dysfunction of bladder, anxiety disorder, spasmodic torticollis, history of urinary tract infections, history MRSA (Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus) and resistance to multiple antibiotics. R14's most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) with ARD (Assessment Reference Date) of 12/14/22 indicates R14 has Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 9/15. This score indicates R14 is moderately cognitively impaired. Section G of R14's MDS indicates that R14 requires extensive assist of 1 staff for toilet use, bed mobility, and transfer. On 9/15/22 R14 went to the hospital and was treated for a Urinary Tract Infection with IV antibiotics and was hospitalized until 9/26/22. R1's current Physician Orders include, in part, the following medication: Hiprex Oral Tablet 1 gm (gram) (Methenamine Hippurate) - Give 1 tablet by mouth one time a day related to personal history of urinary tract infection. Hiprex is used to prevent or control returning urinary tract infections caused by bacteria. It is not used to treat an active infection. Antibiotics must be used first to treat and cure the infection. R14's Guidelines for Daily Cares, dated 2/27/23, indicates the following: Indwelling foley catheter/continent of bowel. Brief. Encourage fluids. Provide catheter care with cares and as needed. Indwelling foley catheter. Empty catheter every shift. Keep tubing kink-free. Record output ever shift. On 2/27/23 at 8:16 AM, Surveyor observed R14 in bed with her catheter bag lying in direct contact with the facility floor. On 2/27/23 at 8:17 AM, Surveyor spoke with RN K (Registered Nurse). Surveyor asked RN K to walk with to R14's room. Surveyor showed RN K if R14's catheter bag was on the floor. Surveyor asked RN K, should R14's catheter bag be covered and off the floor. RN K stated, Yes, for modesty and infection control. On 2/27/23 at 5:50 PM, Surveyor spoke with DON B (Director of Nursing). Surveyor asked DON B, is it acceptable for catheter bags to be on the floor. DON B stated, no, they should be hanging or in a basin and not on the floor. Surveyor asked DON B, should catheter bags be covered. DON B stated catheter bags should be covered when the resident is out and about out of their room. Surveyor asked DON B, should R14's catheter bag have been off the floor. DON B stated, yes.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0757 (Tag F0757)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on interview and record review, the facility did not ensure 1 of 6 residents (R96) of a total of 24 residents reviewed had a drug regimen free from unnecessary drugs. R96 did not meet criteria ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview and record review, the facility did not ensure 1 of 6 residents (R96) of a total of 24 residents reviewed had a drug regimen free from unnecessary drugs. R96 did not meet criteria for collection of a urinalysis or meet criteria for antibiotic thearapy. As evidenced by The facility policy, Antibiotic Stewardship, undated, indicates in part, the following: The facility has established, implements and maintains an Antibiotic Stewardship Program designed to optimize the treatment of infections while reducing the adverse events associated with antibiotic use. The program includes prevention, overall oversight, tracking and reporting antibiotic use and outcomes, and education. The facility recognizes that antibiotic stewardship is a continuous process. Antibiotic overuse can increase the risk for serious diarrheal infections from Clostridium difficile, increased adverse drug events and interactions and colonization and/or infection with antibiotic-resistant organisms. Process: Prevention: A. Evaluate clinical signs and symptoms when a resident is first suspected of having an infection. B. Optimize the use of diagnostic testing C. Implement an antibiotic review process to determine the ongoing need for, duration and choice of an antibiotic once more data is available, including: 1. Clinical Response 2. Additional diagnostic information 3. Alternate explanations for the status change which prompted the antibiotic start. D. Identify clinical situations which may be driving inappropriate courses of antibiotics, such as asymptomatic bacteriuria or urinary tract prophylaxis and implement specific interventions to improve use. The policy indicates the facility follows CDC Guidelines, APIC standards and McGeer's Criteria. Per McGeer Criteria (Surveillance Definitions of Infections in Long-Term Care Facilities: Revisiting the McGeer Criteria on JSTOR) McGeer's criteria indicates the following: . Urinary Tract Infection (UTI) Surveillance Definitions. UTI without indwelling catheter. Criteria: Must fulfill both 1 AND 2. 1.At least one of the following sign or symptom - Acute dysuria (painful urination) or pain, swelling, or tenderness of testes, epididymis, or prostate - Fever or leukocytosis, and 1 of the following: Acute costovertebral angle pain (pain in the kidney area) or tenderness; Suprapubic pain; Gross hematuria (bloody urine); New or marked increase in incontinence; New or marked increase in urgency; New or marked increase in frequency; If no fever or leukocytosis, then 2 of the following: Suprapubic pain; Gross hematuria; New or marked increase in incontinence; New or marked increase in urgency; New or marked increase in frequency. - 2. At least one of the following microbiologic criteria > 105 cfu/mL of no more than 2 species of organisms in a voided urine sample > 102 cfu/mL of any organism(s) in a specimen collected by an in-and-out catheter. (Fever is defined as single oral temp greater than 100 degrees Fahrenheit or repeated oral temp of 99 degrees or a temperature 2 degrees above normal. Leukocytosis is greater than 14,000 white blood cells present in blood work. acute mental status changes, acute onset and fluctuating course, and inattention and either disorganized thinking or altered level of consciousness.) R96 was admitted to the facility 11/23/22 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, displaced intertrochanteric fracture, wedge compression fracture vertebra, osteoporosis and osteoarthritis. R96 is her own person. R96's MDS (Minimum Data Set) indicates R96 has a BIMS (Brief Interview of Mental Status) of 13/15 indicating she is cognitively intact. On 2/4/23 at 1:18 PM, R96's Progress Note indicates the following: T (Temperature) 98.0 P (Pulse) 87 R (Respirations) 18 BP (Blood Pressure) 143/66 O2 (Oxygen saturation) 97% RA (room air). UA (urinalysis) still unable to collect resident urinated in the depends. Resident noted with no confusion or hallucination this time On 2/6/23 at 6:15 PM, R96's Progress Note indicates the following: UA (urinalysis) obtained via straight cath as ordered It is important to note, R96 does not meet McGeers Criteria (standard of practice) to complete a urinalysis. On 2/7/23 at 2:07 PM, R96's Progress Note indicates the following: Called and left message to NP (Nurse Practitioner) re: UA culture results >10,000 E coli (greater than 10,000 colonies of Escherichia coli, which is commonly found in stool) On 2/8/23 at 12:00 PM, R96's Progress Note indicates the following: Updated NP regarding UA culture and sensitivity result. On 2/8/23 at 4:39 PM, a Licensed Practical Nurse entered the following order from the Nurse Practitioner: Started Cipro Oral Tablet 250 mg by mouth two times a day for UTI for 5 Days. Fluid encouraged. Note, there is no evidence of a conversation with the prescribing Nurse Practitioner regarding the order for Cipro, a broad spectrum antibiotic. R96 does not meet McGeers criteria to be treated with an antibiotic for a UTI (Urinary Tract Infection). On 2/27/23 at 5:50 PM, Surveyor spoke with DON B (Director of Nursing). Surveyor asked DON B if a resident has a culture and sensitivity with >10,000 CFU/ml Escherichia coli should they be treated with an antibiotic. DON B reviewed R96's medical record to review the documentation. DON B stated, no. DON B added, R96 is susceptible to it but ideally Cipro is not our first line so we would want to see if we can get something else ordered. Surveyor asked DON B, did the facility have a conversation with the Physician or Nurse Practitioner. DON B stated, a call was made to the Nurse Practitioner (2/8/23), however, there is not evidence of a call back. Surveyor asked DON B, what would you expect staff to do in this case. DON B stated, he would expect a staff to have and document a conversation with the Physician or Nurse Practitioner. DON B agreed that R96 should not have been treated with Cipro based on the culture and sensitivity. Surveyor asked DON B, why is this important. DON B stated, because it leads to multi drug resistant organisms. DON B added, we should educate as much as we can even though they're supposed to be the specialist.
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

Unnecessary Medications (Tag F0759)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility did not ensure that it was free of medication error rates of 5% ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility did not ensure that it was free of medication error rates of 5% or greater. There were 2 errors in 40 opportunities that affected 2 out of 4 residents (R54 & R19) included in the medication pass task, which resulted in an error rate of 5%. *R54 was administered nasal spray incorrectly. *MT (Medication (Med) Tech) administered R19 an enteric coated (ec) bisacodyl crushed. (enteric coating is a special coating that prevents the medicaiton from breaking down in the stomach) This is evidenced by: The facility policy, entitled Nasal Medications, dated 1/1/22, states, in part: . Nasal medications may be installed with drops, spray, or aerosol (nebulizer) . PROCESS: . V. Atomizer (Nasal Spray): A. Resident should be sitting upright with head tilted back slightly. B. Occlude one nostril with finger. C. Insert atomizer tip into open nostril. D. Instruct resident to inhale and squeeze atomizer once, quickly, and firmly . The facility policy, entitled Medication Administration-Oral, with a revision date of 2/2023, states, in part: . The purpose of this policy is to define the medication storage, preparation, administration, and documentation process for the Nursing Department. SSM Health follows State and Federal Regulations for medication administration .Essential Points: .*Sustained release or enteric coated tablets should not be crushed . Example 1 R54 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and has diagnoses that include Diabetes Mellitus, Chronic Rhinitis, and other Allergic Rhinitis. R54's Quarterly MDS (Minimum Data Set) Assessment, dated 1/10/23, shows R54 has a BIMS (Brief Interview of Mental Status) score of 9 indicating moderate cognitive impairment. R54's physician orders, dated 12/29/22, states, in part: . Azelastine 0.1% nasal spray (Azelastine) 2 squirts/sprays in each nostril 2x/day Breakfast: Supper: (rhinitis) chronic . On 2/16/23, at 7:50 AM, Surveyor observed MT T administer Azelastine Nasal Solution 0.1% to R54. MT T inserted tip of atomizer into R54's right nostril and administered two sprays without occluding the left nare. MT T did not provide instructions to R54 on inhaling in, as spray was administered. MT T then administered two sprays into R54's left nare without occluding the right nare without providing instructions to R54. On 2/16/23, at 08:05 AM, Surveyor interviewed MT T and asked when administering nasal spray should the opposite nare be occluded when administering. MT T indicated she had never been taught to occlude opposite nare when administering just to tell patient to inhale. Surveyor asked if MT T instructed R54 and MT T indicated I thought I did. Example 2 R19 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and has diagnoses that include [NAME] Atrial Fibrillation and Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation. R19 's Quarterly MDS (Minimum Data Set) Assessment, dated 11/26/22 shows R19 has a BIMS score of 15 indicating R19 is cognitively intact. R19's Physician's Orders, dated 1/3/23, states, in part: . Bisacodyl Oral Tablet Delayed Release 5 mg (Bisacodyl) Give 1 tablet by mouth one time a day for constipation. Do Not Crush . On 2/16/23, at 8:09AM, Surveyor observed MT T crush R19's Bisacodyl Enteric Coated tablet and administer in applesauce to R19. On 2/27/23, at 2:46PM, Surveyor interviewed DON B (Director of Nursing) and asked while administering nasal sprays would you expect opposite nare to be occluded and resident to be instructed to inhale in during administration. DON B indicated yes. Surveyor asked if crushing an enteric coated tablet is acceptable and DON B indicated no unless physician ordered. Surveyor informed DON B of medication administration observation with MT T. Surveyor informed DON B that R19's bisacodyl ec (enteric coated) tab was crushed before administering and R54 was administered nasal spray without occluding opposite nares during each spray without instructions to resident.
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

ADL Care (Tag F0677)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Example 15 R25 has the following diagnosis: Alzheimer's Disease, Osteoarthritis, Polyosteoarthritis, Anemia, Urge Incontinence, ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Example 15 R25 has the following diagnosis: Alzheimer's Disease, Osteoarthritis, Polyosteoarthritis, Anemia, Urge Incontinence, and Unsteadiness on Feet. R25's most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], section B0700 indicates R25 is rarely or never understood. In R25's most recent MDS, section G0110 indicates extensive assist of two staff is needed with bed mobility and dressing. R25 is total dependent of 2 plus staff members for physical assist for transfers, hygiene and toileting. R25's Alteration in elimination care plan documents, in part: . check and change schedule: AM- 7am, 10am, 1pm and as needed . On 2/16/22 from 7:37 AM- 11:02 AM, Surveyor observed R25 sitting at the breakfast table and staying in the dining room area. At 9:30AM, Surveyor noted the smell of stool. On 2/16/22 at 11:07 AM, Surveyor observed R25's incontinent of a large amount of bowel and urine during personal cares with the assist of 2 CNAs. On 2/16/23 at 11:02 AM, Surveyor sought out and interviewed CNA I (Certified Nursing Assistant). Surveyor asked CNA I if R25 can tell you when she needs to go to the bathroom, CNA I replied, no. Surveyor asked CNA I how often a resident should be checked and changed, CNA I replied, in a perfect world, every 2 hours. Surveyor asked CNA I if she can do check and changes every 2 hours, CNA I replied sometimes, we can't do every 2 hours for check and changes. Surveyor asked CNA I if she has ever worked with one CNA, CNA I replied, almost all the time. Surveyor asked CNA I what type of duties she cannot get completed, CNA I replied, no time for nails. (Note: Surveyor asked for check and change schedules and evidence of completed tasks. Facility was not able to provide documentation prior to exit.) Example 8 R54 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and has diagnoses that include Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, Peripheral Vascular Disease, and Hemiplegia and Hemiparesis. R54's Quarterly MDS (Minimum Data Set) Assessment, dated 1/10/23, shows R54 has a BIMS (Brief Interview of Mental Status) score of 9 indicating moderate cognitive impairment. Section G indicates R54 requires physical help in part of the bathing activity with one assist. R54 requires limited assistance of one with hygiene. R54's documentation for showers from December 5, 2023, through February 21, 2023, indicate R54 did not receive his weekly shower on the following dates: - 12/22/22 - 12/29/22 - 1/19/23 Example 9 R88 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and has diagnoses that include Lumbago with Sciatica, Polyneuropathy, Polyosteoarthritis, and Difficulty in Walking. R88's Quarterly MDS Assessment, dated 12/27/22, shows R88 has a BIMS score of 15 indicating R19 is cognitively intact. Section G indicates R88 requires extensive assistance of one with hygiene. R88 requires physical help in part of bathing activity with one assist. R88's documentation on showers from November 23, 2023, through January 26,2023 indicate R88 did not receive her weekly shower on the following dates: - 12/9/22 -12/16/22 - 12/23/22 - 1/6/22 On 2/15/23, at 10:31AM, Surveyor interviewed R54 and R88 and asked if they receive their showers as scheduled. R88 indicated neither one of them got their showers last week. R88 indicated they do not always receive their showers. R88 indicated she can wash up, but she likes to have showers. Example 10 R30 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and has diagnoses that include Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, Epilepsy, and chronic kidney disease. R30's Quarterly MDS Assessment, dated 12/30/22, shows a BIMS score of 15 indicating R30 is cognitively intact. Section G indicates R30 requires supervision and set up for hygiene. R30 requires physical help in part of bathing activity with assist of one. R30's documentation on showers from November 3, 2023, through January 26, 2023, indicate R30 did not receive her weekly shower on the following dates: - 11/24/22 - 12/8/22 - 12/15/22 - 12/22/22 - 1/5/23 On 2/15/23, at 12:31PM, Surveyor interviewed R30 and asked if R30 has any concerns with facility and R30 indicated there are not enough CNAs (Certified Nursing Assistants) and not getting showers. R30 indicated she did not receive a shower last week and there have been other times R30 did not receive scheduled showers. Surveyor asked if R30 receives bed baths when showers are not given and R30 indicated not always. Example 11 R60 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and has diagnoses that Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, Muscle Weakness, Generalized Anxiety Disorder, and Intercostal Pain. R60's Quarterly MDS assessment dated , 11/29/22, shows R60 has a BIMS score of 15 indicating R60 is cognitively intact. Section G shows R60 requires limited assist of one with hygiene. R60 requires physical help in part of the bathing activity with one assist. R60's documentation on showers from November 3, 2023, through January 26, 2023, shows R60 did not receive her weekly showers on the following dates: - 11/10/22 - 12/8/22 - 1/19/23 On 2/15/23, at 2:43 PM, Surveyor interviewed R60 and asked if she had concerns with the facility and R60 indicated there is not enough staff to take care of all the residents. R60 indicated she did not receive her shower last Thursday or a bed bath and there were other times she did not receive showers. Example 12 R42 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and has diagnoses that include Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and Mild Cognitive Impairment. R42's Quarterly MDS Assessment, dated 11/17/22 shows R42 has a BIMS score of 15 indicating R42 is cognitively intact. Section G shows R42 is independent with hygiene but requires supervision and set up for bathing. R42's documentation on showers from November 8, 2023, through January 31. 2023 shows R42 did not receive her weekly showers on the following dates: - 11/15/22 - 11/29/22 - 12/6/22 - 12/13/22 - 12/27/22 On 2/16/23, at 1:07PM, Surveyor interviewed R42 and asked if she receives showers when scheduled. R42 indicated she received a shower last week but the prior two weeks she did not receive her scheduled shower. Surveyor asked if she received a bed bath and R42 indicated she washed herself up, but she really wanted her showers. R42 indicated she was offered a bed bath one time, but she told staff she would do it herself, but indicated she really wanted her shower. R42 indicated the two weeks her shower was missed staff never came and talked with her about not being able to get R42's shower done. Example 13 R32 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and has diagnoses that include Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, Polyosteoarthritis and Specified Depressive Episode. R32's Quarterly MDS Assessment, dated 10/29/22 shows R32 has a BIMs score of 15 indicating R32 is cognitively intact. Section G shows R32 requires extensive assist of 1 with hygiene. R32 requires physical help in part of bathing activity with assist of one. R32's documentation on showers from November 4, 2023, through January 27, 2023, shows R32 did not receive her weekly showers on the following dates: - 11/25/22 - 12/9/22 - 12/23/22 - 1/6/23 - 1/20/23 On 2/15/23, at 9:40AM, Surveyor interviewed R32 and asked what concerns R32 has regarding the facility. R32 indicated there is not enough staff and R32 must wait a long time to get changed if she gets changed at all. R32 indicated she is to get a bed bath once a week but does not get them all the time if short staffed. R32 indicated she did not get a bed bath six weeks ago and there have been other times but can't recall specific dates. Example 14 R104 was admitted to facility on 9/1/22 and has diagnoses that include Pressure Ulcer to Sacral Region, Non-Pressure Chronic Ulcer of Right and Left Lower Extremities, and Morbid Obesity. R104's admission MDS Assessment, dated 9/7/22 shows R104 has a BIMS score of 9 indicating R104 has moderate cognitive impairment. Section G shows R104 is totally dependent with assist of one for hygiene and bathing. R104's documentation on showers from September 2, 2023, through February 24,2023 shows R104 did not receive weekly shower on the following dates: -10/18/22 - 11/8/22 - 11/15/22 - 11/29/22 - 12/14/22 - 1/10/23 -1/24/23 On 2/21/23, at 4:21PM, Surveyor interviewed CNA P (Certified Nursing Assistant) and asked if there were enough staff to care for the residents and CNA P indicated no. CNA P indicated on 2/20/23 she was the only CNA on the 500 wing. CNA P indicated when there is only one CNA on showers do not get done and showers did not get done on 2/20/23 when she was the only CNA. CNA P indicated R28 informed her today that it has been a while since her last shower. CNA P indicated when she is not able to get showers done or a full body bath she will wash the residents' faces, under arms and private areas. CNA P indicated on 2/20/23 she was not able to toilet and reposition the residents every two hours with being the only CNA on. CNA P indicated the CNA are also required to do the dishes from dinner and the laundry even if only one CNA is scheduled. CNA P indicated she has only been working at the facility for one week and did not sign up for this. On 2/21/23, at 4:45PM, Surveyor interviewed CNA S and asked if CNA S feels enough staff are there to care for the residents. CNA S indicated no; the facility is short staffed a lot of times with just one CNA to a unit of 18-24 residents. Surveyor asked CNA S if she can get her daily assignments completed and CNA S indicated it is daily that she is unable to get her assignments completed. Surveyor asked if showers get completed as they are scheduled, and CNA S indicated approximately two times a week showers are not getting done. CNA S indicated residents complain about when they are going to get their showers. CNA S indicated she was the only CNA scheduled on 2/11/23, 2/12/23, and 2/13/23 until 6PM and no showers got done. Surveyor asked CNA S how the showers get made up and CNA S indicated she does not know if they get made up, she just reports it to the nurse. CNA S indicated call lights do not get answered timely; if the CNA is on one side of wing and a resident on the other side of the wing needs help that resident does not get help. Surveyor asked CNA S what happens when only one CNA is scheduled, and a two person assist needs help. CNA S indicated she will ask the nurse but when the nurse is busy CNA S must leave the wing and go to another wing to find a CNA available to help with the two person assist. CNA S indicated she will turn the resident's call light off and ask them to bear with her and explain CNA S must go find help. CNA S indicated a lot of times the resident will have the call light back on the time she finds assistance and gets back to the resident. CNA S indicates the residents get upset with her at times. CNA S indicated the residents complain every day about short staffing and say the facility needs to get more help. CNA S indicated the residents bite my head off when I tell them it will be a while. CNA S indicated she feels the shortage in staffing is unsafe for the staff and the residents. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure 8 (R25, R30, R104, R32, R42, R54, R88, and R60) of 26 residents reviewed who were unable to carry out activities of daily living received the necessary services to maintain good grooming and personal hygiene assistance. R25 was observed not receiving assistance with incontinence care. R30, R104, R32, R42, R54, R88, and R60 did not receive showers as scheduled. (If they received a bed bath instead of a shower and wanted a shower you can add and per their individual preferences if needed.) This is evidenced by: The facility policy titled, Hygiene - Showers, includes, in part: Outcome Statement: Each resident will receive a bath or shower at least one time weekly and more frequently if needed for hygiene and/or skin stimulation Process: .X. Clip and clean fingernails and toenails . The facility policy titled, Activities of Daily Living - ADL, includes, in part: .A resident who is unable to carry out activities of daily living receives the necessary services to maintain good nutrition, grooming, and personal hygiene. Example 1 R54 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and has diagnoses that include Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, Peripheral Vascular Disease, and Hemiplegia and Hemiparesis. R54's Quarterly MDS (Minimum Data Set) Assessment, dated 1/10/23, shows R54 has a BIMS (Brief Interview of Mental Status) score of 9 indicating moderate cognitive impairment. Section G indicates R54 requires physical help in part of the bathing activity with one assist. R54 requires limited assistance of one with hygiene. R54's documentation for showers from December 5, 2023, through February 21, 2023, indicate R54 did not receive his weekly shower on the following dates: - 12/22/22 - 12/29/22 - 1/19/23 Example 2 R88 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and has diagnoses that include Lumbago with Sciatica, Polyneuropathy, Polyosteoarthritis, and Difficulty in Walking. R88's Quarterly MDS Assessment, dated 12/27/22, shows R88 has a BIMS score of 15 indicating R19 is cognitively intact. Section G indicates R88 requires extensive assistance of one with hygiene. R88 requires physical help in part of bathing activity with one assist. R88's documentation on showers from November 23, 2023, through January 26,2023 indicate R88 did not receive her weekly shower on the following dates: - 12/9/22 -12/16/22 - 12/23/22 - 1/6/22 On 2/15/23, at 10:31AM, Surveyor interviewed R54 and R88 and asked if they receive their showers as scheduled. R88 indicated neither one of them got their showers last week. R88 indicated they do not always receive their showers. R88 indicated she can wash up, but she likes to have showers. Example 3 R30 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and has diagnoses that include Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, Epilepsy, and chronic kidney disease. R30's Quarterly MDS Assessment, dated 12/30/22, shows a BIMS score of 15 indicating R30 is cognitively intact. Section G indicates R30 requires supervision and set up for hygiene. R30 requires physical help in part of bathing activity with assist of one. R30's documentation on showers from November 3, 2023, through January 26, 2023, indicate R30 did not receive her weekly shower on the following dates: - 11/24/22 - 12/8/22 - 12/15/22 - 12/22/22 - 1/5/23 On 2/15/23, at 12:31PM, Surveyor interviewed R30 and asked if R30 has any concerns with facility and R30 indicated there are not enough CNAs (Certified Nursing Assistants) and not getting showers. R30 indicated she did not receive a shower last week and there have been other times R30 did not receive scheduled showers. Surveyor asked if R30 receives bed baths when showers are not given and R30 indicated not always. Example 4 R60 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and has diagnoses that Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, Muscle Weakness, Generalized Anxiety Disorder, and Intercostal Pain. R60's Quarterly MDS assessment dated , 11/29/22, shows R60 has a BIMS score of 15 indicating R60 is cognitively intact. Section G shows R60 requires limited assist of one with hygiene. R60 requires physical help in part of the bathing activity with one assist. R60's documentation on showers from November 3, 2023, through January 26, 2023, shows R60 did not receive her weekly showers on the following dates: - 11/10/22 - 12/8/22 - 1/19/23 On 2/15/23, at 2:43 PM, Surveyor interviewed R60 and asked if she had concerns with the facility and R60 indicated there is not enough staff to take care of all the residents. R60 indicated she did not receive her shower last Thursday or a bed bath and there were other times she did not receive showers. Example 5 R42 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and has diagnoses that include Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and Mild Cognitive Impairment. R42's Quarterly MDS Assessment, dated 11/17/22 shows R42 has a BIMS score of 15 indicating R42 is cognitively intact. Section G shows R42 is independent with hygiene but requires supervision and set up for bathing. R42's documentation on showers from November 8, 2023, through January 31. 2023 shows R42 did not receive her weekly showers on the following dates: - 11/15/22 - 11/29/22 - 12/6/22 - 12/13/22 - 12/27/22 On 2/16/23, at 1:07PM, Surveyor interviewed R42 and asked if she receives showers when scheduled. R42 indicated she received a shower last week but the prior two weeks she did not receive her scheduled shower. Surveyor asked if she received a bed bath and R42 indicated she washed herself up, but she really wanted her showers. R42 indicated she was offered a bed bath one time, but she told staff she would do it herself, but indicated she really wanted her shower. R42 indicated the two weeks her shower was missed staff never came and talked with her about not being able to get R42's shower done. Example 6 R32 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and has diagnoses that include Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, Polyosteoarthritis and Specified Depressive Episode. R32's Quarterly MDS Assessment, dated 10/29/22 shows R32 has a BIMs score of 15 indicating R32 is cognitively intact. Section G shows R32 requires extensive assist of 1 with hygiene. R32 requires physical help in part of bathing activity with assist of one. R32's documentation on showers from November 4, 2023, through January 27, 2023, shows R32 did not receive her weekly showers on the following dates: - 11/25/22 - 12/9/22 - 12/23/22 - 1/6/23 - 1/20/23 On 2/15/23, at 9:40AM, Surveyor interviewed R32 and asked what concerns R32 has regarding the facility. R32 indicated there is not enough staff and R32 must wait a long time to get changed if she gets changed at all. R32 indicated she is to get a bed bath once a week but does not get them all the time if short staffed. R32 indicated she did not get a bed bath six weeks ago and there have been other times but can't recall specific dates. Example 7 R104 was admitted to facility on 9/1/22 and has diagnoses that include Pressure Ulcer to Sacral Region, Non-Pressure Chronic Ulcer of Right and Left Lower Extremities, and Morbid Obesity. R104's admission MDS Assessment, dated 9/7/22 shows R104 has a BIMS score of 9 indicating R104 has moderate cognitive impairment. Section G shows R104 is totally dependent with assist of one for hygiene and bathing. R104's documentation on showers from September 2, 2023, through February 24,2023 shows R104 did not receive weekly shower on the following dates: -10/18/22 - 11/8/22 - 11/15/22 - 11/29/22 - 12/14/22 - 1/10/23 -1/24/23 On 2/21/23, at 4:21PM, Surveyor interviewed CNA P and asked if there were enough staff to care for the residents and CNA P indicated no. CNA P indicated on 2/20/23 she was the only CNA on the 500 wing. CNA P indicated when there is only one CNA on, showers do not get done and showers did not get done on 2/20/23 when she was the only CNA. CNA P indicated when she is not able to get showers done or a full body bath she will wash the residents' faces, under arms and private areas. CNA P indicated on 2/20/23 she was not able to toilet and reposition the residents every two hours with being the only CNA on. CNA P indicated the CNAs are also required to do the dishes from dinner and the laundry even if only one CNA is scheduled. CNA P indicated she has only been working at the facility for one week and did not sign up for this. On 2/21/23, at 4:45PM, Surveyor interviewed CNA S and asked if CNA S feels enough staff are there to care for the residents. CNA S indicated no; the facility is short staffed a lot of times with just one CNA to a unit of 18-24 residents. Surveyor asked CNA S if she can get her daily assignments completed and CNA S indicated it is daily that she is unable to get her assignments completed. Surveyor asked if showers get completed as they are scheduled, and CNA S indicated approximately two times a week showers are not getting done. CNA S indicated residents complain about when they are going to get their showers. CNA S indicated she was the only CNA scheduled on 2/11/23, 2/12/23, and 2/13/23 until 6PM and no showers got done. Surveyor asked CNA S how the showers get made up and CNA S indicated she does not know if they get made up, she just reports it to the nurse. CNA S indicated call lights do not get answered timely; if the CNA is on one side of wing and a resident on the other side of the wing needs help that resident does not get help. Surveyor asked CNA S what happens when only one CNA is scheduled, and a two person assist needs help. CNA S indicated she will ask the nurse but when the nurse is busy CNA S must leave the wing and go to another wing to find a CNA available to help with the two person assist. CNA S indicated she will turn the resident's call light off and ask them to bear with her and explain CNA S must go find help. CNA S indicated a lot of times the resident will have the call light back on the time she finds assistance and gets back to the resident. CNA S indicates the residents get upset with her at times. CNA S indicated the residents complain every day about short staffing and say the facility needs to get more help. CNA S indicated the residents bite my head off when I tell them it will be a while. CNA S indicated she feels the shortage in staffing is unsafe for the staff and the residents. On 2/16/23 at 9:00AM Surveyor interviewed RN H (Registered Nurse) who shared that staffing has been an issue in the facility. Surveyor asked RN H if she could provide further information. RN H indicated they have one CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant) for the entire unit on PM's and states it has been going on weeks and months. Surveyor asked RN H if she could provide any specific dates. RN H indicated New Year's Day there was one CNA on every unit in the building. Surveyor asked RN H if there are tasks that can't get done due to staffing. RN H indicated, showers. Surveyor asked RN H how often they are not able to complete showers. RN H indicated, every day, one to two showers. We try to make them up on the weekend but sometimes they are missed weekly. On 2/20/23 at 2:50PM Surveyor interviewed DON B (Director of Nursing) and asked where shower documentation could be located. DON B indicated; showers were not documented in the old electronic health record. What was done, was, on the MAR (Medication Administration Record) the order would read skin check, vitals, hydration and the nurse would check it off there. It is the policy that those things are to be done with the shower. They are documented in Point of Care in the new computer system which was implemented on 2/1/23. On 2/27/23 at 5:00PM, Surveyor interviewed DON B and asked, what is the expectation for turning and repositioning of residents. DON B indicated the standard is every two hours unless they can do it on their own, otherwise the care plan would dictate what the schedule is. Surveyor asked DON B, if it is not on the care plan, then should staff use the standard procedure. DON B indicated, yes. Surveyor asked DON B if turning and repositioning is documented. DON B indicated; we don't document that in the chart. Surveyor asked DON B, what the expectation is for staff to provide incontinence checks and changes for the residents. DON B indicated; the care plan should state that. If it is not on care plan, then every 2 hours. Normally the schedule is on the care plan, otherwise it would say they are independent. Surveyor asked DON B, what is the expectation for showers. DON B indicated; showers are completed once a week. Surveyor asked DON B if these should be documented in the new computer system. (Of note, see previous interview regarding documentation in old electronic health record) We are now documenting showers in the new electronic health record. Surveyor asked DON B, since 2/1/23, when the new electronic health record started, if the shower is not documented in that system, then there is no evidence it was done. DON B indicated, in the new system, correct. Surveyor asked DON B if they should be documented. DON B indicated, yes. Surveyor asked DON B what the expectation is for call lights to be answered. DON B indicated; we try to get to them within 8 - 10 minutes. Surveyor asked DON B, if staff can't complete the task should they leave the call light on until they can. DON B indicated, if they can complete the task right away then they can shut it off. If they are going to get someone and coming back right away. If they are going to finish toileting someone and then have to come back, then they should leave the light on. Surveyor asked DON B if he was aware of any concerns with showers and ADL's (Activities of Daily Living). DON B indicated, yes. Surveyor asked what actions they are taking in regard to this. DON B indicated, if there is something we can move to another day we will do that. If we have a day that has more staff, we are looking at the schedules and saying ok, let's get these showers done ahead of time. If we have an extra nurse on hand, we are having them help to do them as well. PMs has been the most difficult shift to fill, so I dedicate a lot of time to the schedule and making adjustments.
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Deficiency F0725 (Tag F0725)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility did not have sufficient nursing staff with the appropriate compe...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility did not have sufficient nursing staff with the appropriate competencies and skills sets to provide nursing and related services to assure resident safety and attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident for 6 of 26 residents reviewed for staffing (R25, R32, R45, R60, R35 and R83), as determined by resident assessments and individual plans of care and considering the number, acuity and diagnosis of the facility's resident population in accordance with the facility assessment. R25 was observed not receiving incontinent cares per her individualized care plan. Facility staffing census documentation indicates fewer staff hours than the Staffing Plan in the Facility Assessment for specified shifts. R32, R45 and R60 complained of long call light wait times. R35 complained of not receiving showers. R83 is fed by a family member due to lack of staff. Evidenced by: The facility's Facility Assessment, undated, states in part: . Example 2. Describe your general staffing plan to ensure that you have sufficient staff to meet the needs of the residents at any given time. Consider if and how the degree of fluctuation in the census and acuity levels impact staffing needs . Direct care staff Team Nurses Day Shift- 1:23 ratio Team Nurses PM (Evening) Shift 1:23 ratio Team Nurses NOC (night) Shift 1:23-35 . Aides Day Shift 1:8-10 ratio (These ratios can change due to acuity-reviewed daily) Aides PM Shift 1: 8-10 ratio (These ratios can change due to acuity-reviewed daily) Aides NOC Shift 1:18-19 ratio . (Note: The current census of the facility is 104 residents at entrance. The Facility Assessment indicates staffing levels should be Nurse on Days 4.52, Nurse on PMs 4.56, Nurse on NOCs 2.97, Aides on Days 10.4, Aides on PMs 10.4, Aides on NOCs 5.47.) Example 1 A review of staff schedules for the first half of February indicates direct care staffing is as follows: On 2/1/23 with a Census of 110: 8.5 Aides on PMs, 2 Nurses on NOC. On 2/2/23 with a Census of 110: 8.5 Aides on PMs, 2 Nurses on NOC. On 2/3/23 with a Census of 108: 9.5 Aides on PMs. On 2/4/23 with a Census of 109: 8 Aides on Days, 2 Nurses on NOC. On 2/5/23 with a Census of 109: 6 Aides on Days, 3 Nurses on Days, 2 Nurses on NOCs. On 2/6/23 with a Census of 109: 8.5 Aides on Days, 2 Nurses on NOCs. On 2/7/23 with a Census of 109: 10 Aides on PMs. On 2/9/23 with a Census of 108: 7.5 Aides on Days, 8 Aides on PMs, 3 Nurses on NOCs. On 2/10/23 with a Census of 108: 8 Aides on Days, 8.5 Aides on PMs, 3 Nurses on NOCs. On 2/11/23 with a Census of 108: 9.5 Aides on PMs, 4 Aides on NOCs, 3 Nurses on NOCs. On 2/12/23 with a Census of 108: 7.5 Aides on PMs, 4 Aides on NOCs, 2 Nurses on NOCs. On 2/13/23 with a Census of 106: 8 Aides on PMs. On 2/14/23 with a Census of 106: 8.5 Aides on PMs, 2 Nurses on NOCs. On 2/16/23 with a Census of 105: 9 Aides on PMs. On 2/17/23 with a Census of 104: 9 Aides on PMs, 2 Nurses on NOCs. On 2/18/23 with a Census of 104: 5 Aides on NOCs, 2 Nurses on NOCs. On 2/19/23 with a Census of 104: 9 Aides on PMs. On 2/20/23 with a Census of 101: 7.5 Aides on PMs. Example 2 R25 has the following diagnosis: Alzheimer's Disease, Osteoarthritis, Polyosteoarthritis, Anemia, Urge Incontinence, and Unsteadiness on Feet. R25's most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], section B0700 indicates R25 is rarely or never understood. In R25's most recent MDS, section G0110 indicates R25 requires extensive assist of two staff is needed with bed mobility and dressing. R25 is total dependent of two plus staff members for physical assist for transfers, hygiene, and toileting. R25's Alteration in elimination care plan documents, in part: . check and change schedule: AM- 7am, 10am, 1pm and as needed . On 2/16/22 from 7:37 AM- 11:02 AM, Surveyor observed R25 sitting at the breakfast table and staying in the dining room area. At 9:30AM, Surveyor noted the smell of stool. On 2/16/22 at 11:07 AM, Surveyor observed R25's incontinent of a large amount of bowel and urine during personal cares with the assist of 2 CNAs (Certified Nursing Assistant). On 2/16/23 at 11:02 AM, Surveyor sought out and interviewed CNA I (Certified Nursing Assistant). Surveyor asked CNA I if R25 can tell you when she needs to go to the bathroom, CNA I replied, no. Surveyor asked CNA I how often a resident should be checked and changed, CNA I replied, in a perfect world, every 2 hours. Surveyor asked CNA I if she can do check and changes every 2 hours, CNA I replied sometimes, we can't do every 2 hours for check and changes. Surveyor asked CNA I if she ever works with one CNA, CNA I replied, almost all the time. Surveyor asked CNA I what type of duties she cannot get completed, CNA I replied, no time for nails. (Note: Surveyor asked for check and change schedules and evidence of completed tasks. Facility was not able to provide documentation prior to exit.) On 2/27/23 at 3:16 PM, Surveyor interviewed NHA A (Nursing Home Administrator). Surveyor asked how many current positions are open, NHA A replied there is a full-time recruiter, and a weekly report is emailed. Surveyor asked NHA A the steps taken for recruiting, NHA A replied through Indeed, calling resumes, reaching out to college campuses, a youth [NAME] program, job fairs of in house and in the community, and a referral bonus for staff. Surveyor asked NHA A how staffing is determined, NHA A replied of a combination of the resident count and the acuity. NHA A further explained, if we know the census is higher in an area, we will put the floats in that area. We look every day, and it is part of the clinical tool we look at. Surveyor asked how the staffing affects the residents, NHA A replied that if the staffing is thin or a call in, the NHA A for DON B (Director of Nursing) will stay over, do the dishes, offer a critical shift bonus, we will also come in on the weekends and answer our phone. Surveyor asked NHA A if there has been an issue with weekend staffing, NHA A replied, we call staff to come, we review the staffing and we answer our phones on the weekend. Example 3 R82 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and has diagnoses that include Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, Acute Respiratory Failure with Hypoxia, and Malignant Neoplasm of Upper Lobe, Left Lobe. R82's Quarterly MDS (Minimum Data Set) Assessment, dated 11/9/22, shows R82 has a BIMS (Brief Interview of Mental Status) score of 15 indicating R82 is cognitively intact. R82's call light log, dated 2/15/23, shows R82's call light was turned on at 9:19 PM and cleared at 10:14 PM. Response time was 55 minutes. On 2/16/23, 2:00PM- 3:00PM, Surveyors met with R82 during Resident Council Meeting and asked about staffing and cares. R82 voiced concern regarding the evening prior, 2/15/23. R82 indicated she put her call light on at 9:00PM and needed to have her soiled incontinence product changed and wanted her lights turned off for the night. R82 indicated her call light was not answered until 10:15PM. R82 indicates the CNAs (Certified Nursing Assistants) will enter her room and turn off the call lights and say they will return but often do not return. R82 stated, My home isn't safe anymore. R82 indicated she feels she would have to call 911 on the phone if she was having a hard time breathing to get some help. R82 stated, This is my fear that I will have to call 911 to get help. Example 4 R32 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and has diagnoses that include Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, Polyosteoarthritis, and Anemia. R32's Quarterly MDS Assessment, dated 10/29/22, shows R32 has a BIMS score of 15 indicating R32 is cognitively intact. R32's call light log dated 2/15/23, shows R32's call light was turned on at 6:47PM and not cleared until 8:55PM. The response time was 2 hours and 8 minutes. On 2/16/23, 2:00PM- 3:00PM, Surveyors met with R32 during Resident Council Meeting and asked about staffing and cares. R32 voiced concern regarding call light wait time on 2/15/23. R32 indicated she turned her call light on at 6:40PM and it did not get answered until 9:00PM. R32 indicated she was sitting in her wheelchair on the Hoyer lift sling which had a wrinkle in it causing pain to R32. R32 indicated she has had to wait for the night shift to come on to put her to bed also. R32 indicated she has talked to the NHA A but feels nothing changes. R32 expressed concern saying what if R32 was having a medical emergency, no one would know. Example 5 R45 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and has diagnoses that include Hemiplegia and Hemiparesis following Cerebral Infarction affecting Right Dominant Side and Acute and Chronic Respiratory Failure with Hypoxia. R45's Quarterly MDS assessment dated , 11/12/22 shows R45 has a BIMS score of 15 indicating R45 is cognitively intact. R45's call light log dated 2/15/23, shows R45's call light was turned on at 5:25PM and cleared 5:58PM. The response time was 32 minutes. R45 pushed her call light again at 6:04PM and cleared at 6:42PM. Response time was 37 minutes. R45 pushed her call light again at 7:31PM and it was cleared again at 8:22PM. Response time was 50 minutes when R45 finally got assistance into bed. On 2/16/23, 2:00PM- 3:00PM, Surveyors met with R45 during Resident Council Meeting and asked about staffing and cares. R45 indicated that on the night of 2/15/23 she had to wait three hours to use the bathroom. R45 indicated during that time of waiting R45 called the charge nurse on the phone to get assistance. R45 indicated this is the process she uses when she is waiting too long for assistance. R45 indicated once R45 was assisted onto to the toilet R45 indicated she was left on the toilet for another two hours. R45 indicated there was only one CNA assigned to her hall during that time. R45 also indicated she prefers to go to bed between 7:00PM and 8:00PM so she can watch her television shows. R45 indicated she missed her television shows on the evening of 2/15/23 due to waiting for assistance to get into bed. R45 indicated there was two nights this week where she was not able to get into bed between 9:00PM and 10:00PM. Example 6 R60 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and has diagnoses that include Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, Chronic Kidney Disease Stage 3 B, and Generalized Anxiety Disorder. R60's Quarterly MDS assessment dated , 10/27/22, shows R60 has a BIMS score of 15 indicating R60 is cognitively intact. On 2/16/23, 2:00PM- 3:00PM, Surveyors met with R60 during Resident Council Meeting and asked about staffing and cares. R60 voiced concern regarding the length of time R60 must wait for a staff member that can run the lift to assist R60 with transfers causing R60 discouragement and anxiety. R60 stated I dread nights and sometimes the mornings. Staff will turn off my call light and tell me not to turn my call light back on. Example 7 R35 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and has diagnoses that include Chronic Kidney Disease Stage 3B, Pulmonary Hypertension, and adjustment disorder with Anxiety. R35's Quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] shows R35 has a BIMS score of 15 indicating R35 is cognitively intact. On 2/16/23, 2:00PM- 3:00PM, Surveyors met with R35 during Resident Council Meeting and asked about staffing and cares. R35 indicated residents are not getting their showers because the facility is short staffed. R35 indicated recently her shower was not given and it is not a pleasant feeling. R35 indicated she was not offered a bed bath and had to wash herself up. R35 indicated there have been some shower days where her shower was not given, and the CNA has come into R35's room and told R35 her shower will not be done. R35 stated It gets to the point if I feel I don't need a shower I don't ask. R35 indicated a concern about the facility not having enough staff when during an activity, the activity staff cannot leave the activity and the CNA on the floor can't leave the hall to assist a resident who is in activities and may need to leave the activity to use the bathroom. On 2/21/23, at 10:51AM, Surveyor interviewed FM V (Family Member). FM V indicated that staffing has been an issue since the new company took over (Facility name) in April. FM V indicated she had phoned (Facility Name) board on 1/30/23 because she was so upset nothing had changed since she started taking her concerns to the facility. There was a meeting that took place on 1/30/23 with a board member from (Facility Name) NHA A (Nursing Home Administrator) and a corporate member. FM V indicated she comes in once a day to assist her husband, R83, with eating due to not enough staff. FM V indicates there has been only one CNA on the PM shift on the Wingra unit many times. FM V feels this is unsafe for the residents and the staff. FM V indicated on 1/20/23, she had to assist the nurse with changing R83's incontinence product due to only one nurse and one CNA scheduled. R83 had not been changed since 12:30PM and it was 6:00PM when her and the nurse changed R83. Surveyor asked how FM V knew R83 had not been changed since 12:30PM and FM V indicated the staff write on the white board in R83's room last time changed, and it was written as 12:30PM last changed. R83 was still in bed for supper and a tray was sent to R83's room where FM V fed R83. FM V indicated the nurse had handed FM V R83's medications in the dining room on Wingra that evening, and she had to take it all the way back to R83's room and give it to R83.FM V indicated on 1/6/23 at 5:30PM she was left in the dining room on the Wingra unit with 6 residents while the CNAs left to care for a resident. FM V indicated that evening there were 3 CNAs and 1 nurse for Wingra, Nakoma, and possibly another unit; it was very short staffed. FM V indicated she had to go down the hall and find an activity person to come and sit in dining room so FM V could take R83 back to his room. FM V indicated on 1/8/23 at 12:00PM there was only one CNA, who no longer works at facility, was scheduled for Wingra. FM V indicated there were residents that were left in their rooms and had not gotten up out of bed yet for the day; many trays were delivered to resident rooms. HSKG U (Housekeeping) was making Ensure shakes with ice cream. HSKG U and FM V were feeding residents. FM V indicated HSKG U assists with feeding residents often due to short staff. FM V indicated she was clearing dishes and pouring coffee to the residents. FM V indicated she emailed NHA A and called state the next day.FM V indicated on 2/14/23 there was one CNA for all the Wingra unit, I really got mad. FM V indicates the residents thank her for speaking up because the residents have been voicing concerns, but nothing gets done. On 2/16/23 at 9:00AM Surveyor interviewed RN H (Registered Nurse) who shared staffing has been an issue in the facility. Surveyor asked RN H if she could provide further information. RN H indicated they have one CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant) for the entire unit on PM's and states it has been going on weeks and months. Surveyor asked RN H if she could provide any specific dates. RN H indicated New Year's Day there was one CNA on every unit in the building. Surveyor asked RN H if there are tasks that can't get done due to staffing. RN H indicated, showers. Surveyor asked RN H how often they are not able to complete showers. RN H indicated, every day, one to two showers. We try to make them up on the weekend but sometimes they are missed weekly. The January 1, 2022 schedule was requested and received from the facility. The Facility Census for this date was 116. The day shift indicates the following number of nursing staff by unit: 100 unit: 2 RN's (Of note, the first RN is listed under the 200 unit as well and the second RN is listed under the 300 unit as well) and 1 CNA with a unit census of 20. 200 unit: 1 RN (Of note, this RN is also listed as the first RN for the 100 unit) and 1 CNA until 1:30 with a unit census of 20 300 unit: 1 RN (Of note, this nurse is also listed as the second RN for the 100 unit) and 1 CNA with a unit census of 19. Of note, there is 1 CNA listed at 8 to float all 3 units. 400 unit: 1 RN and 1 CNA with a unit census of 19. 500 unit: 1 RN and 1 CNA with a unit census of 22 600 unit: 1 RN and 1 CNA with a unit census of 16. Of note, there is 1 CNA scheduled to float all 3 units. Surveyor asked DON B (Director of Nursing) if he was aware of any concerns with showers and ADL's (Activities of Daily Living). DON B indicated, yes. Surveyor asked what actions they are taking in regard to this. DON B indicated, if there is something we can move to another day we will do that. If we have a day that has more staff, we are looking at the schedules and saying ok, lets get these showers done ahead of time. If we have an extra nurse on hand we are having them help to do them as well. PM's has been the most difficult shift to fill, so I dedicate a lot of time to the schedule and making adjustments.
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Deficiency F0811 (Tag F0811)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility did not ensure that feeding assistants completed a state approved training co...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility did not ensure that feeding assistants completed a state approved training course for 4 of 34 sampled residents (R83, R19, R38, & R24). A staff member reported to Surveyor that she assists R83, R19, R38 & R24 with dining and she has not completed a Certified Nursing Assistant Course or a state-approved paid feeding assistant training course and who, otherwise by Wisconsin law, should not be allowed to feed residents. FM V (family member) reported to Surveyor that her and a staff member assists residents with dining due to short staffing at the facility. This is Evidenced by: Facility unable to provide policy on paid feeding assistants as the facility does not offer a paid feeding assistant training course. Example 1 R83 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and has diagnoses that include Vascular Dementia, Aphasia following Cerebral Infarction, and Dysphagia, Oropharyngeal Phase. R83's Quarterly MDS (Minimum Date Set) Assessment, dated [DATE] shows R83 is severely cognitively impaired. R83's physician orders dated [DATE], states, in part: . General/Standard diet, Level 6: Soft & Bite Sized texture, Thin/Regular Liquids consistency . Example 2 R19 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and has diagnoses that include Dysphagia, Unspecified, Gastro-Esophageal Reflux Disease without Esophagitis, and Hypokalemia. R19's Quarterly MDS Assessment, dated [DATE], shows R19 has a BIMS (brief interview of mental status) score of 14 indicating R19 is cognitively intact. R19's physicians orders dated [DATE], states, in part: . General/Standard diet, Regular texture, Thin/Regular Liquids consistency . Example 3 R38 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and has diagnoses that include Alzheimer's Disease, Chronic Kidney Disease (Stage 3A), and Seizures. R38's Quarterly MDS Assessment, dated [DATE] shows R19 is severely cognitively impaired. R38's physicians orders, dated [DATE], states, in part: . General/Standard diet, Regular texture . Example 4 R24 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and has diagnoses that include Dementia without Behavioral Disturbance, Major Depressive Disorder, and Gasto-Esophageal Reflux Disease without Esophagitis. R24's Quarterly MDS (minimum data set) Assessment, dated [DATE], shows R24 is severely cognitively impaired. On [DATE], Surveyor interviewed R83's FM V who indicated HSK U (Housekeeping) and herself both assisted R24, R83, R38 and R19 with dining on [DATE] due to short staffing. R83's family member indicated she comes in daily to feed R83 and indicated HSK U assists residents with dining frequently due to short staffing. On [DATE], at 11:25 AM, Surveyor interviewed HSK U and asked if she assists residents with dining. HSK U indicated yes, she assists daily with breakfast due to short staffing. Surveyor asked HSK U what residents she assists and HSK U indicated she assists R24, R83, R38 and R19. Surveyor asked if HSK U has had paid feeding assistant training and HSK U indicated no. Surveyor asked HSK U if she ever assists residents on a pureed diet and HSK U indicated only residents on a regular diet. Surveyor asked HSK U if staff are aware she assists with dining and HSK U indicated RN R (Registered Nurse) is aware. Surveyor asked HSK U if she assisted with dining on [DATE] along with R83's family member and HSK U indicated she fed R24 that day. HSK U recalled R24 being very sick that day; R24 was so pale, and he was slumping over to one side. HSK U indicated she made R24 an ensure shake with ice cream and assisted him with it. Surveyor asked HSK U how she knows how to make ensure shakes with ice cream and HSK U indicated RN R told her how. HSK U indicated she never made and assisted with the ensure shakes without asking RN R first. Surveyor asked if HSK U has Cardio Pulmonary Resuscitation (CPR)/Heimlich training and HSK U indicated like 22 years ago she did but does not recall how it is done. On [DATE], at 11:43 AM, Surveyor interviewed RN R and asked if HSK U ever assists with dining and RN R indicated she has seen HSK U assists residents with dining before but not regularly. Surveyor asked if HSK U has had training in assisting with dining and RN R indicated no. Surveyor asked RN R if staff, family, or volunteers should assist residents with dining without the proper training and RN R indicated no. RN R indicated HSK U assists with dining because they are so short staffed. On [DATE], at 2:46 PM, Surveyor interviewed DON B (Director of Nursing) and asked if HSK U has had paid feeding assistant training and DON B indicated no, not that he is aware of. Surveyor informed DON B that it was brought to the attention of this Surveyor that HSK U assists with dining daily and HSK U indicated to this Surveyor she does assists with dining every day at breakfast. Surveyor asked DON B if staff, family, or volunteers should be assisting residents with dining without proper training and DON B indicated no. On [DATE], at 6:00 PM, Surveyor interviewed DON B and asked who was responsible for overseeing the staff that are feeding residents and DON B indicated the nurses. Surveyor asked DON B if staff should be trained on appropriate feeding techniques. DON B indicated for feeding assistants there is a program that must be completed. Surveyor asked if staff are assisting per care plan and DON B indicated staff should be following the care plans. Surveyor asked DON B if the facility has a state approved training program for paid feeding assistants and DON B indicated no. Surveyor asked if housekeeping has training and DON B indicated no, not to my knowledge. DON B indicated the facility has talked with that housekeeper and housekeeping staff in general and housewide education on [DATE].
CONCERN (F)

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

Food Safety (Tag F0812)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility did not store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. This has the potent...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility did not store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. This has the potential to affect all 104 residents. Raw hamburger was not being thawed in accordance with standards of practice. Clean dishes were found undried and stacked. Findings include Example 1 The Food and Drug Administration's 2022 Food Code states, under section 3-501.13: Time/Temperature Control for SAFETY FOOD shall be thawed: (A) Under refrigeration that maintains the FOOD temperature at 41 degrees Fahrenheit or (B) Completely submerged under running water: (1) At a water temperature of 70 degrees Fahrenheit or below, (2) With sufficient water velocity to agitate and float off loose particles in an overflow On 2/20/23 at 2:45pm, Surveyors observed two large tubes of raw hamburger submerged in water, lying on the bottom of the sink. The water was warm to the touch and the faucet was running. HC D (Head Cook) was nearby and confirmed she was thawing raw hamburger. When asked what the process is for thawing meats, HC D stated that she uses hot water for about 20-25 minutes. According to HC D, if the meat is not thawed by that time, she repeats the process. Surveyor then used a thermometer to record the temperature of the water, while HC D did the same. Both thermometers reached 99.6 degrees Fahrenheit. Example 2 On 2/22/23 at 2:42 PM, Surveyors observed six plastic clear food storage bins on the shelf with visible water trapped inside of each one. Water dripped from bins when unstacked. On 2/27/23 at 4:45 PM, Surveyor interviewed NHA A (Nursing Home Administrator), who is also acting as the interim dietary manager, stated bins should be dry before stacking to prevent bacteria and potential mold.
CONCERN (F)

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

Garbage Disposal (Tag F0814)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

Based on observation and interview, the facility did not ensure that garbage and refuse was disposed of properly. This has the potential to affect all 104 residents. On 2/15/23 at 9:28 AM, Surveyors ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation and interview, the facility did not ensure that garbage and refuse was disposed of properly. This has the potential to affect all 104 residents. On 2/15/23 at 9:28 AM, Surveyors observed the following outside, on the ground near the facility's main garbage dumpster: *8 gloves *A face shield *plastic CPAP/oxygen mask *Numerous broken plastic bottle caps *Opened/used feminine hygiene products *paper towels *Various pieces of scattered cardboard On 2/15/23 at 10:40 AM, NHA A (Nursing Home Administrator) observed the garbage area and reported to Surveyors that the facility could use some improvements as it pertains to disposing of garbage and refuse properly. NHA A stated the task of cleaning the dumpster area is completed regularly but would be added to the monthly cleaning list to ensure consistent proper disposal and cleaning is carried out.
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Life-Threatening (Immediate Jeopardy)
J - Isolated K - Pattern L - Widespread
Actual Harm
G - Isolated H - Pattern I - Widespread
Potential for Harm
D - Isolated E - Pattern F - Widespread
No Harm (Minor)
A - Isolated B - Pattern C - Widespread

Questions to Ask on Your Visit

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

Our Honest Assessment

Strengths
  • • Licensed and certified facility. Meets minimum state requirements.
Concerns
  • • Multiple safety concerns identified: 2 life-threatening violation(s), 5 harm violation(s), $113,802 in fines, Payment denial on record. Review inspection reports carefully.
  • • 70 deficiencies on record, including 2 critical (life-threatening) violations. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
  • • $113,802 in fines. Extremely high, among the most fined facilities in Wisconsin. Major compliance failures.
  • • Grade F (0/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
Bottom line: Trust Score of 0/100 indicates significant concerns. Thoroughly evaluate alternatives.

About This Facility

What is Complete Care At Maple Grove Llc's CMS Rating?

CMS assigns Complete Care at Maple Grove LLC an overall rating of 1 out of 5 stars, which is considered much below average nationally. Within Wisconsin, 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 Complete Care At Maple Grove Llc Staffed?

CMS rates Complete Care at Maple Grove LLC's staffing level at 4 out of 5 stars, which is above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 67%, which is 21 percentage points above the Wisconsin average of 46%. High turnover can affect care consistency as new staff learn residents' individual needs. RN turnover specifically is 61%, which is notably high. RNs provide skilled clinical oversight, so turnover in this role can affect medical care quality.

What Have Inspectors Found at Complete Care At Maple Grove Llc?

State health inspectors documented 70 deficiencies at Complete Care at Maple Grove LLC during 2023 to 2025. These included: 2 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death), 5 that caused actual resident harm, 62 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 Complete Care At Maple Grove Llc?

Complete Care at Maple Grove LLC 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 COMPLETE CARE, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 184 certified beds and approximately 95 residents (about 52% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in Madison, Wisconsin.

How Does Complete Care At Maple Grove Llc Compare to Other Wisconsin Nursing Homes?

Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Wisconsin, Complete Care at Maple Grove LLC's overall rating (1 stars) is below the state average of 3.0, staff turnover (67%) is significantly higher than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (1 stars) is much below the national benchmark.

What Should Families Ask When Visiting Complete Care At Maple Grove Llc?

Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "What changes have been made since the serious inspection findings, and how are you preventing similar issues?" "How do you ensure continuity of care given staff turnover, and what is your staff retention strategy?" "Can 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 facility's high staff turnover rate.

Is Complete Care At Maple Grove Llc Safe?

Based on CMS inspection data, Complete Care at Maple Grove LLC 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 Wisconsin. Families considering this facility should ask detailed questions about what corrective actions have been taken since these incidents.

Do Nurses at Complete Care At Maple Grove Llc Stick Around?

Staff turnover at Complete Care at Maple Grove LLC is high. At 67%, the facility is 21 percentage points above the Wisconsin average of 46%. Registered Nurse turnover is particularly concerning at 61%. RNs handle complex medical decisions and coordinate care — frequent RN changes can directly impact care quality. High turnover means new staff may not know residents' individual needs, medications, or preferences. It can also be disorienting for residents, especially those with dementia who rely on familiar faces. Families should ask: What is causing the turnover? What retention programs are in place? How do you ensure care continuity during staff transitions?

Was Complete Care At Maple Grove Llc Ever Fined?

Complete Care at Maple Grove LLC has been fined $113,802 across 5 penalty actions. This is 3.3x the Wisconsin average of $34,217. Fines at this level are uncommon and typically indicate a pattern of serious deficiencies, repeated violations, or failure to correct problems promptly. CMS reserves penalties of this magnitude for facilities that pose significant, documented risk to resident health or safety. Families should request specific documentation of what issues led to these fines and what systemic changes have been implemented.

Is Complete Care At Maple Grove Llc on Any Federal Watch List?

Complete Care at Maple Grove LLC 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.