CRITICAL
(J)
Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation
Deficiency F0741
(Tag F0741)
Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility did not have sufficient staff with appropriate competencies and...
Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility did not have sufficient staff with appropriate competencies and skill sets to provide direct nursing and behavioral health related services to assure resident safety for each resident to attain or maintain their highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for 1 of 1 sampled resident (R11) and 1 of 1 supplemental residents reviewed (R55).
R11 had expressed suicidal ideations related to his chronic pain (phantom limb pain) multiple times in the two months preceding R11 stabbing himself in the chest with scissors due to unrelieved pain. R11 was hospitalized for a self-inflicted stab wound to his chest and placed on an emergency psychiatric detention as a result of his suicide attempt. Following this incident, the resident returned to the facility and continued to express suicidal ideation and uncontrolled pain. Although R11 has had sharp objects removed from his room since the incident on 5/24/24, adequate supervision has not been provided when R11 expresses suicidal ideations.
R55 expressed suicidal ideations multiple times between 8/5/24 and 4/10/25. Over this time, R55 obtained sharp objects on occasions. On 4/10/25, scissors were removed from R55's room, after which the resident stated that if he had them he would use them like this and proceeded to hold his hand up to his throat.
The facility's failure to provide residents with sufficient staffing that had the appropriate competencies and skill sets to provide direct nursing and behavioral health related services to assure safety needs were met to attain or maintain their highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being to address behavioral health needs such as monitoring, on going assessments, and interventions to improve or stabilize R11 or R55's condition created a finding of immediate jeopardy that began on 5/30/24. NHA A (Nursing Home Administrator) was notified of the immediate jeopardy on 4/10/25 at 2:46 PM. The immediate jeopardy was removed on 4/15/25. However, the deficient practice continues at a scope/severity of D (potential for more than minimal harm/isolated) as the facility continues to implement its action plan.
This is evidenced by:
The facility policy titled, Notification of Change, reviewed 1/2025, states in part: . The Residents physician and responsible party must be notified when an event involving the resident occurs or when the resident experiences a change in condition, potential discharge, room transfer or death .Notification Parameters: [Corporation Name] has adopted the current INTERACT Tools Change in Condition: When to report to the MD (Medical Doctor)/NP (Nurse Practitioner)/PA (Physician Assistant) . ASSESSMENT: 1. When made aware of a change in condition of a resident the Licensed nurse will perform an assessment based on their professional judgement . NOTIFY THE PHYSICIAN IMMEDIATELY IF THE RESIDENT REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ACTION . NOTIFICATION: . 4. Document each attempt in the residents medical record. 5. Notify the Director of Nursing of the Residents condition change. 6. The Licensed nurse is to provide frequent checks on the residents condition while waiting for a call back from the Physician and or NP. Alert the direct care givers of residents condition change and signs and symptoms to be watching for . 8. Inform the physician of the services available in the facility vs. automatic transfer of the resident to the emergency room or admission to the hospital .
The facility policy titled, Pain Management Policy, reviewed 1/2025, states in part: . Purpose: to provide an approach to pain management that provides the resident with optimal comfort, dignity and quality of life. Resident experiencing pain will be treated using non-pharmacological and pharmacological methods to optimally control pain, maximize function and promote quality of life . 5. Each resident's plan of care will include interventions to effectively manage pain, including pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions . 6. Pain will be reassessed after interventions to evaluate the effectiveness of the intervention and to recognize undesirable side effects and documented in the medical record. 7. The provider will be notified if comfort is not achieved following pain management interventions, for changes in pain characteristics and/or with new onset pain or breakthrough pain .
The facility policy titled, Trauma Informed Care, reviewed 1/2025, states in part: . It is the policy of this facility to provide care and services which, in addition to meeting professional standards, are delivered using approaches which are culturally-competent, account for experiences and preferences, and address the needs of trauma survivors by minimizing triggers and/or re-traumatization . Trauma results from an event, series of events, or set of circumstances that is experienced by an individuals as physically or emotionally harmful or life threatening and that has lasting adverse effects on the individuals' functioning and mental, physical, social, emotional, or spiritual well-being. Common sources of trauma may include, but are not limited to: . d. Physical, sexual, mental, and/or emotional abuse (past or present) e. Rape . i. Traumatic life events . Trauma-Informed Care is an approach to delivering care that involves understanding, recognizing and responding to the effects of all types of trauma. A trauma-informed approach to care delivery recognizes the widespread impact and signs and symptoms of trauma in residents, and incorporates knowledge about trauma into care plans, policies, procedures and practices to avoid re-traumatization .Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines: 1. The facility will work to facilitate the principles of trauma informed care which include: a. Safety - Ensuring residents have a sense of emotional and physical safety . 2. The facility will use a multi-pronged approach to identifying a resident's history of trauma . This will include asking the resident about triggers that may be stressors or may prompt recall of a previous traumatic event, as well as screening and assessment tools . 6. The facility will identify triggers which may re-traumatize residents with a history of trauma. Trigger-specific interventions will identify ways to decrease the resident's exposure to triggers which re-traumatize the resident, as well as identify ways to mitigate or decrease the effect of the trigger on the resident, and will be added to the resident's care plan .7. Trauma-specific care plan interventions will recognize the interrelation between trauma and symptoms of trauma such as . depression and anxiety . 10. In situations where a trauma survivor is reluctant to share their history, the facility will still try to identify triggers which may re-traumatize the resident, and develop care plan interventions which minimize or eliminate the effect of the trigger on the resident.
The facility policy titled, Behavioral Health Services, reviewed 1/2025, states, in part: . It is the policy of this facility to ensure residents receive necessary behavioral health services to assist them in reach and maintain their highest level of mental and psychosocial functioning. Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines: 1. The facility will ensure that necessary behavioral health care services are person-centered and provided to each resident. 2. Behavioral health care and services shall be provided in an environment that is conducive to mental and psychosocial well-being. 3. Conditions that may require specialized services and supports include, but are not limited to: a. Depression b. Anxiety . 4. The facility utilizes assessments for identifying and assessing a resident's mental and psychosocial status providing person-centered care. This process includes, but is not limited to: . b. Obtaining history regarding mental, psychosocial, and emotional health. c. Ongoing monitoring of mood and behavior. d. Care plan development and implementation. e. Evaluation . 6. All facility staff, including contracted staff and volunteers, shall receive education to ensure appropriate competencies and skill sets for meeting the behavioral health needs of residents. Education shall be based on the role of the staff member and resident needs identified through the facility assessment. Behavioral health training as determined by the facility assessment will include, but is not limited to, the competencies and skills necessary to provide the following: a. Person-centered care and services that reflect the resident's goals of care. b. Interpersonal communication that promotes mental and psychosocial well-being. c. Meaningful activities which promote engagement and positive meaningful relationships. d. An environment and atmosphere that is conducive to mental and psychosocial well-being. e. Individualized, non-pharmacological approaches to care . 7. Facility staff will implement person-centered care approaches designed to meet the individual goals and needs of each resident, which includes non-pharmacological interventions . 8. The Social Services Director shall serve as the contact person for questions regarding behavioral services provided by the facility and outside sources such as physician, psychiatrists, or neurologists .
Surveyor reviewed the facility's assessment, last reviewed on 8/2/24, to determine the need for staff with skills and competencies in order to provide nursing and related behavioral health services to maintain safety for R11 and R55.
Facility assessment indicates: .Purpose
The purpose of the assessment is to determine what resources are necessary to care for residents competently during both day-to-day operations and emergencies. The use [sic] this assessment to make decisions about your direct care staff needs, as well as your capabilities to provide services to the residents at our facility. Using a competency-based approach focuses on ensuring that each resident is provided care that allows the resident to maintain or attain their highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being.
The intent of the facility is for the facility to evaluate its resident population and identify the resources needed to provide the necessary person-centered care and services the residents require.
The assessment is organized in three parts:
1.
Resident profile including numbers, diseases/conditions, physical and cognitive disabilities, acuity, and ethnic/cultural/religious factors that impact care
2.
Services and care offered based on Resident needs (includes types of care your Resident population requires)
3.
Facility resources needed to provide competent care for Residents, including staff, staffing plan, staff training/education and competencies, education and training, physical environment and building needs, and other resources, including agreements with third parties, health information technology resources and systems, a facility-based and community-based risk assessment, and other information that you may choose
Part 1 of the facility assessment, titled, Our Resident Profile with sub-heading, Diseases/Conditions, physical and cognitive disabilities indicates that the facility accepts residents with Psychiatric/Mood Disorders such as: Depression, Impaired Cognition, Mental Disorder, Bipolar Disorder (Mania/Depression), Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), Anxiety Disorder, Schizophrenia, Insomnia, Mood Adjustment Disorder, and Behavior that needs interventions. The facility is also able to accept residents with neurological disorders such as Alzheimer's Disease, Non-Alzheimer's Dementia, Down Syndrome, Traumatic Brain Injuries, Autism, Huntington's Disease, Tourette's Syndrome, and Cerebral Palsy.
Part 2 of the facility assessment, titled, Services and Care We Offer Based on our Residents' Needs, indicates that the facility can provide care for residents with mental health and behavior needs, to include: managing the medical conditions and medication-related issues causing psychiatric symptoms and behavior, identify and implement interventions to help support individuals with issues such as dealing with anxiety, care of someone with cognitive impairment, care of individuals with depression, trauma/PTSD, other psychiatric diagnoses, and intellectual or developmental disabilities. This section also indicates that the facility can provide care for residents with a need for psycho/social/spiritual support, to include: finding out what resident's preferences and routines are, what makes a good day for the resident, what upsets him or her and incorporate this information into the care planning process, making sure staff care for the resident have this information, recording and discussing treatment and care preferences, supporting resident's emotional and mental well-being, supporting helpful coping mechanisms, providing opportunities for social activities and life enrichment, and identifying hazards and risks for residents.
In the section titled, Contingency Planning for Staff, the facility assessment indicates in case of an emergency event requiring additional staffing: the administrator will direct available department heads to contact available staff to elicit ability to work, non-nursing staff will complete tasks to alleviate burden from nursing staff as allowed without certification or license, contact company affiliated facilities to determine availability to assist, contact the Regional Director of Operations to approve use of current company agency staffing contracts and offer additional incentives for staff to pick up open shifts such as bonuses.
In the section titled, Staff training/education and competencies the facility assessment indicates various education, training, and competencies that are necessary for staff to provide the level and types of support and care needed for the facility's resident population. Trauma informed care is listed under the training section. Under annual competencies, the facility assessment indicates person-centered care, including care planning, resident and family education about treatments and medications, along with caring for residents with mental and psychosocial disorders, as well as residents with a history of trauma and/or post-traumatic stress disorder, and implementing non-pharmacological interventions.
Surveyor requested training provided by the facility to staff regarding suicidal ideation and precautions since R11's attempted suicide on 5/24/24. The education provided is print-outs of slide-show presentations titled, Behavioral Health Services and Non-Pharmacological Interventions.
Surveyor reviewed the document provided by the facility regarding staff education. This document is untitled and undated. The earliest Completion Date reviewed noted by Surveyor was 2/1/24 and the latest date noted by Surveyor was 3/19/25. The Course Name of trainings include Behavioral Health Services, Non-Pharmacological Interventions (Pain and Behavior), and New Hire Behavioral Health. The titles of staff members include Registered Nurses (RN), Licensed Practical Nurses (LPN), Certified Nursing Assistants (CNA), Dietary staff, housekeeping staff, Activities Staff, and Maintenance Staff. Out of the 15 RNs reviewed, only 8 completed all three trainings, indicating a 53% training completion rate. Out of the 12 LPNs reviewed, 9 completed all three trainings, indicating a 75% training completion rate. Out of the 51 CNAs reviewed, 32 completed all three trainings, indicating a 63% training completion rate. SS N (Social Services) only completed the New Hire Behavioral Health training, according to the documentation provided.
(Of note: This list does not include any therapy or agency staff.)
According to the National Library of Medicine, risk factors for suicide include, in part: older populations, male, past suicide attempts, adverse childhood experiences, socioeconomic challenges, access to lethal means, recent diagnosis of terminal or chronic illnesses.
Example 1:
R11 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that include: amputation of right toes, type 2 diabetes with diabetic polyneuropathy (damage to multiple peripheral nerves causing pain, tingling, burning, numbness, or sensitivity to touch), acquired absence of limb (amputation), phantom limb syndrome w/pain (sensation that limb is still attached to body and can include feelings of pain, numbness, tingling, or temperature changes), and other chronic pain.
According to the National Library of Medicine, phantom limb pain is the perception of pain or discomfort in a limb that is no longer there. This pain most commonly presents as a result of amputation. While the cause of the pain is not completely understood, it is thought to originate with the trauma to the nerves surrounding the amputation site and involve neurons in both the spinal cord and brain as well. This pain is often described as tingling, throbbing, sharp, pins/needles in the limb that is no longer there. Pain severity varies and tends to be intermittent in frequency. Treatment has not been proven to be very effective for phantom limb pain and focuses on symptomatic control. Medication options include acetaminophen (Tylenol), ibuprofen, opioids, antidepressants, anticonvulsants (anti-seizure medications), beta blockers, topical anesthetics like Capsaicin, botulinum toxin injections, and local anesthetics. Phantom limb pain is very complex and difficult to treat and is best managed by an interprofessional team involving mental health professionals, pharmacists, and pain management physicians.
R11's most recent Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), with Assessment Reference Date of 1/9/25, states that R11 has a BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) of 15 out of 15, indicating that R11 is cognitively intact. Section D indicates that R11 never has self-isolating behavior. Section J indicates R11 experiences pain frequently, the pain frequently interferes with his sleep and day-to-day activities.
Physician orders include: May be treated by house Psychiatrist as needed . Start date: 4/1/24. End date: 5/30/24. Start date: 5/30/24.
TENS (electrical current stimulates nerve cells and blocks the transmission of pain signals) unit may be applied for 20 minutes. Staff must assist resident with application and removal. TENS unit to be stored in med (medication) cart . Start date: 1/7/25
Due to suicidal ideation and attempt check room for sharp objects and remove every shift. May complete with 2 staff if needed. Three Times A Day . Start date: 10/25/24.
Progress note each shift on resident status - include pain scale and mood/behaviors. Include nursing therapeutic interventions communication and interventions used. Every Shift . Start date: 5/31/24. End date: 9/9/24. Start date: 9/9/24.
Pain Assessment every 4 hours - MUST BE COMPLETED. Must offer PRN (as needed) interventions and document progress note with interventions if pain is over 6/10. Special Instructions: 0 - 10 Scale. 0 = No Pain, 1-3 Mild, 4-6 Moderate, 7-10 Severe. Every Shift . Start date: 5/30/24.
Behavior Monitoring: Yelling=1, Refusal of Care/Services=2, Combative=3, Hallucinations=4, Agitation=5, Delusions=6, Other=7 (if other please note specific behavior), None=8. Special Instructions: Interventions=calm/slow approach=1, avoid over-stimulation=2, reassurance=3, re-approach=4, re-direct=5, diversional activity=6, offer toileting/snack/drink=7, exercise=8, pain relief=9, other=10, n/a (not applicable)=11. Every Shift . Start date: 5/30/24.
R11's current Comprehensive Care Plan indicates, in part:
Problem: Resident displays physical and verbal behavioral symptoms that impact resident by putting them at risk for physical injury, interferes with participation in activities or social interactions and impacts others (staff and residents) by placing them at risk of physical injury and disrupts care or living environment. Start date: 9/23/24 .
Interventions: Approach: Obtain a psych consult/psychosocial therapy as needed. Start: 9/23/24. Approach: Administer medications as ordered. Monitor and record effectiveness. Report adverse side effects. Start: 9/23/24. Approach: Maintain a calm environment and approach to the resident. Start: 9/23/24. Approach: Assess whether the behavior endangers the resident and/or others. Intervene if necessary. Start: 9/23/24. Approach: Observe for changes in behavior, document, and report to doctor. Start: 9/23/24. Approach: Observe for change in mental status, document and notify physician. Start: 9/23/24. Approach: Offer reassurance to resident as necessary. Start: 9/23/24. Approach: Allow distance in seating other residents around resident. Start: 9/23/24. Approach: Remove resident from group activities when behavior is unacceptable. Start: 9/23/24. Approach: Provide opportunity for resident to vent feelings. Listen in non-judgmental manner. Start: 9/23/24. Approach: Prepare and organize supplies before caring for resident. Avoid delays and interruptions in care. Start: 9/23/24. Approach: When resident becomes physically abusive, move resident to a quiet, calm environment. Start: 9/23/24. Approach: Maintain a calm, slow, understandable approach with the resident. Start: 9/23/24
Approach: When resident becomes physically abusive, keep distance between resident and others: staff, other residents, visitors. Start: 9/23/24. Approach: Seat resident where frequent observation is possible. Start: 9/23/24
Approach: Avoid over-stimulation: added noise, crowding, other physically active residents. Start: 9/23/24. Approach: Encourage (R11) to NOT use his motorized wheelchair when intoxicated. Assist to provide him alternate mobilization. Start: 9/23/24
Problem: Resident has expressed thoughts of being better off dead. Start date: 4/5/24. Last revised: 1/17/25 Interventions: Approach: Resident to be placed on 15 minute checks. To be completed if/when resident is making suicidal comments. Start date: 4/5/24. Approach: Provide 1:1 sessions with staff as needed. Start date: 4/5/24. Approach: Monitor for decline in resident's mood and report to physician for evaluation as needed. Start date: 4/5/24 Approach: Obtain a psych consult/psychosocial therapy PRN. Start date: 4/5/24 Approach: During acute phase, do not make demands on resident. Remove excess stimulation. Start date: 4/5/24. Approach: Convey an attitude of acceptance toward the resident. Start date: 4/5/24. Approach: Maintain a calm environment and approach to the resident. Start date: 4/5/24. Approach: Assess if mood endangers the resident and/or others. Intervene if necessary. Start date: 4/5/24. Approach: Encourage to verbalize feelings, concerns and fears. Clarify misconceptions. Start date: 4/5/24. Approach: Establish a trusting relationship with the resident and family. Start date: 4/5/24. Approach: Use distraction, relaxation, breathing techniques, etc. during acute phases. Monitor and record effectiveness. Start date: 4/5/24. Approach: Provide reassurance and comfort during acute periods. Start date: 4/5/24. Approach: Resident has a history of making thoughts of being better off dead, these statements are often made when experiencing pain. Offer pain interventions when states are made. Start date: 5/8/24. Approach: When resident makes suicidal ideation statements, contact provider (on-call during off hours). Start date: 10/24/24. Approach: Resident's room to be assessed every shift for sharp objects or other objects or forms of hurting oneself. May be completed with 2 staff as needed. Start date: 11/11/24
Problem: Resident has pain R/T: phantom limb syndrome with pain. Start date: 4/2/24. Last Revised/Reviewed: 1/17/25 Interventions: Approach: Monitor and record any non-verbal signs of pain: guarding, moaning, restlessness, grimacing, diaphoresis, withdrawal. Start date: 4/2/24
Approach: Evaluate effectiveness of pain management interventions. Adjust if ineffective or adverse side effects emerge. Start date: 4/2/24 Approach: Allow sufficient uninterrupted rest periods. Start date: 4/2/24 Approach: Handle gently and try to eliminate any environmental stimuli. Start date: 4/2/24 Approach: Position for comfort with physical support as necessary. Start date: 4/2/24 Approach: Administer medications as ordered. Monitor and record effectiveness. Start date: 4/2/24 Approach: Use pain relief measures such as distraction, imagery, relaxation, heat/cold, massage, etc. Monitor and record effectiveness. Start date: 4/2/24 Approach: Assess past effective and ineffective pain relief measures. Start date: 4/2/24 Approach: Monitor and record any complaints of pain: location, duration, quantity, quality, alleviating factors, aggravating factors. Start date: 4/2/24 Approach: Resident to have a pain assessment done every 4 hours. Start date: 5/31/24
Approach: Resident will hit his lower extremities and reports that this behavior is to treat the phantom pain he experiences. Offer pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions when he is doing this. Resident often refuses additional interventions when displaying this behavior. Start date: 10/24/24
Approach: TENS Unit for Pain Relief: Resident is independent with use of TENS Unit for pain management of right foot phantom limb pain. Assist with charging unit as needed. Start date: 12/4/24
On 4/1/24, R11 was admitted to the facility with orders that indicate in part: capsaicin cream, 0.025%, scheduled to apply to right foot four times a day for pain, along with an order to apply to R11's skin as needed once a day for pain. Nortriptyline 25 mg scheduled every evening for nerve pain. Venlafaxine capsule, 24 hour extended release, for a total amount of 187.5 mg, scheduled daily. Acetaminophen (Tylenol) 1,000 mg, every 6 hours as needed for pain, Max dosing 3,000 mg in 24 hours. Diclofenac sodium get 1%, apply 4 grams to skin four times daily as needed for joint damage causing pain and loss of function. Complete a pain assessment every shift with a scale of 0-10, with 0 indicating no pain, 1-3 indicating mild pain, 4-6 indicating moderate pain, and 7-10 indicating severe pain.
On 4/2/24 at 5:00 PM, a Progress Note was written by ADON K (Assistant Director of Nursing) that states, in part: Provider, [NP L's Name], NP (Nurse Practitioner) notified of resident's request to keep pain creams at bedside and to have a PRN muscle relaxant. Provider notified staff that the resident has an appointment with pain medicine on April 9th, the resident is willing to wait until this appointment to address muscle relaxer and medication management of pain .
On 4/3/24, R11's Medication Administration Record (MAR) indicates R11 reported 7 out of 10 pain to Day shift.
On 4/3/24 at 10:46 PM, R11's MAR indicates R11 received 1000 mg of PRN acetaminophen which was indicated to be Not Effective.
On 4/3/24, MAR indicates R11 reported 7 out of 10 pain to Evening shift.
On 4/4/24 at 12:30 AM, R11's MAR indicates R11 received 1000 mg of PRN acetaminophen for 9 out of 10 pain, which was indicated to be Somewhat Effective. 4 grams of diclofenac gel was also administered and marked to be Not Effective.
On 4/4/24, R11's MAR indicates R11 reported 7 out of 10 pain to Day shift.
On 4/4/24 at 7:55 AM, R11's MAR indicates R11 received 1000 mg of PRN acetaminophen for 7 out of 10 pain, which was indicated to be Not Effective.
On 4/4/24 at 11:56 AM, a Progress Note was written by RN M (Registered Nurse), that states, in part: Resident c/o (complaining) of [sic] 9/10 R (right) foot/ankle pain in his R foot. Resident was heard hollering and yelling out in pain, and when this writer went into room to assess, resident was moaning and crying. Stated that he couldn't take the pain anymore, and stated he just wants the lord to take him, he can't live like this, it's been like this for years. Resident said that he hasn't slept in 3 days, since he's been here, and the Tylenol and cream you guys hive [sic] me doesn't do f**king s**t. Asked resident if there is anything that has worked in the past, and resident replied oxycodone (opioid medication) has helped me sleep and taken the pain away before. Resident was provided diclofenac (non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug) cream as well, this did help resident. Reduced pain from 9/10, down to a 3/10 in about 10-15 minutes. Resident then requested more of it because pain was coming back. The writer asked resident what he meant by he wants the lord to take him, and he stated this pain makes me suicidal. This writer asked him if he had a plan, he replied no he did not, but this has been going on for years and none of these f**king doctors understand that this pain makes me not want to be alive anymore. DON (Director of Nursing), ADON, and social worker all updated about these comments, as well as APNP (Advanced Practice Nurse Prescriber) [NP L's Name] .
On 4/4/24 at 12:15 PM, a Progress Note was written by DON B, that states, in part: Writer notified of resident's suicidal comments made this shift. Writer had 1:1 conversation with resident. Resident stated this pain is so bad, I just want to die. Resident denied having a plan. Resident sitting up in bed, with flat affect during conversation. Resident stated this isn't new to me, it happens all the time. Resident placed on 15 minute checks. [NP L's Name] NP aware and met with resident in house. NP reviewed residents history, and stated these comments and c/o pain are not new for resident. Resident is followed by pain clinic and has appointment next week. New orders received from [NP L's Name] .
On 4/4/24, R11's Physician Orders indicate new orders were placed for: acetaminophen (Tylenol) 650 mg, scheduled three times a day for pain, not to exceed 4,000 mg in 24 hours. Voltaren (diclofenac sodium) gel, 1% apply 2 grams to the right lower extremity four times a day as needed for pain.
On 4/4/24 at 3:49 PM, a Progress Note was written by SS N (Social services), that states: The writer followed up with resident regarding the suicidal ideation comments. Resident stated that he is in pain and the medication he is receiving is not helping. This writer made sure resident does not have a plan.
(Of note: No PHQ-9 (Patient Health Questionnaire-9, a screening tool for depression) was completed at this time.)
On 4/4/24, MAR indicates R11 reported 7 out of 10 pain to Evening shift.
On 4/5/24, R11's Comprehensive care plan problem is created for, Resident has expressed thoughts of being better off dead. Interventions as noted above, including initiating 15 minute checks when R11 makes suicidal comments.
On 4/5/24, MAR indicates R11 reported 9 out of 10 pain to Day shift.
On 4/5/24 at 7:31 AM, R11's MAR indicates R11 received 4 grams of diclofenac gel and is marked to be Effective.
On 4/7/24 at 3:13 PM, a Progress Note was written by LPN O (License Practical Nurse), that states: Resident reported 8/10 pain to right stump most of the shift. Rubbing stump occasionally in an attempt to minimize pain. Scheduled and PRN creams applied, resident reports not effective. Resident insisted he had a cream that is now used up that did work but not sure the name of that medication. Resident became upset when writer unable to provide him with the name or tube of medicated cream that he reported was effective. Resident reported he thought it may be lidocaine; however, he does not currently have order for Lidocaine ointment. Left note with resident's request for provider to follow up on
(Of note: R11's MAR indicates the resident reported pain of 1/10, 3/10, and 0/10 for each shift of 4/7/24)
On 4/8/24, MAR indicates R11 reported 8 out of 10 pain to Day shift.
On 4/8/24 at 3:41 AM, R11's MAR indicates R[TRUNCATED]
CRITICAL
(L)
Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Someone could have died · This affected most or all residents
⚠️ Facility-wide issue
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable disease and ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable disease and infections. This had the potential to affect all residents residing within the facility at the time of an outbreak on 1/2/25. This outbreak involved 49 out of 83 residents and 37 staff.
As of 1/2/25, the facility was in a GI (gastrointestinal) outbreak with 2 staff and 1 resident with noted signs and symptoms of GI outbreak.
- Facility staff line listings were not completed contemporaneously.
- Temporary Care plans were not started for residents with GI signs and symptoms.
- Residents with orders for Laxatives and Diuretics continued to take their prescribed medication without any monitoring for dehydration or bowel movement consistency and frequency.
- Staff returned to work too soon following GI signs and symptoms.
- Facility does not indicate when residents were taken off precautions following GI signs and symptoms.
- Housekeeping did not ensure they cleaned non symptomatic resident rooms prior to those residents with GI signs and symptoms.
- Housekeeping did not use any type of clothing barrier (e.g., apron) when sorting dirty laundry.
- Facility did not notify DPH (Department of Public Health) of the outbreak until 1/6/25. The outbreak started on 1/2/25.
- Facility did not complete a timeline of the outbreak.
- Facility did not complete lessons learned following the GI outbreak.
- Facility did not have an Ad Hoc QAPI meeting to discuss the GI outbreak.
The facility's failure to mitigate the spread of the GI outbreak created a finding of immediate jeopardy that began on 1/3/25. NHA A (Nursing Home Administrator) and DON B (Director of Nursing) were notified of the immediate jeopardy on 4/10/25 at 2:46 PM. The immediate jeopardy was removed on 1/14/25; however, the deficient practice continues at a severity/scope level of F (potential for more than minimal harm/widespread) as the facility continues to implement its action plan.
This is evidenced by:
The facility policy titled, Norovirus Prevention and Control, last reviewed 1/2025, states in part .
Policy: This facility will implement infection control measures to prevent the transmission of norovirus infection.
Procedure: 1. Place residents with symptoms of norovirus gastroenteritis on Contact Precautions in a private room. If a private room cannot be accommodated efforts must be attempted to separate symptomatic resident from asymptomatic residents. 2. Residents with norovirus gastroenteritis will be placed on Contact Precautions for a minimum of 48-72 hours after the resolution of symptoms. Longer periods of isolation or cohorting for medically complex residents may be considered. 3. Minimize symptomatic resident's movements within the unit; restrict recovering residents during 48-72 hour recover time frame also from leaving the resident-care area unless it is for essential care or treatment; and suspend group activities (e.g., dining events) for the duration of an outbreak. 4. During outbreak, frequent hand hygiene after providing care or having contact with residents suspected or confirmed with norovirus gastroenteritis. 5. Transfers may be limited to Contact Precautions are not able to be maintained; or transfers may be postponed until residents no longer require Contact Precautions. 6. Perform additional cleaning and disinfection of frequently touched environmental surfaces and equipment in resident care areas, resident with isolation and cohorted areas, as well as high-traffic clinical areas. Frequently touched surfaces include, but not limited to, commodes, toilets, faucets, hand/bed railing, telephones, door handles, computer equipment, and kitchen preparation surfaces. Clean and disinfect shared equipment between residents using EPA-registered products with label claims for use in healthcare which lists activity against norovirus. Follow the manufacturer's recommendations for application and contact times. 7. Clean and disinfect surfaces starting from the areas with a lower likelihood of norovirus (e.g., toilets, bathroom fixtures). Change mop heads when a new bucket of cleaning solution is prepared or after cleaning large spills of emesis or fecal material. 8. During outbreaks, change privacy curtains when they are visibly soiled and upon resident discharge or transfer. 9. Handle soiled linens carefully, without agitating them, to avoid dispersal of virus. Use Standard Precautions, including the use of appropriate PPE (e.g., gloves and gowns), to minimize the likelihood of cross-contamination. 10. Staff who work with, prepare or distribute food will be excluded from duty immediately if they develop symptoms of acute gastroenteritis. Any staff presenting with norovirus symptoms will be off work and not to return until a minimum of 48 hours after the resolution of symptoms or longer upon recommendation from Infection Control Preventionist or Infection Control Committee.
The facility policy titled, Infection Control Program Introduction, last reviewed 1/2025, states in part .
Introduction: Infections are among the most frequent and significant problems facing nursing facility residents today. They account for a large proportion of morbidity and mortality, and for many hospital transfers. This Infection Control Manual will provide information for the essential functions and practices of the facility and also be flexible enough to fit a facility's specific environment and able to accommodate new issues or requirements.
Purpose of Infection Control Program: The major purposes of Infection Control Programs in the nursing facility are to minimize the effects of infections on residents and employees, and to educate the staff. A successful Infection Control Program requires an underlying commitment and facility-wide participation. It should not just be seen as a way to meet paperwork requirements but as a way to analyze and use information effectively to improve and prevent problems.
Coordination and Oversight: The Director of Nursing has the responsibility of coordination and oversight of the Infection Control Program. The Director of Nursing may appoint a clinical staff person with interest and additional training in infection prevention and control to assist in the coordination and oversight of the Infection Control Program.
All infections are tracked and logged regularly. The Infection Control Committee or its equivalent should review
Elements of an Infection Control Program: The success of this Infection Control Program is base as facility-wide effort involving all disciplines and individuals. It should also be considered an integral part of a facility's overall quality assurance and performance improvement program, and have the active support of administration, residents, families, clinical, support staff, and attending physicians. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) require the long-term care facilities to establish and maintain an Infection Control Program designed to provide a safe, sanitary and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of disease and infection.
All infections are tracked and to be logged regularly. The Infection Control Committee or its equivalent should review summaries of this information at least quarterly.
Policies and Procedures: This review should also assess how well and how consistently the staff has complied with existing policies and regulations, and any trends or significant problems since the previous review.
Surveillance: Surveillance refers to a system for recognizing the occurrence of infections, recording their number and frequency, detecting outbreaks and epidemics, monitoring employee infections, and detecting unusual pathogens with infection control implications.
Prevention and treatment begin with recognizing the kinds of infections that occur and the signs and symptoms of their onset. Infections among the residents are not always obvious. Therefore, medical criteria and standardized definitions of infections are needed to help recognize and manage infections, (Corporation Name) will utilize McGeer's criteria to assist in the recognition of infections and ensure antibiotic usage is appropriate as part of their Stewardship program.
The facility policy titled, Cleaning and Disinfecting Residents' Rooms, undated, states in part . Resident Room Cleaning: 9. When possible, precaution/isolation rooms should be cleaned last, and water discarded after cleaning room. 11. Clean curtains, window blinds and walls when they are visibly soiled and dirty.
The facility policy titled, Standard Precautions, undated, states in part . Gowning: Wear a gown that is appropriate to the task, to protect skin and prevent soiling or contamination of clothing during procedures and resident-care activities when contact with blood, body fluids, secretions, or excretions is anticipated. Appropriated handling of laundry: Handle, transport, process used linen to avoid contamination of air, surfaces and persons. All soiled linens should be bagged prior to exiting room. Washing of linens will be in accordance with CMS (Centers for Medicare and Medicaid) requirements and per Chapter 5, Water Temperatures; Maintenance Manual.
On 12/31/24, two staff members developed signs and symptoms related to GI outbreak. CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant) Q (NOC shift) was placed on the line list with vomiting and diarrhea and BOM (Business Office Manager) P was placed on the line list for diarrhea.
On 1/2/25, R17, a resident on the 200 wing was placed on the line list for GI (gastrointestinal) s/sx (signs and symptoms). R17's symptoms included nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea. Surveyor reviewed R17's eMAR (electronic medication administration record) and eTAR (electronic treatment administration record) and noted that the facility was monitoring R17's bowel movements but not the consistency or frequency.
On 1/3/25, R8, R18, R34, R64, and R70, were all noted to have GI s/sx. These five residents encompassed all 4 units of the facility.
Surveyor reviewed R8's eMAR and eTAR. R8 had orders for Senokot tablet 8.6 mg (milligrams). Give 1 tablet PO (by mouth) daily for constipation, once daily. During the period in which R8 was experiencing s/sx of GI outbreak she continued to receive her Senokot without bowel monitoring in place for frequency and consistency. The facility did not update the physician or consider holding the medication while R8 was experiencing GI related s/sx. R8 had orders in the eMAR and eTAR to enter a progress note every shift to include symptoms present/not present related to acute gastroenteritis: nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, abdominal cramping, fever, chills, start 1/5/25 to 1/6/25. R8 was noted to be added to the line list for the GI outbreak on 1/3/25 with a well date of 1/4/25, indicating R8 was not being monitored for GI s/sx until after her well date.
Surveyor reviewed R18's eMAR and eTAR. R18 had orders for furosemide tablet 20 mg (a diuretic.) Take 1 tablet by mouth daily for fluid in the lungs due to chronic heart failure. During the period in which R18 was experiencing s/sx of GI outbreak he continued to receive his furosemide without fluid monitoring. The facility did not update the physician or consider holding the medication while R18 was experiencing GI related s/sx. R18's eMAR and eTAR note that the facility was monitoring R18's bowel movements but not the consistency or frequency.
Surveyor reviewed R34's eMAR and eTAR. R34 had orders for furosemide tablet 40 mg. Give 1 tablet daily for high blood pressure. During the period in which R34 was experiencing s/sx of GI outbreak she continued to receive her furosemide without fluid monitoring. The facility did not update the physician or consider holding the medication while R34 was experiencing GI related s/sx. R34's eMAR and eTAR note that the facility was monitoring R34's bowel movements but not the consistency or frequency. R34 had orders in the eMAR and eTAR to enter progress note every shift to include symptoms present/not present related to acute gastroenteritis: nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, abdominal cramping, fever, chills, start 1/5/25 to 1/7/25.
R34 was noted to be added to the line list for the GI outbreak on 1/3/25 with a well date of 1/5/25, indicating R34 was not being monitored for GI s/sx until after her well date.
Surveyor reviewed R64's eMAR and eTAR. R64 had orders for Senna-S tablet 8.6-50 mg. Take 1 tablet by mouth daily for constipation. During the period in which R64 was experiencing s/sx of GI outbreak she continued to receive her Senna-S without bowel monitoring in place for frequency and consistency. The facility did not update the physician or consider holding the medication while R64 was experiencing GI related s/sx. eMAR and eTAR note that the facility was monitoring R64's bowel movements but not the consistency or frequency. R64's eMAR and eTAR also include orders to monitor GI symptoms: Monitor lung sounds, vitals, and for additional symptoms Q (every) shift x (times) 72 hours TID (three times a day), start date 1/5/25 and end date 1/7/25. R64's GI s/sx started on 1/3/25 with a well date of 1/6/25, indicating R64 was not being monitored for GI s/sx until 2 days after he began experiencing s/sx.
Surveyor reviewed R70's eMAR and eTAR. R70 had orders for Senokot-S tablet 8.6-50 mg. Give 2 tablets by mouth 2 times a day for constipation prevention. Hold for loose stools. During the period in which R70 was experiencing s/sx of GI outbreak he continued to receive his Senokot-S without bowel monitoring in place for frequency and consistency. The facility did not update the physician or consider holding the medication while R70 was experiencing GI related s/sx. R70 has orders in the eMAR and eTAR to enter progress note every shift to include symptoms present/not present related to acute gastroenteritis: nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, abdominal cramping, fever, chills, start 1/5/25 to 1/6/25. R70 was noted to be added to the line list for the GI outbreak on 1/3/25 with a well date of 1/4/25, indicating R70 was not being monitored for GI s/sx until after her well date.
On 4/9/25 at 9:30 AM, Surveyor interviewed RNC/IP C (Regional Nurse Consultant/infection preventionist). Surveyor asked RNC/IP C when outbreak should have been called. RNC/IP C stated, after the second resident but can't give you the date. Surveyor gave RNC/IP C the infection control logs to review. RNC/IP C stated, 1/2/25 would have been the outbreak but I was not the IP at that time and cannot say when she called the outbreak. I was not notified of any outbreak until 1/4/25.
Note: The facility should have considered this an outbreak starting on 1/2/25. However, the facility has no evidence they identified the outbreak until they contacted DPH (Department of Public Health) on 1/6/25.
Note: Facility has no timeline or documentation to show when the outbreak was identified.
Note: The facility has no documentation that shows that they updated any of the residents' PCPs (Primary Care Physicians) or the Medical Director of the outbreak.
On 1/4/25, R1, R12, R38, R40, R46, R50, R60, R71, and R240 were all noted to be experiencing GI s/sx. These nine residents encompassed the 200, 300, and 400 units of the facility.
Surveyor reviewed R1's eMAR and eTAR. R1's eMAR and eTAR note that the facility was monitoring R64 's bowel movements but not the consistency or frequency. R1's eMAR and eTAR include orders to monitor for 72 hours lung sounds and VS (vital signs) due to GI illness starting on 1/4/25 and ending on 1/5/25 and to enter progress note every shift to include symptoms present/not present related to acute gastroenteritis: nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, abdominal cramping, fever, chills, start 1/5/25 to 1/7/25. R1 was noted to be added to the GI outbreak line list on 1/4/25 with a well date of 1/8/25, indicating monitoring of R1 did not start until the day after sx began and ended a day prior to symptoms ending. R1's eMAR and eTAR also indicate R1 was placed on contact precautions on 1/4/25 and precautions were discontinued on 1/7/25. R1 had a well date of 1/8/25, indicated precautions were stopped the day prior to R1's well date.
Surveyor reviewed R12's eMAR and eTAR. R12 had orders for furosemide tablet 20 mg, give 1 tablet PO daily for visible water retentions and furosemide 0.5 mg tablet (10 mg) PO in the afternoon for visible water retention. During the period in which R12 was experiencing s/sx of GI outbreak she continued to receive all but one dose of her furosemide without fluid monitoring. The facility did not update the physician or consider holding the medication while R12 was experiencing GI related s/sx. R12's eMAR and eTAR note that the facility was monitoring R12's bowel movements but not the consistency or frequency. R12 had orders in the eMAR and eTAR to enter progress note every shift to include symptoms present/not present related to acute gastroenteritis: nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, abdominal cramping, fever, chills, start 1/5/25 to 1/8/25. R12 was noted to be added to the line list for the GI outbreak on 1/4/25 with a well date of 1/9/25, indicating R12's monitoring did not start until the day after sx began and ended a day prior to symptoms ending.
Surveyor reviewed R38's eMAR and eTAR. R38 had orders for Miralax 17 gram/dose, dissolve 17 grams into at least 8 ounces of beverage of choice and drink daily for bowel management, hold for loose stools/high volume ostomy output, increase to 2x (two times) daily if constipation and Sennosides-docusate sodium tablet 8.6-50 mg, take 1 tablet by mouth 2 times a day for bowel management, hold for loose stools/high volume ostomy output. During the period in which R38 was experiencing s/sx of GI outbreak he continued to receive his Miralax and Sennosides-docusate sodium without bowel monitoring in place for frequency and consistency. R38's eMAR and eTAR note that the facility was monitoring R38's bowel movements but not the consistency or frequency. R38 had orders in the eMAR and eTAR for GI symptoms: Monitor for and chart symptoms and temp Q shift x72 hours, start 1/7/25 to 1/7/25. R38 was noted to be added to the line list for the GI outbreak on 1/4/25 with a well date of 1/5/25, indicating R38's monitoring did not start until 3 days after s/sx began and 2 days after R38's well date. R38's eMAR and eTAR also indicate that R38's isolation precautions were discontinued on 1/7/25. Facility does not have time of well date for discontinuation of isolation precautions, unable to determine from documentation and interviews if precautions discontinued appropriately.
Surveyor reviewed R40's eMAR and eTAR. R40 had orders in the eMAR and eTAR to enter progress note every shift to include symptoms present/not present related to acute gastroenteritis: nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, abdominal cramping, fever, chills, start 1/5/25 to 1/6/25. R40 was noted to be added to the line list for the GI outbreak on 1/4/25 with a well date of 1/5/25, indicating R40's monitoring did not begin until her well date and ended the following day. R40's eMAR and eTAR also indicates that R40's isolation precautions were discontinued on 1/7/25. Facility does not have time of well date for discontinuation of isolation precautions, unable to determine from documentation and interviews if precautions discontinued appropriately.
Surveyor reviewed R46's eMAR and eTAR. R46's eMAR and eTAR note that the facility was monitoring R46's bowel movements but not the consistency or frequency. R46 also has orders to encourage fluids each shift, this is signed out every shift but does not include amounts of intake. R46's eMAR and eTAR orders include GI Symptoms: Monitor lung sounds, vitals, and for additional symptoms Q shift x 72 hours, start 1/5/25 to 1/7/25. R46 was added to the line list for the GI outbreak on 1/4/25 with a well date of 1/5/25, indicating R46's monitoring did not start until her well date.
Surveyor reviewed R50's eMAR and eTAR. R50 had orders for Miralax 17 gram/dose. Give 17g (grams) PO BID (twice a day) for emptying of the bowel, titrate to have 1 BM (bowel movement) per day and Senokot-S tablet, 8.6-50 mg, take 1 tab PO BID for constipation. R50 was added to the GI line list for s/sx on 1/4/25 with a well date of 1/5/25. During the time that R50 was experiencing GI s/sx she continued to receive Miralax and Senokot-S BID. R50's eMAR and eTAR note that the facility was monitoring R50's bowel movements but not the consistency or frequency. R50 had orders in the eMAR and eTAR to enter progress note every shift to include symptoms present/not present related to acute gastroenteritis: nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, abdominal cramping, fever, chills, start 1/5/25 on PM shift and ending 1/7/25 on PM shift. R50's eMAR and eTAR also includes vitals x 72 hours each shift, plus lung sounds, start date 1/4/25 at 11:00 PM and ending on 1/5/25 at 11:00 PM. According to eMAR and eTAR R50's isolation precautions were discontinued on 1/7/25. Facility did not document the time of R50's last symptoms making it difficult to determine if isolation precautions were discontinued appropriately.
Surveyor reviewed R60's eMAR and eTAR. R60 had orders for furosemide 20 mg, administer 1 tablet (20 mg) by mouth daily for hypertension. R60 was added to the GI line list for s/sx on 1/4/25 with a well date of 1/5/25. During the period in which R60 was experiencing s/sx of GI outbreak she continued to receive all doses of her furosemide without fluid monitoring. The facility did not update the physician or consider holding the medication while R60 was experiencing GI related s/sx. R60's eMAR and eTAR note that the facility was monitoring R60's bowel movements but not the consistency or frequency. R60's eMAR and eTAR includes an order for GI Symptoms: Monitor and chart for symptoms and temp Q shift x 72 hours, start date of 1/5/25 and end date of 1/7/25. R60's eMAR and eTAR note that the facility was monitoring bowel movements but not the consistency or frequency.
Note: R60's monitoring for GI symptoms did not begin until her well date.
Surveyor reviewed R71's eMAR and eTAR. R71 was added to the facility line listing for GI s/sx on 1/4/25 and a well date of 1/5/25. R71's eMAR and eTAR note that the facility was monitoring R71's bowel movements but not the consistency or frequency. R71 had orders in the eMAR and eTAR to enter progress note every shift to include symptoms present/not present related to acute gastroenteritis: nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, abdominal cramping, fever, chills, start 1/5/25 on PM shift and ending 1/7/25 on NOC (night) shift. R71's well date on the GI line list is documented as 1/5/25. R71's monitoring did not begin until the date of his listed well date. R71's eMAR and eTAR indicates Vitals x 72 hours each shift, plus lung sounds each shift, start date 1/4/25 and end date 1/5/25.
Note: The vitals monitoring for R71 were started on 1/4/25 but only completed on 1/5/25.
Surveyor reviewed R240's eMAR and eTAR. R240 was added to the facility line listing for GI s/sx on 1/4/25 and a documented well date 1/5/25. R240's eMAR and eTAR note that the facility was monitoring R240's bowel movements but not the consistency or frequency. R240 had orders in the eMAR and eTAR to enter progress note every shift to include symptoms present/not present related to acute gastroenteritis: nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, abdominal cramping, fever, chills, start 1/5/25 on PM shift and ending 1/7/25 on PM shift. Facility does not have time of well date for discontinuation of isolation precautions, unable to determine from documentation and interviews if precautions discontinued appropriately.
On 1/5/25, R10, R56, and R239 were noted to be experiencing GI s/sx. These three residents encompassed the 200, 300, and 400 units.
Surveyor reviewed R10's eMAR and eTAR. R10 was added to the facility line listing for GI s/sx on 1/5/25 and a documented well date of 1/6/25. R10 had orders for sennosides-docusate sodium tablet 8.6-50 mg. Give 2 tabs po BID for constipation. Torsemide tablet 10 mg (a diuretic.) Give 1 tablet (10 mg) with 20 mg tablet for total of 30 mg daily for edema. Torsemide tablet 20 mg. Give 1 tablet (20 mg) with 10 mg tablet for total of 30 mg daily for edema. During the period in which R10 was experiencing s/sx of GI outbreak she continued to receive all doses of torsemide and sennosides-docusate sodium without fluid monitoring. R10's eMAR and eTAR note that the facility was monitoring R10's bowel movements but not the consistency or frequency. R10 had orders in the eMAR and eTAR to enter progress note every shift to include symptoms present/not present related to acute gastroenteritis: nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, abdominal cramping, fever, chills, start 1/5/25 on PM shift and ending 1/8/25 on NOC shift. Facility does not have time of well date for discontinuation of isolation precautions on 1/8/25; unable to determine from documentation and interviews if precautions discontinued appropriately.
Surveyor reviewed R56's eMAR and eTAR. R56 was added to the facility line listing for GI s/sx on 1/5/25 and a documented well date of 1/6/25. R56 had orders for Miralax 17 grams. Give 17 g PO daily for constipation. HOLD for loose stools. During the period in which R56 was experiencing s/sx of GI outbreak she received Miralax as scheduled aside from 1/6/25 when medication was held. R56's eMAR and eTAR notes that the facility was monitoring R56's bowel movements but not the consistency or frequency. R56's eMAR and eTAR include an order for GI Symptoms: Monitor and chart for symptoms and temp Q shift x 72 hours, start date of 1/5/25 AM shift and end date of 1/7/25 PM shift.
Surveyor reviewed R239's eMAR and eTAR. R239 was added to the facility line listing for GI s/sx on 1/5/25 and a documented well date of 1/6/25. R239 had orders for Citrucel tablet 500 mg. Take 1 tab PO BID for constipation. Take with plenty of water. During the period in which R239 was experiencing GI s/sx her Citrucel was held on only 2 occasions, 1/5/25 AM shift and 1/7/25 PM shift. R239 received all other doses during this time frame. R239's eMAR and eTAR notes that the facility was monitoring R239's bowel movements but not the consistency or frequency. R239 had orders in the eMAR and eTAR to enter progress note every shift to include symptoms present/not present related to acute gastroenteritis: nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, abdominal cramping, fever, chills, start 1/5/25 on PM shift and ending 1/8/25 on PM shift.
On 1/6/25, R5, R9, R16, R21, R22, R51, R54, R67, R80, and R242 were noted to be experiencing GI s/sx. These residents resided among all four units of the facility. There were also six staff (COTA (Certified Occupational Therapy Assistant) GG, AA (Activities Assistant) HH, PT (Physical Therapist) II, CNA JJ, CNA KK, CNA LL) that were experiencing GI s/sx.
COTA GG was placed on the staff GI line list on 1/6/25 with symptoms of vomiting and diarrhea. COTA GG has no well date or return to work date listed.
AA HH was placed on the staff GI line list on 1/6/25 with symptoms of nausea, vomiting, and abdominal cramping. AA HH has no well date listed but returned to work on 1/13/25.
PT II was placed on the staff GI outbreak line list on 1/6/25 with symptoms of nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea. PT II has no well date or return to work date listed.
CNA JJ was placed on the staff GI outbreak line list on 1/6/25 with symptoms of nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea. CNA JJ has no well date listed but returned to work on 1/9/25.
CNA KK was placed on the staff GI outbreak line list on 1/6/25 with symptoms of nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea. CNA KK has no well date listed but returned to work on 1/12/25.
CNA LL was placed on the GI outbreak line list on 1/6/25 with symptoms of nausea and vomiting. CNA LL has no well date listed but returned to work on 1/10/25.
On 1/6/25, DPH was notified of the facility GI outbreak by the DON (Director of Nursing). At this point the facility had 28 residents and eight staff with GI signs and symptoms.
Surveyor reviewed R5's eMAR and eTAR. R5 was added to the facility line listing for GI s/sx on 1/6/25 and a documented well date of 1/7/25. R5 had orders for furosemide tablet 20 mg for accumulation of fluid resulting from CHF (congestive heart failure), edema. Miralax 17 gram/dose. Mix 17 grams in drink of choice PO every other day for constipation and Senokot-S tablet 8.6-50 mg. Give 1 tablet PO daily for constipation. During the period in which R5 was experiencing s/sx of GI outbreak she continued to receive all doses of furosemide without fluid monitoring. R5 also continued to receive all doses of Miralax and Senokot-S. R5's eMAR and eTAR notes that the facility was monitoring R5's bowel movements but not the consistency or frequency.
Surveyor reviewed R9's eMAR and eTAR. R9 was added to the facility line listing for GI s/sx on 1/6/25 and a documented well date of 1/7/25. R9's eMAR and eTAR notes that the facility was monitoring R9's bowel movements but not the consistency or frequency. R9's eMAR and eTAR include an order for GI Symptoms: Monitor and chart for symptoms and temp Q shift x 72 hours, start date of 1/6/25 AM shift and end date of 1/8/25 NOC shift.
Surveyor reviewed R16's eMAR and eTAR. R16 was added to the facility line listing for GI s/sx on 1/6/25 and a documented well date of 1/9/25. R16 had orders for senna tablet 8.6 mg. Give 2 tablets by mouth daily for constipation. During the period in which R16 was experiencing s/sx of GI outbreak she continued to receive all doses of senna without monitoring frequency or consistency of bowel movements. R16 had orders in the eMAR and eTAR to enter progress note every shift to include symptoms present/not present related to acute gastroenteritis: nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, abdominal cramping, fever, chills, start 1/6/25 on PM shift and ending 1/9/25 on NOC shift.
Surveyor reviewed R21's eMAR and eTAR. R21 was added to the facility line listing for GI s/sx on 1/6/25 and a documented well date of 1/7/25. R21 had orders for furosemide 20 mg. Give 0.5 tablet (10 mg) PO daily for chronic BLE (bilateral lower extremity) edema and Senna with Docusate Sodium tablet 8.6-50 mg. Give 2 tablets po BID for constipation. Hold for loose stools. During the period in which R21 was experiencing s/sx of GI outbreak she continued to receive all doses of furosemide and Senna with Docusate Sodium without monitoring frequency or consistency of bowel movements or fluid hydration. R21 had orders in the eMAR and eTAR to enter progress note every shift to include symptoms present/not present related to acute gastroenteritis: nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, abdominal cramping, fever, chills, start 1/6/25 on PM shift and ending 1/9/25 on NOC shift.
Surveyor reviewed R22's eMAR and eTAR. R22 was added to the facility line listing for GI s/sx on 1/6/25 and a documented well date of 1/7/25. R22 had orders for Miralax 17 grams/dose. Give 17 grams PO in beverage of choice daily for constipation and psyllium husk powder. Give 3.4 grams in beverage of choice BID for constipation. During the period in which R22 was experiencing s/sx of GI outbreak he continued to receive all doses of Miralax and psyllium husk powder without monitoring frequency or consistency of bowel movements.
Surveyor reviewed R51's eMAR and eTAR. R51 was added to the facility line listing for GI s/sx on 1/6/25 and a documented well date of 1/7/25. R51's eMAR and eTAR notes that the facility was monitoring R51's bowel movements but not the consistency or frequency. R51 had orders in the eMAR and eTAR to enter progress note every shift to include symptoms present/not present related to acute gastroenteritis: nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, abdominal cramping, fever, chills, start 1/6/25 on AM shift and ending 1/8/25 on NOC shift. R51's eMAR and eTAR include an order for GI Symptoms: Monitor and chart for symptoms and temp Q shift x 72 hours, start date of 1/6/25 AM shift and end date of 1/6/25 PM shift, this was documented as completed. Facility does not have time of well date for discontinuation of isolation precautions on 1[TRUNCATED]
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
Deficiency F0692
(Tag F0692)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents received adequate fluid intake to ma...
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 residents received adequate fluid intake to maintain acceptable parameters of hydration for 1 of 4 Residents (R19) reviewed for nutrition.
On 3/7 - 3/13/25 R19 was hospitalized with aspiration pneumonia and received intravenous fluids during his hospitalization. On 3/17-3/19/25 R19 was hospitalized with dehydration requiring intravenous fluids. R19 was consistently not meeting his daily recommended fluid intake of greater than 1,400 ml (milliliters). R19 had a significant weight loss of 10.9% from 3/7/25 - 3/26/25. The facility failed to ensure R19 received adequate fluid intakes to maintain acceptable parameters of hydration by failing to total and assess daily fluid intake; accurately assess and complete on going assessments for signs and symptoms of dehydration (e.g., sunken eyes, cool/clammy skin, dry tongue, dark colored urine, and sticky saliva); failure to weigh resident weekly; failure to weigh resident upon readmission to the facility; failure to add/revise care plan interventions to prevent further dehydration and weight loss; failure to timely communicate weight changes to provider.
This is evidenced by:
Facility Policy entitled 'Dehydration/Fluid Maintenance, reviewed 1/2025, states in part: Purpose: To determine the risk status of residents to develop dehydration and to implement measures to assure adequate fluid/maintenance hydration. Goal: To prevent dehydration from happening by identifying risk factors which lead to dehydration and provide the resident with sufficient fluid intake to maintain proper hydration and health. Procedure: At the time of each resident's admission, readmission, quarterly review, or significant change in condition, a Nutritional Assessment will be completed by the DTR/RD with input from the interdisciplinary team. The attending physician will be notified of the results of the assessment if the resident is found to be at risk for dehydration and the appropriate recommendations will be written and protocols will be implemented to promote hydration. Risk factors include: a. Fluid loss exceeds the amount of fluids consumed, b. Elevated temperatures or infection, c. Dependence on staff for the provision of fluid intake, e. Renal disease, f. Dysphagia, g. Limited fluid intake lacking thirst sensation, h. Refusal of fluids.
Once risk factors are identified, a plan of care will be initiated to provide sufficient fluid and maintain proper hydration. Plan for the amount of fluid provided at each meal, snack and additional fluids provided by nursing staff.
Based on medical condition, ability to consume adequate fluids, and/or any resident that presents with a diagnosis of dehydration will have a care plan that addresses the potential for dehydration/fluid maintenance.
Assessing and Care Planning: Follow the standard care process of identification, assessment, treatment and monitoring when addressing dehydration. Interventions should be individualized, aggressive, and revised as needed based on the residents responses, outcome and needs. Creative Suggestions include: (consider using to keep residents well hydrated) Offer additional fluids during medication time (4-8 ounces), Assist residents to drink fluids, Ensure that clients received thickened liquids are encouraged to consume adequate fluids due to their high risk of dehydration.
According to Strategies for Ensuring Good Hydration in the Elderly, Dehydration is a frequent etiology of morbidity and mortality in elderly people. It causes the hospitalization of many patients and its outcome may be fatal. Indeed, dehydration is often linked to infection, and if it is overlooked, mortality may be over 50%. Older individuals have been shown to have a higher risk of developing dehydration than younger adults. Modifications in water metabolism with aging and fluid imbalance in the frail elderly are the main factors to consider in the prevention of dehydration. Particularly, a decrease in the fat free mass, which is hydrated and contains 73% water, is observed in the elderly due to losses in muscular mass, total body water, and bone mass. Since water intake is mainly stimulated by thirst, and since the thirst sensation decreases with aging, risk factors for dehydration are those that lead to a loss of autonomy or a loss of cognitive function that limit the access to beverages. The prevention of dehydration must be multidisciplinary. Caregivers and health care professionals should be constantly aware of the risk factors and signs of dehydration in elderly patients. Strategies to maintain normal hydration should comprise practical approaches to induce the elderly to drink enough. This can be accomplished by frequent encouragement to drink, by offering a wide variety of beverages, by advising to drink often rather than large amounts, and by adaptation of the environment and medications as necessary. https://onlinelibrary.[NAME].com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1753-4887.2005.tb00151.x
The facility policy, Weight and Height Records Policy, revised 8/2023, documents, in part, as follows: In order to provide appropriate and resident centered care the facility staff will obtain and monitor resident weights as follows: Weight loss or gain of 3# (pounds) less for those residents 100# will resident in a resident being reweighed. Weights greater than 100# will follow weight bariance [sic] reporting for CMS/MDS (Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services/Minimum Data Set) guidelines as follows: 5% +/-30 days, 7.5% +/-90 days, 10% +/-180 days. Weights will be recorded in EMR (electronic medical record) when obtained. Dietician/CDM (Certified Dietary Manager) weight range will not exceed +/-10% (percent).
R19 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including, but not limited to, as follows: multiple sclerosis (a central nervous system condition that disrupts communication between the brain and body), chronic kidney disease stage 3 (a moderate decline in kidney function), weakness, and dysphagia oropharyngeal phase (difficulty with the oral prepatory phase - trouble forming the food bolus before swallowing).
On 3/27/24 RD G (Registered Dietician) completed the following Initial Assessment: Diet Fluids >1,400 ml/day (greater than 1,400 milliliters per day)
On 9/27/24 DON B (Director of Nursing) ordered the following for R19: Weekly weight. Once a day on Monday
R19 is a DNR (Do Not Resuscitate). It is noted in R19's record, R19's APOAHC (Activated Power of Attorney for Health Care) made the decision to enroll R19 in comfort care on 3/28/25. Of note, R19's APOAHC declined hospice care.
R19's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] indicates R19 has a Brief interview of Mental Status (BIMS) of 10 out of 15 indicating he is moderately cognitively impaired. R19's family member is his APOAHC (Activated Power of Attorney for Health Care).
R19's comprehensive care plan documents, in part, as follows: (Problem Start Date: 3/19/25) R19 is at end of life, is receiving comfort care. (Approach start date: 3/28/25) R19's APOAHC (Activated Power of Attorney for Health Care) declined hospice services stating she would only like the facility staff to care for him and no other staff.
R19's comprehensive care plan documents, in part as follows: (Problem Start Date: 4/7/23) Nutritional Status-Resident triggers at risk for malnutrition based on MNA (mini nutritional assessment), PMH (past medical history), mechanically altered diet textures, and disease progression. Goal: Resident will receive adequate nutrition/hydration. Approach: .(Approach Start Date: 4/7/23) Diet provides >1,920 cc's of fluids per day. Encourage nectar thick fluids at bedside and with activities. Monitor for signs & symptoms of fluid imbalance (i.e. swelling, shortness of breath, dry mucous membranes, dry skin, poor skin turgor). Monitor meal intake/record. Offer substitutes if consumes <50% of meals.
On 1/20/25 R19 weighed 204.1
On 1/27/25 R19 weighed 202.9
On 2/10/25 R19 weighed 203.1
It is important to note, the facility is collecting intakes, however, the facility is not totaling R19's daily fluid intakes, therefore not assessing the data they are collecting. R19's intakes (calculated by Surveyor) leading up to hospitalization are as follows:
3/3: 200 ml
3/4: 900 ml
3/5: 400 ml
3/6: 800 ml
Of note, R19 did not reach his fluids needs.
On 3/6/25 the Nurse Practitioner wrote the following order: Encourage fluids/hydration throughout the shift. 7:00 AM - 3:00 PM, 3:00 PM - 11:00 PM and 11:00 PM - 7:00 AM
R19 was hospitalized [DATE] -3/13/25 for aspiration pneumonia. R19 received IV (intravenous) fluids during this hospitalization. *See RD G's (Registered Dietician) note below.
On 3/13/25 at 4:04 PM, RD G (Registered Dietician) documented the following Progress Note: Nutrition Update: Noted resident's return from the hospital following sepsis. Received IVF (intravenous fluids) d/t (due to) hydration needs. *Received an estimated total of 5,124 ml between 3/7-3/8, with an average of 731 ml per day over 7 days. Current diet order in place: Pureed with nectar thick liquids. Continue to monitor chewing/swallowing ability at this facility, SLP (Speech-Language Pathology) to eval (evaluate) in-house, RD G will continue to monitor and f/u (follow up) quarterly/prn (as needed) to assess intake, wt (weight) status, and diet tolerance.
R19's intakes (calculated by Surveyor) leading up to hospitalization are as follows:
3/13: 320 ml
3/14: 580 ml
3/15: 370 ml
3/16: 680 ml
Of note, R19 did not reach his fluids needs, the facility did not provide documentation of a dehydration assessment.
The facility did not weigh R19 from 3/13 - 3/17/25.
R19 was hospitalized 3/17-3/19/25 with dehydration requiring IV (intravenous) fluids.
R19's hospital report documents, in part, as follows: Creatinine: 2.28 (High). Estimate GFR: 29 (High) Sodium: 144 (Reference Range 135-145)
The hospital physician documents, in part, as follows: Patient was admitted to inpatient on 3/17/25 for Somnolence (excess sleepiness). admitted for infection vs dehydration causing AMS (Altered Mental Status) - appeared hemoconcentrated (increase in red blood cells, white blood cells and platelets in the blood due to a reduction in the volume of plasma (liquid portion of the blood).), high specific gravity. Urine and blood cultures negative at 24 hours, abx (antibiotics) discontinued. Patient continued to do well. Returned to baseline mentation after fluid administration - *feel this was dehydration with lack of infectious etiologies.
The hospital has the following weights documented for R19:
3/7/25: 218.4
3/17/25: 208.3 - It is important to note, R19 lost over ten (10) pounds in 10 days. (Significant weight loss) = -4.62%
3/18/25: 206.1 = - 5.63%
3/19/25: 207.8 = -4.85%
On 3/19/25 R19 was readmitted to the facility following a hospital stay. The facility did not obtain R19's weight upon readmission.
On 3/20/25 at 3:05 PM, RD G (Registered Dietician) documented the following Progress Note: Nutrition Update: Noted resident's return from the hospital following an event of somnolence. Received IVF (intravenous fluids) d/t hydration needs. *Received an estimated total of 5,800 ml (milliliters) between 3/17-3/18/25, with an average of 834 ml per day over 7 days. Current diet order in place: Pureed with nectar thick liquids. Continue to monitoring chewing/swallowing ability at this facility, SLP (Speech-Language Pathology) to eval (evaluate) in-house. RD G will continue to monitor and f/u (follow up) quarterly/prn (as needed) to assess intake, wt (weight) status, and diet tolerance.
(Of note: R19 has received over 10,000ml of IV fluids during hospitalization in less than 2 weeks.)
On 3/26/25 R19 weighed 194.6 at the facility there is no documentation indicating R19's Physician/provider was updated.
(It is important to note, R19 returned to the facility following a hospitalization on 3/19/25. The facility did not weigh R19 until 3/26/25. During this time, R19 continued to lose weight.)
From 3/19/25 - 3/26/25 R19 experienced a 6.35% weight loss.
On 3/27/25 at 4:28 PM, RD G (Registered Dietician) documented the following Progress Note: Nutrition update: Noted resident's updated weight status, and 195 lbs (pounds) on 3/26/25. 9 lb loss over the past 1.5 months. The loss was anticipated r/t (related to) multiple hospitalizations within this timeframe. Continue to monitor wt (weight) status for goal of stabilization. Continue current diet textures and feeding precautions in place. RD G will continue to monitor and f/u (follow up) prn (as needed).
Of note, there is no documentation of any weights/monitoring until eight (8) days after R19's readmission to the facility. There are no new care plan interventions indicated as being implemented upon R19's return after being hospitalized related to dehydration. No documentation was provided indicating nurses are monitoring or documenting signs and symptoms for R19 related to dehydration.
On 4/7/25 R19 weighed 200 .9
On 4/14/25 at approximately 12:00 PM, Surveyor observed CNA CCC (Certified Nursing Assistant) assisting R19 with his lunch in the dining room. Surveyor observed R19 had ample fluids and food on his tray for the meal. R19 had 480 ml (milliliters) of fluid on his tray. Surveyor observed R19 drank 240 ml.
On 4/14/25 at 1:00 PM, Surveyor spoke with RN DDD (Registered Nurse). Surveyor asked RN DDD, who documents fluid intakes. RN DDD stated, the nurses document fluid intakes at the end of the shift. RN DDD stated, nurses and CNA's (Certified Nursing Assistants) document in the same place. Surveyor asked RN DDD, who is responsible for totaling daily fluid intakes. RN DDD stated, she is unsure and the computer system may automatically. Surveyor asked RN DDD, what are symptoms of dehydration that require monitoring. RN DDD stated, staff should monitor output, skin turgor, dry lips, low blood pressure, etc. RN DDD stated, staff really have to be on top of offering R19 fluids while he is in his room. RN DDD stated, R19 needs assistance with eating and drinking and he has end stage MS (Multiple Sclerosis), a degenerative disease.
On 4/14/25 at 1:40 PM, Surveyor spoke with CNA CCC (Certified Nursing Assistant). Surveyor asked CNA CCC (Certified Nursing Assistant) if R19 has difficulty eating or drinking. CNA CCC stated, sometimes R19 gets too sleepy so she will take a break or ask if R19 is finished. CNA CCC stated, R19 has better days than others. CNA CCC stated, sometimes R19 will hold food in his mouth and she will follow up and offer him juice to help get the food down. CNA CCC stated, R19 does not normally have any difficulty swallowing liquids. Surveyor asked CNA CCC, do you record fluid intakes for R19. CNA CCC stated, she records intakes or tells the CNA's what R19 ate or drank. CNA CCC stated, R19 had 480 milliliters of fluids on his tray and R19 drank 240 ml (milliliters) between nectar thick milk and orange juice at lunch today. CNA CCC stated, R19 was unable to finish the meal as he got too sleepy to finish the rest. CNA CCC stated, R19 would drop his head down. CNA CCC stated, R19 has fluids in his room such as apple juice (out of reach for safety reasons) that staff will offer R19 and give him a couple sips.
On 4/14/25 at 2:00 PM, Surveyor spoke with DON B (Director of Nursing). Surveyor asked DON B, is she aware that R19 was dehydrated during the 3/17-3/19/25 hospitalization. DON B stated, she does not remember if the facility has that documented or not. Surveyor shared RD G's (Registered Dietician) Progress Notes (above). DON B stated, yes, the facility is aware. Surveyor asked DON B, are you aware that R19's received IVF (intravenous fluids) during his prior hospitalization from 3/7-3/13/25. DON B stated, yes, she is aware of that. Surveyor asked DON B, what is the facility doing to address this. DON B stated, R19 has an order in place to encourage fluids. DON B stated, R19 is following up with ST (Speech Therapy) & OT (Occupational Therapy). DON B stated, R19 is currently actively participating in ST and OT. Surveyor asked DON B, who is responsible for totaling R19's daily fluid intakes. DON B stated, she is unsure. DON B added, RD G may calculate the fluid totals. (Note, per interview with RD G (below), she does not calculate fluid totals on a daily basis. Currently, nobody at the facility totals daily fluid intakes. Subsequently, daily fluid intakes are not being monitored on a daily basis.) Surveyor asked DON B, how do you know that R19 is meeting his daily fluid needs when his fluid intakes are not totaled on a daily basis. DON B stated, there's no way to know if R19 is meeting his daily fluid needs. DON B stated, staff would need to add the fluid totals. Surveyor asked DON B, would you expect staff to total fluid intakes. DON B stated, yes. Surveyor asked DON B, why is this important. DON B stated to make sure R19 is adequately hydrated. DON B stated, we did recently have a goal of cares switched from Full Code to DNR (Do Not Resuscitate) due to weight loss and overall decline. Surveyor asked DON B, when were intakes put in place for R19. DON B stated, this started on 10/14/24 to encourage fluids. Surveyor asked DON B, what was this in response to. DON B stated, this was to a high Creatinine lab. Surveyor asked DON B, are staff to be encouraging fluids. DON B stated, yes. Surveyor asked DON B, should R19 have fluid in his room. DON B stated, staff can bring fluids when they check in on him and offer. DON B stated staff should be assisting him with fluids and should leave them out of R19's reach as R19 requires supervision with drinking and eating. Surveyor asked DON B, should the provider have been notified with R19's significant weight loss. DON B stated, yes.
On 4/14/25 at 2:19 PM, Surveyor spoke with RD G (Registered Dietician). Surveyor asked RD G, where do staff record fluid intakes. RD G stated, she believes staff document intakes under vital signs and that's where she looks for intakes. Surveyor asked RD G, do staff document fluid intakes in any other locations. RD G stated, no, not that she is aware. Surveyor asked RD G, who is responsible for totaling daily fluid intakes. RD G stated, that would be the nursing realm. RD G stated she looks at fluid intakes as a whole picture and does not total them on a daily basis. Surveyor asked RD G, why is important to ensure that residents are getting enough fluids and adequately hydrated. RD G stated, to ensure residents do not become dehydrated. RD G stated, for R19 the facility provides nectar thick fluids, Magic Cups (supplement), encourage milk, juice, and water with all meals.
The facility failed to ensure R19 received adequate fluid intakes to maintain acceptable parameters of hydration
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Abuse Prevention Policies
(Tag F0607)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, facility did not implement written policies and procedures that prohibit and prevent abuse, neglect, and exploitation of residents and misappropriation of residen...
Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview and record review, facility did not implement written policies and procedures that prohibit and prevent abuse, neglect, and exploitation of residents and misappropriation of resident property.
The facility did not conduct thorough background checks on 2 of 8 employees that were randomly selected.
Findings include
The facility's abuse prevention program states, in part:
*The facility will conduct thorough investigations of histories of prospective staff, in addition to inquiry of the state, nurse aid registry or licensing authorities prior to employment.
*The facility will obtain verification of screening prior to employment or engagement for prospective consultants, contractors, volunteers, caregivers and students and its nurse aid training program and students from affiliated academic institutions, including therapy, social, and activity programs. Screening may be conducted by the facility itself, third party agency, or academic institution. It is recognized that state specific regulatory requirements may require additional limitations to be followed. The facility will require these individuals to be subject to the same scrutiny prior to placement in the facility. The facility should maintain documentation of the screening that has occurred.
*All applicants for employment will be checked from previous and/or current employers and make reasonable efforts to uncover information about any past criminal prosecutions. Applicants will be asked to supply references of previous work history.
*The facility will ensure specific additional state requirements for criminal background checks and state law be followed that may prevent certain convicted crimes from working in a long term care facility.
*The national background check program or specific state licensure requirements that may address criminal background checks will be referenced and followed.
*No applicant will be hired/employed or otherwise engaged if there exists any indication of unfitness for employment.
On 4/8/25, Surveyors randomly selected 8 facility staff to conduct background checks. Of the 8 records provided, CNA D (Certified Nursing Assistant), was hired on 3/7/25, CNA D did not have a Georgia state background check despite CNA D acknowledging on her BID (Background Information Disclosure) with the state of Wisconsin that she currently lived in Georgia.
The facility hired RN E on 3/15/25, but her Wisconsin BID was filled out and signed on 5/27/23. The facility did not run a new background check on RN E (Registered Nurse), including a Florida background check despite RN E acknowledging on her application that she was currently living in Florida.
It should be noted that RN E is an agency nurse while CNA D was recently an agency nurse that was hired by the facility.
On 4/8/25 at 2:55 PM, Surveyor interviewed NHA A (Nursing Home Administrator) who stated that RN E was working with her current agency at a different facility in the state of Wisconsin, so the facility used that BID and subsequent Wisconsin background check from 5/27/23 from this other facility. The facility ran new background checks, including out of state checks, for RN E and CNA D on 4/9/25.
The facility has policies to conduct background checks on prospective employees, but did not implement those policies before RN E and CNA D began working in the facility.
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Report Alleged Abuse
(Tag F0609)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility did not ensure that all alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, exploitation, or mistreatment, are reported immediately to the administrator of ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview and record review, the facility did not ensure that all alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, exploitation, or mistreatment, are reported immediately to the administrator of the facility and to other officials, including the State Survey Agency, in accordance with State law through established procedures for 2 of 22 sampled residents (R45 & R18) reviewed for abuse.
Facility did not report an incident of resident-to-resident altercation involving R45 and R18 to the State Agency (SA).
Evidenced by:
The facility Abuse Prevention Program Policy and Procedure reviewed 01/2025, includes, in part, the following: VII. Reporting/Response. All alleged or suspected violations are to be reported immediately to the Administrator or Director of Nursing, which are responsible to notify required official, including to the State Survey Agency, . and any other agencies in accordance with State law through established procedures. All alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, exploitation or mistreatment, including injuries of unknown source and misappropriation of resident property, and reported immediately, but not later than 2 hours after the allegation is made if the events that cause the allegation involve abuse or result in serious bodily injury. Reporting results of all investigations to required officials in accordance with State law, including to the State Survey Agency, within 5 working days of the incident, and if the alleged violation is verified appropriate corrective action must be taken.
Example 1
On 4/7/25 at 1:55 PM Surveyor interviewed R45. R45 stated in early March he had an altercation with his former roommate (R18).
R45's Resident Progress Notes include, in part, the following:
03/04/2025 08:31 PM Resident and roommate had altercation this shift. Roommate did not like that resident had tv on loud and was speaking on phone on speaker. Roommate started saying negative things to resident. Resident stated, Quit saying those things about me or I am going to beat you. This made roommate very angry, and staff had to separate roommate from room. Notified ADON (Assistant Director of Nursing) and Social Services of situation. Roommate moved into separate room.
03/04/2025 05:36 PM[Recorded as Late Entry on 03/06/2025 10:38 AM] Writer notified that resident and roommate were arguing this evening. Resident was utilizing profanities, in which roommate disagreed with. Writer immediately spoke with resident along with SW (Social Worker). Resident declined to move, so roommate was moved to different room for the evening. Writer educated resident on appropriate language while in the facility. Resident apologized and stated understanding. Resident stated well I just don't like the way he talks sometimes.
R18's Resident Progress Notes include, in part, the following:
03/04/2025 8:38 PM Resident and Roommate had an altercation this shift. Resident did not like the tv noise and speaker phone noise coming from the roommate's room. Resident said bad things about roommate to roommate. Roommate said, Quit saying those things about me or I am going to beat you. Resident got mad and put call light on and demanded to be separated from resident. Writer later spoke to resident, and they stated that they were fearful for their life. Writer notified ADON (Assistant Director of Nursing) and Social Services of the incident. Resident separated and place [sic] into different room.
On 4/9/25 at 4:45 PM Surveyor interviewed NHA A (Nursing Home Administrator). Surveyor asked NHA A if the interaction between R45 and R18 that occurred on 3/4/25 had been reported to the State Agency. NHA A stated no it had not been reported. Surveyor asked NHA A if the interaction between R45 and R18 should have been reported. NHA A stated yes.
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Investigate Abuse
(Tag F0610)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility did not have evidence that all alleged violations of abuse were thoroughly investigated for 2 of 22 sampled residents (R45 and R18) reviewed for abus...
Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview and record review, the facility did not have evidence that all alleged violations of abuse were thoroughly investigated for 2 of 22 sampled residents (R45 and R18) reviewed for abuse.
Facility did not fully investigate an incident of resident-to-resident altercation involving R45 and R18 to the State Agency (SA).
Evidenced by:
The facility Abuse Prevention Program Policy and Procedure reviewed 01/2025, includes, in part, the following: V. Investigation. 1. The Administrator and or Director of Nursing are to initiate and coordinate completion of a thorough investigation. Investigations must be initiated immediately and concluded as soon as possible not to exceed (5) days.
Example 1
On 4/7/25 at 1:55 PM Surveyor interviewed R45. R45 indicated in early March he had altercation with his former roommate (R18).
R45's Resident Progress Notes include, in part, the following:
03/04/2025 08:31 PM Resident and roommate had altercation this shift. Roommate did not like that resident had tv on loud and was speaking on phone on speaker. Roommate started saying negative things to resident. Resident stated, Quit saying those things about me or I am going to beat you. This made roommate very angry, and staff had to separate roommate from room. Notified ADON (Assistant Director of Nursing) and Social Services of situation. Roommate moved into separate room.
03/04/2025 05:36 PM[Recorded as Late Entry on 03/06/2025 10:38 AM] Writer notified that resident and roommate were arguing this evening. Resident was utilizing profanities, in which roommate disagreed with. Writer immediately spoke with resident along with SW. Resident declined to move, so roommate was moved to different room for the evening. Writer educated resident on appropriate language while in the facility. Resident apologized and stated understanding. Resident stated well I just don't like the way he talks sometimes.
R18's Resident Progress Notes include, in part, the following:
03/04/2025 8:38 PM Resident and Roommate had an altercation this shift. Resident did not like the tv noise and speaker phone noise coming from the roommate's room. Resident said bad things about roommate to roommate. Roommate said, Quit saying those things about me or I am going to beat you. Resident got mad and put call light on and demanded to be separated from resident. Writer later spoke to resident, and they stated that they were fearful for their life. Writer notified ADON (Assistant Director of Nursing) and Social Services of the incident. Resident separated and place into different room.
On 4/9/25 at 4:45 PM Surveyor interviewed NHA A (Nursing Home Administrator). Surveyor asked NHA A if the interaction between R45 and R18 that occurred on 3/4/25 had been fully investigated. NHA A stated no it had not been investigated. Surveyor asked NHA A if the interaction between R45 and R18 should have been investigated. NHA A stated yes.
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Transfer Requirements
(Tag F0622)
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 permit a resident to return to the facility following a hospitaliza...
Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to permit a resident to return to the facility following a hospitalization for 1 of 1 sampled resident (R11) and 1 of 1 supplemental residents (R55) reviewed.
R11 was not permitted to return to the facility following an emergency facility-initiated transfer to the hospital. The facility discharged R11 and stated they would not allow R11 to return.
R55 was not permitted to return to the facility following an emergency facility-initiated transfer to the hospital. The facility discharged R55 and would not allow R55 to return. It should be noted R55's guardian wished for R55 to return to the facility and R55 was pending Medicaid approval at the time of discharge.
Example 1
R11 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that include: type 2 diabetes with diabetic polyneuropathy (damage to multiple peripheral nerves causing pain, tingling, burning, numbness or sensitivity to touch), acquired absence of limb (amputation), phantom limb syndrome with pain (sensation that limb is still attached to body and can include feelings of pain, numbness, tingling, or temperature changes), and other chronic pain.
On 4/10/25, according to facility progress notes, R11 was discharged to a hospital emergency room with a recommendation to transfer resident to an inpatient mental health facility.
On 4/14/25 at 1:54 PM, Surveyor interviewed RNC C (Regional Nurse Consultant). Surveyor asked RNC C to describe R11's discharge on [DATE]. RNC C indicated facility staff spoke with R11 and he was willing to go to the hospital to have his pain evaluated. RNC C also indicated that facility staff discussed alternative placement with R11 at [Facility Name], a new inpatient mental health facility. RNC C indicated that this facility would not admit directly from a skilled nursing facility so R11 needed to go to the hospital first. RNC C also indicated their facility was not appropriate for R11 because they could not manage his behaviors. Surveyor asked RNC C if she advised the social worker at the hospital that R11 was not going to be accepted back to the facility. RNC C indicated she spoke with the hospital social worker and provided her with the inpatient mental health facility's contact information but that R11 would not be accepted back to the nursing home. Surveyor asked RNC C if R11 wishes, can he return to the facility. RNC C indicated, no because of safety concerns as the facility is unable to provide adequate staffing to maintain his safety.
Example 2
R55 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that include: centrilobular emphysema (chronic lung disease that causes damage to the upper lobes of the lungs), chronic respiratory failure with hypercapnia (high levels of carbon dioxide in blood due to respiratory failure), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, dysphagia (difficulty swallowing), heart failure, unspecified intellectual disabilities, Barrett's esophagus without dysplasia (tissue lining of esophagus changes due to long-term irritation causing symptoms of difficulty swallowing, heartburn, and chest pain), and anxiety disorder.
On 4/10/25 at 7:00 PM, a Progress Note is dated and indicated to be a late entry from 4/11/25 at 7:55 AM, was written by RNC C (Regional Nurse Consultant,) and states in part: Discharge Note: [Resident Name] did leave the facility at 1808 (6:09 PM). Writer did speak with [Social Worker Name] SW (Social Worker) at [Hospital Name]. He did state that he was going to harm himself with scissors. Hospice RN was giving [Resident Name] scissors on her visits with him . Call was placed and discussed with hospice that [Resident Name] was not able to be continuous 1:1 with staff for maintaining safety. They did agree and he was transferred to the hospital. He was admitted to the hospital last evening on the oncology floor for safety and monitoring. Hospice will explore alternative placement for safety.
On 4/14/25 at 1:54 PM, Surveyor interviewed RNC C. Surveyor asked RNC C to describe R55's discharge on [DATE]. RNC C indicated facility staff spoke with R55, and he was willing to go to the hospital. RNC C also indicated that facility staff worked with R55's hospice service, who agreed to R55's transfer. RNC C indicated R55 needed to be hospitalized where he could have more supervision, and he was ultimately discharged because he needed a higher level of supervision than the facility could provide. Surveyor asked RNC C if she advised the social worker at the hospital that R55 was not going to be accepted back to the facility. RNC C indicated she spoke with the hospital social worker and indicated that he would not be accepted back. Surveyor asked RNC C if R55 wishes, can he return to the facility. RNC C indicated, no because of safety concerns as the facility is unable to provide adequate staffing to maintain his safety.
On 4/14/25 at 2:13 PM, Surveyor interviewed FM (Family Member) JJJ, who is one of R55's guardians. Surveyor asked FM JJJ if she was notified by the facility prior to R55 being transferred to the hospital. FM JJJ indicated that she was not and found out he was taken to the hospital when the hospital called FM JJJ to ask about R55. Surveyor asked FM JJJ if she knows R55 was discharged from the facility. FM JJJ indicated she was told by the hospital social worker that the facility would not take R55 back. Surveyor asked FM JJJ if she would like R55 to return to the facility. FM JJJ indicated yes, and that she told the facility this on Friday when she spoke to facility staff. Surveyor asked FM JJJ where R55 is currently. FM JJJ indicated R55 is still in the hospital.
On 4/14/25 at 2:25 PM, Surveyor interviewed FM KKK, who is R55's other guardian. Surveyor asked FM KKK if he was notified by the facility prior to R55 being transferred to the hospital. FM KKK indicated he was not. FM KKK also indicated himself and FM JJJ were visiting the facility on Thursday 4/10/25 around 2:00 PM and no one at the facility informed them of the incident that happened earlier that day. Surveyor asked when FM KKK was notified of R55's transfer. FM KKK indicated he was called on Friday, 4/11/25 by ADON K (Assistant Director of Nursing) who told him at that time that R55 was in the hospital and the facility would not let R55 return to the facility due to not having a working plan to deal with R55's mental health problems. FM KKK also indicated he was told the facility could not provide the services need for R55's mental health problems such as one on one care. FM KKK also indicated R55 is in the process for applying to Medicaid and was told R55 would have to share a room once his Medicaid was approved.
It should be noted a facility must permit a resident to return to the facility pending a hospital transfer. The facility must have evidence that the resident's status at the time the resident seeks to return to the facility (not at the time the resident was transferred for acute care) meets one of the criteria at §483.15(c)(1)(i)(A) through (D). R11 and R55 were emergently transferred to the hospital and then the facility elected to discharge them from the facility not permitting R11 or R55 to return.
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Transfer Notice
(Tag F0623)
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 notify the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman of a facili...
Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to notify the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman of a facility-initiated discharge, failed to ensure the written notice contained all pertinent information for a discharge notice including the location to which the resident is transferred or discharged , a statement of the resident's appeal rights, and the name and address of the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman for 1 of 1 sampled resident (R11) and 1 of 1 supplemental residents (R55) reviewed for facility-initiated discharge.
The facility failed to notify R11 and R55 in writing prior to a facility-initiated discharge, did not give R11 or R55 a chance to appeal the facility-initiated discharge, and did not appropriately prepare R11 or R55 for the facility-initiated discharge.
This is evidenced by:
The facility policy titled, Resident Transfers and Discharge Notification, dated 1/2025, states in part: . Procedure: Facility-initiated transfer or discharge - Involuntary Discharge The facility will provide written notice in a language the resident or resident's representative can understand. The notice must also be provided to an immediate family member or legal representative. Written notice will be given at least 30 days before the proposed discharge. In specific circumstances written notice may need to be given less than 30 days, prior to discharge. The facility will utilize and complete all appropriate State forms that include the reason for the discharge, the date of the proposed discharge, the location to which the person will be discharged and their right to appeal the discharge by requesting a hearing .
Example 1
R11 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that include: type 2 diabetes with diabetic polyneuropathy (damage to multiple peripheral nerves causing pain, tingling, burning, numbness or sensitivity to touch), acquired absence of limb (amputation), phantom limb syndrome with pain (sensation that limb is still attached to body and can include feelings of pain, numbness, tingling, or temperature changes), and other chronic pain.
R11's most recent Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), with Assessment Reference Date of 1/9/25, states that R11 has a BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) of 15 out of 15, indicating that R11 is cognitively intact. Section D indicates that R11 never has self-isolating behavior. Section J indicates R11 experiences pain frequently, the pain frequently interferes with his sleep and day-to-day activities.
On 4/10/25, according to facility progress notes, R11 was discharged to a hospital emergency room with a recommendation to transfer resident to an inpatient mental health facility. Progress notes do not indicate R11 was provided a written notice 30 days prior to discharge that included the reason for discharge, the effective date of discharge, the location to which R11 is being discharged , a statement of R11's appeal rights, or the contact information for R11's Ombudsman.
(Of note: The Ombudsman was not notified of R11's facility-initiated discharge.)
On 4/14/25 at 1:54 PM, Surveyor interviewed RNC C. Surveyor asked RNC C to describe R11's discharge on [DATE]. RNC C indicated facility staff spoke with R11, and he was willing to go to the hospital to have his pain evaluated. RNC C also indicated that facility staff discussed alternative placement with R11 at [Facility Name], a new inpatient mental health facility. RNC C indicated that the mental health facility would not admit directly from a skilled nursing facility so R11 needed to go to the hospital first. RNC C also indicated the nursing home was not appropriate for R11 because they could not manage his behaviors. Surveyor asked RNC C if the Ombudsman, family, and R11 were notified of the transfer. RNC C indicated R11 was notified, however the ombudsman and family were not notified. Surveyor asked RNC C if the facility did a bed hold for R11. RNC C indicated a bed hold was provided. Surveyor asked RNC C if the facility initiated a facility-initiated discharge and will not take R11 back, should the facility provide R11 with a 30-day notice prior to being discharged and give R11 the right to appeal. RNC C stated, technically, and indicated the facility was more concerned with R11's safety. Surveyor asked if a written notice was provided to R11 prior to transfer. RNC C indicated a written notice was not provided. Surveyor asked RNC C if she advised the social worker at the hospital that R11 was not going to be accepted back to the facility. RNC C indicated she spoke with the hospital social worker and provided her with the inpatient mental health facility's contact information and that resident would not be accepted back. Surveyor asked RNC C if R11 wants to return to the facility, will the facility accept R11 back. RNC C indicated, no because of safety concerns as the facility is unable to provide adequate staffing to maintain his safety.
On 4/14/25 at 2:40 PM, Surveyor contacted OM HHH (Ombudsman) and asked if they had received a 30-day notice for R11's facility-initiated discharge. OM HHH indicated she did not receive any notification for R11's facility-initiated discharge.
Example 2
R55 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that include: centrilobular emphysema (chronic lung disease that causes damage to the upper lobes of the lungs), chronic respiratory failure with hypercapnia (high levels of carbon dioxide in blood due to respiratory failure), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, dysphagia (difficulty swallowing), heart failure, unspecified intellectual disabilities, Barrett's esophagus without dysplasia (tissue lining of esophagus changes due to long-term irritation causing symptoms of difficulty swallowing, heartburn, and chest pain), and anxiety disorder.
R55's most recent Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), with Assessment Reference Date of 2/12/25, states that R55 has a BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) of 13 out of 15, indicating that R55 is cognitively intact. Section D indicates that R55 never has self-isolating behaviors.
R55's Level 2 Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) evaluation summary indicates that a nursing facility may choose to admit or retain R55 because it was decided that R55 is appropriate for nursing facility placement.
R55's Comprehensive Care Plan, indicates, in part:
Problem: Resident is unable to care for self at home AEB (As Evidenced By) requiring 24 hour [sic] care/supervision and will be a long-term placement in nursing facility due to: End of Life-Hospice Care. Start date: 8/5/24.
Interventions:
Approach: Allow resident to make choices and decisions regarding care as long as they are safe and appropriate. Start date: 8/5/24.
Approach: Facility to provide 24 hour [sic] care/supervision while maintain resident's dignity and safety. Start date: 8/5/24.
Approach: Staff to provide cues/reminders/encouragement to promote resident's independence and autonomy. Start date: 8/5/24.
On 4/10/25 at 5:48 PM, a Progress Note was written by LPN III, that states, in part: Call placed to [Hospice Provider Name] this evening. Spoke to [Nurse Name], RN and updated her regarding sending resident into the ED (Emergency Department) for evaluation due to the incident from earlier. Call placed to POA (Power of Attorney) - no answer and unable to leave a voicemail. Call placed to second ER contact, his brother, [Family Member Name]. Updated him on resident going to the ED (Emergency Department) and why. All questions were answered. Brother stated that he would get ahold of his sister, [Family Member Name] (POA) and notify her as well. ADON (Assistant Director of Nursing) did contact [Emergency Medical Service Name].
On 4/10/25 at 6:11 PM, a Progress Note was written by DON B (Director of Nursing), that states, in part: Writer explained to resident that hospice requested he be sent to ER (Emergency Room) due to suicidal ideation, statements, and gestures made today. Resident stated good, then they can look at my stomach too.
(Of note: Progress note does not contain notification of R55's discharge, only a transfer. Additionally, R55 has a guardian and is not his own person.)
On 4/10/25 at 7:00 PM, a Progress Note is dated and indicated to be a late entry from 4/11/25 at 7:55 AM, that was written by RNC C that states, in part: Discharge Note: [Resident Name] did leave the facility at 1808 (6:08 PM). Writer did speak with [Social Worker Name] SW (Social Worker) at [Hospital Name]. He did state that he was going to harm himself with scissors. Hospice RN was giving [Resident Name] scissors on her visits with him . Call was placed and discussed with hospice that [Resident Name] was not able to be continuous 1:1 with staff for maintaining safety. They did agree and he was transferred to the hospital. He was admitted to the hospital last evening on the oncology floor for safety and monitoring. Hospice will explore alternative placement for safety.
On 4/14/25 at 1:54 PM, Surveyor interviewed RNC C. Surveyor asked RNC C to describe R55's discharge on [DATE]. RNC C indicated facility staff spoke with R55, and he was willing to go to the hospital. RNC C also indicated that facility staff worked with R55's hospice service, who agreed to R55's transfer. RNC C indicated R55 needed to be hospitalized where he could have more supervision, and he was ultimately discharged because he needed a higher level of supervision than the facility could provide. Surveyor asked RNC C if the Ombudsman, family, and R55 were notified of the transfer. RNC C indicated R55's family, hospice service, and provider were notified of R55's transfer. Surveyor asked RNC C if the facility did a bed hold for R55. RNC C indicates a bed hold was provided. Surveyor asked RNC C if the facility initiated a facility-initiated discharge and will not take R55 back, should the facility provide R55 with a 30-day notice prior to being discharged and give R55 the right to appeal. Surveyor asked RNC C if R55 should have been given a 30-day notice prior to being discharged by the facility. RNC C stated, technically, and indicated the facility was more concerned with R55's safety. Surveyor asked if a written notice was provided to R55's guardian prior to transfer. RNC C indicated a written notice was not provided. Surveyor asked RNC C if she advised the social worker at the hospital that R55 was not going to be accepted back to the facility. RNC C indicated she spoke with the hospital social worker and indicated that he would not be accepted back. Surveyor asked RNC C if R55 wanted to return to the facility, would the facility accept R55 back. RNC C indicated, no because of safety concerns as the facility is unable to provide adequate staffing to maintain his safety.
(Of note: The Ombudsman was not notified of R55's facility-initiated discharge.)
On 4/14/25 at 2:13 PM, Surveyor interviewed FM JJJ (Family Member), who is one of R55's guardians. Surveyor asked FM JJJ if she was notified by the facility prior to R55 being transferred to the hospital. FM JJJ indicated that she was not and found out he was taken to the hospital when the hospital called FM JJJ to ask about R55. Surveyor asked FM JJJ if she knows R55 was discharged from the facility. FM JJJ indicated she was told by the hospital social worker that the facility would not take R55 back. Surveyor asked FM JJJ if she would like R55 to return to the facility. FM JJJ indicated yes, and that she told the facility this on Friday when she spoke to facility staff. Surveyor asked FM JJJ where R55 is currently. FM JJJ indicates R55 is still in the hospital.
On 4/14/25 at 2:25 PM, Surveyor interviewed FM KKK, who is R55's other guardian. Surveyor asked FM KKK if he was notified by the facility prior to R55 being transferred to the hospital. FM KKK indicated he was not. FM KKK also indicated himself and FM JJJ were visiting the facility on Thursday 4/10/25 around 2:00 PM and no one at the facility informed them of the incident that happened earlier that day. Surveyor asked when FM KKK was notified of R55's transfer. FM KKK indicated he was called on Friday, 4/11/25 by ADON K who told him at that time that R55 was in the hospital and the facility would not let R55 return to the facility due to not having a working plan to deal with R55's mental health problems. FM KKK also indicated he was told the facility could not provide the services needed for R55's mental health problems such as one on one care. FM KKK also indicated R55 is in the process for applying to Medicaid and was told R55 would have to share a room once his Medicaid was approved.
R11 and R55 were transferred to the hospital, the facility's intent is to discharge both R11 and R55. The facility did not provide a 30-day notice, did not afford R11 or R55 the right to appeal the discharge, and did not notify the Ombudsman of the facility-initiated discharges.
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 F0624
(Tag F0624)
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 provide and document sufficient preparation and orientation to resi...
Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide and document sufficient preparation and orientation to residents to ensure safe and orderly transfer or discharge from the facility for 1 of 1 sampled resident (R11) and 1 of 1 supplemental residents (R55) reviewed for facility-initiated discharge.
The facility failed to notify R11 and R55 in writing prior to a facility-initiated discharge, and did not appropriately prepare R11 or R55 for the facility-initiated discharge.
This is evidenced by:
The facility policy titled, Resident Transfers and Discharge Notification, dated 1/2025, states in part: . Procedure: Facility-initiated transfer or discharge - Involuntary Discharge The facility will provide written notice in a language the resident or resident's representative can understand. The notice must also be provided to an immediate family member or legal representative. Written notice will be given at least 30 days before the proposed discharge. In specific circumstances written notice may need to be given less than 30 days, prior to discharge. The facility will utilize and complete all appropriate State forms that include the reason for the discharge, the date of the proposed discharge, the location to which the person will be discharged and their right to appeal the discharge by requesting a hearing .
Example 1
R11 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that include: type 2 diabetes with diabetic polyneuropathy (damage to multiple peripheral nerves causing pain, tingling, burning, numbness or sensitivity to touch), acquired absence of limb (amputation), phantom limb syndrome with pain (sensation that limb is still attached to body and can include feelings of pain, numbness, tingling, or temperature changes), and other chronic pain.
R11's most recent Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), with Assessment Reference Date of 1/9/25, states that R11 has a BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) of 15 out of 15, indicating that R11 is cognitively intact. Section D indicates that R11 never has self-isolating behavior. Section J indicates R11 experiences pain frequently, the pain frequently interferes with his sleep and day-to-day activities.
On 4/10/25, according to facility progress notes, R11 was abruptly discharged to a hospital emergency room with a recommendation to transfer resident to an inpatient mental health facility. Progress notes do not indicate R11 was provided appropriate orientation and preparation transfer and discharge. R11 was abruptly discharged and facility staff stated R11 would not be allowed to return.
On 4/14/25 at 1:54 PM, Surveyor interviewed RNC C. Surveyor asked RNC C to describe R11's discharge on [DATE]. RNC C indicated facility staff spoke with R11, and he was willing to go to the hospital to have his pain evaluated. RNC C also indicated that facility staff discussed alternative placement with R11 at [Facility Name], a new inpatient mental health facility. RNC C indicated that the mental health facility would not admit directly from a skilled nursing facility so R11 needed to go to the hospital first. RNC C also indicated the nursing home was not appropriate for R11 because they could not manage his behaviors. Surveyor asked RNC C if the Ombudsman, family, and R11 were notified of the transfer. RNC C indicated R11 was notified, however the ombudsman and family were not notified. Surveyor asked RNC C if the facility did a bed hold for R11. RNC C indicated a bed hold was provided. Surveyor asked RNC C if the facility initiated a facility-initiated discharge and will not take R11 back, should the facility provide R11 with a 30-day notice prior to being discharged and give R11 the right to appeal. RNC C stated, technically, and indicated the facility was more concerned with R11's safety. Surveyor asked if a written notice was provided to R11 prior to transfer. RNC C indicated a written notice was not provided. Surveyor asked RNC C if she advised the social worker at the hospital that R11 was not going to be accepted back to the facility. RNC C indicated she spoke with the hospital social worker and provided her with the inpatient mental health facility's contact information and that resident would not be accepted back. Surveyor asked RNC C if R11 wants to return to the facility, will the facility accept R11 back. RNC C indicated, no because of safety concerns as the facility is unable to provide adequate staffing to maintain his safety.
Example 2
R55 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that include: centrilobular emphysema (chronic lung disease that causes damage to the upper lobes of the lungs), chronic respiratory failure with hypercapnia (high levels of carbon dioxide in blood due to respiratory failure), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, dysphagia (difficulty swallowing), heart failure, unspecified intellectual disabilities, Barrett's esophagus without dysplasia (tissue lining of esophagus changes due to long-term irritation causing symptoms of difficulty swallowing, heartburn, and chest pain), and anxiety disorder.
R55's most recent Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), with Assessment Reference Date of 2/12/25, states that R55 has a BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) of 13 out of 15, indicating that R55 is cognitively intact. Section D indicates that R55 never has self-isolating behaviors.
On 4/10/25 at 5:48 PM, a Progress Note was written by LPN III, that states, in part: Call placed to [Hospice Provider Name] this evening. Spoke to [Nurse Name], RN and updated her regarding sending resident into the ED (Emergency Department) for evaluation due to the incident from earlier. Call placed to POA (Power of Attorney) - no answer and unable to leave a voicemail. Call placed to second ER contact, his brother, [Family Member Name]. Updated him on resident going to the ED (Emergency Department) and why. All questions were answered. Brother stated that he would get ahold of his sister, [Family Member Name] (POA) and notify her as well. ADON (Assistant Director of Nursing) did contact [Emergency Medical Service Name].
On 4/10/25 at 6:11 PM, a Progress Note was written by DON B (Director of Nursing), that states, in part: Writer explained to resident that hospice requested he be sent to ER (Emergency Room) due to suicidal ideation, statements, and gestures made today. Resident stated good, then they can look at my stomach too.
(Of note: Progress note does not contain notification of R55's discharge, only a transfer. Additionally, R55 has a guardian and is not his own person.)
On 4/10/25 at 7:00 PM, a Progress Note is dated and indicated to be a late entry from 4/11/25 at 7:55 AM, that was written by RNC C that states, in part: Discharge Note: [Resident Name] did leave the facility at 1808 (6:08 PM). Writer did speak with [Social Worker Name] SW (Social Worker) at [Hospital Name]. He did state that he was going to harm himself with scissors. Hospice RN was giving [Resident Name] scissors on her visits with him . Call was placed and discussed with hospice that [Resident Name] was not able to be continuous 1:1 with staff for maintaining safety. They did agree and he was transferred to the hospital. He was admitted to the hospital last evening on the oncology floor for safety and monitoring. Hospice will explore alternative placement for safety.
Of note, the facility abruptly discharged the resident without allowing the resident to return.
On 4/14/25 at 1:54 PM, Surveyor interviewed RNC C. Surveyor asked RNC C to describe R55's discharge on [DATE]. RNC C indicated facility staff spoke with R55, and he was willing to go to the hospital. RNC C also indicated that facility staff worked with R55's hospice service, who agreed to R55's transfer. RNC C indicated R55 needed to be hospitalized where he could have more supervision, and he was ultimately discharged because he needed a higher level of supervision than the facility could provide. RNC C indicated a written notice was not provided. Surveyor asked RNC C if she advised the social worker at the hospital that R55 was not going to be accepted back to the facility. RNC C indicated she spoke with the hospital social worker and indicated that he would not be accepted back. Surveyor asked RNC C if R55 wanted to return to the facility, would the facility accept R55 back. RNC C indicated, no because of safety concerns as the facility is unable to provide adequate staffing to maintain his safety.
On 4/14/25 at 2:13 PM, Surveyor interviewed FM JJJ (Family Member), who is one of R55's guardians. Surveyor asked FM JJJ if she was notified by the facility prior to R55 being transferred to the hospital. FM JJJ indicated that she was not and found out he was taken to the hospital when the hospital called FM JJJ to ask about R55. Surveyor asked FM JJJ if she knows R55 was discharged from the facility. FM JJJ indicated she was told by the hospital social worker that the facility would not take R55 back. Surveyor asked FM JJJ if she would like R55 to return to the facility. FM JJJ indicated yes, and that she told the facility this on Friday when she spoke to facility staff. Surveyor asked FM JJJ where R55 is currently. FM JJJ indicates R55 is still in the hospital.
On 4/14/25 at 2:25 PM, Surveyor interviewed FM KKK, who is R55's other guardian. Surveyor asked FM KKK if he was notified by the facility prior to R55 being transferred to the hospital. FM KKK indicated he was not. FM KKK also indicated himself and FM JJJ were visiting the facility on Thursday 4/10/25 around 2:00 PM and no one at the facility informed them of the incident that happened earlier that day. Surveyor asked when FM KKK was notified of R55's transfer. FM KKK indicated he was called on Friday, 4/11/25 by ADON K who told him at that time that R55 was in the hospital and the facility would not let R55 return to the facility due to not having a working plan to deal with R55's mental health problems. FM KKK also indicated he was told the facility could not provide the services needed for R55's mental health problems such as one on one care. FM KKK also indicated R55 is in the process for applying to Medicaid and was told R55 would have to share a room once his Medicaid was approved.
R11 and R55 were transferred to the hospital, the facility's intent is to discharge both R11 and R55 without proper notice, prepartation or orientation for discharge.
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0625
(Tag F0625)
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 written information to the resident or resident representative...
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 written information to the resident or resident representative regarding the bed hold policy for 1 (R55) of 1 supplemental resident's reviewed for facility-initiated discharge
R55 is not his own person and has two guardians. Neither guardian was provided with a written bed hold prior to R55 being transferred to the hospital on 4/10/24.
This is evidenced by:
The facility policy entitled, Bed Hold, dated, 1/2025, states, in part: . Policy: Our facility allows residents to hold or reserve a bed while absent from the facility due to hospitalization or therapeutic leave. This policy applies to all residents regardless of payment source and will be provided to the resident or resident's representative at the time of admission and again with any emergency transfer from the community . Procedure: 1. The facility Social Worker or designee will provide a copy of the bed hold policy to the resident and/or the resident representative at the time of admission and again prior to a transfer due to hospitalization or therapeutic leave. The signed copies will be maintained in the resident's financial personal file. 2. The facility shall provide the bed hold policy Acknowledgement to the resident or the resident representative with any . transfer to alternative healthcare community including hospital admission .
R55 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that include, in part: centrilobular emphysema (chronic lung disease that causes damage to the upper lobes of the lungs), chronic respiratory failure with hypercapnia (high levels of carbon dioxide in blood due to respiratory failure), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, dysphagia (difficulty swallowing), heart failure, unspecified intellectual disabilities, Barrett's esophagus without dysplasia (tissue lining of esophagus changes due to long-term irritation causing symptoms of difficulty swallowing, heartburn, and chest pain), and anxiety disorder.
Facility provided Surveyor with a document titled, WI - Bed-Hold Acknowledgement, that was signed and dated by DON B (Director of Nursing) on 4/10/25. The document is checked next to the statement, 1. I agree to pay the facility the continuing daily rate I am charged for the period of the resident's absence from the facility. I will notify the facility anytime during the absence if I do not want to continue holding the bed. Bed-hold charges will cease the day following removal of the resident's belongings. On the signature line marked, Resident/Responsible Party, it states, verbal consent given.
On 4/14/25 at 2:13 PM, Surveyor interviewed FM JJJ (Family Member), who is one of R55's guardians. Surveyor asked FM JJJ if she was notified by the facility prior to R55 being transferred to the hospital. FM JJJ indicated that she did not and found out he was taken to the hospital when the hospital called FM JJJ to ask about R55. Surveyor asked FM JJJ if she knows R55 was discharged from the facility. FM JJJ indicates she was told by the hospital social worker that the facility would not take R55 back.
On 4/14/25 at 2:25 PM, Surveyor interviewed FM KKK, who is R55's other guardian. Surveyor asked FM KKK if he was notified by the facility prior to R55 being transferred to the hospital. FM KKK indices he was not. FM KKK also indicates himself and FM JJJ were visiting the facility on Thursday 4/10/25 around 2:00 PM and no one at the facility informed them of the incident that happened earlier that day. Surveyor asked when FM KKK was notified of R55's transfer. FM KKK indicates he was called on Friday, 4/11/25 by ADON K who told him at that time that R55 was in the hospital and the facility would not let R55 return to the facility due to not having a working plan to deal with R55's mental health problems.
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Safe Transfer
(Tag F0626)
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 permit 1 of 1 sampled resident (R11) and 1 of 1 supplemental reside...
Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to permit 1 of 1 sampled resident (R11) and 1 of 1 supplemental residents (R55) reviewed for facility-initiated discharge to return to the facility after a hospitalization and the ability to return to the facility.
R11 and R55 were not allowed to return to the facility following an emergency facility-initiated transfer to the emergency room. The facility stated they would be discharging R11 and R55 due to inability to provide the staffing level needed to care for R11 and R55. It should be noted R11 signed a bed hold and the facility had a bed hold for R55 that stated the family gave verbal consent to hold the bed and would pay the bed hold charges.
Example 1
R11 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that include: type 2 diabetes with diabetic polyneuropathy (damage to multiple peripheral nerves causing pain, tingling, burning, numbness or sensitivity to touch), acquired absence of limb (amputation), phantom limb syndrome w/pain (sensation that limb is still attached to body and can include feelings of pain, numbness, tingling, or temperature changes), and other chronic pain.
R11's most recent Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), with Assessment Reference Date of 1/9/25, states that R11 has a BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) of 15 out of 15, indicating that R11 is cognitively intact. Section D indicates that R11 never has self-isolating behavior. Section J indicates R11 experiences pain frequently, the pain frequently interferes with his sleep and day-to-day activities.
On 4/10/25, according to facility progress notes, R11 was discharged to a hospital emergency room with a recommendation to transfer resident to an inpatient mental health facility.
On 4/14/25 at 1:54 PM, Surveyor interviewed RNC C (Registered Nurse Consultant). Surveyor asked RNC C to describe R11's discharge on [DATE]. RNC C indicated facility staff spoke with R11, and he was willing to go to the hospital to have his pain evaluated. Surveyor asked RNC C if the facility did a bed hold for R11. RNC C indicates a bed hold was provided. Surveyor asked RNC C if she advised the social worker at the hospital that R11 was not going to be accepted back to the facility. RNC C indicates she spoke with the hospital social worker and provided her with the inpatient mental health facility's contact information but that R11 would not be accepted back. Surveyor asked RNC C if R11 wishes, can he return to the facility? RNC C indicated, no because of safety concerns as the facility is unable to provide adequate staffing to maintain his safety.
Example 2
R55 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that include: centrilobular emphysema (chronic lung disease that causes damage to the upper lobes of the lungs), chronic respiratory failure with hypercapnia (high levels of carbon dioxide in blood due to respiratory failure), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, dysphagia (difficulty swallowing), heart failure, unspecified intellectual disabilities, Barrett's esophagus without dysplasia (tissue lining of esophagus changes due to long-term irritation causing symptoms of difficulty swallowing, heartburn, and chest pain), and anxiety disorder.
On 4/10/25 at 7:00 PM, a Progress Note is dated and indicated to be a late entry from 4/11/25 at 7:55 AM, that was written by RNC C that states in part: Discharge Note: [Resident Name] did leave the facility at 1808 (6:08 PM). Writer did speak with [Social Worker Name] SW (Social Worker) at [Hospital Name]. He did state that he was going to harm himself with scissors. Hospice RN was giving [Resident Name] scissors on her visits with him . Call was placed and discussed with hospice that [Resident Name] was not able to be continuous 1:1 with staff for maintaining safety. They did agree and he was transferred to the hospital. He was admitted to the hospital last evening on the oncology floor for safety and monitoring. Hospice will explore alternative placement for safety.
On 4/14/25 at 1:54 PM, Surveyor interviewed RNC C. Surveyor asked RNC C to describe R55's discharge on [DATE]. RNC C indicated facility staff spoke with R55, and he was willing to go to the hospital. RNC C also indicated that facility staff worked with R55's hospice service, who agreed to R55's transfer. RNC C indicates R55 needed to be hospitalized where he could have more supervision, and he was ultimately discharged because he needed a higher level of supervision than the facility could provide. RNC C indicates a bed hold was provided. Surveyor asked RNC C if she advised the Social Worker at the hospital that R55 was not going to be accepted back to the facility. RNC C indicated she spoke with the hospital Social Worker and indicated that R55 would not be accepted back. Surveyor asked RNC C if R55 wishes, can he return to the facility? RNC C indicated, no because of safety concerns as the facility is unable to provide adequate staffing to maintain his safety.
R11 and R55 were transferred from the skilled nursing facility to the emergency room without permitting either resident to return to 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
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 a resident who is unable to carry out activi...
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 a resident who is unable to carry out activities of daily living receives the necessary services to maintain good grooming and personal hygiene for 1 of 22 residents reviewed for ADLs (Activities of Daily Living) (R34).
R34 requested to use the bathroom. CNA EEE (Certified Nursing Assistant) told R34 she is on a two (2) hour toileting schedule and will need to wait. R34 was waiting approximately 1 hour and 20 minutes before being assisted to the bathroom.
Evidenced by:
The facility's policy, Activities of Daily Living, dated 3/2023, includes, in part, as follows: It is the policy of the facility to specify the responsibility to create and sustain an environment that humanizes and individualizes each resident's quality of life by ensuring all staff, across all shifts and departments, understand the principles of quality of life, and honor and support these principles for each resident; and that the care and services provided are person-centered, and honor and support each resident's preferences, choices, values and beliefs. The facility will provide care and services for the following activities .Elimination-toileting. A resident who is unable to carry out activities of daily living will receive the necessary services to maintain good grooming and personal hygiene .
R34 was admitted to the facility 10/18/24 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, need for assistance with personal care, encounter for orthopedic aftercare following surgical amputation, acquired absence of left foot, and osteoarthritis of knee.
R34's MDS (Minimum Data Set) assessment dated [DATE] notes a Brief Interview of Mental Status score of 13/15 indicating R34 is cognitively intact. R34 requires extensive assist of 2 staff for toileting. R34 is her own decision maker.
R34's comprehensive care plan documents, in part, as follows: (Problem Start Date: 10/29/24) Urinary Incontinence: Resident is occasionally incontinent of bladder. Continent of bowel. Uses bedpan or commode. Long Term Goal Target Date 5/1/25 Resident will be clean, dry and odor free. Approach: .(Approach Start Date: 10/29/24) Provide staff assistance for all toileting and incontinence needs.
R34's comprehensive care plan documents, in part, as follows: Resident at risk for falls related to recent surgery/amputation of partial right foot, general weakness. Goal: Resident will be free from falls and injury due to fall. Approach: (Approach Start Date: 10/29/24) Resident is NWB (non weight bearing)to right leg, Hoyer lift (full body), assist of 2.
On 4/7/25 at 10:35 AM, Surveyor spoke with R34. R34 stated, about 15 minutes ago she asked CNA EEE (Certified Nursing Assistant) for assistance to use the bathroom. R34 stated, CNA EEE, told her she was on a two (2) hour toileting schedule and would need to wait. Surveyor asked R34, how did this make you feel. R34 stated, There ain't nothing I can do about it if I have to wait. R34 added, I didn't know I was on a 2 hour toileting schedule again. Note, R34 is not a two (2) hour toileting schedule.
On 4/07/25 at 10:37 AM, Surveyor spoke with CNA EEE (Certified Nursing Assistant). Surveyor asked CNA EEE, how long she has been working at the facility. CNA EEE stated, two (2) years. Surveyor asked CNA EEE, is R34 on a two (2) hour toileting schedule. CNA EEE stated, yes, from what she has been told. Surveyor asked, CNA EEE, when R34 asked her to use the bathroom about 15 minutes prior, what did she tell R34. CNA EEE stated, I told her she's on a toileting schedule and I need to take care of other residents first. Surveyor asked CNA EEE, what should you do when a resident is on a toileting schedule and asks to use bathroom in between the two (2) hour window. CNA EEE stated, Probably take them right away. CNA EEE stated, CNA JJ (Certified Nursing Assistant) is on break and she needs to wait for him.
On 4/7/25 at 10:42 AM, Surveyor observed CNA JJ (Certified Nursing Assistant) come to R34's room. Surveyor observed CNA JJ state to CNA EEE, R34 is not in her room did she go to the activity.
On 4/7/25 at 10:56 AM, Surveyor spoke with CNA JJ (Certified Nursing Assistant). Surveyor asked CNA JJ, how long he has worked at the facility. CNA JJ stated, he has worked at the facility for 1 1/2 years. Surveyor asked CNA JJ, is R34 on a two (2) hour toileting schedule. CNA JJ stated, he honestly has no idea and some staff say they take R34 to the bathroom when she requests. CNA JJ stated, when he sees her call light on he takes her to the bathroom. CNA JJ stated, R34 declined when he followed up with her. Surveyor asked CNA JJ, when did you asked R34. CNA JJ stated, around 10:45 AM.
Note, Surveyor observed CNA JJ filling water mugs, however, CNA JJ did not follow up with R34 while she was in the activity as Surveyor was observing during the time R34 was in the activity.
On 4/7/25 from 10:35 AM - 11:30 AM, Surveyor observed R34 in an activity. Surveyor observed that no staff approached R34 to ask if she needs to use the bathroom.
On 4/7/25 at 11:30 AM, Surveyor observed R34 enter her room and activate her call light.
On 4/7/25 at 11:30 AM, Surveyor asked R34, did any staff ask if you needed to use the bathroom since you went to the activity. R34 stated, no.
On 4/7/25 at 11:38 AM, Surveyor observed CNA EEE and CNA JJ enter R34's room and assist her to the bathroom.
On 4/9/25 at 3:45 PM, Surveyor spoke with R34. Surveyor asked R34, how did being told she needed to wait two (2) hours in between toileting and staff would not assisting her make her feel. R34 stated, she did not want to go in her pants. R34 added, she can't remember if she had an accident.
On 4/10/25 at 1:20 PM, Surveyor spoke with DON B (Director of Nursing). Surveyor asked DON B, if a resident requests to be toileted what do you expect staff to do. DON B stated, staff should respond to the need ASAP (As Soon As Possible). Surveyor asked DON B, what if a resident is on a two (2) hour toileting schedule. DON B stated, same answer, as soon as they have time to respond to whatever need is requested by the resident. Surveyor asked DON B, what is a reasonable amount of time for a resident to wait for assistance to use the bathroom. DON B stated, the call light average is 7-10 minutes at the absolute most. Surveyor stated, on 4/7/25 at approximately 10:15-10:20 AM, R34 asked CNA EEE to use the bathroom. Surveyor stated, R34 waited approximately 1 hour and 20 minutes. Surveyor asked DON B, is this an acceptable amount of time for a resident to wait to be toileted. DON B stated, no. Surveyor asked DON B, what should CNA EEE have done. DON B stated, CNA EEE should find any other staff member (to assist). Surveyor asked DON B, what should CNA JJ (Certified Nursing Assistant) have done. DON B stated, CNA JJ should have checked in with R34 to see if she needed to use the bathroom. DON B stated, R34 prefers to not have CNA JJ care for her but she has allowed him to perform cares. DON B added, at that time if she did not allow CNA JJ to assist her CNA JJ should have found other staff. Surveyor asked DON B, should staff have approached R34 during the activity and discreetly asked if she needed to use the bathroom. DON B stated, yes, staff should have asked R34. Surveyor asked DON B, is R34 on a two (2) hour toileting schedule. DON B stated, not that she is aware.
R34 requested to use the bathroom. CNA EEE told R34 she is on a two (2) hour toileting schedule and will need to wait. R34 was waiting approximately 1 hour and 20 minutes before being assisted to the bathroom.
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 receives care, consistent with profess...
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 receives care, consistent with professional standards of practice, to prevent pressure ulcers for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for pressure injuries (R73).
R73 had a pressure reducing air mattress for pressure injury healing and was observed laying on the mattress with multiple layers under R73.
Findings include
A study published on the National Library of Medicine titled The Effect of Multiple Layers of Linens on Surface Interface Pressure: Results of a Laboratory Study concluded that excessive linen usage for patients on therapeutic support surfaces (such as air mattresses) should be discouraged. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23749661/
R73 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and has diagnoses that include malignant neoplasm of bone (bone cancer) and an unstageable pressure ulcer of sacral region (resident's bottom). R73 was admitted to the facility with orders for an air mattress. Surveyor confirmed this air mattress was in place on 4/7/25.
On 4/7/25 at 12:42 PM during R73's wound care, it was observed by Surveyor that R73 was lying on an incontinence pad. The incontinence pad was lying on top of a sheet folded into three layers on itself, which was then lying on top of the bedsheet and air mattress.
Again on 4/9/25 8:52 AM Surveyor observed the resident lying on top of the incontinence pad which was on top of a sheet folded thrice (three times) which was then on top of the bed sheet and air mattress.
On 4/8/25 at 3:57 PM Surveyor interviewed CNA H (Certified Nursing Assistant) who stated that staff typically have put additional sheets and incontinence pads underneath R73. CNA H indicated that this had been done for a while. Additionally, on 4/10/25 at 1:45 PM CNA I and CNA J both stated that R73 has had the extra sheet and incontinence pad the whole time he has been at the facility.
On 4/9/25 at 9:14 AM, Surveyor interviewed DON B (Director of Nursing) who indicated that she was not sure if placing multiple layers on top of an air mattress was a standard of practice or not. DON B stated that removing the blanket and incontinence pad wouldn't hurt in better assisting R73's wounds.
On 4/14/25 at 11:15 AM, Surveyor interviewed RNC C (Regional Nurse Consultant). RNC C stated that the facility did not have any documentation indicating that placing additional layers of blankets and linens on top of an air mattress was a standard of practice.
R73 was observed laying on multiple layers between him and the airmattress.
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0745
(Tag F0745)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not provide medically related social services to attain or ...
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 medically related social services to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident for 1 of 1 sampled resident (R11) and 1 of 1 supplemental resident (R55).
R11 stabbed himself with a pair of scissors after experiencing uncontrolled phantom limb pain. Prior to this, R11 had expressed suicidal ideations related to his chronic pain multiple times in the two months prior to this event. R11 was hospitalized for a self-inflicted stab wound to his chest and placed on an emergency psychiatric detention as a result of his suicide attempt. Following this incident, the resident returned to the facility and continued to express suicidal ideation and uncontrolled pain. No trauma assessment was completed or PHQ-9s (depression screening) following suicidal statements.
R55 expressed suicidal ideations multiple times between his admission date of 8/5/24 and his discharge date of 4/10/25. Over this time, the resident obtained sharp objects on occasions. On 4/10/25, scissors were removed from the resident's room, after which the resident stated that if he had them he would use them like this and proceeded to hold his hand up to his throat. No trauma assessment was completed. PHQ-9s (depression screening) were not completed following suicidal statements.
This is evidenced by:
The facility policy entitled, Behavioral Health Services, reviewed 1/2025, states, in part: . It is the policy of this facility to ensure residents receive necessary behavioral health services to assist them in reach and maintain their highest level of mental and psychosocial functioning. Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines: 1. The facility will ensure that necessary behavioral health care services are person-centered and provided to each resident . 3. Conditions that may require specialized services and supports include, but are not limited to: a. Depression b. Anxiety . 4. The facility utilizes assessments for identifying and assessing a resident's mental and psychosocial status providing person-centered care. This process includes, but is not limited to: . b. Obtaining history regarding mental, psychosocial, and emotional health. c. Ongoing monitoring of mood and behavior. d. Care plan development and implementation. e. Evaluation . 6. All facility staff, including contracted staff and volunteers, shall receive education to ensure appropriate competencies and skill sets for meeting the behavioral health needs of residents. Education shall be based on the role of the staff member and resident needs identified through the facility assessment. Behavioral health training as determined by the facility assessment will include, but is not limited to, the competencies and skills necessary to provide the following: a. Person-centered care and services that reflect the resident's goals of care. b. Interpersonal communication that promotes mental and psychosocial well-being. c. Meaningful activities which promote engagement and positive meaningful relationships. d. An environment and atmosphere that is conducive to mental and psychosocial well-being. e. Individualized, non-pharmacological approaches to care . 8. The Social Services Director shall serve as the contact person for questions regarding behavioral services provided by the facility and outside sources such as physician, psychiatrists, or neurologists .
The facility policy entitled, Trauma Informed Care, reviewed 1/2025, states in part: . It is the policy of this facility to provide care and services which, in addition to meeting professional standards, are delivered using approaches which are culturally-competent, account for experiences and preferences, and address the needs of trauma survivors by minimizing triggers and/or re-traumatization . Trauma results from an event, series of events, or set of circumstances that is experienced by an individuals as physically or emotionally harmful or life threatening and that has lasting adverse effects on the individuals' functioning and mental, physical, social, emotional, or spiritual well-being. Common sources of trauma may include, but are not limited to: . d. Physical, sexual, mental, and/or emotional abuse (past or present) e. Rape . i. Traumatic life events . Trauma-Informed Care is an approach to delivering care that involves understanding, recognizing and responding to the effects of all types of trauma. A trauma-informed approach to care delivery recognizes the widespread impact and signs and symptoms of trauma in residents, and incorporates knowledge about trauma into care plans, policies, procedures and practices to avoid re-traumatization .Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines: 1. The facility will work to facilitate the principles of trauma informed care which include: a. Safety - Ensuring residents have a sense of emotional and physical safety . 2. The facility will use a multi-pronged approach to identifying a resident's history of trauma . This will include asking the resident about triggers that may be stressors or may prompt recall of a previous traumatic event, as well as screening and assessment tools . 6. The facility will identify triggers which may re-traumatize residents with a history of trauma. Trigger-specific interventions will identify ways to decrease the resident's exposure to triggers which re-traumatize the resident, as well as identify ways to mitigate or decrease the effect of the trigger on the resident, and will be added to the resident's care plan .7. Trauma-specific care plan interventions will recognize the interrelation between trauma and symptoms of trauma such as . depression and anxiety . 10. In situations where a trauma survivor is reluctant to share their history, the facility will still try to identify triggers which may re-traumatize the resident, and develop care plan interventions which minimize or eliminate the effect of the trigger on the resident.
Example 1:
R11 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that include, in part: type 2 diabetes with diabetic polyneuropathy (damage to multiple peripheral nerves causing pain, tingling, burning, numbness or sensitivity to touch), acquired absence of limb (amputation), phantom limb syndrome w/ pain (sensation that limb is still attached to body and can include feelings of pain, numbness, tingling, or temperature changes), and other chronic pain.
R11's most recent Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), with Assessment Reference Date of 1/9/25, states that R11 has a BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) of 15 out of 15, indicating that R11 is cognitively intact. Section D indicates the R11 never has self-isolating behavior. Section J indicates R11 experiences pain frequently, the pain frequently interferes with his sleep and day-to-day activities.
R11's current Comprehensive Care Plan indicates, in part:
Problem: Resident has expressed thoughts of being better off dead. Start date: 4/5/24. Last revised: 1/17/25
Interventions: Approach: Obtain a psych consult/psychosocial therapy PRN. Start date: 4/5/24 .Approach: Monitor for decline in resident's mood and report to physician for evaluation as needed. Start date: 4/5/24 .
Surveyor requested R11's trauma assessment. The facility indicated that no trauma assessment was conducted for R11.
Surveyor reviewed R11's PHQ-9 assessments. The only PHQ-9 assessments that could be found were associated with R11's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments on the following dates: 4/8/25 (admission MDS), 6/3/24, 7/9/24, 7/15/24, 10/9/24, 1/9/25. R11 scored a zero on all of these assessments, indicating minimal depression.
On 4/4/24 at 11:56 AM, a Progress Note is written by RN M (Registered Nurse), that states, in part: Resident c/o (complaining) of [sic] 9/10 R (right) foot/ankle pain in his R foot. Resident was heard hollering and yelling out in pain, and when this writer went into room to assess, resident was moaning and crying. Stated that he couldn't take the pain anymore, and stated he just wants the lord to take him, he can't live like this, it's been like this for years. Resident said that he hasn't slept in 3 days, since he's been here, and the Tylenol and cream you guys hive me doesn't do f**king sh*t .
(Of note: Surveyor conducted record review and was unable to find a PHQ-9 that was conducted as a result of the R11 making this statement).
On 4/8/24 at 6:49 PM, a Progress Note is written by ADON K (Assistant Director of Nursing) that states: Resident tearful and voiced depressive statements to staff prior to supper tonight. Resident stated I would be better off dead than deal with this pain, and Just kill me, it would hurt less. Writer did sit with resident who immediately stated, I don't want to hurt myself, I just don't want to hurt anymore. Resident denied having a plan to self harm when asked by writer .
(Of note: Surveyor conducted record review and was unable to find a PHQ-9 that was conducted as a result of the R11 making this statement).
On 5/8/24 at 11:02 PM, a Progress Note is written by MR (Medical Records) S that states: Went into resident's room to speak with him about appointments and questions he had. Resident started crying and saying he was in so much pain and thinking suicidal thoughts because he didn't like being in so much pain. He made comments about the pain being at a 7-8. Resident kept saying he just wanted the pain to go away, and he didn't want to be here anymore so the pain would go away. He made comments about hanging his head out of the window .
On 5/8/24 at 12:59 PM, a Progress Note is written by SS N (Social Services) that states: This writer spoke with resident regarding the suicidal thoughts. Resident stated he does not have a plan. Resident stated that the Tylenol and pain cream he is receiving is not enough for the pain. Resident mentioned strong medication such as Oxycodone to keep the pain below a 5. Followed up with charge nurse who is addressing concerns with provider. Another appointment for pain management was scheduled.
(Of note: Surveyor conducted record review and was unable to find a PHQ-9 that was conducted as a result of the R11 making this statement and SS N following up with R11).
On 5/24/24 at 10:23 PM a Progress Note is written by RN W that R11 attempted suicide by stabbing himself with a pair of scissors. As a result, R11 was hospitalized and placed on an emergency psychiatric hold.
On 11/11/24 at 9:54 AM, a Progress Note is written by DON B, that states, in part: . Writer had 1:1 conversation with resident and resident stated Writer asked to speak with resident this AM regarding resident yelling out at staff and refusing medication. Writer has 1:1 conversation with resident .Resident stated give me a gun and get it over with. Resident then stated give me a knife so I can use it on my leg to cut it off. resident was immediately placed on 1:1 . NP in house and immediately updated . New order received to send resident to [Hospital Name] ER due to pain and suicidal ideation .
(Of note: Surveyor conducted record review and was unable to find a PHQ-9 that was conducted as a result of the R11 making this statement and SS N following up with R11).
On 4/7/25 at 1:58 AM, a Progress Note is written by LPN Y (Licensed Practical Nurse), that states, in part: . nurses performed a safety check in residents room where metal utensil and a pair of scissors were found. The scissors were hidden in 2 socks [sic] and put under bed
(Of note: Surveyor conducted record review and was unable to find a PHQ-9 that was conducted as a result of finding sharp objects hidden in R11's room and no evidence of SS N following up with R11).
On 4/9/25 at 11:03 AM, Surveyor entered R11's room for an interview. Surveyor observed R11 holding his right leg, rocking back and forth, crying, with his noted favorite music playing on his television. Surveyor asked R11 if he needed a nurse. R11 indicated his pain treatments don't help so he did not want a nurse. Surveyor asked R11 if they could ask a few questions. R11 indicated he did not mind, put his leg back down and lay still on the bed. Surveyor asked R11 where he obtained the scissors when he hurt himself in May. R11 indicated the scissors were left on the windowsill next to his bed. Before Surveyor could ask another question, Surveyor observed R11's affect become flat, and his voice monotone as he indicated that he was laying in bed and squeezing a washcloth because his pain was overwhelming and excruciating, he had just had enough, he reached out, grabbed the scissors, and stabbed himself. R11 also indicated that he just didn't want to live like this anymore. R11 looked at Surveyor, with a flat affect and monotone voice, and stated, You know . I'm just disappointed the scissors were so small, and it didn't cut me deep enough. R11 looked back at the ceiling and Surveyor asked R11 if staff were still leaving scissors in his room. R11 indicates they are, and that he is disappointed that he can't do activities or play cards because he is worried about bothering the other residents if he needs to grab his foot to soothe his pain. Surveyor asked if R11 would tell Surveyor were he is still getting scissors and other sharp objects from. R11 indicates staff leave them in his room and that he takes them off maintenance carts and the facility desks. Surveyor also notes R11's roommate receives metal silverware with his meals that he eats in his room.
Immediately following this conversation, Surveyor approached RNC (Regional Nurse Consultant) C and advised her that R11 is still obtaining sharp objects and that Surveyor is concerned for his safety. RNC C indicated staff would ensure R11's safety.
On 4/9/25 at 3:15 PM, a Progress Note is written by CNA J that states: Writer notified by administrator that a state surveyor observed scissors in resident room. The writer and administrator went to resident's room and did an assessment on the room to locate scissors. No scissors were found.
(Of note: Surveyor conducted record review and was unable to find a PHQ-9 that was conducted as a result of the R11 making this statement and SS N (Social Services) following up with R11).
On 4/9/25 at 4:38 PM, Surveyor interviewed SS N. Surveyor asked SS N what her process is for monitoring residents with depression. SS N indicates she completes a PHQ-9 on admission along with a BIMS score. SS N also indicates if the resident triggers they do a care plan and monitor for one week. SS N indicates her monitoring also depends on which resident it is, sometimes its venting, sometimes its figuring out a plan, and for residents with amputations she tries to reconnect and help them achieve a level of peace. Surveyor asked SS N how often she conducts PHQ-9 assessments. SS N indicates she does them every 3 months, with a change of status, and if a nurse reports signs and symptoms of depression. SS N also indicates she talks with the resident about activities, brainstorms with them to see how she can help, tries to identify residents with specific triggers, monitor residents who are on medications, monitors residents' mood, and refers residents to behavior health services if it is appropriate. Surveyor asked SS N if she conducts trauma assessments. SS N indicates she completes a trauma assessment on admission if the resident has a history of PTSD. Surveyor asked SS N about R11's day-to-day mood. SS N indicates R11 has spurts of depression related to not being able to go home, his significant other having financial difficulties, difficulties with his financial applications, feeling defeated about not being able to discharge from the facility, and his pain levels. Surveyor asked SS N who is responsible for monitoring R11's depression. SS N indicates it is the clinical team's responsibility.
(of note: SS N indicated she is aware of R11 having spurts of depression, and has not provided additional services or monitoring for R11.)
On 4/10/25 at 7:58 AM, Surveyor interviewed SS N. Surveyor asked SS N (Social Services) if a resident makes suicidal ideation statements, should a PHQ-9 be conducted. SS N indicates depending on the statements she follows up and that she doesn't necessarily conduct the assessment but tries to ask them what's going on and try to assist with stressors. Surveyor asked SS N when R11 makes suicidal ideation statements, should a PHQ-9 be conducted. SS N indicates she does not know and is unsure if it would beneficial since he doesn't trigger. Surveyor asked SS N if she conducts the PHQ-9 or the PHQ- 2. SS N indicates she is unsure but will ask all the questions on the PHQ-9 since R11 has a significant difference between his PHQ-9 results and his mood and behavior. Surveyor asked SS N if R11 received a trauma assessment upon admission. SS N indicates, no. Surveyor asked SS N if R11 should have received a trauma assessment. SS N indicates, he probably should have. Surveyor asked SS N if she is aware R11 has a significant history of childhood abuse. SS N indicates, no. Surveyor asked SS N since it is noted that R11 told a staff member about his history of abuse, would she have expect to have been notified. SS N indicates, yes. Surveyor asked if SS N has access to residents' psychiatric notes. SS N indicates she probably has access. Surveyor asked SS N who is responsible for reviewing the psychiatric notes. SS N indicates DON B and ADON K are usually the ones who check in with residents after appointments. Surveyor asked SS N why it would be important for her to be aware of a resident's history of trauma. SS N indicates because she would be able to have a trauma care plan, assist the resident with things they need, and provide trauma-informed care. Surveyor asked SS N if she thinks R11's history of trauma could be playing a part into R11's mood and behavior. SS N indicates, yes.
On 4/10/25 at 8:53 AM, Surveyor interviewed DON B and NHA A. Surveyor asked DON B if all residents should have a trauma assessment completed. DON B indicates she does not know. NHA indicates all residents should have a trauma assessment completed on admission. Surveyor asked if DON B was aware R11 had a significant history of childhood abuse. DON B indicates she was not until he went to his psychiatrist appointment. Surveyor asked DON B if SS N should be aware of R11's significant history of childhood abuse. DON B indicates, yes. Surveyor asked DON B if a resident makes suicidal ideation statements, should a progress note be written. DON B indicates, yes, based on orders. Surveyor asked DON B and NHA A if a resident makes a suicidal ideation statement, should a PHQ-9 be reassessed. NHA indicates, yes.
Facility failed to provide sufficient and appropriate medically related social services that met R11's needs.
Example 2:
R55 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that include, in part: centrilobular emphysema (chronic lung disease that causes damage to the upper lobes of the lungs), chronic respiratory failure with hypercapnia (high levels of carbon dioxide in blood due to respiratory failure), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, dysphagia (difficulty swallowing), heart failure, unspecified intellectual disabilities, Barrett's esophagus without dysplasia (tissue lining of esophagus changes due to long-term irritation causing symptoms of difficulty swallowing, heartburn, and chest pain), and anxiety disorder.
R55s most recent Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), with Assessment Reference Date of 2/12/25, states that R55 has a BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) of 13 out of 15, indicating that R55 is cognitively intact. Section D indicates the R55 never has self-isolating behaviors.
R55's Level 2 Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) evaluation summary indicates that a nursing facility may choose to admit or retain R55 because it was decided that R55 is appropriate for nursing facility placement.
R55's Comprehensive Care Plan indicates, in part:
Problem: Impaired psychosocial well-being: resident has expressed/displayed that doing favorite activity is not important to them. Start date: 8/16/24.
(Of note: Interventions for this problem are not individualized to the resident's favorite activity, which is watching his favorite TV shows as indicated by the care plan.)
Problem: Resident has expressed suicidal comments and thoughts. Start date: 9/30/24.
.Approach: Social worker contacted Hospice in regard to resident's request for additional social interaction. Start date: 11/25/24 .
R55's Hospital Document entitled, Discharge Summary, dated 8/5/24, states, in part: . Primary Discharge Diagnosis . Hemoptysis (coughing up blood) . Pneumonia (infection of the air sacs in the lungs) .
R55's Hospital Document entitled, History and Physical - UW Hospital Medicine Survey, dated 7/14/14, states, in part: . Update: Per nursing, patient had informed them of thoughts of self harm several weeks ago but no active thoughts of SI (suicidal ideation). Will continue to monitor and readdress with patient and family while inpatient .
On 8/12/24, R55's PHQ-9 (Depression Scale) score was 0 indicating minimal depression.
(Of note: This PHQ-9 was completed as part of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) process and was not conducted as a result of any of R55's behaviors.).
On 9/29/24 at 2:05 PM, a Progress Note is written by LPN AAA (Licensed Practical Nurse), that states: [Resident Name] stated this shift he wished he would die. He stated he is tired, in pain, has difficulty breathing and eating and is ready to be done. He asked the GPT nurse if there is anything she could give him for this. She did assess him for pain and administered Morphine per PRN orders. This nurse approached [Resident Name] and offered some follow up conversation. [Resident Name] does not have a plan, he stated he would not do anything at this time. He reiterated that he is tired and it's hard for him to do anything. He said he was feeling sorry for himself. It's noted that [Resident Name] is on hospice, he is end of life and comfort is his goal at this time. He was tearful and appreciative of the talk. He agreed to rest and let the morphine kick in. This nurse updated the ADON and the on-call MD. Intervention at this time is to initiate 15-minute checks for his safety, continue to offer PRN's for his comfort and re-evaluate with clinical team in the morning 9/30/2024. On call MD [Doctor's Name] in agreement with this plan. TP charting initiated. [Hospice Name] on call Nurse also updated.
(Of note: Surveyor conducted record review and was unable to find a PHQ-9 that was conducted as a result of the R11 making this statement).
On 9/30/24, R55's Comprehensive Care Plan was updated to include the problem and interventions for R55 expressing suicidal comments and thoughts.
(Of note: R55's initial care plan had the same interventions as R11's (above).)
On 11/25/24 at 12:48 PM, a Progress Note is written by SS N, that states: The writer contacted Hospice to have additional social interaction. Writer also encouraged resident to join activities of interest in common area with others. Writer spoke with activities director to have him added to 1:1 activity for more social interaction. Care plan updated.
On 12/9/24 at 1:51 PM, a Progress Note is written that states: Removed knife that was bungee corded to walker during am (day) shift due to safety concerns and prior suicidal comments. Placed in top right drawer of med (medication) cart.
(Of note: Surveyor conducted record review and was unable to find a PHQ-9 that was conducted as a result of the R11 possessing a knife).
On 12/15/24 at 2:16 PM, a Progress Note is written by LPN O that states, in part: Staff reported observing bright red blood coming from resident's urethra during toileting. Staff reported she noted a bloody wooden part of a Q-tip on resident's bedside table. While resident still sitting on toilet, this writer inspected resident's penis, noted scant amount of pink drainage coming from urethra. see, it's bleeding, I don't know what happened, but it's bleeding. Denied pain/tenderness. Denied knowledge of cause. Denied inserting any kind of object into urethra. During conversation with resident, resident insisted the bloody wooden stick was from after he touched his penis, got blood on in his hand then touched the wooden stick. Denied inserting the wooden stick into his pennis/urethra. Discarded the bloody wooden Q-tip piece. Found other sharp objects on top of resident's bedside table and in top drawer. All visible sharp objects in resident's room were removed and placed inside a ziplock bag with resident's name, the bag is locked in unit 100 medcart . When asked if resident had any thoughts of hurting himself, resident responded, I can't do what I want to do. When asked what it was that he wanted to do, resident responded like, I want to go outside but I can't. 15 minute checks implemented. Nu further unsafe actions noted this afternoon .
(Of note: Surveyor conducted record review and was unable to find a PHQ-9 that was conducted as a result of R11 conducting self-harm behaviors and statements).
On 1/19/25 at 11:11 PM, a Progress Note is written that states, in part: resident was seen wrapping silverware in a napkin. He was unaware I was in room. he then placed in top drawer. He took all meds (medications) very pleasant. I did remove silverware. He then started [sic] to swear and throw other items .
(Of note: Surveyor conducted record review and was unable to find a PHQ-9 that was conducted as a result of R11 intentionally hiding sharp objects).
On 4/10/25 at 9:59 AM, a Progress Note is written by RN M that was edited at 2:09 PM, that states, in part: Room check complete. Staff found a pair of safety scissors and these were removed. This afternoon, around 1330 (1:30 PM), resident became upset that his scissors were taken and stated that if he had them [sic], he would use them like this and proceeded to hold his hand up to his throat. Nursing assistant that was with resident stayed with him and made sure he was safe . This writer asked what resident would use scissors for, resident replied that he just wanted to cut out my papers coloring books [sic] because sometimes they don't fit in my binder. I would never cut myself or hurt myself like they do on TV. Resident denied having thoughts/ideation of self harm or having a plan .
(Of note: Surveyor conducted record review and was unable to find a PHQ-9 that was conducted as a result of R11 making these statements or related behaviors).
On 4/14/25 at 11:18 AM, Surveyor interviewed SS N. Surveyor asked SS N if a trauma assessment was completed for R55. SS N indicates, no. Surveyor asked SS N if a trauma assessment should have been completed. SS N indicates she probably should have done one but moving forward they will be doing one for every resident upon admission. Surveyor asked SS N why she wrote the note on 11/25/24 regarding R55 needing additional social interaction. SS N indicates she doesn't know why she wrote the note, but maybe it was related to the family reporting R55 was bored and that he was spending a lot of time in his room. Surveyor asked SS N if this information should be contained in the note. SS N indicates, probably for this reason. Surveyor asked if a PHQ-9 was conducted after this note was written. SS N indicates it was not, but that he scored a zero on 11/12/24. Surveyor asked SS N if a PHQ-9 was conducted after R55 was found with a knife bungee-corded to his walker. SS N indicates, no. Surveyor asked SS N if a PHQ-9 should have been conducted at that time. SS N indicates, probably. Surveyor asked SS N if she recalls any of the details surrounding R55 being found with a knife bungee corded to his walker. R55 indicates it was a pocketknife and she believed it belonged to a relative who had passed away.
On 4/14/25 at 11:59 AM, Surveyor interviewed DON B. Surveyor asked DON B if the incident of finding R55 with a knife bungee corded to his walker was discussed at his care conference. DON B indicates, no. Surveyor asked DON B if a resident who has made suicidal statements and found with a knife, should that be included in a care conference. DON B indicates, yes. Surveyor asked DON B if she would expect that care conference conversation to be included in the care conference note. DON B indicates, yes. Surveyor asked DON B if she would expect the social worker to work with activities if there is a concern for additional social interaction. DON B indicates, yes, but that her guess is that it was a request for possible volunteers to assist with social interaction. Surveyor asked DON B if those volunteers are not available, would it be the facility's responsibility to provide additional social interaction. DON B indicates, yes. Surveyor asked DON B if she would expect the social worker to write a note about what prompted her request for additional social interaction. DON B indicates, yes. Surveyor asked if this could be a sign of worsening depression. DON B indicates, yes. Surveyor asked DON B what nursing staff could have done had they been aware of R55's increased need for social interaction. DON B indicates, staff could offer more 1:1 in house interactions, encouraged activities, and provide additional activities of choice.
Facility failed to provide sufficient and appropriate medically related social services that met R55's needs.
CONCERN
(D)
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 interview and record review the facility did not provide food prepared in a form designed to meet individual needs for ...
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 food prepared in a form designed to meet individual needs for 1 of 1 sampled resident (R48).
The facility has not reassessed R48's swallowing ability after she was unable to wear her lower denture due to an abscess to ensure she receives food prepared in a form that meets her needs.
As evidenced by
The facility's policy, Diet Order, revised 1/2025, documents, in part, as follows: During the course of the resident's stay, any diet change as recommended by the Dietician, Diet Technician, Speech Language Pathologist, or Nurse should be communicated to the attending M.D. (Medical Doctor). for consideration. Nursing may downgrade a diet texture temporarily for example: oral problems, difficulty swallowing/chewing, mouth sores, etc.
R48 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including, but not limited to, as follows: diabetes mellitus type 2 (a long-term condition in which the body has trouble controlling blood sugar which also impedes wound healing), anxiety (feelings of worry or nervousness), and bipolar disorder (a disorder associated with mood swings ranging from depressive lows to manic highs).
R48's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] indicates R48 has a Brief interview of Mental Status (BIMS) of 15 out of 15 indicating she is cognitively intact. R48 is her own decision maker.
On 3/10/25, R48's physician examined R48 noting, in part, as follows: .res c/o (complained of) of cold sore in mouth. She has Oragel next to her which she has been applying. She is not sure this is helping much. As I examine her mouth takes out her lower denture and has multiple food products that have gotten stuck underneath between her gum and her denture.
On 3/24/25 R48 was seen by Dentist. The Dentist documented the following:
Type of Exam: limited
Rason for visit: mass on lower lip
Diagnosis: pt (patient) would need a biopsy for proper diagnosis
Recommended treatment: referral to oral surgeon
Reason for visit: patient has traumatized soft tissue by the implant on #27-inner soft tissue of lower right lip indentation by the implant - implants on #22, 27 were placed by OS (Oral Surgeon) at (facility name).
Diagnosis: patient's implants on bottom were displacing her tissue causing a hole and irritation on the lip and tissue.
Recommended treatment: referred to OS (Oral Surgeon) for evaluation, patient was prescribed pain medication and antibiotic.
On 3/6/25 RD G (Registered Dietician) documented the following: R48's Nutritional Status includes the following: Diet per doctor's orders. CHO (consistent carbohydrate diet used to manage blood sugar levels) with whole/thin textures. Provide adaptive equipment in line with therapy recommendations.
On 3/25/25, the Nurse Practitioner assessed R48, documenting, in part, as follows: .Area of concerns on the inner lower lip. She has no upper or lower teeth. She does have 2 metal spikes noted in the lower gumline. Abscessed area is right next to 1 of the spikes. Patient unable to wear dentures. Abscess has ruptured.
On 4/7/25 at 10:00 AM, Surveyor spoke to R48. R48 stated she has an abscess from her lower denture. R48 stated she has not been wearing her dentures for approximately 5-6 weeks. R48 stated the abscess is painful. R48 added, she knows what she can and cannot eat.
On 4/8/25 at 4:57 PM, Surveyor spoke with DON B (Director of Nursing). Surveyor asked DON B, is R48 having any issues in her mouth. DON B stated, she was and she will need to look for a diagnosis from the physician. DON B stated, R48 declines to wear her dentures as the metal part was rubbing on her lip, that's how R48 explained it to DON B. DON B stated, R48 followed up with the dentist and she is not sure what came of that. DON B stated, she will obtain the documentation that is not scanned into R48's medical record.
On 4/9/25 at 8:35 AM, Surveyor spoke with RN M (Registered Nurse). Surveyor asked RN M, does R48 have any areas of concern in her mouth. RN M stated, R48 has pain to the right lower gum, R48's dentures are not fitting right or rubbing. RN M stated, she is receiving an antibiotic, and went out to a couple appointments. RN M added, R48 is using Magic Mouthwash, salt water rinse, and a lidocaine viscous she is almost constantly c/o pain to that area.
On 4/9/25 at 10:35 AM, Surveyor spoke with RD G (Registered Dietician). Surveyor asked RD G, does R48 have areas of concern in her mouth. RD G stated, I'll have to look at her more closely. Surveyor asked RD G, if a resident is unable to wear dentures what do you expect staff to do. RD G stated, staff should let culinary staff know along with RM GGG (Rehab Manager). RD G stated, RM GGG will delegate to the appropriate staff. Surveyor asked RD G, has anybody notified you that R48 is unable to wear her lower dentures. RD G stated, no, that I will need to look into [sic]. Surveyor asked RD G, if a resident is unable to wear dentures what are the concerns you would have. RD G stated, she wants to make sure the resident can chew their foods appropriately to make sure we're meeting them where they're at. Surveyor asked RD G, is this a choking risk. RD G stated, That is a potential.
On 4/9/25 10:57 AM and 11:45 AM, Surveyor spoke with RD G (Registered Dietician) and RM GGG (Rehab Manager). RM GGG stated she spoke with R48 two times this week regarding her chewing ability specifically with her pain. RM GGG stated, she asked R48 if pain has impacted her chewing. Surveyor asked RD G, what dates did you speak with R48. RM GGG stated, she spoke with R48 on 4/7/25 and 4/8/25. RM GGG stated, because R48 stated she was not having any issues she did not document this. RM GGG, stated, she should have documented the conversations. RM GGG stated, R48 told her she was not having any issues and did not want to eat baby food (pureed). RM GGG did not document any conversations with R48.
On 4/10/25 at 8:30 AM, Surveyor spoke with R48. R48 stated, she is currently taking an antibiotic and will be seeing the Oral Surgeon on 4/14/25. R48 stated she would liked her food minced or cut in small pieces so it is easier for her to eat. Surveyor asked R48, is she is getting enough to eat. R48 stated, yes. R48 stated, on 4/9/25 at approximately 4:30 PM, RM GGG (Rehab Manager) discussed the form of food she would like to eat. Surveyor asked R48, have any staff member talked to you before yesterday about the form of food you would like to eat since having this issue with your dentures/abscess. R48 stated, No, I'm glad something is finally going to be done. R48 stated, the facility is going to have to do something because she's sick of it (abscess and difficulty eating). R48 added, I'm finally getting some help, thank you so much.
On 4/10/25 at 1:30 PM, Surveyor spoke with DON B (Director of Nursing). Surveyor asked DON B, given that R48 has an abscess in her mouth and is unable to wear her lower dentures, would you expect staff to reassess R48's ability to chew and swallow her food safely. DON B stated, yes. Surveyor asked DON B, would you expect RM GGG (Rehab Manager) to document conversations with R48. DON B stated, yes. Surveyor stated, R48 requested that her food be cut up in small pieces to make it easier for her to eat. DON B stated, as soon as we are done talking she will pass this information along.
Staff were aware that R48 had an abscess and was not able to wear her dentures, staff did not re-assess R48 to ensure R48 was provided food prepared in a form designed to meet her needs.
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, interview and record review the facility did not ensure the environment remained free of hazards for 4 of 4 supplemental residents (R12, R66, R68 and R70) who smoke.
R12 was obse...
Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview and record review the facility did not ensure the environment remained free of hazards for 4 of 4 supplemental residents (R12, R66, R68 and R70) who smoke.
R12 was observed outside smoking, on the sidewalk in the front of the facility, with no receptacle to dispose of her cigarette butts in the area.
R66 was observed outside smoking, on the patio in the smoking area, with a small receptacle to dispose his cigarette butts. In the same area was a plastic garbage can with a large amount of cigarette butts in it.
R68 and R70 are indicated as being smokers and the facility does not have an appropriate receptacle for smoking material to be disposed into.
Evidenced by:
The facility Smoking Policy, reviewed 01/2024, includes, in part, the following: Purpose: To offer a safe environment to all residents in the facility. 15.2 Procedure. 8. All smoking materials will be disposed of in the proper designated containers that meet NFPA (National Fire Protection Association) standards.
On 4/9/25 at 7:00 AM Surveyor observed R12 sitting in her wheelchair, on the sidewalk in the front of the facility smoking a cigarette. There was no receptacle to dispose of her cigarette butts safely in the area. In addition, the ground was covered with used cigarette butts on both sides of the sidewalk.
On 4/9/25 at 11:18 am Surveyor interviewed R12. Surveyor asked R12 where she disposes of her cigarette butts when she smokes on the sidewalk in the front of the facility. R12 stated since there is no receptacle by the sidewalk or in the front of the facility she throws them on the ground by the sidewalk.
On 4/9/25 at 3:09 PM Surveyor observed R66 outside the facility, on the patio, under the gazebo, in the smoking area, smoking a cigarette. Surveyor asked R66 where he disposed of his cigarette butts. R66 stated he disposed of his cigarette butts in the ash receptacle on the table. R66 stated when the ash receptacle was full it was emptied into the garbage can by the gazebo. Surveyor observed a large plastic garbage can with garbage and a large amount of cigarette butts in it.
Surveyor asked R66 if he could smoke any other place. R66 stated he went out front of the facility on the sidewalk to smoke.
On 4/9/25 at 11:01 AM Surveyor interviewed MR FF (Medical Records). Surveyor asked MR FF who were on the smoking list. MR FF showed Surveyor a smoking list, that was hanging at the nurse's station. R12's, R66's, R68's and R70's names were on the list. MR FF stated these were the 4 residents who went out to smoke on the patio area during smoking times and in addition R12, R66 and R68 also were allowed to smoke out front of the facility on the sidewalk since they were independent smokers and were able to sign themselves out of the facility.
On 4/9/25 at 4:55 PM Surveyor interviewed NHA A (Nursing Home Administrator). Surveyor asked NHA A if there was a proper designated receptacle that met NFPA standards for residents to dispose their smoking materials in on the patio? NHA A stated he believed there was a small receptacle. Surveyor asked NHA A if he was aware that the small receptacle was disposed of in the plastic garbage. NHA A stated he was not aware. Surveyor asked NHA A if a plastic garbage can was a safe receptacle. NHA A stated no it was not a safe smoking material receptacle. Surveyor asked NHA A where residents were to dispose of their smoking materials when they smoked in front of the facility on the sidewalk. NHA A stated there was no place for residents to dispose of smoking materials when smoking in front of the facility on the sidewalk. NHA A stated there should be a receptacle for residents to dispose of smoking materials when smoking in the front of the facility on the sidewalk.
R12, R66, R68 and R70 do not have a proper receptacle to dispose of smoking materials while smoking outside at the facility.
CONCERN
(E)
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** Example 3
R46 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. R46 was placed on an air mattress for risk of skin breakdown. On 4/7/25 at...
Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Example 3
R46 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. R46 was placed on an air mattress for risk of skin breakdown. On 4/7/25 at 2:40 PM Surveyor observed R46's bed with an air mattress and enabler bars on both sides of R46's bed.
Example 4
R25 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. R25 was placed on an air mattress for complaints of pain related to osteoarthritis. On 4/7/25 at 1:45 PM Surveyor observed R25's bed with an air mattress and enabler bars on both sides of R25's bed.
On 4/10/25 at 1:21 PM Surveyor interviewed RNC C (Regional Nurse Consultant). Surveyor asked RNC C for evidence that R46's and R25's enabler bars and air mattresses were monitored to ensure there was no gap between the mattress and enabler bars. RNC C stated she did not have evidence the enabler bars and air mattresses were monitored for a gap. RNC C stated the facility should monitor the enabler bars and air mattresses to ensure there is no gap.
Example 5
R54 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Upon admission, R54 was placed on am air mattress for pressure injury reduction.
On 4/9/25 at 8:35 AM, Surveyor observed R54 to have an air mattress with an enabler bar to the right side of the air mattress. R54 stated the enabler bar helps her to get out of bed. Surveyor observed a gap of approximately 1 1/2 inches between the air mattress and enabler bar.
Example 6
R49 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Upon admission R49 was placed on an air mattress for pressure injury reduction.
On 4/9/25 at 8:38 AM, Surveyor observed R49 to have an air mattress with bilateral enabler bars. Surveyor observed a gap of approximately 1 inch between the air mattress and enabler bar.
On 4/09/25 at 2:48 PM, Surveyor interviewed MA F (Maintenance Assistant) who stated that maintenance was not measuring the gap between the enabler bars and the mattresses as far as I'm aware. It should be noted the facility's maintenance supervisor no longer works at the facility. MA F was not able to find any documentation on the monitoring of this gap between the enabler bars and the mattress.
The facility was unable to provide any manufacturer documentation regarding the installation of the enabler bars or any manufacturer recommendations on how to monitor, measure and adjust the enabler bars for appropriate fit with air mattresses.
On 4/10/25 and again on 4/14/25, Surveyors requested any information or documentation as to if and how the enabler bars were being monitored for safety and/or measuring the gap between the air mattress and enabler bars for proper fit. No documentation was provided.
R73, R46, R54, R25 and R49 all have an air mattress with enabler bars/bedrails. The facility did not complete all requirements as listed in F700 of the State Operations Manual prior to installing bed rails/enabler bars.
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to have a system in place to assess for risk of entrapment between the mattress and side rail and failed to identify and recognize that the use of side rails with an air mattress increases the risk for entrapment for 3 of 3 sampled residents (R73, R46 and R25) and 2 of 2 supplemental Residents (R49 and R54) reviewed for bed rails.
R73, R46, R54, R25 and R49 all have an air mattress with enabler bars/bedrails. The facility did not complete all requirements as listed in F700 of the State Operations Manual prior to installing bed rails/enabler bars.
The facility failed to complete a safety/gap test with the air mattress and provide written documentation of ongoing monitoring of bed rails.
Findings include
According to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), The FDA recommends the following actions to prevent deaths and injuries from entrapment and falls from adult portable bed rails: .
When installing and using bed rails:
*Confirm that the age, size, and weight of the person using the bed rails are appropriate for the bed rails used.
*Install bed rails using the manufacturer's instructions to ensure a proper fit.
*Ensure that the safety strap or bed rail retention system is permanently attached to the rail and secured to the bed frame according to the manufacturer's instructions.
*Regularly inspect the mattress and bed rails for gaps and areas of possible entrapment. *Regardless of mattress width, length, and depth, the bed frame, bed rail and mattress should leave no gap wide enough to entrap a patient's head or body.
*Use caution when using bed rails with a soft mattress as this may increase risk of entrapment between the mattress and bed rail.
*Be aware that gaps can be created by movement or compression of the mattress which may be caused by patient weight, patient movement or bed position, or by using a specialty mattress, such as an air mattress, mattress pad or waterbed.
*Check bed rails regularly to make sure they are still installed correctly as rails may shift or loosen over time.
*When in doubt, call the manufacturer of the bed rails for assistance.
https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/adult-portable-bed-rail-safety/recommendations-consumers-and-caregivers-about-adult-portable-bed-rails
Example 1
R73 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Upon admission, R73 was placed on am air mattress for pressure injury reduction.
On 4/7/25 at 10:21 AM, Surveyor observed R73 in his bed. Surveyor confirmed the air mattress was in use and observed enabler bars on either side of R73's bed.
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0804
(Tag F0804)
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 each resident receives food and drink that i...
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 receives food and drink that is palatable and at a safe and appetizing temperature. This has the potential to affect more than a minimal number of residents residing at the facility.
Residents voiced concerns with hot foods being served cold. (R45, R25, R14, and R11)
3 of 3 test trays were observed to not be served at desirable temperatures.
Evidenced by:
The facility Resident Council Minutes included, in part, the following:
3/3/25: Dietary: resident specific requests. Note there was no further explanation what the requests were.
12/2/24: Cold food, has improved.
11/4/24: Food coming cold.
Example 1
R45 was admitted to the facility 11/8/24. R45's most recent MDS (Minimum Data Set) with an ARD (Assessment Reference Date) of 2/14/25 indicates R45 is cognitively intact.
On 4/7/25 at 2:10 PM Surveyor interviewed R45 about his meals. R45 stated the food was often served cold and tasted awful. R45 stated he has told multiple staff on numerous occasions with no changes.
Example 2
R25 was admitted on [DATE]. R25's most recent MDS (Minimum Data Set) with an ARD (Assessment Reference Date) of 3/7/25 indicates R25 is cognitively intact.
On 4/10/25 at 12:15 PM Surveyor interviewed R25 about her meals. R25 stated the food and coffee were served cold. R25 also stated she would like to have meat with her breakfast meals, has asked for meat for breakfast but not received any.
Example 3
On 4/8/25 at 8:15 AM Surveyor received the last tray served on the 400 unit hall cart. The following foods and drinks were served as part of the meal. Scrambled eggs temped at 96.1, toast cool and soggy. The scrambled eggs and toast were cold and not palatable.
On 4/8/25 at 12:32 PM Surveyor received the last tray served on the 200 unit hall cart. The following foods and drinks were served as part of the meal. Carrots temped at 108 degrees and coffee temped at 103.6. The carrots and coffee were cold and not palatable.
On 4/9/25 at 8:34 AM Surveyor received the last tray served on the 200 unit hall cart. The following foods and drinks were served as part of the meal. Scrambled eggs temped at 116, Biscuits and gravy temped at 121, and coffee temped at 102.6. The scrambled eggs, biscuits and gravy and coffee were cold and not palatable.
On 4/9/25 at 10:12 AM Surveyor interviewed DM FFF (Dietary Manager). Surveyor explained the findings from the test trays to DM FFF. DM FFF stated foods and drinks served should be at the appropriate temperatures and palatable.
Example 4
R14 was admitted to the facility on [DATE].
On 4/7/25 at 10:41 AM, R14 stated to Surveyor that the scrambled eggs at the facility were terrible and that they were often cold.
Example 5
R11 was admitted to the facility on [DATE].
R11's most recent Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), with Assessment Reference Date of 1/9/25, states that R11 has a BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) of 15 out of 15, indicating that R11 is cognitively intact.
On 4/7/25 at 10:10 AM, Surveyor interviewed R11. Surveyor asked R11 about the food served by the facility. R11 states the food is cold when he receives it.
Residents voiced concerns regarding palatability of the food, 3 or 3 rest trays were not palatable as food was cold.
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0838
(Tag F0838)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on interview and record review, the facility did not ensure the facility wide assessment developed by the facility included all relevant details to ensure the facility provided care and services...
Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview and record review, the facility did not ensure the facility wide assessment developed by the facility included all relevant details to ensure the facility provided care and services to residents to meet their individual needs within the facility's identified resources. This has the potential to affect all 76 residents residing in the facility.
The facility assessment does not indicate:
- How many residents the facility can safely care for with suicidal ideation
- How many residents the facility can safely care for with PTSD or a history of trauma
- How many staff members are required to safely care for residents with suicidal ideation
- How many staff members are required to safely care for residents with PTSD or a history of trauma
- Staff training required to care for residents with suicidal ideation and/or PTSD or a history of trauma
This is evidenced by:
The facility's policy titled Facility Assessment, dated 1/2025 states in part: Policy: This facility conducts and documents a facility-wide assessment to determine what resources are necessary to care for our residents competently . Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines: 1. The facility assessment will, at a minimum, address or include: a. The facility's resident population, including but not limited to: i. Number of residents and the facility's capacity; ii. The care required by the resident population, using evidence-based, data-driven methods that consider the types of diseases, conditions, physical and behavioral health needs, cognitive disabilities, overall acuity and other pertinent facts that are present within that population, consistent with and informed by individual resident assessments; iii. The staff competencies and skillsets that are necessary to provide the level and types of care needed for the resident population; . b. The facility's resources, including but not limited to; . iii. Services provided, such as physical therapy, pharmacy, behavioral health and specific rehabilitation therapies; iv. All personnel, including managers, nursing and other direct care staff (both employees and those who provide services under contract), and volunteers, as well as their education and/or training and any competencies related to resident care . 3. The facility will use the facility assessment to: a. Inform staffing decisions to ensure that there are a sufficient number of staff with the appropriate competencies and skill sets necessary to care for its residents' needs as identified through resident assessments and plans of care. b. Consider staffing needs for the facility and adjust as necessary based on changes to its resident population and needs . 8. Based on the assessment of resident characteristics, the facility will determine what care/services, staff competencies, and staffing needs are required to meet the needs of our residents. This will be compared to the specific care/services, including by contract, and training we provide. Action plans will be implemented as necessary . 10. The facility assessment will be reviewed and updated as necessary and at least annually .
Surveyor reviewed the facility assessment, dated 8/2/24, to determine the need for staff with skills and competencies in order to provide nursing and related behavioral health services to maintain resident safety and psychosocial well-being.
.Purpose
The purpose of the assessment is to determine what resources are necessary to care for residents competently during both day-to-day operations and emergencies. The use this assessment to make decisions about your direct care staff needs, as well as your capabilities to provide services to the residents at our facility. Using a competency-based approach focuses on ensuring that each resident is provided care that allows the resident to maintain or attain their highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being.
The intent of the facility is for the facility to evaluate its resident population and identify the resources needed to provide the necessary person-centered care and services the residents require.
The assessment is organized in three parts:
1.
Resident profile including numbers, diseases/conditions, physical and cognitive disabilities, acuity, and ethnic/cultural/religious factors that impact care
2.
Services and care offered based on Resident needs (includes types of care your Resident population requires)
3.
Facility resources needed to provide competent care for Residents, including staff, staffing plan, staff training/education and competencies, education and training, physical environment and building needs, and other resources, including agreements with third parties, health information technology resources and systems, a facility-based and community-based risk assessment, and other information that you may choose
Part 1 of the facility assessment, titled, Our Resident Profile with sub-heading, Diseases/Conditions, physical and cognitive disabilities indicates that the facility accepts residents with Psychiatric/Mood Disorders such as: Depression, Impaired Cognition, Mental Disorder, Bipolar Disorder (Mania/Depression), Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), Anxiety Disorder, Schizophrenia, Insomnia, Mood Adjustment Disorder, and Behavior that needs interventions. The facility is also able to accept residents with neurological disorders such as Alzheimer's Disease, Non-Alzheimer's Dementia, Down Syndrome, Traumatic Brain Injuries, Autism, Huntington's Disease, Tourette's Syndrome, and Cerebral Palsy.
Part 2 of the facility assessment, titled, Services and Care We Offer Based on our Residents' Needs, indicates that the facility can provide care for residents with mental health and behavior needs, to include: managing the medical conditions and medication-related issues causing psychiatric symptoms and behavior, identify and implement interventions to help support individuals with issues such as dealing with anxiety, care of someone with cognitive impairment, care of individuals with depression, trauma/PTSD, other psychiatric diagnoses, and intellectual or developmental disabilities. This section also indicates that the facility can provide care for residents with a need for psycho/social/spiritual support, to include: finding out what resident's preferences and routines are, what makes a good day for the resident, what upsets him or her and incorporate this information into the care planning process, making sure staff care for the resident have this information, recording and discussing treatment and care preferences, supporting resident's emotional and mental well-being, supporting helpful coping mechanisms, providing opportunities for social activities and life enrichment, and identifying hazards and risks for residents.
In the section titled, Contingency Planning for Staff, the facility assessment indicates in case of an emergency event requiring additional staffing: the administrator will direct available department heads to contact available staff to elicit ability to work, non-nursing staff will complete tasks to alleviate burden from nursing staff as allowed without certification or license, contact company affiliated facilities to determine availability to assist, contact the Regional Director of Operations to approve use of current company agency staffing contracts and offer additional incentives for staff to pick up open shifts such as bonuses.
In the section titled, Staff training/education and competencies the facility assessment indicates various education, training, and competencies that are necessary for staff to provide the level and types of support and care needed for the facility's resident population. Trauma informed care is listed under the training section. Under annual competencies, the facility assessment indicates person-centered care, including care planning, resident and family education about treatments and medications, along with caring for residents with mental and psychosocial disorders, as well as residents with a history of trauma and/or post-traumatic stress disorder, and implementing non-pharmacological interventions.
On 4/10/24 at 4:34 PM, Surveyor interviewed DON B (Director of Nursing). Surveyor asked DON B what behavioral health training has been provided to staff. DON B indicated she is unsure, but that she knows it is done at least annually. Surveyor asked DON B if she has enough staff
with the appropriate competencies to care for residents with mental health concerns. DON B indicated for 15-minute checks yes, but for 1:1s we find the staff.
On 4/14/25 at 11:59 AM, Surveyor interviewed DON B. Surveyor asked DON B how many residents the facility can safely care for with suicidal ideation. DON B indicated she does not know. Surveyor asked DON B how many residents the facility can safely care for with PTSD or a history of trauma. DON B indicated she does not know. Surveyor asked DON B if this information should be a part of the facility assessment. DON B indicated yes. Surveyor asked DON B, what skills and competencies are needed to effectively care for residents with suicidal ideation and/or PTSD or a history of trauma. DON B indicated, the training the facility held over the weekend along with effective communication. Surveyor asked DON B how staff are trained to provide non-pharmacological interventions to residents with suicidal ideation and/or PTSD or a history of trauma. DON B indicated, the training the facility held over the weekend and the interventions are listed on care plans. Surveyor asked DON B if prior to this survey, there was a process in place to train staff on these topics. DON B indicated no, but care plans were updated with suicidal ideation and intentions. Surveyor asked DON B where can staff find appropriate interventions for each resident who has experienced or is experiencing suicidal ideation and/or PTSD or a history of trauma. DON B indicated the resident care plans. Surveyor asked DON B if this information should be included in the facility assessment. DON B indicated yes. Surveyor asked DON B, what process do you have in place to ensure staff competency in the care of residents with suicidal ideation, PTSD, or a history of trauma. DON B indicated the facility did not have one but moving forward the facility will have a process to ensure everyone, including new hires, are trained and follow-up with continuing education. Surveyor asked DON B if she made observations of staff providing 15-minute checks, 1:1 observation, person-centered interventions such as assessing the room for sharp objects. DON B indicated she was for 15-minute checks. Surveyor asked DON B if she makes observations of the staff ability to communicate and interact with residents. DON B indicated yes. Surveyor asked DON B if any of those observations are documented. DON B indicated no.
On 4/14/25 at 1:54 PM, Surveyor interviewed RNC C (Registered Nurse Consultant). Surveyor asked RNC C how many residents the facility can safely care for with suicidal ideation. RNC C indicated the facility staff has not had a chance to meet regarding residents with these needs, but that she will be reviewing all future referrals to the facility. Surveyor asked RNC C if this information be a part of the facility assessment. RNC C indicated that giving a specific number is not always accurate for who you actually have in house, and that the facility does not have an actual number.
The facility assessment did not determine what resources were necessary to care for residents with suicidal ideations and behavioral health needs. The facility assessment did not address the number of residents and the facility's resident capacity. The care required by the resident population, using evidence-based, data-driven methods for residents behavioral health needs, and other pertinent facts that are present within that population, consistent with and informed by individual resident assessments.
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
QAPI Program
(Tag F0867)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not identify issues to which quality assessment and assurance activities are necessary or develop and implement appropriate plans o...
Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not identify issues to which quality assessment and assurance activities are necessary or develop and implement appropriate plans of action to correct identified quality deficiencies. This is evidenced by the number and seriousness of citations during this recertification survey, which has the potential to affect all 76 residents who reside in the facility.
During this recertification survey from 4/7/25 through 4/14/25, the facility had multiple citations including F880 L, F741 J with 2 examples, F692 G, and F838 F. The facility Quality Assurance Committee has failed to identify key areas of deficient practice and implement action plans to correct these deficient practices.
1.
Sufficient/competent Staff-Behavioral Health Needs
2.
Infection Control
3.
Nutrition/hydration Status Maintenance
4.
Facility Assessment
This is evidenced by:
The facility policy titled, Quality Assurance and Performance Improvements (QAPI), last reviewed 1/2025, states in part .
Policy: It is the policy of facility to develop, implement, and maintain an effective, comprehensive, data-driven QAPI program that focuses on indicators of the outcomes of care and quality of life and addresses all the care and unique services the facility provides.
Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines:
2. The QAA (Quality Assessment and Assurance) Committee and a written QAPI (Quality Assessment and Assurance) Plan:
c. Develop and implement appropriate plans of action to correct identified quality deficiencies.
d. Regularly review and analyze data, including data collected under the QAPI program and data resulting from
drug regimen reviews, and act on available data to make improvements.
3. The QAPI plan will address the following elements:
a. Design and scope of the facility's QAPI program and QAA Committee responsibilities and actions.
c. Process addressing how the committee will conduct activities necessary to identify and current quality deficiencies. Key components of this process include, but are not limited to, the following:
i. Track and measuring performance.
ii. Establishing goals and thresholds for performance improvements.
iii. Identifying and prioritizing quality deficiencies.
iv. Systemically analyzing underlying causes of systemic quality deficiencies.
v. Developing and implementing corrective action or performance improvements activities.
vi. Monitoring and evaluating the effectiveness of corrective action/performance improvement activities and revising as needed.
d. A prioritization of program activities that focus on resident safety, health outcomes, autonomy, choice of quality of care, as well as, high-risk, high-volume, or problem-prone areas as identified in the facility assessment that
reflects the specific units, programs, departments and unique population the facility serves. The facility must also consider the incidence, prevalence, and severity of problems or potential problems identified.
f. Process to ensure care and services delivered meet accepted standards of quality.
Program Development Guidelines:
1. Program Design and Scope -
a. The QAPI program will be ongoing, comprehensive, and will address the full range of care and services provided by the facility.
b. At a minimum, the QAPI program will:
i. Address all systems of care and management practices.
iii. Utilize the best available evidence to define and measure indicators of quality and facility goals that reflect processes of care and facility operations that have been shown to be predictive of desired outcomes for residents of a Skilled Nursing Facility (SNF) or Nursing Facility (NF).
iv. Reflect the complexities, unique cares, and services the facility provides.
3. Program Feedback, Data System, and Monitoring -
a. The facility maintains procedures for feedback, data collections systems, and monitoring, including adverse event monitoring.
Example 1
Infection Control
The facility has been cited at F880 at the immediate jeopardy level during recertification survey on 4/14/25. The QAPI Team did not have a plan in place for increased audits or monitoring that interventions were in place and functioning appropriately to prevent the spread of infection during their GI (Gastrointestinal) outbreak in January 2025.
The facility had a GI outbreak in January that involved 49 residents and 37 staff. Upon interviewing the IP (infection preventionist), Surveyor learned that the facility did not identify the outbreak timely, did not complete a contemporaneous line listing of those residents and staff experiencing GI related s/sx (signs and symptoms), did not complete hand hygiene and PPE (personal protective equipment) audits, did not provide education to staff, or recognize and put an action plan in place when the outbreak spread to involve three quarters of their residents and staff. (Cross Reference F880)
The facility did not utilize the QAPI process during or after the outbreak to gain feedback, collect data, and monitor the infection prevention and control process. There was no evidence the facility identified deficient practices during or after the GI outbreak or analyzed the data to implement a process improvement for infection control/GI outbreaks.
Example 2
Sufficient/competent Staff-Behavioral Health Needs
The facility has been cited at F741 at the immediate jeopardy level during recertification survey on 4/14/25. The QAPI team did not have a plan in place for increased audits, education, or monitoring that interventions were in place and functioning appropriately in order to prevent residents from acting on suicidal ideations.
The facility had residents with suicidal ideation and the facility did not ensure that these residents did not have access to items that they could use to injure themselves, did not complete education with staff on suicidal ideations, did not update the residents' care plans, and did include in their facility assessment the ability to care for these residents. (Cross Reference F741)
The facility did not utilize the QAPI process to identify this high-risk resident population, identify risk factors related to the care for residents with suicidal ideations, monitor the care provided for these residents, ensure staff had the needed competencies and skillsets to care for these residents.
Example 3
Nutrition/hydration Status Maintenance
The facility has been cited at F671 at the harm level during recertification survey on 4/14/25. The QAPI team did not have a plan in place for increased audits, education, or monitoring that interventions were in place and functioning appropriately in order to maintain nutritional/hydration status.
The facility had a resident who required monitoring of their fluid and hydration status and the facility did not have a plan in place to ensure residents maintained their fluid and hydration intake. The facility did not complete education with staff, did not update the residents plan of care, and did not track the residents hydration status to prevent decline and hospitalization.
The facility did not utilize the QAPI process to identify this high-risk resident, identify risk factors related to the care for residents who require hydration monitoring, ensure staff had the needed competencies and skillsets to care for residents who are at risk for dehydration. The facility did not identify an at-risk resident despite multiple hospitalizations for dehydration.
Example 4
Facility Assessment
The facility has been cited at F838 at the no actual harm/widespread level during recertification survey on 4/14/25. The facility has not used the QAPI process to review their facility assessment and ensure all components of the facility assessment are included in their facility wide assessment including the diagnosis, type, resident number, and staff needed to care for certain populations within the facility. The facility assessment did not identify the competencies and number of staff needed to care for resident populations. If the facility assessment were reviewed in QAPI and the facility identified at risk areas within the facility the facility should have identified these areas as not being included in their facility assessment.
Despite the large GI outbreak in January the facility did not review and identify deficiencies needing improvement or take the outbreak to the QAPI team for review to help identify system failures needing improvement. The facility did not identify or take to the QAPI team concerns related to suicidal ideation even after one resident was able to harm himself with an item that was left in his room. The facility did not identify or take concerns of nutrition and hydration to the QAPI team when a resident was noted to have been hospitalized on more than one occasion for nutrition and hydration status.
On 4/14/25 at 4:11 PM, Surveyor interviewed NHA A (Nursing Home Administrator). Surveyor asked NHA A how the facility identifies areas of concern to be reviewed by the QAPI committee. NHA A stated, they are identified by chart review, trends in grievances, and staff. Surveyor asked NHA A how the facility decides what areas of concern they are going to work on in QAPI. NHA A stated, we decide to work on area that is trending on time. Last couple have been antipsychotics, before that, it was falls, and GI outbreak before that. Surveyor asked NHA A how the facility determines it is effective in making changes in QAPI. NHA A stated, continue to tract the trend. An example is in January we had 21 falls, we then looked at falls in February to see if the plan is working or if we need to adjust if not showing much improvement. Surveyor asked NHA A if the facility reviewed in QAPI the GI outbreak in January. NHA A indicated the facility did look at the outbreak. Surveyor asked NHA A if the QAPI team ever looked at residents for suicidal ideation following one resident injuring himself with a pair of scissors left in his room by staff. NHA A stated, they had a QAPI meeting before I started and can't say what was done before me but know we have not discussed them specifically.
The facility did not identify issues to which quality assessment and assurance activities are necessary or develop and implement appropriate plans of action to correct identified quality deficiencies or remain in compliance.