Failure to Prevent Drug Overdoses in Residents with Substance Use Disorder
Summary
The facility failed to identify potential risks and hazards for residents with a substance use disorder, develop and implement comprehensive and individualized care plans, and provide adequate supervision to prevent unintentional or intentional drug overdoses. This resulted in Immediate Jeopardy and actual harm/death when a resident overdosed by injecting opioid medications into his PICC line after obtaining a syringe from the trash bin on the facility medication cart. The resident had a history of intravenous illicit substance abuse prior to admission and had an intravenous line while at the facility. The resident was found unresponsive on the bathroom floor and subsequently passed away. A plastic jar with various pills, used syringes, and an unopened syringe were found in the resident's nightstand drawer after the incident. Another resident with a history of substance abuse disorder was found unresponsive in his room from a drug overdose. The resident had obtained medications from a former resident and had stored them in his room for several days prior to the incident. The resident was transferred to the emergency room with altered mental status and unresponsiveness due to an intentional opiate overdose. The toxicology report revealed the resident had overdosed on prescribed opiates and non-prescribed Fentanyl. The facility identified 26 residents with a history of substance use disorder, but failed to provide adequate supervision and individualized care plans for these residents. The facility's assessment revealed there were 15 residents with active or current substance use disorders for the first quarter of 2023. However, the facility did not implement interventions to address the residents' history of intravenous drug use. The facility also failed to perform mouth sweeps after medication administration and did not use tamper tape or locked caps for intravenous access lines. The facility's policies on medication storage and resident self-administration of medication were not adequately followed, leading to unsecured medications and drug paraphernalia being found in residents' rooms.
Removal Plan
- Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #100 called emergency medical services (EMS) for possible drug overdose for Resident #1. Police arrived shortly after EMS.
- LPN #100 notified Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) #102 that Resident #1 was being sent out for possible drug overdose. The LNHA was notified of Resident #1's possible drug overdose.
- The facility began their investigation into Resident #1's possible drug overdose. The LNHA spoke to the hospital and obtained an official police report. The LNHA interviewed Resident #67 (roommate of Resident #1) and Resident #29 about any information related to Resident #1's overdose.
- LNHA reviewed video footage of the front reception camera for any packages being delivered to the facility. This was completed due to information received from an interview with Resident #29. No evidence was observed on camera footage of any packages being delivered.
- The DON provided education on the new process changes to five registered nurses (RNs) and twelve LPNS on the following system changes: effective Immediately, all syringes will only be disposed of in a sharp container including all needles syringes and mouth sweeps will be performed on all resident's post medication administration. Any agency nurses would be educated by the DON prior to the start of their shift on the above system changes if needed.
- Physician orders were written by the DON for all residents to have mouth sweeps after administration of medication. These were to appear on the medication administration record (MAR) for the nurses to sign and validate that this task was performed.
- The DON completed writing physician orders for all residents to say, Crush medications if suspected 'cheeking' medications (concealing a medication in the mouth i.e. between the teeth and the cheek, to avoid swallowing it).
- An audit was initiated by the DON for the disposal of syringes into the appropriate sharp container and not in the medication trash bin on the side of the medication cart. This audit would be completed by the DON/Designee three times per week for two weeks then two times a week for two weeks and then weekly for eight weeks. Results of the audits to be reviewed in monthly QA for further need of monitoring and/or enhancement.
- An audit was initiated by the DON for mouth sweeps to ensure a mouth sweep was performed post medication administration. The DON/Designee would complete this audit three times a week for two weeks, then twice a week for two weeks, and then weekly for eight weeks. Results would be reviewed in monthly QA for further need of monitoring and or enhancement.
- The facility reviewed the care plans for all the residents to identify any resident who had a history of substance abuse were identified and to make sure those identified as having a history of substance abuse had an appropriate care plan in place.
- Resident #2 was noted to be unresponsive by LPN #130. Resident #2's pulse was 55 and oxygen saturation was 66. LPN #130 applied oxygen to Resident #2 per non-rebreather and then called 911. LPN #130 administered two doses of Narcan (a medication to treat narcotic overdose in an emergency) prior to Emergency Medical Services (EMS) arrival. Resident #2 was arousing but not yet oriented. Police arrived on the scene and searched Resident #2's room. No medications were found in Resident #2's room.
- EMS made the decision to transport Resident #2 to the ED.
- The DON verified with LPN #130 the last time Resident #2 had received a dose of his medication and the medication was crushed as physician ordered.
- DON drove to the hospital and interviewed Resident #2 about details of the potential drug overdose.
- Facility Department Heads completed a full house sweep of 18 resident's rooms; residents who were on the facility substance use disorder (SUD) program per the contract agreement. No illegal substances were found in this sweep of residents' rooms. These 18 residents had signed a contract allowing staff to conduct room searches because they were identified at high risk.
- The facility department heads conducted a room sweep for 24 residents not on the SUD program who gave permission for the room sweep when asked. No illegal substances were found.
- An emergency Quality Assessment and Performance Improvement (QAPI) meeting was held with facility department heads and Medical Director #500 to discuss Resident #2's overdose and the facility's plan of correction and steps taken toward an abatement plan.
- The DON completed education to the facility nurses for policy review of medication storage and for no medication/substance to be kept in the resident's rooms. Five RN's,12 LPNS, and 19 State tested Nursing Assistants (STNAs) were educated. All assigned agency nurses would be educated by the DON prior to the start of their shift on the facility medication storage policy and no medications/substances to be unsecured in resident rooms.
- The LHNA completed in person education for all 53 residents residing in the facility on this date related to the facility policy for medication storage in the facility and there were to be no medications/substances in resident rooms.
- The facility initiated random room audits to check for unsecured medications/substances five times a week times for two weeks, then three times a week for two weeks, then times a week for two weeks, and then weekly for six weeks. Results would be reviewed in monthly QA for further need of monitoring and/or enhancement. This audit will be performed by the DON/Designee.
- Onsite surveyor observations revealed the nurses disposed of syringes and needles in the sharp' container. There were no syringes observed in the medication trash bins.
- Surveyors noted there were no medications observed in Resident #2's room.
- Surveyor review of Resident #2 and #3's medication administration records (MAR) revealed nursing was completing mouth sweeps after medication administration.
- Surveyor review of the facility's audits for medication sweeps post medication administration, the disposal of syringes into the appropriate sharp container, and checks for unsecured medications/substances revealed no negative findings from the audits completed through this time.
Penalty
Resources
Below are regulatory guidelines relevant to this citation:
Failure to ensure effective fall alarms and supervision: two residents had Smart Caregiver monitoring devices set to LOW volume, and one resident's bed alarm did not alert staff before the resident was found on the floor after an unwitnessed fall. One resident had dementia, osteoporosis, prior TIA, and cognitive impairment and was fully dependent on staff, while staff also found that a second resident's bed and recliner alarms did not activate properly during testing.
Failure to assess the safety of perimeter mattresses for two residents. Both residents had severely impaired cognition and significant mobility limitations, and both care plans included use of a perimeter mattress to define the edges of the bed. However, their Mobility, Physical Device, and Fall Risk assessments lacked documentation of a perimeter/defined edge mattress assessment. Staff interviews showed inconsistent understanding of the required order, IDT review, engineering review, and safety assessment before use.
Improper Mechanical Lift Transfers: A resident with dementia, spinal cord dysfunction, and dependence for transfers was supposed to be moved with a full-body mechanical lift and two staff members, but a TMA stated she transferred the resident alone. The resident reported that staff sometimes used only one person for lift transfers because of staffing shortages, while other staff and the DON stated this was unsafe and against policy.
Two residents were involved in accident-hazard deficiencies. One resident with cancer, PVD, and Alzheimer’s disease was observed in a wheelchair with feet extending past short footrests, with the lower legs resting against the hard footrests despite a care plan entry for padding. Another resident with dementia and a hx of falls had an unwitnessed fall, but ordered orthostatic BP monitoring was not completed accurately and staff reported no post-fall PT referral was received.
A resident was given a new electric wheelchair without a prior therapy assessment and could not stop the chair, causing it to strike a bed frame and resulting in a leg laceration, tibia/fibula fractures, and a syncopal episode from blood loss. Another resident with cognitive impairment and high fall risk continued to self-transfer and fall, but the care plan was not updated with new fall interventions after repeated incidents.
A CNA used a Hoyer lift alone to weigh one resident, and another CNA was observed using a Hoyer lift alone to weigh a second resident. One resident’s care plan called for a 2-assist Hoyer lift, and the facility’s lift competency checklist and policy both required two caregivers for mechanical lift use; the DON and Director of Therapy also stated that two staff members are always required.
Failure to Ensure Effective Fall Alarms and Supervision
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide adequate supervision and effective use of assistive fall-prevention devices for two residents who were reviewed for fall precautions. One resident had diagnoses including unspecified dementia, age-related osteoporosis, a history of transient ischemic attack, and cognitive impairment, and was described by the POA as weak, bedbound, and unable to participate in physical therapy after a prior right femur fracture. The resident was completely dependent on staff for eating, hygiene, mobility, and toileting, and the care plan included a bed alarm per orders. The resident was found on the floor next to the bed after an unwitnessed fall. The POA reported receiving a call from the facility that the resident had been found on the floor and was not injured, and stated the resident frequently forgot to ask for help and had tried to get up without assistance before. A nurse stated the bed alarm was not heard when the resident fell, and the facility was unable to provide evidence that the bed alarm functioned as intended or alerted staff before the resident was found on the floor. The event report identified the fall as unwitnessed and did not indicate that a bed alarm alerted staff. The facility also failed to ensure the Smart Caregiver sensor pad monitoring system used for another resident was functioning properly and set at an audible volume. Two Smart Caregiver monitor boxes at the nurses' station for that resident's bed and recliner were observed set to LOW volume, and the chime settings faced the back wall of the desk. When a CNA tested the recliner alarm from the resident's room, the monitor at the nurses' station did not illuminate or sound an alert on either attempt. The CNA changed the batteries but did not retest the device, and both CNAs stated they could hear alarms only if they were near the nurses' station and did not recall training on operation or testing of the devices. The facility director stated the facility did not perform preventive maintenance on the devices and relied on staff to ensure they functioned properly.
Failure to Assess Safety of Perimeter Mattresses
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that 2 residents with perimeter mattresses were assessed for safety. One resident had a significant change MDS showing severely impaired cognition, dementia, reduced mobility, muscle weakness, and need for assistance with bed mobility, sitting, standing, and transfers. That resident’s care plan identified limited physical mobility related to dementia with mood disturbance and anxiety, a genetic muscle disorder, spinal stenosis, and osteoarthritis, and included use of a perimeter mattress to help find the edges of the bed for bed mobility. However, the resident’s Mobility, Physical Device, and Fall Risk assessment lacked documentation of an assessment for a perimeter/defined edge mattress. The second resident’s annual MDS showed severely impaired cognition, dementia, multiple sclerosis, repeated falls, and need for partial to moderate assistance with bed mobility. The care plan identified limited physical mobility related to weakness, falls, incontinence, hypertension, renal disease, dementia, MS, depression, and delusional disorder, and included use of a bariatric sized bed with a perimeter mattress to define the edges of the bed. That resident’s Mobility Physical Device and Fall Risk assessment also lacked documentation of an assessment for a perimeter/defined edge mattress. During observation, the resident was in bed asleep with a perimeter mattress. Staff interviews showed differing understanding of whether a physician order, assessment, IDT review, engineering review, and safety assessment were required before use of a perimeter mattress, and the DON confirmed both residents’ most recent assessments lacked documentation of a perimeter/defined edge mattress assessment.
Improper Mechanical Lift Transfers
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure transfers were performed according to R24’s assessed needs, care plan interventions, and facility policy. R24’s records showed she had diagnoses including non-traumatic spinal cord dysfunction, diabetes, dementia, depression, heart failure, and asthma. She was dependent on staff for toileting and transfers, was frequently incontinent of bowel and bladder, and had care plan directions for assistance with transfers using a full-body mechanical lift and two staff members. During interviews, a TMA stated she transferred R24 with the full-body mechanical lift by herself because R24 needed to use the bathroom and she felt the transfer was safe. R24 stated staff sometimes transferred her with only one staff member and said they told her there was not enough staff. Other staff interviewed stated transfers with the full-body mechanical lift using one staff member were unsafe and should not occur. The facility policy for using a mechanical lift stated that at least two trained associates are needed to safely move a resident with a mechanical full-body floor-based lift or ceiling/overhead full-body lift.
Unsafe Wheelchair Fit and Incomplete Post-Fall Monitoring
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide an environment free from accident hazards for two residents. Resident 27 was readmitted with diagnoses including cancer, peripheral vascular disease, and Alzheimer's disease and was sometimes able to make needs known. On multiple observations, Resident 27 was seated in a slightly tilted back wheelchair with feet extending beyond the footrests, and the back of the lower legs rested against the hard footrests above the ankle/heel area. A pillow was observed either on the floor or behind the legs rather than padding the footrests. The focused care plan for skin integrity included padding to wheelchair footrests, and staff interviews confirmed the footrests were too short and needed adjustment or replacement, but staff had not notified therapy or otherwise addressed the wheelchair fit. Resident 50 was admitted with diagnoses including dementia, history of falls, and UTI and was sometimes able to make needs known. The care plan identified the resident as at risk for falls. After an unwitnessed fall in the 300 hallway, the incident investigation added interventions to monitor orthostatic blood pressures and refer to physical therapy. However, the record showed an orthostatic blood pressure order on 05/20/2026 was not completed, and subsequent orthostatic blood pressures recorded the same blood pressure and pulse for all three positions on 05/22/2026, 05/23/2026, and 05/24/2026. Staff later stated they had not received a post-fall therapy referral, and the DNS stated the resident should have had orthostatic blood pressures taken accurately to rule out orthostatic hypotension.
Failure to assess electric wheelchair use and update fall interventions
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to comprehensively assess a resident for the use of an electric wheelchair and failed to develop new interventions to reduce fall risk for another resident. The report states that the facility’s policies required a device evaluation before an electric wheelchair was initiated, resident education and consent, and an updated service plan identifying device use and other interventions. The fall management policy required individualized care plan updates, a systematic review after each fall, identification of root cause, and review of prior interventions when new interventions were implemented. Resident 73 was admitted with weakness and lymphedema and had an above-the-knee left leg amputation, requiring assistance with bed mobility, transfers, and locomotion. The resident’s record showed cognitive intactness, lower extremity impairment, supervision or touch assistance for bed-to-chair transfers, and use of a manual wheelchair. On 4/17/26, a newly issued electric wheelchair was delivered and the resident was assisted into it. The resident reported that the representative showed how the chair worked but not enough, and that the resident did not know how to stop it. The resident then returned to the room, could not stop the chair, and the chair continued forward into the bed, causing the resident’s right leg to strike the metal bed frame. The resident sustained a five-centimeter laceration to the right anterior lower leg, fractures of the right tibia and fibula, and a brief syncopal episode secondary to blood loss. The resident also received an anticoagulant, which contributed to significant bleeding. The clinical record contained no evidence that the resident had been assessed to safely operate the electric wheelchair before use. Resident 3 was admitted with a right total hip replacement with deep hardware removal and post-traumatic osteoarthritis of the right hip. The resident had a high fall risk on Morse Fall Scale assessments, cognitive impairment on OT evaluation, and a PT evaluation showing a score of zero on the Short Physical Performance Battery, indicating high fall risk and increased risk of mobility disability. The resident fell on 3/31/26 after getting up independently and sustained a right femur fracture requiring surgical repair, and fell again on 5/12/26 after getting up independently and sustained a skin tear to the right elbow. The care plan identified fall risk and included reminders to use the call light, non-skid socks, and one-person assistance for toileting and transfers, but revisions to the care plan did not add new or amended fall prevention interventions. Staff statements indicated the resident continued to self-transfer and toilet without assistance, staff believed the resident was independent, and the existing fall prevention interventions were ineffective.
Unsafe One-Person Use of Mechanical Lift
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure safe use of a mechanical lift for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for accidents. During an observation on 6/2/2026 at 8:42 AM, Resident #4 was lying on his bed on top of a Hoyer pad while CNA Staff K stood on the right side of the bed with a mechanical lift; the lift hand bags were observed over the resident, and no other staff member was in the room. Staff K stated that he was weighing Resident #4 and that normally only one person uses the Hoyer lift for weights, although the resident’s care plan documented a Hoyer lift with 2 assist. On 6/4/2026 at 10:15 AM, CNA Staff D was observed using a Hoyer lift alone to obtain Resident #13’s weight, with the resident lifted approximately 12 inches off the mattress in the sling and no other staff present. Staff D stated that he was performing weekly weights and most of the time did the weights using the Hoyer lift by himself. Resident #13’s MDS Section GG coded the resident as dependent, and the facility’s mechanical lift competency checklist stated that two caregivers are present, while the facility policy for using a mechanical lifting device stated that at least two nursing assistants are needed to safely move a resident with a mechanical lift. The DON and Director of Therapy both stated that a mechanical lift should always be used by two staff members.
Trusted data from CMS and state health departments
Every citation, penalty and Plan of Correction is sourced from public CMS records (latest release July 29, 2026) and official state health department websites — never guesswork.
In your survey window? See what surveyors are citing.
The Survey-Prep Report maps your facility's risk from 12 months of CMS and state citation data — what's being cited around you and what to check first. $129 one-time.