Failure to Prevent Elopement of Cognitively Impaired Resident
Summary
The facility failed to provide adequate supervision and timely interventions for a cognitively impaired resident with a history of exit-seeking behaviors, resulting in the resident's elopement. The resident, who resided in a secured unit, broke a window in his room using a fire extinguisher and later exited the building by jumping out of the second-story window. The resident was missing for approximately 12 hours before being found by police and EMS six miles from the facility. This incident affected one of three residents reviewed for elopement risk and highlighted the facility's failure to ensure the safety of residents at risk for elopement. On the morning of the incident, a State-tested Nursing Assistant (STNA) discovered the broken window and reported it to a Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN). The staff moved the resident to a common area but later allowed him to return to his room with the broken window. The LPN assigned to monitor the resident left him unsupervised to attend to another resident, during which time the resident eloped through the broken window. The facility's failure to provide continuous supervision and secure the environment contributed to the resident's ability to elope. The resident's medical record revealed a history of schizoaffective disorder, schizophrenia, dementia, and other mental health conditions, making him a high risk for elopement. Despite being identified as an elopement risk and residing in a secured unit, the facility did not implement adequate measures to prevent his escape. The incident underscores the facility's shortcomings in monitoring and safeguarding residents with known exit-seeking behaviors, leading to a serious lapse in resident safety.
Removal Plan
- LPN #220 was informed the window in Resident #39's room was broken.
- LPN #220 was stationed outside the resident's room to supervise and ensure the safety of Resident #39 and to prevent re-entrance and access to the resident's room.
- LPN #220 stationed outside of the resident's room responded to another resident screaming and went to check on the resident.
- STNA #265 checked the resident's room for the resident and noted him missing.
- Resident #39 was believed to have exited through the broken second floor window and landed 13 feet below on the exterior ground which consisted of grass and concrete and was unsecured. On the ground there was a pillow, unused gloves, wipes, a flat bed sheet and a bed spread. A head count was conducted immediately and there was a total of 45 residents present in-house out of a census of 47 (there was one resident on a Leave of Absence (LOA) with family and Resident #39 was unaccounted for).
- Upon discovering the Resident #39 could not be located, STNAs #218, #217, #312, #265 and LPN #251 began searching the facility.
- All other windows were checked by STNAs #216 and #312 and validated as being secured, and all exits/entrances were validated as being secured by STNA #218.
- STNAs #218 and #312 searched the perimeter of the facility.
- LPN #293 notified the local Police Department Resident #39 was missing. Resident #39's Guardian, Psychiatric (Psych) Physician #316 and Medical Director (MD) #317 were notified by LPN #251.
- Maintenance Technician (MT) #318 arrived at the facility.
- The DON and Administrator were notified that Resident #39 could not be located.
- LPN #293 was placed on door watch outside of Resident #39's room to ensure the resident's room was not entered due to the broken window where she remained until the window was fixed by MT #318.
- The DON, Business Office Manager (BOM) #207, Therapy Manager #258, Activities Director (AD) #305, MT #318, Administrator, RDO #315, Minimum Data Set (MDS) Coordinator #256 and Social Services Designee (SSD) #271 arrived at the facility and conducted an additional neighboring community search to locate the missing resident.
- Calls were made to all local hospitals by SSD #271 and Resident #39 was not located.
- The Administrator conducted a second audit of all door alarms and the elevator keypads to check for proper function and locking mechanism. No concerns were identified.
- MT #318 conducted a second window audit to ensure all windows were secured and in proper function. There were no concerns identified.
- The DON and RDO #315 reviewed/completed wandering observation tools for each resident. No new residents were identified as an elopement risk.
- MDS Coordinator #256 reviewed/updated all care plans to identify residents who were at risk for wandering and elopement. No new residents identified.
- The DON reviewed the elopement binder, the elopement policy, pictures, and face sheets of all at risk residents and no corrections were needed.
- The search for Resident #39 was concluded by the facility staff.
- The DON and Administrator initiated education on elopement management with all facility staff. There were 108 educated out of 108 total staff and completed and the facility utilized no agency staff. All 108 staff were educated electronically and any staff member not present was instructed to sign off on the education prior to the next scheduled shift.
- Education was provided to the Administrator by RDO #315 on elopement management and elopement prevention.
- Education was provided to the Administrator and DON by RDO #315 on management of potential risks and hazards to prevent accidents that include but not limited to safeguarding identified risks/hazards to avoid exposure to residents.
- Education was provided to the Administrator and DON by RDO #315 on supervision of residents when known risks or hazards are identified that include but not limited to one-on-one (1:1) supervision.
- Resident #39 was located in a neighboring community six miles away by STNA #265 who was heading home and familiar with the area. STNA #265 observed the resident with the police and EMS. STNA #265 notified the DON Resident #39 had been located.
- RDO #315 was notified by the Administrator that Resident #39 had been located by STNA #265.
- An unknown Dispatcher at the local Police Department (PD) called the Administrator to provide an update on the status of Resident #39. The PD Dispatcher was instructed to have EMS transport Resident #39 to the local hospital for a psychological evaluation.
- Resident's #39's Guardian was notified by the DON and Administrator Resident #39 had been located and was being transported to the local hospital for a medical and psychological evaluation.
- Psych Physician #316 was updated by the Administrator and DON on the status of the resident being transitioned to the hospital's Psychiatric Unit. Psych Physician #316 reported the hospital would evaluate the resident and determine if he was appropriate for a 72-hour hold (psychiatric admission).
- An unknown ER Nurse at the local hospital called and spoke with the Administrator and DON and informed them Resident #39 would be assessed psychologically and medically.
- Medical Director #317 was updated on Resident #39's status by the Administrator.
- The DON and Administrator reported to the Quality Assurance Performance Improvement (QAPI) committee the findings related to compliance. The QAPI committee consists of the Administrator, DON, SSD #271, RD #252, BOM #207, MDS Coordinator #256, RDO #315, Therapy Manager #258, and MD #317 (via telephone).
- The DON called the local hospital for an update on Resident #39. The hospital noted Resident #39 was assessed, and no new discoveries or diagnoses were determined, thus the resident was set for discharge back to the facility.
- An elopement drill was conducted by the DON and Administrator. No issues were identified.
- Resident #39 returned to the facility. The resident's Guardian and MD #317 were notified of the resident's return with no new orders given.
- Resident #39 was immediately placed on 1:1 observation and will remain until determined by the Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) and MD #317 that 1:1 observation was no longer required. All staff were educated on expectations of the resident being on 1:1 observation by the DON and Administrator.
- An admission assessment was completed (including skin, pain, and a Braden Scale) on Resident #39. A care conference with the facility's IDT and Resident #39's Guardian/mother was scheduled.
- To monitor for ongoing compliance, elopement drills will be completed twice weekly for four weeks, then monthly. The drills will be conducted by the DON or Administrator on day shifts and night shifts.
- A 72-hour care conference was held with the facility's IDT which included SSD #271, DON, Administrator, Therapy Manager #258, MD #317, RDO #315, Registered Dietitian (RD) #252, BOM #275 and Resident #39's Guardian/mother. The Guardian was okay with the new interventions of a room move, 1:1 observation, and a psychiatric consultation. A Brief Interview Mental Status (BIMS) assessment was completed on Resident #39 and noted to be a 12 which indicated the resident was cognitively intact. Resident #39's care plan was updated to show the resident eloped and new interventions include 1:1 observation, educate the resident to speak with staff if he would like to take a walk outside, provide diversionary activities, notify the physician of behavior changes, and offer additional snacks and hydration.
- Resident #39's room change was conducted. Resident remains on 1:1 observation close to the nurse's station.
Penalty
Resources
Below are regulatory guidelines relevant to this citation:
Failure to Follow Fall Interventions: A resident with dementia, ESRD on dialysis, impaired mobility, and a history of falls was observed ambulating and self-transferring in her room and bathroom without staff assistance, despite orders and a care plan requiring one-person assist with a walker, call light use, frequent safety checks, and skid strips by the bed. Staff interviews confirmed the resident was transferring independently and that the skid strips were not in place as documented.
A resident assessed as high risk for falls did not receive the physician-ordered fall mat on the right side of the bed. Surveyors observed no mat during multiple checks, and the TAR did not reflect the intervention. The resident said the mat had been removed after a new bed was placed, while an RN and the DON acknowledged the order remained in place even though the mat was no longer being used.
Smoking safety interventions were not consistently implemented for four residents who smoked. Two residents were observed smoking with staff supervision but without the smoking aprons listed in their assessments and care plans, and two other residents were also observed smoking in wheelchairs without aprons despite care plan interventions requiring them. The DON confirmed the apron requirement for two of the residents, while the ADON stated residents sometimes complained about the aprons and that he did not know when smoking assessments were completed.
A resident with cerebral palsy, severe cognitive impairment, wheelchair use, and a care plan requiring a mechanical lift for all transfers was manually transferred by a CNA instead of using the lift. During observation, the CNA lifted the resident by the upper back and moved him between the wheelchair and bed without mechanical assistance, despite having completed lift competency training and despite the DON confirming the resident required a mechanical lift for all transfers.
Failure to supervise a resident at risk for elopement led to repeated exit-seeking and wandering events, including being found off the unit and near exterior areas. The resident had dementia with cognitive impairment, hemiplegia, and diabetes, and staff notes described missing documentation of several wandering episodes, an incomplete care plan intervention, and incidents involving a broken alarmed door, a Wanderguard, and an unknown visitor letting the resident off the unit.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment fell during a lift transfer when a sling strap came loose and the chest strap clip broke, and two other residents were observed being transferred with total body lifts using slings that were not verified against their care plans or mobility assessments. Staff interviews showed some CNAs relied on the sling already in the room or on how it fit, rather than consistently checking the care plan or Kardex for the correct sling size and transfer method.
Failure to Follow Fall Interventions
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a resident's fall interventions were in place for one resident reviewed for falls. The resident had diagnoses of dementia and end-stage renal disease requiring dialysis, was documented as having intact cognition but needing supervision with ADLs, transfers, and walker use, and was identified as a fall risk due to ESRD, impulsive behavior, and impaired mobility. The resident's nursing and provider orders directed staff to assist with ambulation, remind the resident to use the call light and wait for staff, and complete frequent safety checks each shift. The resident had a documented fall in which she was found sitting on the floor between her drawer and walker with bleeding from a forehead injury and a skin tear to her jaw, and she was transferred to the hospital where she received stitches. The incident report stated the resident lost her balance when she walked to her drawer to close it. The resident's care plan later identified a self-care performance deficit related to actual falls, weakness, and impaired mobility, and included interventions such as assistance from one staff member with a walker and gait belt, assistance with transfers and toileting, use of assistive devices, skid strips next to the bed, and frequent monitoring for safety. During observations, the resident was seen ambulating and self-transferring in her room and bathroom without staff assistance and at times without using her walker or call light. Staff observed the resident walking independently in her room, and an unidentified staff member passed by without entering the room. The resident stated that she walked and used the bathroom by herself and did not need to follow instructions. Staff interviews confirmed that the resident transferred independently and ambulated without a walker or staff assistance, while another nurse stated the resident was not supposed to self-transfer and that skid strips were not present despite being listed in the care plan. The DON stated that staff were expected to follow resident orders and care plans for safety.
Missing Ordered Fall Mat for High-Fall-Risk Resident
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure a resident assessed as high risk for falls received the physician-ordered fall prevention intervention of a fall mat positioned on the right side of the bed. Resident #50 was admitted with diagnoses including orthostatic hypotension, lack of coordination, reduced mobility, and communication deficit. The resident’s fall risk assessment showed a score of 50, indicating high risk for falling, and the care plan identified the resident as at risk for falls and fall-related injury due to a history of falls with fracture, cognitive impairment, and decreased safety awareness. During multiple observations, the resident was seen at the bedside and no fall mat was present on the right side of the bed or located in the room. The physician order dated 6/7/2026 specified a mat on the right side of the bed, but the MAR and TAR did not reflect the fall mat as an implemented intervention. The resident stated the fall mat had been removed after a new bed was placed and had been gone for a long time. An RN stated the resident was a fall risk and that the order for the fall mat should be followed or cancelled if no longer needed. The DON stated the bed had been changed out and the mat would get in the way, and the order should have been cancelled.
Smoking Safety Interventions Not Followed
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure adequate assessment and implementation of smoking safety interventions for four sampled residents who smoked. Residents #12 and #85 were observed smoking in the designated smoking area with staff supervision on multiple occasions, but neither was observed wearing a smoking apron even though the smoking binder and care plan indicated they needed one. During an interview, the ADON confirmed both residents were listed as needing aprons and stated the residents sometimes complained about the apron, but they should not smoke unless they put it on. The ADON also stated he does not go out with smokers often and does not know when assessments are completed. Resident #12 had diagnoses including COPD, muscle weakness, and epilepsy, and smoking evaluations noted tobacco use and balance problems while sitting or standing; smoking was added to the care plan with a clothing protector intervention. Resident #85 had diagnoses including hemiplegia and right-hand contracture, and although initial smoking evaluations indicated tobacco use with no impairments, smoking was later added to the care plan with a clothing protection requirement. Resident #52, who had CVA with right-sided weakness and paralysis, diabetes, mood disorder, major depressive disorder, and right hand and upper arm contracture, was observed smoking in a wheelchair without a smoking apron despite a care plan intervention requiring one. Resident #11, who had TBI, schizoaffective disorder, major depressive disorder, paraplegia, and upper extremity contractures, was also observed in the smoking area in a wheelchair without a smoking apron, and no attempt was made by the smoking monitor to get the apron on. The DON confirmed that Residents #52 and #11 were supposed to wear smoking aprons when smoking, and the facility smoking policy required residents to be educated and evaluated for smoking upon admission, re-admission, and quarterly.
Failure to Use Required Mechanical Lift for Resident Transfer
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure Resident #5 was transferred with a mechanical lift as required. Resident #5 was admitted with diagnoses including cerebral palsy, BPH, and hypertension, and a quarterly MDS showed severe impairment in thinking with a BIMS score of 4. He required substantial to maximal assistance with toileting hygiene, used a wheelchair for mobility, and his care plan documented a history of falls with interventions initiated for a mechanical lift for all transfers to wheelchairs. A POC task also indicated he required a mechanical lift for transfers every shift, and he was listed among residents requiring a sling/mechanical lift. During observation, CNA C provided incontinent care and transferred Resident #5 from his specialized wheelchair to the bed and back without using a mechanical lift. Instead, she manually lifted him by placing her arms around his upper back and interlocking her fingers. In interview, CNA C stated she had been employed for a month, had completed lift competency during orientation, but did not use the lift because she felt comfortable transferring him without assistance and had never used the mechanical lift on him, although other staff did. The DON stated Resident #5 required a mechanical lift for all transfers and that staff could see this in the POC. The facility policy stated mechanical lifting devices shall be used for lifting and moving residents when necessary.
Failure to Supervise Resident at Risk for Elopement
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide adequate supervision to prevent resident elopement for a resident who was identified as at risk for elopement and did not reside on a secured unit. The resident had diagnoses including hemiplegia, diabetes, and dementia, and the MDS indicated cognitive impairment. The record showed multiple elopement evaluations with changing results, including several assessments that identified the resident as at risk for elopement in July 2026, while earlier assessments had indicated not at risk or were incomplete. The care plan identified the resident as an elopement risk/wanderer related to impaired safety awareness, but the record contained only one incomplete intervention related to wandering, and no resident preferences were included. Behavior monitoring documented exit-seeking and wandering behaviors on multiple occasions in May, June, and July 2026, but progress notes did not document the behaviors noted on 5/21/26, 6/21/26, and 7/14/26. A physician order for a Wanderguard was created after the resident was found wandering outside on the curb, and staff notes described discussions with family and assessments after the resident was returned to the unit. The resident was later involved in additional elopement-related events. Staff statements and progress notes described the resident being found near a door, in the front hall, in the assisted living area, and off the unit near common areas, with staff searching for her after she was reported missing. One note stated the resident could escape through a security door because the alarm was broken and had not been fixed yet. Another investigation note stated the resident was found off the unit in a common area adjacent to the unit after being let off by an unknown visitor. The facility determined that the resident was cognitively unable to recognize the door requiring a code and would be physically unable to open it without assistance. The report states the facility was out of compliance with resident safety and supervision since 4/12/26.
Failure to verify correct sling size and safe lift use during resident transfers
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure staff followed accident prevention interventions and safe device use for three sampled residents who required total body lift transfers. The report states that four certified nursing assistants did not verify the correct sling size before transferring residents, despite care plans and the lift’s sling-size identification system directing staff to use specific sling sizes based on resident weight and transfer needs. Resident 39 had severe cognitive impairment, Alzheimer’s disease, dementia with behavioral disturbance, anxiety disorder, and muscle weakness. Her care plan and mobility assessments showed a progression from sit-to-stand lift use to total body lift use with two staff members and a medium sling. On 5/1/26, she was transferred from her wheelchair to her bed by a CNA using a sit-to-stand lift when the sling strap came loose from the hook on the lift and the chest strap clip broke, causing her to fall backward onto the floor. She sustained a skin tear on her right forearm, bruising to the right side of her face, redness to the right side of her body, and a bruise on her right frontal scalp. She was sent to the ER, where X-rays showed no acute findings or fractures. Observations later showed resident 39 being transferred with a total body lift using a large sling, and resident 8 and resident 25 were also observed with large total body lift slings on. Resident 8 had paraplegia, moderate cognitive impairment, and a care plan directing total body lift transfers with a medium and extra-large sling, while his mobility assessment indicated an extra-large sling and two staff members. Resident 25 had vascular dementia and muscle weakness; her care plan directed total body lift transfers with two staff members, and her mobility assessment indicated a large sling. Interviews with CNAs showed that staff sometimes relied on the sling already in the room or judged sling size by how it fit, rather than consistently referring to the care plan or Kardex. The DON and MDS coordinator stated that staff were expected to use the resident’s care plan or Kardex to determine sling size for safe transfers.
Trusted data from CMS and state health departments
Every citation, penalty and Plan of Correction is sourced from public CMS records (latest release October 8, 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.