Failure to Provide Accessible Water for Resident
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that water was readily available and within reach for a resident, identified as R24, which resulted in the potential for inadequate fluid intake. During observations, it was noted that R24's water cup was placed on a bedside table positioned to the left side of the bed and up against the wall, making it out of sight and reach. Despite R24 expressing a liking for water, the water cup remained in the same inaccessible position during subsequent observations. R24, who has Alzheimer's Disease and Dementia, was observed with a dry mouth, indicating possible dehydration. Interviews with staff revealed that water cups are typically kept out of sight to prevent other confused residents from taking them. However, when a resident is in their room, water should be placed within easy reach, which was not the case for R24. The Director of Nursing acknowledged that water should be within reach for residents. The report highlights the importance of maintaining adequate hydration for older adults, especially those with chronic conditions, as stated in an article by the National Library of Medicine.
Penalty
Resources
Below are regulatory guidelines relevant to this citation:
Failure to Notify PCP and Family of Significant Weight Loss: A resident experienced significant weight loss after admission, with weights showing a marked decline over time and no weight-loss interventions in the care plan. Nursing and dietary notes documented continued monitoring and notification of the RD, but there was no documentation that the PCP or resident representative was notified about the 9.2% loss in 30 days, and the record lacked further weight-related follow-up.
Failure to monitor weight and nutrition status: one resident did not have a required weight evaluation, and two residents had significant weight loss without reassessment or new nutritional interventions. One resident with neurologic disease and malnutrition developed a coccyx pressure area that worsened, while another resident with diabetes, anemia, and malnutrition lost weight despite a supplement order. The DON and NHA confirmed the failures.
Failure to monitor significant weight loss and follow nutritional interventions. Two residents had documented weight loss that triggered facility policy for weekly weights and reweighing within 24 hours, but one resident was not weighed weekly after a major loss and a dietitian's order to increase Ensure was not implemented. Another resident with Alzheimer's disease and dysphagia had an MNA score indicating malnutrition, then lost 4.5 pounds in one week without a documented reweigh or notification to the MD or responsible party.
Failure to Complete RD Nutritional Assessments: The facility did not complete required admission nutritional assessments by an RD for two residents. One resident had a femur fracture, falls, and pulmonary disease, and another had renal dialysis dependence, sepsis, and a colostomy. Facility policy required an RD assessment within 72 hours of admission, but staff reported the facility had no current RD on staff after the prior RD resigned, and the DON confirmed the assessments were not completed.
Failure to Maintain Resident Weights: Surveyors found that multiple residents had ongoing poor PO intake and significant weight loss. One resident on comfort-focused care picked at meals and had severe weight loss; another with dementia and dysphagia slept through meals, left trays untouched, and did not receive feeding assistance during observation; a third with CHF, DM2, and dysphagia said the pureed food was cold and bland and returned trays; a fourth with dysphagia and a G-tube had choking and swallowing difficulty with pureed foods; and a fifth with stroke-related weakness said she disliked the food and wanted salt. Chart review showed repeated weight loss, nutrition notes, and RD interviews documenting inadequate intake, supplements, and interventions that did not address the stated causes of poor intake.
Failure to Follow Feeding Assistance and Swallowing Orders: A resident with severe cognitive impairment, malnutrition, and dysphagia was supposed to receive meal assistance, no straws, and supervised feeding with modified liquids and textures. Surveyors observed staff setting up meals and leaving the resident alone, and also observed the resident using a straw despite restrictions. Therapy and the DOR stated the resident needed supervision, cueing, and staff present during meals, while an LPN confirmed medications were being given whole in applesauce without a physician order.
Failure to Notify PCP and Family of Significant Weight Loss
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to assess the cause of a significant weight loss and failed to notify the PCP and resident representative for Resident #8. The resident’s MDS documented admission to the facility on 5/29/26 with a weight of 182 lbs. and identified significant weight loss without a physician-prescribed weight loss regimen. The resident’s weight log showed weights of 210.8 lbs. on 5/29/26, 207.6 lbs. on 5/31/26, 195.8 lbs. on 6/7/26, 178 lbs. on 6/25/26, 180.4 lbs. on 7/5/26, 179.6 lbs. on 7/26/26, 174.6 lbs. on 8/2/26, and 176.8 lbs. on 8/9/26, reflecting a 16.1% weight loss since admission. The care plan lacked interventions related to weight loss. The Nutrition/Dietary Progress Note on 6/7/26 documented a 4.5% weight loss since admission and stated staff would continue monitoring weight. A later note on 6/17/26 documented transfer to a short-term medical facility, and a note on 6/25/26 documented return from the hospital. The Nutrition/Dietary Progress Note on 7/15/26 documented a 9.2% weight loss in 30 days, noted no nutritional supplements were provided, stated staff would continue monitoring, and documented that the Dietitian was notified. The progress notes did not document notification of the PCP or resident representative regarding the 9.2% weight loss, and they lacked further documentation addressing weight.
Failure to Monitor Weight and Nutrition Status
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to properly monitor residents’ weight and nutrition status. Review of the facility policy indicated that any weight change of 5% or more since the last weight assessment was to be retaken the next day for confirmation and, if verified, nursing was to notify the dietician in writing. For Resident R6, the clinical record showed a physician order for weekly weights, but the weight record from 6/28/26 through 8/4/26 did not include a weight evaluation, and the facility failed to obtain a monthly weight. For Resident R97, the record showed diagnoses including Progressive Supranuclear Palsy, stroke history, cognitive deficit, and malnutrition. The resident lost 7.5 pounds, or 6.05%, from 7/5/26 to 8/1/26, and developed a 1 cm x 1 cm open area on the coccyx on 7/1/26 that worsened by 7/28/26. The dietician had last assessed the resident on 5/15/26 and did not reassess after the pressure ulcer developed or identify nutritional interventions. For Resident R9, the record showed diagnoses including diabetes, anemia, and malnutrition, with Glucerna ordered for weight stabilization. The resident lost 11.3 pounds, or 8.29%, in one month and 17.5 pounds, or 12.28%, in three months, but the dietician confirmed no reassessment or new interventions were put in place to address the weight loss.
Failure to Monitor Significant Weight Loss and Follow Nutritional Orders
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to consistently monitor resident weights and implement nutritional interventions after significant weight changes were identified for two residents. Facility policy required residents with a weight gain or loss of three pounds or more to be reweighed within 24 hours, with notification to the physician and dietary manager or registered dietitian if the change was confirmed. Resident 43, who had chronic kidney disease, weighed 103.8 pounds on May 15, 2026, then returned from hospitalization on June 1, 2026 at 96 pounds, a 7.5% loss over 16 days, and later weighed 92.4 pounds on June 16, 2026. The record did not show a weekly weight during the week of June 8, 2026 as required after the significant loss. A dietary progress note for Resident 43 documented unplanned significant weight loss and recommended increasing Ensure from twice daily to three times daily, but the record did not show that this recommendation was implemented. Resident 87, who had Alzheimer's disease and dysphagia, had a Mini Nutritional Assessment score of 5, indicating malnutrition. After a DON discussed declining appetite and weight loss with the resident's spouse and responsible party, the spouse requested weekly weights. The resident then weighed 142.3 pounds and 137.8 pounds one week later, a 4.5-pound loss, but the record did not show a reweigh within 24 hours or documentation that the physician or responsible party was notified of the significant weight loss.
Failure to Complete RD Nutritional Assessments
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to complete a comprehensive nutritional assessment by a registered dietitian for two residents. One resident was admitted with diagnoses including a left femur fracture, falls, and pulmonary disease, and an admission MDS was completed, but the clinical record did not show that a comprehensive nutritional assessment had been completed by an RD for that assessment. Another resident was admitted with diagnoses including dependence on renal dialysis, sepsis, and a colostomy, and although an admission MDS was completed, the record also did not reveal a comprehensive nutritional assessment completed by an RD for the MDS. Facility policy stated that residents were to receive an admission nutritional assessment by an RD, initiated within 72 hours of admission and completed by the ARD. During interviews, the Food Service General Manager was unable to identify the current clinical RD, and the Nursing Home Administrator stated the facility did not currently have an RD on staff because the prior RD resigned and a replacement had not been hired. The DON confirmed that the required admission nutritional assessments by an RD had not been completed for the two residents.
Failure to Maintain Resident Weights
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain the weight of five residents, with survey observations and record review showing ongoing poor intake and significant weight loss. The deficiency was based on observation, interview, and chart review for residents 103, 48, 54, 2, and 89. The report states this failure had the potential to lead to malnutrition, muscle wasting, functional loss, and increased susceptibility to infections. Resident 103, a resident in her 60s with a right humerus fracture, DM2, retinopathy, HTN, and anemia, was observed picking at lunch and saying the food was pretty good but would be better with salt. Her weight dropped from 178 lbs to 160 lbs and then to 150 lbs within about seven weeks, with the losses described as severe. A nutrition note documented inadequate oral intake with an average 50% meal intake and a goal of comfort care focused. The RD stated she interpreted the POLST comfort measures selection to mean no weight or food intake goals were desired, while the ADON stated the POLST was not for day-to-day care planning. Resident 48, an older resident with DM2, CKD, muscle wasting, moderate protein/calorie malnutrition, osteoporosis, anemia, dementia, and dysphagia, was observed asleep through meals with trays left untouched, and at one meal she appeared confused and unable to identify how to use empty cups. She did not eat during the observed meal periods and no staff arrived to assist her over a 20-minute period. Her weight declined from 124 lbs to 92 lbs over the documented period. Nutrition notes recommended supplements, encouraged PO/fluids, and small portions, and the current care plan listed comfort care focused. The RD stated the resident had been refusing meals and only drinking supplements, was unsure what language she spoke, and had not initiated 1:1 feeding assistance. Resident 54, a resident in his 70s with CHF, DM2, dysphagia, severe protein/calorie malnutrition, anemia, and muscle wasting, stated he disliked the food because it lacked seasoning, the pureed texture was unappealing, and hot food was served cold. He said he wanted a soft scrambled egg but staff never offered a substitute, and he returned a lunch tray because the hot items were cold. His weight fell from 173 lbs to 156 lbs, then 146 lbs, and later 145 lbs. Nutrition documentation identified unintentional weight loss and noted honoring food preferences and offering meal substitutes when intake was less than 50%, but the RD stated the root cause was not clearly identified and that interventions did not address the reasons he gave for low intake. Resident 2, a resident in her 70s with dysphagia, depression, and muscle wasting, reported choking on oatmeal and difficulty swallowing pureed ham that she described as grainy and caught in her throat. She was receiving tube feedings via G-tube and had been started on pureed food for oral gratification. Her weight history showed a loss from 190 lbs to 168 lbs in one month, described as severe, with later weights fluctuating to 175 lbs and 171 lbs. The RD stated she kept a word document of recommendations but had no system to follow up whether recommendations were adopted. Resident 89, an older resident with DM2, stroke with left-sided weakness, dysphagia, and muscle weakness, stated she did not like the food and would eat better if she could have a salt packet. She reported losing weight because she disliked the food. Her weight history showed a steady decline from 200 lbs to 155 lbs over several months, including a severe loss of 9 lbs in one month. Nutrition notes described variable supplement intake and unintentional significant weight loss related to poor PO intake, while later notes added water to meals and changed the diet to CCD. The RD stated the resident had been losing weight because she did not care for the food served, and the interventions did not address that stated reason.
Failure to Follow Feeding Assistance and Swallowing Orders
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure Resident #45’s care-planned interventions were implemented and physician orders were followed for eating assistance and adaptive equipment. Resident #45 was admitted after a hospital stay with discharge diagnoses including failure to thrive, unsteady gait, and severe malnutrition, and his records also listed cerebral infarction, unspecified protein-calorie malnutrition, and adult failure to thrive. The hospital discharge instructions included a soft, bite-sized diet with thin liquids, aspiration precautions, one-to-one supervision, slow feeding, upright positioning, no straws, and medications whole in puree, but the facility’s physician orders did not include an order to give medications whole in applesauce or pudding. The record showed that Resident #45’s physician orders included assistance with all meals and no straws, and the care plan included eating assistance and no straws. Speech therapy evaluated him for dysphagia and recommended nectar-thick liquids and mechanical soft/ground textures. Therapy documentation also noted that on one occasion he had thin liquids at the bedside despite being on nectar-thick liquids, and the thin liquid was removed after staff education. The admission MDS reflected severe cognitive impairment and that he required supervision or touching assistance with eating. Survey observations showed Resident #45 eating without staff present after meal setup, including one observation where he was seated with a meal tray and no staff assisting him, and another where staff set up the meal and left the room. The DOR stated he needed supervision, a lot of cueing, small bites, alternating bites and sips, and that staff should stay in the room while he ate. Additional observations showed Resident #45 using a straw even though he was not supposed to have straws, and the DOR confirmed the straw was not allowed. An LPN confirmed that medications were given whole in applesauce even though no physician order was present for that method.
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.