Failure to Ensure Resident Safety in Smoking Practices
Summary
The facility failed to ensure the safety and well-being of a resident who was reviewed for smoking. The resident, who had a medical history of dementia, delirium, and nicotine dependence, was admitted to the facility and was identified as a smoker. Despite the resident's severe cognitive impairment, the facility did not implement adequate interventions to ensure the resident's safety and compliance with the smoking policy. The resident continued to smoke unsupervised, refused to turn in their lighter, and smoked used cigarettes found on the ground, which posed a significant safety risk. The facility's smoking policy required that residents who smoked be assessed for their ability to smoke safely and that any smoking-related privileges, restrictions, and concerns be noted on the care plan. However, the facility failed to enforce these policies effectively. The resident's care plan included interventions such as applying a protective apron during smoking and keeping the resident's cigarettes and lighter, but these interventions were not adequately implemented. The resident was observed smoking outside designated times and areas, and staff failed to remove the lighter or provide necessary supervision. Interviews with facility staff revealed a lack of consistent communication and documentation regarding the resident's smoking behavior and the necessary interventions. The Director of Nursing and other staff members were aware of the resident's non-compliance with the smoking policy, but additional interventions were not implemented in a timely manner. The facility's failure to address the resident's smoking behavior and ensure compliance with the smoking policy resulted in a situation that was likely to cause serious harm to the resident and others.
Removal Plan
- Immediate Smoking Assessments: All identified residents who smoke were assessed for safety risks, including cognitive impairment and ability to handle smoking materials safely. Residents were identified based on their current desire to smoke. The resident smoking assessment titled, Resident Smoking Initial Assessment, was completed for the identified residents. The assessments were completed, and the residents' care plans were updated accordingly.
- The active smoker list was updated to include Resident #37.
- All residents were previously assessed on admission for a desire to smoke. All new residents will be assessed on admission if they have a desire to smoke. This will be completed by admitting nurse.
- All identified residents were re-educated on the risk vs benefit of following the smoking policy.
- All other necessary interventions including supervised smoking, appropriate storage of smoking materials, smoking in designated areas, and offering of aprons were implemented immediately.
- Immediate Supervision Implementation: The smoking program was reviewed for resident safety by the interdisciplinary team including the Administrator, Activities Director, Director of Nursing, Medical Records Director, Director of Staff Development, Social Services, and the Medical Director.
- Staff were educated by the Director of Staff Development. Staff education included nurses, nurse assistants, activity assistants, department heads, dietary, administration, and housekeeping. Education included how to ensure smoking activities occur in designated, supervised areas to prevent unsupervised smoking and reduce fire hazards. Additionally, staff were trained on the importance of supervision and monitoring of smoking residents, including the prevention of unsafe practices. Education will be ongoing with an expected completion of all staff. Education will be conducted by the Director of Staff Development or designee. Any additional staff or new staff will be given a one on one education prior to start of shift.
- Training on the importance of supervision and monitoring of smoking residents, including the prevention of unsafe practices will be provided for all new hires by Director of Staff Development as part of the orientation process.
- Restriction of Smoking Materials: Any potentially dangerous items, including lighters or cigarettes, have been removed from residents' rooms.
- A lighter was removed from Resident #37's room by CNA.
- All rooms were visually inspected, and residents were asked for any smoking paraphernalia. There was no additional smoking paraphernalia.
- The Activities Director will conduct a monthly sweep visually inspecting all resident rooms and asking for smoking paraphernalia. The Activity Director was educated to this responsibility by the Administrator and Director of Nursing.
- All Staff including nurses, nurse assistants, activity assistants, department heads, dietary, administration, and housekeeping educated by the Director of Staff Development that staff who identify smoking paraphernalia should report it to Administrator or designee. All staff off site were educated via phone by department heads, administrator or designee.
- Revised Smoking Policy and Agreement Enforcement: A smoking agreement has been reintroduced and enforced for all residents who smoke, with clear guidelines about safe smoking practices, supervision, and the need to follow all facility policies. The smoking agreement was revised to better match the facility's smoking policy and procedure. A revision was made indicating that aprons are offered and strongly encouraged based on assessment, instead of requiring an apron to be eligible for the smoking program.
- Residents have the right to refuse smoking apron. Staff will continue to offer and encourage the apron. In the event of a refusal, the resident will be educated on the risk vs. benefit of the apron use. The resident will be provided supervision during smoking by Activity aide or designee during smoke break. Fire blanket and fire extinguisher are available in smoking area.
- Staff assisting residents who refuse to wear apron will notify the Activity Director or designee. Activity aides were trained by Activity Director. The Activity Director or designee will bring this to the attention to the interdisciplinary team during the interdisciplinary team meeting. This will then be care planned by nursing during the interdisciplinary team meeting.
- Residents who refuse to sign the agreement will have their smoking materials stored securely and will only be allowed to smoke under direct supervision. Residents who refuse to sign will be asked to turn in any smoking paraphernalia. If resident refuses to voluntarily give up paraphernalia the interdisciplinary team including the administrator, director of nursing, activity director, medical record director, director of staff development, infection preventionist, social services or other designee, will confiscate smoking materials as per our policy or discharge the resident.
- Residents who refuse to sign will be placed on every shift visual monitoring for smoking paraphernalia. Monitoring will be done by licensed nurses. Licensed nurses were trained by Director of Staff Development and Director of Nursing.
- Staff Education and Training: Facility staff, including nurses, nurse assistants, activity assistants, department heads, dietary, administration and housekeeping, have been immediately educated on the updated smoking policy, the importance of smoking assessments, and how to ensure that all smoking activities are managed safely. The education was conducted by the Director of Staff Development.
- Environmental Safety Measures: Fire safety training was given by fire training vendor.
- Additionally, fire safety training was done by the Director of Staff Development. Staff educated included nurses, nurse assistants, activity assistants, department heads, dietary, administration and housekeeping. Training was completed, and additional fire safety measures, such as fire extinguishers and fire blankets near designated smoking areas, have been implemented. Staff not currently in facility were called and educated by the Director of Staff Development via phone.
- Safe smoking area training was done for the Activities Director and activity assistants. Training was done by the Director of Staff Development and Administrator.
- Activities and or designee will do a check after each smoke break to ensure that smoking areas are safe and free from hazards such as loose smoke buds. Aides will verify receptacle is in working order, fire extinguisher is in place and fire blanket is in present. Activity aides were trained by activity director and administrator.
- Activity aides will supervise that all cigarettes will be extinguished and disposed in proper receptacle of after each smoking break. Activity aides were trained by activity director and administrator.
- A weekly scheduled audit conducted by the Medical Records Director or designee to review and monitor compliance with safety procedures.
- Compliance of audits conducted by the Medical Records Director will be monitored for three months and will be added to the Medical Record Director's portion (or designee) for our QAPI meeting, quarterly thereafter.
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.