Failure to manage wandering, abnormal vitals, change in condition, incontinence care, and diet orders
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that residents wearing WanderGuard devices had physician orders for the devices and that the devices were being checked for function. During review of the wander/elopement risk list and the electronic medical record, Residents #17, #18, and #19 were found to have WanderGuard sensor bracelets in place without physician orders. Staff interviews confirmed the devices were on the residents, and the Administrator later confirmed that the residents did not have orders for the devices at the time of the survey review. The facility also failed to adequately supervise and monitor a resident with a documented wander risk and to recognize and act on abnormal vital signs. Resident #5 had a wander risk score of 13 and documentation showing wandering behavior related to adjustment to the nursing home, but the resident was not included on the facility wander list and the quarterly wander assessment was overdue. The record also showed low temperatures of 35.7 C and 33.6 C on separate occasions without documented recheck, nurse notification, or provider notification. The DON and NHA were unable to state the accepted temperature range, and the DON confirmed that the low temperature was outside the acceptable range. The facility failed to provide timely necessary care in response to a change in condition for Resident #4. The resident had abnormal lab results suggestive of bacterial infection, reported feeling unwell, had pain, blood pressure issues, and decreased appetite, and a chest x-ray showed multifocal patchy nodular opacities/infiltrates. An antibiotic order was entered, but the medication was not administered before the resident was transferred to the hospital. The record also showed an SBAR note directing a STAT dose and ER transfer for possible sepsis, and the CRNP stated the nurse was expected to give the antibiotic on the evening of the order. The facility further failed to ensure necessary incontinence care and timely response to call lights for Residents #8 and #9, and failed to ensure diet interventions matched the medical diet orders for Resident #9. Call bell reports for two rooms showed approximately 32 requests with response times greater than 15 minutes, and residents reported long waits for assistance. Resident #9 was observed in a heavily saturated brief, and staff confirmed the resident had not been changed as expected overnight. Documentation showed only once-per-shift sign-off rather than point-of-care documentation for incontinence care. For Resident #9, the care plan called for a controlled carbohydrate and heart healthy diet, but the diet order history showed periods when the resident received only a heart healthy diet and later a regular diet, while the directions section contained additional diet instructions that did not populate on the meal ticket.
Penalty
Resources
Below are regulatory guidelines relevant to this citation:
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.