Delayed Call Light Response
Summary
The facility failed to develop interventions to ensure residents’ call lights were answered in a timely manner for residents who filed grievances about long call light response times. One resident was cognitively intact, had generalized muscle weakness and abnormal gait/mobility, required substantial assistance with toileting hygiene and transfers, and had care plan interventions to keep the call light within reach and answer it promptly. The resident also had frequent bladder and bowel incontinence, used an incontinence product, and had a toileting schedule for assistance upon rising, before and after meals, and before sleep. During interview and observation, the resident stated she often waited a long time for staff to answer her call light and reported waiting 45 minutes to get ready for the day. Continuous observation showed the resident’s call light remained on for an extended period while staff passed by or entered other rooms, and the resident stated she had placed the call light on to go to the bathroom. The call light was not answered until much later, and the resident was taken to the bathroom after the prolonged wait. Staff interviews indicated the resident typically toileted after breakfast, and another staff member stated the resident was incontinent most of the time. Two other residents also reported long call light waits. One cognitively intact resident reported repeated complaints to administration about waiting 45 to 60 minutes to get out of bed in the morning and said the delays caused morning accidents because she could not hold her urine long enough. Another resident’s wife reported chronic long waits for call light response. Review of grievance records and call light logs showed repeated prolonged response times, including multiple calls lasting from minutes into over an hour, and the administrator confirmed awareness of the long call light grievances and that long call light times remained a problem.
Penalty
Resources
Below are regulatory guidelines relevant to this citation:
Resident Council meetings were held in the dining room instead of a private space, with staff and other residents coming in and out during the meetings. Residents stated they filtered what they said because of the lack of privacy, and the AD and Administrator both acknowledged the dining room was not private and that no sign was posted when council was in session.
Failure to support resident family group meetings: A facility handbook stated residents have the right to organize and participate in resident/family groups, but family council minutes did not show that families chose to stop meetings or that the facility formally told families the meetings would end. Family representatives said the meetings had previously occurred monthly or quarterly but were no longer being held, and the NHA and Activities Director confirmed the prior administration stopped them and that there was no formal communication to families.
Failure to support family group formation and track a family concern. A resident family member reported interest in starting a family council for the secured unit and said he contacted administration and the LTC ombudsman, but the facility did not assist him or provide information to help form the group. The concern was not entered on the concern log, and the ANHA confirmed the facility was aware of the issue but did not assist with forming the family group.
Grievance resolutions were not documented or communicated. During a resident council meeting, eight residents stated their grievances had not been resolved and that staff had not discussed resolutions with the council. Review of grievance records showed many complaints lacked documentation of resolution, complainant notification, and the method of communication. The Administrator identified herself as the grievance official and stated she expected grievances to be completed and followed up within 5 days, while the facility policy required a written decision for the person with the grievance.
A resident council meeting was interrupted three times when the BOM entered to retrieve a resident, returned to say the resident would not be back, and an Infection Control staff member entered regarding resident care. Residents stopped discussing meeting business during each interruption. The Activities Director Assistant said she did not know meetings should not be interrupted, the Activities Director said she had not told her about using a Do Not Disturb sign, and the DON acknowledged staff had not been adequately instructed. The Resident Council President stated interruptions had happened before and residents had become reluctant to discuss concerns because meetings were not consistently private.
Failure to investigate a Resident Council grievance regarding long call bell response times. Residents reported that some concerns get responses while others do not, and that staffing problems and agency staff not answering call bells were ongoing. Review of grievance logs showed no grievance form or investigation for the concern, and the NHA confirmed the issue had not been investigated.
Resident Council Held Without Privacy
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide a private meeting space for Resident Council meetings for 7 of 15 confidential residents reviewed for resident rights. Record review showed Resident Council meetings were held in the dining room in February, March, April, May, June, and July 2026, with 4 to 6 residents present at each meeting. An observation on 8/12/26 at 11:00 AM showed staff and residents coming in and out of the dining room during the Resident Council meeting, and those individuals were not attending the meeting. During an interview on 8/12/26 at 11:00 AM, 7 alert and oriented residents who attended Resident Council stated the meetings were always held in the dining room, staff came in and out with no privacy, and they filtered what they said because staff were present. The Activities Director stated on 8/13/26 at 10:30 AM that Resident Council had been held in the dining room for the entirety of her 12-year employment, that the dining room was not private, and that no sign was posted for the meeting. The Administrator stated on 8/13/26 at 11:15 AM that she knew Resident Council was supposed to be held in a private setting, that it had always been held in the dining room during her 10 years of employment, and that the dining room was not private.
Failure to Support Resident Family Group Meetings
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to assist resident families with forming and continuing a family group for three of three resident families identified in the report. The facility handbook stated residents have the right to organize and participate in resident groups, and that the facility must provide a resident or family group with private space and take reasonable steps, with the group’s approval, to make residents and family members aware of upcoming meetings. However, review of the family council minutes dated 8/20/25 showed families were informed of upcoming events, shared suggestions, and were told the next meeting would be announced later, while the minutes did not document that families had decided not to continue meetings or that the facility had communicated it would stop conducting Family Group meetings. Resident family interviews indicated the meetings were no longer being held. Two resident family representatives stated the facility no longer provided family meetings and had previously held them monthly, while another family representative stated the prior administrator stopped the quarterly meetings and that there had been no formal communication to families that the meetings were no longer occurring. The NHA stated August 2025 was the last Family Council meeting and that the prior administration did not want to continue the meetings, while the Activities Director stated the prior administrator stopped the meetings and that there was no formal communication to families. The report also states that information was disseminated to the NHA, DON, and Regional Director of Clinical Services that the facility failed to assist a resident family with forming a family group for four of four resident families as required.
Failure to Support Family Group Formation and Track Family Concern
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to honor a resident family member’s right to organize and participate in a family group and failed to follow up on the family member’s concern. Resident Family R110 stated that in May 2026 he was interested in attending a resident group and starting a family group for the fourth floor. He reported that he spoke with administration and sent an email about the concern, but nothing had happened, and he had tried to work with the ombudsman but did not have contact information for other families and could not be on the unit continuously to locate them. He also stated that the facility did not assist him or provide information for starting a resident family group. Review of the resident rights agreement showed that a resident has the right to have family members or other resident representatives meet in the facility with the families or resident representatives of other residents. A letter from Resident Family R110 to the NHA stated that he had contacted the county LTC ombudsman about starting a Family Council for the secured nursing care unit and had discussed the idea with several family members who were interested in forming the council. However, the concern log from May 2026 to the current review did not include this concern. During interview, the ANHA stated that the NHA and ANHA were aware of the concern, that it was not included on the concern log, and that the facility did not assist Resident Family R110 with forming a family group.
Grievance resolutions were not documented or communicated
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that resident grievances were addressed and that documentation of staff efforts to resolve those grievances was communicated to residents and approved as effective resolutions for eight residents who attended the resident council meeting on 7/29/26. During the meeting, residents 16, 30, 31, 63, 79, 81, 108, and 109 stated that their grievances had not been resolved and that staff had not come to the council or to any members to discuss grievance resolutions brought from the resident council. The residents reviewed included individuals with BIMS scores ranging from 11 to 15, indicating cognition that was intact for most and moderately impaired for one resident. Review of grievance records from May 2026 through July 2026 showed that 37 of 77 grievances did not have documented resolution, including the complainant notification and the method used to communicate the outcome. The Administrator stated on 7/30/26 that she was the grievance official responsible for reviewing and ensuring completion of grievances, and that she expected grievances to be resolved, completed, and followed up with the complainant within 5 days. The facility's March 2025 grievance policy stated that the Administrator oversees the grievance process, routes grievances to the appropriate department manager, and that the person with the grievance has the right to a written decision.
Resident Council Meeting Interrupted
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide residents with a private location for a resident council meeting when the scheduled meeting was interrupted three times after it began. During the meeting, the Business Office Manager entered to retrieve a resident, returned later to say the resident would not be coming back, and then an Infection Control staff member entered regarding resident care. Residents stopped discussing meeting business during each interruption. During interviews later that day, the Activities Director Assistant stated she did not know meetings should not be interrupted and that she intended to begin placing a "Do Not Disturb" sign on the door for future meetings. The Activities Director stated she had not told her assistant about using a sign, and the DON acknowledged staff had not been adequately instructed to avoid entering resident council meetings. The Resident Council President stated interruptions had occurred previously and residents had become reluctant to discuss concerns because meetings were not consistently private.
Failure to Investigate Resident Council Grievance
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to make ongoing efforts to resolve grievances presented by the Resident Council. Facility policy stated that grievances voiced during resident or family council meetings were to be recorded on a designated grievance form and addressed by the Grievance Official. Resident Council meeting minutes documented that residents raised concern that call bell response times were longer than ten minutes and were causing residents to have accidents. However, review of the grievance logs for June and July 2026 found no documented evidence that a grievance form was created or that the concern was investigated. During an interview, residents stated that some concerns receive responses while others do not, and that staffing remains a problem with agency staff sitting on their phones instead of providing care and answering call bells. The Nursing Home Administrator confirmed that the concern about long call bell wait times had been voiced at the Resident Council meeting and had not been investigated as of the date of interview.
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.