Failure to Follow COVID-19 PPE, Isolation, Testing, and Test-Expiration Requirements During Outbreak
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to follow its own infection prevention and control policies and current CDC guidance during an ongoing COVID-19 outbreak. The facility policy required staff entering rooms of residents with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 to use an N95 or higher-level respirator, gown, gloves, and eye protection. One resident who tested positive for COVID-19 was placed on transmission-based precautions (TBP) with a door sign specifying gown, gloves, N95, and eye protection. A nurse aide entered this resident’s room wearing a gown, gloves, and mask but without eye protection, and there was no eye protection available on the PPE caddy outside the room. The nurse aide stated she believed her eyeglasses counted as eye protection. The infection prevention (IP) nurse, ADON, Administrator, and Regional Nurse all confirmed that full PPE, including eye protection, was required and that staff had been educated, but they could not explain why the nurse aide did not comply. The facility also failed to ensure appropriate PPE use during COVID-19 specimen collection. CDC interim guidelines for collecting and handling clinical specimens for COVID-19 require an N95 or higher-level respirator, eye protection, gloves, and gown for healthcare providers collecting specimens or working within 6 feet of patients suspected to be infected. The facility did not have a policy addressing PPE for COVID-19 specimen collection. During observation of resident COVID testing, one unit manager collecting nasal swabs wore an N95, gown, and gloves but did not wear eye protection, while another unit manager handling the specimens in the hallway wore an N95 and gloves. The IP nurse and ADON stated that full PPE, including eye protection, should be worn for COVID testing and that the facility had an adequate supply of face shields. The unit manager who collected the specimen reported she was unsure if eye protection was required and only obtained face shields after consulting someone from corporate. The facility failed to follow CDC return-to-work criteria for staff with COVID-19 and did not maintain adequate records of staff testing. The facility’s policy referenced CDC interim guidance for managing healthcare personnel with COVID-19 infection, which requires at least 7 days since symptom onset with a negative viral test within 48 hours prior to return (or 10 days if testing is not performed or if the day 5–7 test is positive), and, if using antigen tests, negative tests on day 5 and again 48 hours later. Review of the facility’s COVID-positive staff log showed 12 staff had tested positive, and 9 returned to work before 10 days from symptom onset without documentation of negative tests on both day 5 and day 7. The IP nurse stated staff were tested with antigen tests on day 5 and allowed to return to work on day 7 if that test was negative, and that she did not perform or document a second test on day 7. She also stated staff performed self-testing, that tests were placed in the break room or taken home, and that there was no process to track when staff tested, whether they tested as required, or whether tests were performed according to manufacturer instructions. The facility Physician and Administrator stated the facility should follow its infection control policies and CDC guidance, and the Administrator acknowledged there was no oversight or logging of staff COVID test results. The facility also failed to maintain TBP for COVID-positive residents in accordance with its policy and CDC guidance. The facility’s policy required residents with mild to moderate illness who were not moderately to severely immunocompromised to remain on TBP for at least 10 days after symptom onset, with additional criteria for severe illness and for test-based strategies requiring two negative tests 48 hours apart. Review of the COVID-positive resident log showed that multiple residents were removed from TBP after 7–9 days from symptom onset, rather than after the full 10 days. The IP nurse stated residents were tested with antigen tests on day 5 and, if negative, were removed from TBP after 7 days; if positive on day 5, TBP continued for 10 days. She reported she did not perform a second test on day 7 before discontinuing TBP and was unaware that two negative tests 48 hours apart were required when using a testing strategy. She also stated that TBP orders were entered for 10 days in the electronic system but were not discontinued when residents were taken off precautions earlier. Additionally, the facility used expired COVID-19 test kits for resident and staff testing during the outbreak and did not follow manufacturer expiration dates. Observations in the staff break room showed boxes of two different brands of COVID tests with expiration dates already passed. The IP nurse stated three brands of COVID tests, all with listed expiration dates that had passed, were used for staff and resident testing during the outbreak and that she believed the tests could be used for six months beyond the printed expiration date. Customer service representatives for each test manufacturer confirmed that the lot numbers in question did not have extended expiration dates, that the printed expiration dates were final, and that tests used after those dates would not be considered accurate or valid, with potential for false negative or false positive results. The Health Department nurse stated the facility had recently contacted them about using expired tests and that the department was working on guidance. The facility Physician stated that using expired COVID tests could affect test efficacy, that the protein in the test solution breaks down over time, and that expired tests could produce false negative results.
Penalty
Resources
Below are regulatory guidelines relevant to this citation:
A resident with an indwelling Foley catheter had EBP identified in the care plan, but staff did not consistently wear gowns during close contact care, including vital signs, medication administration, hygiene-related contact, and topical treatment. In addition, a TMA administered medications to three residents without sanitizing hands between residents or before handling medications, despite policy and DON expectations requiring hand hygiene. Laundry practices were also inconsistent with sanitary handling, as staff sorted soiled laundry without gowns and gloves being available in the room and reported using only gloves for most dirty laundry tasks.
An LVN failed to follow hand hygiene and insulin pen preparation practices during a medication pass for a resident with diabetes. After washing his hands, he turned off the faucet with his bare hand, then administered insulin without cleaning the insulin pen’s rubber seal with alcohol first. The DON stated both actions were a break in infection control, and the facility policy required proper hand hygiene and noted that gloves do not replace hand hygiene.
Failure to perform hand hygiene during wound care was identified for a resident with a stage 4 coccyx pressure ulcer, diabetes, CAD, and HTN. An RN and the ADON provided perineal and wound care, but the RN repeatedly changed gloves without sanitizing hands and did not sanitize hands or change gloves before removing soiled packing and applying new wound packing and a dressing. The DON stated staff were expected to sanitize hands every time gloves were removed, and facility policy required hand hygiene after glove removal and before moving from a contaminated body site to a clean body site.
An RN failed to follow hand hygiene and safe medication handling during med pass, including touching dropped tablets and handling meds without gloves or hand hygiene between steps. The facility also failed to store nebulizer mouthpieces and masks in labeled bags when not in use for residents receiving respiratory treatments, including a resident with CHF, CKD, DM2, and anemia. The DON confirmed the expected storage and handling practices were not followed.
An LPN was observed cleaning a community-use glucometer with an alcohol pad instead of the bleach wipe or equivalent required by the facility policy. The LPN stated he always used alcohol pads, while the DNS stated staff were to use bleach wipes. The glucometer was used for CBG checks on several residents with diabetes, and their records did not indicate a BBP.
A resident with MRSA and an abdominal wound was observed during wound care with contracted wound care staff entering without proper PPE, touching room items, and performing wound care without consistent hand hygiene or glove changes while moving from dirty to clean tasks; the same staff then went to another resident’s room without gowns despite EBP signage. The facility also failed to timely replace another resident’s oxygen tubing for CPAP/oxygen use, and the tubing had no label showing when it was last changed.
Failure to Use EBP, Perform Hand Hygiene, and Maintain Sanitary Laundry Practices
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to implement enhanced barrier precautions (EBP) for a resident with an indwelling Foley catheter. The resident’s annual MDS identified cognitive impairment, diagnoses including obstructive and reflux uropathy, bladder neck obstruction, and urine retention, and that the resident used an indwelling catheter. The care plan, revised 6/8/26, directed staff to follow infection control protocols, post an EBP sign on the resident’s door, communicate the need for EBP, and use appropriate PPE during high-contact care. During observation, the resident had an EBP identifier and sign posted, and PPE supplies were available outside the room, but staff did not consistently wear gowns during close contact care. An LPN entered the resident’s room wearing gloves but no gown to obtain vital signs, stood close while applying and removing the blood pressure cuff, then removed gloves, performed hand hygiene, retrieved medications, and returned to the room without gloves or a gown to administer medications while touching the overbed table, water mug, and personal belongings. A NA entered the room without a gown or gloves and stood against the bed with her uniform touching the linens and overbed table before exiting after using hand sanitizer. An RN applied topical cream to the resident’s legs while wearing gloves but no gown. The nurse manager stated all staff were expected to wear a gown and gloves whenever coming into close contact with the resident, while the RN stated gowns were only needed when emptying the catheter. The facility also failed to ensure hand hygiene during medication administration for three residents. A TMA prepared and administered medications to three residents without washing or sanitizing hands between residents or before handling medications, and stated she only sanitized her hands when medications were powdery or when giving lactulose. The DON stated staff were expected to sanitize hands before and after preparing medications for a resident and between residents, and the medication administration policy required hand hygiene before passing medications, prior to handling medications, and after coming in contact with a resident. In addition, laundry services were not conducted in a sanitary manner: the soiled laundry room contained multiple soiled laundry bins, no gowns or gloves were available in the room, and a laundry worker stated she wore only gloves except when removing items from the soaking bin or handling biohazard bagged laundry. The housekeeping/laundry supervisor stated staff were expected to wear a gown and gloves whenever working with dirty laundry and remove them before working with clean laundry.
Infection Control Lapses During Insulin Administration
Penalty
Summary
Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program was deficient when an LVN failed to follow hand hygiene and insulin administration practices during a medication pass for a resident with diabetes. Resident #97 was cognitively intact, had diagnoses including diabetes, peripheral vascular disease, acquired absence of left toes, and acquired absence of the right leg below the knee, and was ordered Lantus insulin 30 units subcutaneously twice daily. During observation, the LVN washed his hands in the resident’s bathroom and turned off the faucet with his bare hand instead of using a paper towel, then returned to the medication cart and administered insulin without cleaning the rubber seal of the insulin pen with alcohol first. During interview, the LVN stated that after washing hands the faucet should be turned off with a paper towel because the handle could be contaminated and germs could be reintroduced, and he acknowledged he did not realize he had turned it off with his bare hand. He also stated he was not sure the rubber seal on the new insulin pen had to be cleaned with alcohol before use, despite having skills training within the year. The DON stated the nurse should have wiped the rubber seal with alcohol before inserting the needle and should have used a paper towel to turn off the faucet because it was cross contamination and a break in infection control. The facility’s hand hygiene policy stated all staff must perform proper hand hygiene procedures and that gloves do not replace hand hygiene.
Failure to Perform Hand Hygiene During Wound Care
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure infection prevention practices, including hand hygiene, were followed during wound care for a resident with a stage 4 coccyx pressure ulcer. The resident was cognitively intact and had diagnoses including diabetes mellitus, coronary artery disease, and hypertension. The resident’s assessment and care plan identified chronic pressure ulcers, diabetic foot ulcers, dependence for several activities of daily living, and a history of being noncompliant with repositioning and often refusing to get out of bed. During observation of wound care, the clinical manager RN and the ADON entered the resident’s room wearing gowns and gloves and began perineal care and wound care. The RN removed and replaced gloves multiple times while cleansing stool from the resident’s buttocks and upper thigh, but did not sanitize her hands after removing soiled gloves. The RN then gathered wound care supplies, removed the wound packing, measured the wound, and packed the pressure ulcer with new packing and applied a dressing without sanitizing hands or changing gloves before beginning the new wound packing and dressing application. During interview, the RN confirmed she had not sanitized her hands after each glove change and had not sanitized her hands or changed gloves after removing the soiled packing before applying the new wound packing and dressing. The DON stated her expectation was that staff sanitize hands every time gloves are removed and that after a wound is cleansed, staff should remove gloves, wash hands, and apply new gloves before applying new dressings. The facility policy stated hand hygiene should be performed after removing gloves, after handling clean or soiled dressings, and before moving from a contaminated body site to a clean body site during resident care.
Infection Control Failures During Medication Pass and Respiratory Equipment Storage
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to follow infection control standards for hand hygiene during medication administration for 2 of 5 observed medication passes. During one observation, an RN poured a tablet into her hand from a blister pack and administered it to a resident. During a second observation, the RN performed hand hygiene, used a tissue as a barrier, and poured medications for another resident, but when a Hydroxychloroquine tablet fell onto the medication cart she picked it up and discarded it without performing hand hygiene before continuing. An Eliquis tablet fell onto the tissue barrier and was handled without gloves, and a Divalproex tablet was also poured into the RN’s hand before being placed into the medication cup. The RN then entered the resident’s room and administered the medications. The facility also failed to follow infection control standards for storage of respiratory equipment for 3 of 7 residents reviewed for respiratory services. During an observation, an RN removed a nebulizer T-mouthpiece from a gray plastic basin on a nightstand; the mouthpiece was not stored in a bag. The RN administered an Albuterol nebulizer treatment to the resident. The RN stated the mouthpiece is normally stored in a bag when not in use and that she should have gotten a new one and discarded the one not bagged before giving the treatment. The DON stated the nebulizer mouthpiece and mask should be stored in a bag when not in use and that staff should have disposed of the mouthpiece and gotten a new one. Record review and observations showed Resident #2, who had diagnoses including hypertensive heart and chronic kidney disease with heart failure, congestive heart failure, type 2 diabetes, and anemia, had a nebulizer mask sitting next to the machine on the bedside table and left open to air rather than secured in a labeled bag. The same condition was observed again in the resident’s empty room two days later. The DON stated the expectation was that nebulizer equipment be stored in a bag labeled for the resident when not in use, and if it was not stored appropriately it should have been removed and replaced with new equipment. Resident #2 had an order for Ipratropium-Albuterol nebulizer solution, and the MAR showed it was administered multiple times in July.
Improper Cleaning of Community-Use Glucometer
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure a community-use glucometer was cleaned with an EPA-approved disinfectant for 1 of 4 halls reviewed for infection control, specifically Hall 2. The facility’s 10/2025 glucometer cleaning policy stated staff were to clean glucometers with a bleach germicidal wipe or equivalent, but on 7/7/26 at 7:46 AM an LPN was observed cleaning a community-used glucometer with an alcohol pad and stated he always used alcohol pads to clean the glucometers. The LPN identified residents on Hall 2 who had CBG checks as Residents 7, 13, 63, 68, 71, and 99. Each of these residents had diabetes, and their clinical records did not indicate they had a BBP. At 8:38 AM, the DNS stated staff were to use bleach wipes to clean the community-use glucometers.
Failure to Use PPE During Wound Care and Replace Oxygen Tubing Timely
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that all staff, including contracted wound care staff, wore appropriate PPE and performed hand hygiene during wound care for a resident with intact cognition, peripheral vascular disease, an abdominal wall ulceration, and MRSA. A contact precautions sign was posted on the resident’s door requiring hand hygiene, gloves, gown, and dedicated or disposable equipment. During observation, the facility LPN washed hands and donned gown and gloves, but contracted wound care staff entered the room without appropriate PPE, touched the resident’s bedding and items in the room, and later proceeded with wound care after being asked to put on gowns. During the wound care, the contracted staff performed care on the resident’s abdominal wound without changing gloves or performing hand hygiene when moving from dirty to clean tasks. One staff member released the abdominal fold, removed the old dressing, measured the wound, and applied a new dressing while another staff member reached into the wound cart with an ungloved, unwashed hand, opened a sterile package, and handed it to the physician. The physician then leaned over the resident’s bedding and obtained a wound sample. After leaving the room, the staff removed PPE and performed hand hygiene, then went to another resident’s room for wound care without placing gowns on despite the enhanced barrier precautions sign posted there. The facility also failed to change oxygen tubing timely for a resident with COPD, sleep apnea, oxygen therapy, and CPAP use. The resident stated the oxygen tubing had not been changed since admission and that the tubing in use had been provided by the resident because staff used it instead of obtaining one from supply. The tubing was observed without any label showing when it had last been changed, and staff could not confirm the last change because there was no order documenting weekly tubing changes. Facility staff stated oxygen tubing was expected to be changed weekly, but the resident’s orders did not include a weekly tubing change order.
Trusted data from CMS and state health departments
Every citation, penalty and Plan of Correction is sourced from public CMS records (latest release August 26, 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.