Failure to Prevent Abuse and Neglect and to Investigate Allegations Involving Two Residents
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to protect residents from abuse and neglect, including failure to provide timely incontinent care and repositioning, failure to protect a resident from verbal abuse by a CNA, and an allegation of physical abuse by the ADON. One cognitively intact female resident with dementia, anxiety, depression, diabetes mellitus, and atrial fibrillation was care planned as needing staff assistance for ADLs, including one-person assistance for bathing, two-person assistance with a mechanical lift for transfers, and staff supervision for toileting, bed mobility, dressing, and eating. She was also care planned for bladder incontinence and impaired mobility, with interventions including application of barrier cream after incontinent episodes. A later care plan entry documented a potential psychosocial well-being problem related to an allegation of verbal abuse. Video evidence from one date showed this resident lying in bed on her back, not turned, repositioned, or provided incontinent care from 1:56 PM until 7:55 PM. On another date, a time-lapse video from 5:45 AM to 11:45 AM showed no staff entering the room to check, change, or reposition her for six hours. In interviews, the resident’s family member reported calling the facility and requesting incontinent care because no staff had checked on the resident since before 6 AM when night shift staff last checked her. A nursing assistant assigned to the resident on one of the dates stated she had not been in the room to provide care because she had not had time and acknowledged she was new and found it difficult to care for all assigned residents, adding that residents should be checked every two hours and that not doing so could be considered neglect. Another CNA who cared for the resident on the earlier date recalled arriving around mid-afternoon, possibly entering the room only to provide fresh ice and asking the resident if she needed changing, then not changing her until about 8 PM after a family call, and could not recall changing her at any other time that shift. This CNA stated she should have made rounds on every resident every two hours to check and clean them and acknowledged that failing to do so placed the resident at risk for neglect. The DON and Administrator both stated their expectation that CNAs check residents at least every two hours and recognized that extended periods without checks placed residents at risk for neglect. The same cognitively intact resident was also subjected to degrading verbal interactions by a CNA during incontinent care, captured on video with audio. The video showed the resident lying in bed on her back when the CNA entered, snatched gloves from the wall box, and responded condescendingly when the resident said she needed to be changed, telling her there was a line and that there were no “first privileges.” When the resident commented that the CNA did not like her job, the CNA replied hatefully that she liked her job but not when people could not wait in line, and further stated that the resident thought she was privileged and kept hitting her call light. The resident remarked that someone must have “peed in [the CNA’s] cheerios,” and the CNA responded that she had been doing this too long to “deal for people like this” and that she would not hold her tongue for anyone. While providing care, the CNA continued to interject instructions in a rude manner, pointing and telling the resident to roll. The resident later told surveyors that a staff member had talked mean to her when she asked to be changed, that the staff member must have had a bad day, and that she did not want that staff member back in her room. The resident’s family member reported bringing the video of the verbal interaction to the ADON and asking her to watch it, and requested that the CNA not be allowed back in the resident’s room because of how she talked to and treated the resident. The family member stated the ADON declined to watch the video, said she did not need to see it and would retrain the aide, and then walked away to move tables in the dining hall, leaving the family member standing there. In her interview, the ADON acknowledged declining to watch the video when it was offered, stating that the family member told her the CNA had provided all care perfectly but needed to talk to the resident when providing care. She said she did not retrain the CNA, did not initiate any reporting or investigation because she believed everything was done correctly, and told the CNA only to do the required care and get out of the resident’s room. The ADON stated she did not consider it important to talk to residents while providing care and said she did not receive a request from the family to keep the CNA out of the room. She also stated that if allegations of abuse were not reported and investigated properly, residents were placed at risk of abuse. A second resident, an elderly female with senile degeneration of the brain, dementia, and atherosclerotic heart disease, had a quarterly MDS showing she was usually understood and usually understood others, but with a BIMS score of 5 indicating severely impaired cognition and disorganized thinking. She required supervision or touching assistance with eating and was dependent on staff for toileting and transfers, and was incontinent of bowel and bladder. Her care plan documented an ADL self-care performance deficit related to impaired mobility, cognition, weakness, and reliance on staff for ADL assistance. An anonymous staff person reported that about three months prior, this resident was in the dining room hollering “Help! Help!” when the ADON walked by; the resident reached out to grab the ADON to stop her, and the ADON hit the resident on the hand and told her to leave her alone and not touch her. The anonymous reporter stated they then went to assist the resident, that another staff member also witnessed the incident, and that they were tired of injustices residents experienced. They reported that the ADON often refused to assist residents and that they had reported this to the DON, who did nothing, which was why they had not reported the hand-hitting incident earlier. The anonymous reporter further stated that many employees had witnessed the ADON’s mistreatment of residents and reported it to the DON but would not report it further due to fear of being fired. Another staff member named as a witness denied seeing the ADON abuse or mistreat residents and denied seeing the ADON hit this resident. The Administrator reported that the ADON was suspended related to the allegation of hitting this resident. When interviewed, the resident, who was confused, stated she did not remember any staff hitting or mistreating her and said everyone treated her well, but her confusion was evident when she answered her ringing cell phone by picking up her drink and saying hello. The DON stated that abuse should be reported immediately to the abuse coordinator and that if staff would not report to her, they should go to the Administrator, and that failure to report abuse and neglect immediately placed residents at risk of not being protected from abuse. The Administrator stated she expected staff to follow the abuse and neglect policy and report abuse and neglect immediately, that she was not aware of any abuse allegations involving this resident, and that abuse not being reported placed residents at risk of further abuse. The facility’s undated Abuse and Neglect policy stated that residents have the right to be free from abuse, neglect, misappropriation of resident property, and exploitation, and that residents should not be subjected to abuse by anyone, including facility staff, other residents, consultants, volunteers, staff of other agencies, family members, friends, or others. The policy defined abuse to include deprivation of goods or services necessary to attain or maintain physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being, and specified that instances of abuse cause physical harm, pain, or mental anguish, including verbal, sexual, physical, and mental abuse. Physical abuse was defined to include hitting, and mental abuse to include humiliation and harassment. Neglect was defined as the failure of the facility, its employees, or service providers to provide goods and services necessary to avoid physical harm, pain, mental anguish, or emotional distress. The policy required that all reports or suspicions of abuse, neglect, or potentially criminal behavior be investigated per facility protocol, reviewed by the Administrator and/or Abuse Preventionist within 24 hours, and reported to state authorities within specified time frames. It also required any employee with reasonable cause to believe an elderly or incapacitated adult was suffering from abuse, neglect, or exploitation to make an immediate verbal report to the Abuse Preventionist or designee and to the Administrator, with mandated reporting to state and/or adult protective services.
Penalty
Resources
Below are regulatory guidelines relevant to this citation:
A facility failed to protect two residents with severe cognitive impairment from sexual abuse by not completing a comprehensive assessment of each resident’s capacity to consent after repeated sexual encounters were discovered. Staff found the residents together in bed or in the bathroom, often unclothed, and allowed privacy based on their behavior without documenting a structured consent assessment. The facility also did not fully investigate unexplained bruising and reported vaginal bleeding for one resident in the setting of the known relationship, and the MD was not notified of the incidents or injuries.
Failure to protect a resident from resident-to-resident physical abuse: one resident entered another resident’s area, got into her belongings, and then grabbed, hit, and scratched her left wrist/hand, causing a skin tear, bruise, swelling, and pain. The injured resident said she was afraid of the other resident, while staff heard yelling, found both residents in the room, separated them, and documented the wound and bruising. The other resident had dementia with behavioral disturbance and used a walker and wheelchair.
Failure to protect a resident from resident-to-resident abuse: a resident with PTSD and a long history of physical and sexual abuse reported another resident repeatedly entered their room at night, then later exposed himself, blocked the resident from leaving, and used meth in front of them. The record lacked an investigation, trauma assessment, psychosocial monitoring, and documented behavior-based monitoring for the other resident, and staff interviews confirmed the concerns were not fully addressed in the chart.
A resident with dementia, CKD, HF, and severe cognitive impairment was involved in a physical abuse allegation when a CNA struck or batted his arm/hand during care after he grabbed at staff. A witness reported that the CNA hit the resident hard and yelled at him, while the CNA said she only tapped his hand away and did not consider it abusive. The resident could not answer questions about the event, and the facility’s records showed the allegation was not promptly escalated through the abuse reporting chain.
A resident with impaired cognition, stroke-related deficits, and constipation was subjected to manual stool removal by an LPN after a suppository did not work. Staff interviews and the resident’s statements indicated she said stop and begged the LPN to stop while he continued the procedure, and she later described the care as painful, violating, and demeaning. The LPN said he manually removed the stool in the bathroom, did not complete an abdominal assessment, and did not contact the provider for further direction.
A resident with CKD, CHF, ESRD, DM, and multiple foot wounds did not receive ordered daily wound care, and the TAR and progress notes lacked documentation that the treatments were completed on multiple occasions. The resident was later hospitalized for worsening wound infection, with purulent drainage and concern for osteomyelitis; the wound care provider also reported concerns that ordered dressing changes were not being done and noted worsening skin breakdown to the buttocks.
Failure to Assess Consent and Investigate Injury With Resident Sexual Activity
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to protect two cognitively impaired residents from sexual abuse by not completing a comprehensive assessment of each resident’s capacity to consent to sexual activity after becoming aware that they were engaging in sexual contact. One resident had diagnoses including Alzheimer’s disease, neurocognitive disorder with Lewy bodies, dementia, and anxiety, with documentation showing severe cognitive impairment, wandering, hallucinations, confusion, and inability to consistently orient to time or place. The other resident also had diagnoses including Alzheimer’s disease and dementia with psychotic disturbance, with repeated BIMS scores showing severe cognitive impairment and care plan documentation noting cognitive loss and a history of wandering and checking doors. The record showed repeated incidents in which the two residents were found together in bed or in the bathroom, often unclothed, and staff documented that they appeared calm or did not show obvious distress. Staff notes and interviews showed that the residents were allowed privacy and continued access to each other without documentation of a formal assessment of whether either resident understood the nature of the relationship or could knowingly and voluntarily consent. Staff interviews also reflected that they relied on the residents’ behavior, such as whether they pushed away or said no, rather than documenting a structured assessment of capacity after each incident. The facility also failed to investigate unexplained bruising and reported vaginal bleeding for one resident in the context of the known sexual activity. The record documented bruises on the forearms and thigh in various stages of healing, along with a report of bloody vaginal discharge, but there was no evidence of a physical assessment or investigation to determine whether the findings were related to abuse, coercion, trauma, or another cause. Interviews with the RN, LPN, DON, MD, and family showed that the physician had not been notified of the sexual incidents, the bruising, or the vaginal bleeding, and that staff had not documented a formal assessment after the incidents.
Failure to Protect Resident from Resident-to-Resident Physical Abuse
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to protect a resident from resident-to-resident physical abuse when one resident attacked another during the night, causing a skin tear to the left wrist, bruising to the left thumb, swelling, pain, and fear for safety. The injured resident was admitted with diagnoses including type 2 diabetes mellitus, unsteadiness on feet, need for assistance with personal care, and muscle weakness, and had a BIMS score of 15/15 indicating cognitive intactness. The other resident involved had diagnoses including type 2 diabetes mellitus, dementia with other behavioral disturbance, and essential hypertension, and used a walker and wheelchair for locomotion. According to the injured resident, she returned from the bathroom and found the other resident in her area getting into her refrigerator. When she told the other resident to get out of her things, the other resident became angry, grabbed her left wrist, hit her left hand, and scratched her, causing the injury. The injured resident stated she was afraid of the other resident and was glad the other resident had been moved to another unit so she could not hurt her again. At observation the next day, the resident’s left wrist/hand was bandaged, an observable bruise was present at the base of the left thumb, and the hand/wrist was slightly swollen and painful to touch. Facility documentation and staff statements confirmed that staff heard yelling from the room, found the residents in the room, and separated them. Nursing notes documented a skin tear with partial skin flap loss to the left wrist/forearm and bruising to the left thumb, with the wound cleansed and steri-strips applied. Staff statements described the other resident as being in the injured resident’s area and making unwanted contact, while the administrator stated the investigation was still ongoing and could not yet determine whether resident-to-resident abuse had occurred. The facility’s abuse prevention policy states residents are to be free from abuse by anyone, including other residents, and defines physical abuse as willful infliction of injury resulting in physical harm or pain.
Failure to Protect Resident from Resident-to-Resident Abuse
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to protect residents from abuse and failed to provide adequate supervision and effective interventions when Resident 7 reported fear and unsafe interactions with another resident. Resident 7 was admitted with COPD and PTSD and had a documented history of childhood through adulthood abuse, including physical and sexual abuse, domestic violence, and trafficking. A trauma questionnaire showed Resident 7 had previously tried to avoid reminders of past events and reported that nothing made them feel worse at that time. In one incident, Resident 7 told staff they were afraid to go to sleep because another resident came to their room at night and shook them awake. The resident admitted going to the room and waking Resident 7, and staff educated that resident about safety and respect. The progress note did not appear in the incident log or grievance log, and the record did not show an investigation, monitoring for negative psychological social outcomes, a trauma assessment, or care plan interventions to promote a sense of security. Staff interviews confirmed the social service department was unaware of the situation and that a trauma assessment should have been completed. In a second incident, Resident 7 reported that the same resident blew methamphetamine smoke in their face in the smoking shed, blocked them from leaving with a wheelchair, and exposed and masturbated in front of them. Resident 7 stated the event triggered past childhood trauma and made them feel trapped. The facility investigation documented a separation plan and one-to-one supervision for Resident 7, while the other resident was placed on alert status with increased monitoring and behavior risk. However, the record did not show implementation of behavior-based monitoring for the other resident, and observations later showed Resident 7 without staff supervision.
Physical abuse allegation involving a resident during care
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure a resident was free from physical abuse when a CNA slapped the resident’s arm during care. The resident was a male with dementia without behavioral disturbance, chronic kidney disease, and heart failure. His care plan identified that he could be physically aggressive due to poor impulse control and resistive to care because of impaired cognition, and his quarterly MDS showed severely impaired cognition with a BIMS score of 2, extensive assistance needs for most ADLs, and bowel and bladder incontinence. According to the incident documentation, the event occurred in the resident’s room during care when one CNA reported that another CNA hit the resident’s hand after the resident grabbed her. A written statement from the witnessing CNA said the CNA hit the resident hard on the arm and then yelled at him. The resident was unable to answer questions about the event because of his stroke and cognitive impairment, and the incident report noted that he had a history of hitting staff. The CNA involved stated that the resident struck her arm and that she tapped his hand gently, comparing her action to what one would do with a child. The facility’s investigation summary described the contact as the CNA batting the resident’s hand away, while the witness described it as striking the resident on the arm. The report also showed that the allegation was not immediately escalated through the facility’s abuse reporting process, as the witness said she reported it to an LVN and was told the DON had been notified, but the abuse coordinator did not receive the information until later. The facility’s records also reflected that the incident was ultimately treated as an unsubstantiated allegation of abuse.
Abuse During Manual Stool Removal
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure a resident was free from abuse during bowel care when an LPN performed manual removal of impacted stool from the rectum without consent and continued after the resident asked him to stop. The resident had moderately impaired cognition, was dependent on staff for transfers and toileting hygiene, and had a history of constipation. Her diagnoses included stroke, atrial fibrillation, hemiplegia/hemiparesis, adjustment disorder, and mixed anxiety and depressed mood. Her care plan identified limited physical mobility and the need for two staff with a stand lift for transfers. On the day of the incident, the resident had not had a bowel movement for several days and had received constipation medications and a rectal suppository. Progress notes documented that a rectal check found hard stool and that manual evacuation was performed with removal of large amounts of stool. Staff interviews described that the resident cried, said stop, and begged the LPN to stop while he continued the manual removal for additional time. The resident later reported that the procedure was painful, that she felt violated, embarrassed, and demeaned, and that she believed the nurse was smiling and laughing at her during the care. Multiple staff interviews confirmed that the resident was distressed during the procedure and that the LPN did not stop when she requested it. Staff also stated the procedure was invasive and should have been stopped when the resident expressed pain. The LPN stated he manually removed the stool in the bathroom, did not complete an abdominal assessment, did not administer an enema before manual removal, and did not contact the provider for further direction. The report also states the facility failed to ensure the resident was free from abuse during cares, and the immediate jeopardy was identified based on this event.
Failure to Complete Ordered Wound Care
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide wound care services as ordered by the physician for one resident with multiple chronic conditions, including CKD, CHF, HTN, ESRD, muscle wasting/atrophy, anemia, and diabetes-related foot wounds. The resident’s records showed a BIMS score of 15, indicating cognitive intactness, and documented multiple wounds, including ulcers on both feet, a diabetic foot ulcer, and a wound infection. Physician orders required daily wound care to the left calcaneus, right calcaneus, right plantar foot, right medial foot, and daily povidone-iodine application to the right foot, but the TAR did not document completion of these treatments on multiple dates in May 2026, and the progress notes also lacked documentation that the treatments were completed. The resident was hospitalized on 5/26/26 with worsening wound infection. The hospital history and physical documented ESRD on daily dialysis, CHF, COPD, DM, depression, HTN, prior MI with stenting, oxygen use, chronic wound status, and ulcers of both feet with necrosis of muscle. The hospital record stated the resident reported the nursing home should have been changing wound dressings daily but said that was not done. The wound care provider stated the right foot wound had purulent drainage, she was concerned about osteomyelitis, and she sent the resident to the emergency room. She also stated she had concerns that the facility was not completing the ordered dressing changes and that the resident had worsening buttocks skin breakdown, while the DON stated treatments should be completed as ordered and documented on the TAR or in progress notes.
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.