Failure to Protect Cognitively Impaired Residents From Sexual Abuse and Inadequate Consent Assessment
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to protect residents from sexual abuse by not adequately assessing capacity to consent to sexual activity and not implementing effective interventions for a resident with known sexually inappropriate behaviors. Resident B had diagnoses including unspecified dementia, major depressive disorder, and a cognitive communication deficit, with an MDS showing moderate cognitive impairment and moderate impairment in decision-making for daily tasks. Her care plans addressed impaired cognition, poor safety awareness, and impulsiveness, and she used a position change alarm due to attempts to self-transfer. A care plan for promotion of safe intimate/sexual practices, created shortly before the incident, stated she was alert, aware, and coherent in choosing to engage in an intimate/sexual relationship and included interventions such as assessing her understanding of the nature of the act and her ability to refuse, encouraging appropriate touch, and reminding her that sexual partners must be able to provide mutual consent. Her representatives were notified that she was seeking companionship with a male resident and agreed to hand-holding and companionship, but they did not agree to more intimate acts. Resident C had diagnoses including unspecified dementia with behavioral disturbance and delusional disorders, with an MDS indicating severe cognitive impairment. His record documented a history of inappropriate personal boundaries manifested by inappropriate touching, such as rubbing another person’s back, reaching for a leg, and shoulder rubbing. He had been treated with medroxyprogesterone for hypersexuality and was also on risperidone. Behavior notes and staff interviews described increased friendliness and physical contact with multiple female residents, including patting arms, hand holding, rubbing arms and legs, and entering female residents’ rooms, sometimes becoming agitated or hostile when redirected. Staff, including a housekeeper and an RN, reported that he had been seen with his penis exposed in a lounge, asking a female resident to put her hands in his pants, pulling a female resident’s hand toward his genital area over clothing, and touching a female resident’s breast. Despite this pattern, his care plan for inappropriate personal boundaries was resolved, and the Social Service Director and DON indicated that, after discussions with the Ombudsman, care plans regarding sexual behaviors were resolved based on the view that such behaviors were residents’ rights rather than maladaptive behaviors. On the evening of 3/22/26, a Qualified Medication Aide observed Resident C in Resident B’s room with his pants partially down, exposing his buttocks, while Resident B, seated in her recliner and leaning forward, was performing oral sex on him. Resident B’s roommate was in the hallway at the time. The QMA instructed Resident C to leave; he became angry but complied. Resident B said little and, after the incident, had forgotten that anything had occurred. Subsequent nursing documentation noted that Resident B would not or could not discuss the incident, described the male resident as a friend, and denied unwanted touching. Interviews with Resident B’s representative indicated that Resident B had moderate to severe dementia, sometimes did not recognize family, frequently asked where she was and when she was going home, and that performing oral sex was not consistent with her prior behavior or values. Resident B later demonstrated significant disorientation, unable to state where she was, what town she was in, or the year, and denied having a male friend or male visitors in her room. Additional interviews and records showed that staff were aware of Resident C’s ongoing sexually focused behaviors and the need for redirection. Behavior notes shortly before the incident documented increased agitation and interactions with female peers, his anger when asked to visit females only in public areas, and an episode of inappropriate behavior with a confused female resident from whom he was redirected. The Psychiatric NP reported that the facility had been concerned about Resident C’s sudden focus on female residents and that he had required medication to prevent escalation of inappropriate touching. The NP also stated that staff had to redirect Resident C several times related to female residents and that he became agitated when redirected. The acting Administrator acknowledged that a Sexual Consent Capacity Assessment was not completed for the residents prior to the incident and that behavior documentation was only maintained if behaviors were considered maladaptive. The surveyors determined, using the reasonable person concept, that this failure to assess capacity to consent and to implement interventions to mitigate Resident C’s sexually inappropriate behaviors resulted in severe psychosocial harm, including dehumanization and humiliation, for Resident B. Other residents and staff expressed concerns related to Resident C’s behaviors. A cognitively intact resident reported hearing from staff and in the hallway that a female resident had performed oral sex on Resident C and expressed fear that he might enter her room and touch her, stating she did not want to be touched. The Social Service Director described Resident C as social with many female residents, with hypersexuality increasing as he formed more relationships, and acknowledged that staff struggled to distinguish between appropriate social interaction and infringement on residents’ rights. Several residents, including Residents F and E, had histories of dementia and prior care plans for inappropriate personal boundaries that were later resolved, and some had care plans for companionship with male peers that included general interventions such as assessing understanding and ability to refuse, but the records lacked individualized monitoring and interventions specifically addressing intimate or sexual behaviors for all involved residents. The combination of Resident C’s known sexually inappropriate behaviors, his severe cognitive impairment, Resident B’s moderate cognitive impairment and poor memory, the absence of a formal sexual consent capacity assessment prior to the incident, and the lack of sustained, effective behavioral interventions for Resident C led to the cited deficiency for failure to protect residents from sexual abuse. The surveyors concluded that the facility failed to ensure residents were protected from sexual abuse when Resident B, with moderate cognitive impairment, was found performing oral sex on Resident C, who had severe cognitive impairment and a known history of sexually inappropriate behaviors. They found that the facility did not assess the residents’ capacity to consent to sexual activity prior to the incident and did not implement interventions to mitigate Resident C’s sexually inappropriate behaviors. Using the reasonable person concept, they determined that this deficient practice resulted in severe psychosocial harm, including dehumanization and humiliation, for Resident B.
Penalty
Resources
Below are regulatory guidelines relevant to this citation:
A CNA aggressively slapped and grabbed a resident’s wrist during lunch feeding assistance, then roughly pulled the resident’s hand off his shirt sleeve after she had grabbed it. The CNA had prior disciplinary actions, including a previous feeding incident in which a resident choked and required the Heimlich maneuver. A nurse later assessed the resident and found no bruises or cuts.
A facility failed to protect two residents from resident-to-resident physical abuse. In one incident, a resident with dementia and cognitive impairment was struck during a dispute over TV volume and responded by scratching the other resident. In another, a resident with dementia and physically aggressive behaviors scratched a roommate’s face, leaving superficial marks. Staff interviews and clinical records confirmed both altercations and the resulting injuries.
A resident with a left ankle fracture, muscle weakness, and total-assist transfer needs was supposed to receive 2-person assistance and remain NWB on the left leg. Instead, a nurse aide transferred the resident with only one staff member during a toilet-to-wheelchair transfer, and the resident heard a pop and developed increased pain. X-ray and hospital imaging confirmed fractures of the distal R tibia and fibula, and the facility substantiated neglect for not following the care plan.
Failure to Protect Resident from Repeated Room Intrusions: A cognitively intact resident with depression and hip OA was repeatedly frightened when another resident with dementia and wandering behaviors entered her room, took belongings, and could not be reliably redirected. Staff used a stop sign banner and other barriers, but the other resident continued to enter the room, and the resident became so fearful that she requested discharge before completing her therapy goals.
Failure to protect a resident from alleged physical abuse: A resident with COPD, speech disturbances, and dysphagia reported that an LPN pushed them in the chest during med pass after they refused meds, causing them to fall. The resident had no visible injuries, but the report was documented by nursing staff and the NP, and the resident later reiterated by writing/gestures that the LPN pushed them. The LPN denied pushing the resident and described the contact as accidental, while the facility concluded there was no evidence of abuse.
A resident-to-resident sexual abuse allegation was not thoroughly investigated, and the resident was not promptly protected or monitored after the allegation. In a separate issue, a handwritten sign with personal care instructions was posted above another resident's bed, and an RT, LPN, RN, and CNA all acknowledged it was a privacy and dignity concern and against facility policy.
Failure to Protect Resident from Abuse During Feeding Assistance
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure a resident’s right to be free from abuse during lunch assistive feeding. While standing about 3 feet from the lunch table, the surveyor heard a CNA aggressively slap Resident #56’s left wrist and observed the CNA grab the resident’s left wrist and roughly pull her hand off of his shirt sleeve after she had grabbed it. The surveyor then continued observing the meal and later reported the incident to the DON and Administrator. Resident #56 was assessed by a licensed nurse after the incident, and no bruises or cuts were found on her wrists. The CNA involved had been hired by the facility in 2024, had signed the facility’s Resident Abuse Procedural Summary, and had attended behavior training in 2026. The CNA also had three prior disciplinary actions, including a prior incident in which a resident choked after being given too large a bite during assistive feeding and required a Heimlich maneuver.
Failure to Protect Residents from Resident-to-Resident Physical Abuse
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure two sampled residents were free from physical abuse by other residents. One resident with dementia, anxiety, chronic pain, visual hallucinations, and moderate cognitive impairment was involved in an altercation with a roommate after a disagreement about TV volume. The incident escalated when the roommate attempted to take the TV remote and struck the resident with an open hand, and the resident responded by scratching the roommate. The record also documented a new scratch on the resident’s left hand and later noted that the resident no longer wanted to share a room with the other resident. The other incident involved a resident with dementia and significant cognitive impairment who had a behavior care plan for impaired safety awareness and physically aggressive behaviors. The record stated that the resident clawed a roommate in the face, leaving superficial scratches and red marks on the roommate’s chin and cheek. The roommate’s record reflected ongoing monitoring for scratches to the chin and neck, and the roommate stated that the other resident reached up and ran fingernails across her face while they were getting up for breakfast. Facility documentation and staff interviews confirmed both resident-to-resident incidents. Staff described the first event as a physical altercation triggered by conflict over TV volume, and the second as an incident in which one resident scratched another resident’s face. The DON stated the facility investigated and reported the incidents, and also acknowledged that the documentation surrounding the second event was inconsistent and did not meet expectations or policy. The cited deficiency was based on the facility’s failure to ensure the residents were protected from physical abuse by other residents.
Failure to Follow Two-Person Transfer Plan Resulted in Resident Fractures
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to protect a resident from neglect when staff did not follow the resident’s individualized transfer plan requiring assistance from two staff members. The resident was admitted with a left lower leg trimalleolar fracture, polyosteoarthritis, and muscle weakness, and the MDS indicated the resident was cognitively intact but required total assistance for transfers and toileting. The comprehensive care plan and physician orders both directed staff to provide two-person assistance for transfers and to maintain non-weight-bearing status on the left lower extremity. During a transfer from the toilet to a wheelchair, one nurse aide assisted the resident without a second staff member. According to the documentation, the resident stood without difficulty, but during the pivot transfer the resident’s right foot turned inward and both the resident and the aide heard a loud pop. The resident immediately reported increased pain. Later that day, x-ray findings identified an acute fracture of the right tibia, and the resident was transferred to the hospital emergency department for further evaluation and treatment. Hospital imaging confirmed fractures of the distal right tibia and fibula, and the resident was scheduled for surgical repair. The facility’s investigation determined that the aide transferred the resident with only one staff member despite the care plan and physician order requiring two staff members, and that this failure directly resulted in the resident sustaining the fractures. The facility substantiated caregiver neglect and terminated the employee following the investigation.
Failure to Protect Resident from Repeated Room Intrusions
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to protect a cognitively intact resident with osteoarthritis of the right hip and major depressive disorder from mental abuse by another resident. The resident was admitted as a vulnerable adult and her care plan identified a goal of being free from abuse, neglect, or financial exploitation, but it did not include interventions to protect her from abuse. The resident later reported that another resident repeatedly entered her room, scared her, and took belongings, and she asked staff to contact her lawyer. She also began using a stop sign banner across her door and later barricaded her room with a walker, closet door, and bedside table because she was afraid of the other resident. The other resident had moderate cognitive impairment, vascular dementia with agitation, and Alzheimer’s disease, and his care plan documented restlessness, agitation, sundowning, wandering into other residents’ rooms, and urinating in public. Progress notes showed repeated episodes of wandering into other residents’ rooms, difficulty with redirection, aggression toward staff, and disruptive behavior in resident rooms. Notes also documented that he entered the affected resident’s room on multiple occasions, and staff observed that he could move barriers out of the way and continue entering the room despite attempts to block access. Staff interviews confirmed that the resident was very scared of the other resident and that the repeated room intrusions continued over several days. Staff stated that stop sign banners did not stop him, closed doors did not stop him, and that it often took two or more staff to remove him from rooms. The resident requested discharge from the facility and left before reaching her maximal level with therapy services. Therapy documentation stated she was improving but still needed higher-level therapy before discharge, and the therapy director stated her early discharge was because she could not remain in the facility due to the other resident coming into her room. Facility records also showed staffing levels that were below the facility assessment on several shifts, and the assignment sheets did not identify a staff member assigned to 1:1 observation for the wandering resident.
Failure to Protect Resident from Alleged Physical Abuse
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a resident was free from physical abuse when a nurse allegedly made physical contact with the resident during medication administration. Resident #7, who had diagnoses including COPD, speech disturbances, and dysphagia, had intact cognition on the MDS dated 03/18/2026 and was care planned as at risk for misappropriation, neglect, abuse, and/or exploitation. On 04/08/2026, the resident reported to the RN supervisor that an LPN pushed them in the chest after they refused medications, causing them to fall to the floor. The resident was assessed and no visible injuries were noted. The resident’s report was documented in nursing and medical progress notes, and the facility’s investigation recorded that the resident was visibly upset while describing the incident. The LPN denied the allegation and stated that any contact was accidental, describing that the resident was close behind them as they left the room and that the resident’s chest contacted their back or shoulder. The RN supervisor, DON, and NP each documented interviews and assessments in which no bruising, swelling, or visible injury was found, and the resident later communicated by writing and gestures that they had told the LPN to leave the room and that the LPN pushed them in the chest and they fell. The facility concluded there was no evidence of abuse, neglect, exploitation, or mistreatment, despite the resident’s allegation and the conflicting accounts from the LPN and resident. The RN supervisor stated law enforcement was notified and police interviewed the resident and the LPN, but no report was filed. The DON later stated the contact was accidental and that the resident’s reporting was inconsistent regarding whether a fall occurred.
Failure to Protect Resident from Abuse and Maintain Privacy
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure a resident was free from abuse when a resident-to-resident sexual abuse allegation was not thoroughly investigated and the resident was not promptly protected or monitored after the allegation. The report states this involved 1 of 52 sampled residents, Resident 45, and that the deficient practice had the potential to place the resident at risk for continued abuse, emotional distress, fear, anxiety, a diminished sense of safety, and delayed implementation of interventions necessary to protect the resident from further abuse. The facility also failed to protect the privacy and confidentiality of Resident 58. Resident 58 was admitted with diagnoses including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. During observation, a handwritten sign reading, "Attention please no briefs chucks only!!" was posted above the resident's bed and remained there on a later observation. Staff members including a Respiratory Therapist, LPN, RN, and CNA each acknowledged the sign was visible above the bed and stated it was a privacy, dignity, and policy issue. A facility Residents Rights policy stated residents have the right to privacy and confidentiality with personal care and medical records, and that resident medical and personal care information is private and staff are required to respect and uphold resident privacy at all times.
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.