Elopement of Cognitively Impaired Resident Due to Inadequate Supervision and Security Screening
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to provide adequate supervision and prevent accidents when a cognitively impaired resident was able to leave the building unnoticed during the night and was later found on a public street. The resident was an older female admitted for rehabilitation after a cerebral infarction (stroke) and had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 7/15, indicating severe cognitive impairment. Her care plan identified an ADL self-care performance deficit related to weakness and deconditioning from a recent hospital stay, with interventions focused on encouraging participation in care, use of the call bell, explanation of procedures, and PT/OT evaluation and treatment. The care plan did not identify or address elopement risk or specific supervision needs related to her cognitive status. On the night of the incident, nursing documentation shows that at approximately 11:00 p.m. the resident was observed in bed sleeping and vital signs were taken without changes. Around 1:00–1:15 a.m., the RN making rounds discovered the resident was no longer in her bed, checked her bathroom and adjacent rooms, and did not find her. Security was alerted, and the RN searched the stairwell and pool area without locating the resident, then proceeded to the front of the building. A security guard reported that he had allowed a woman to exit the building around that time, believing she was homeless. Staff then searched outside and found the resident walking on a pedestrian walkway along the road to the right side of the building. She was returned to the facility, assessed with no injuries noted, and one-on-one supervision was initiated. Interviews and record reviews revealed multiple failures in supervision and identification that led to the elopement. The security guard stated he saw the resident in the swimming pool area, opened a locked gate for her when she could not open it, and escorted her out the front door without asking her name or any identifying questions, without checking for identification, and without notifying nursing staff. He reported assuming she was homeless based on her statement that she came through a back door used by homeless individuals and stated he did not see any identifying bracelets or clothing that would make him think she was a resident, although the family member reported the resident was wearing a fall-risk bracelet and a visible heart monitor. The facility had a pool area and dog park accessible from emergency exits and gates, and the resident was able to reach these areas and then the front of the building without being recognized or stopped by staff. The family member and speech therapist both described the resident as having significant cognitive and communication deficits, including difficulty understanding verbal instructions, needing repeated explanations and visual aids, and not consistently being oriented to person, place, or time, yet these deficits were not effectively incorporated into supervision practices that would have prevented her from leaving the facility unnoticed.
Removal Plan
- Instituted immediate monitoring of emergency exit doors leading outside to the pool and common areas by assigning a staff person at each door of egress; implemented a sign-in/sign-out sheet and prohibited resident/visitor/staff exit unless there is an emergency; ensured assigned staff are relieved for breaks/lunches with documentation on an assigned form.
- Implemented staff exterior walking rounds with documentation, including hourly rounds in the dog park and pool areas; verified dog park gate and pool gate are secured with staff initials.
- Implemented walkie-talkie protocol: charge nurses check out walkie talkies at the beginning of each shift and return them at the end to enhance communication with security.
- Re-educated staff on emergency exit and fire door usage: staff must not use these doors unless there is an emergency and must investigate each time an alarm sounds.
- Re-educated staff on elopement/missing resident procedures: alert staff by calling a Code Yellow, complete skills check quiz for each employee, and ensure elopement binders are located on the 1st and 2nd floor nurses' stations and at the front desk.
- Provided in-service on abuse and neglect (definitions, types, reporting) and identified the abuse coordinator.
- Provided instant in-service on unfamiliar person protocol to remind staff of obligations to identify all persons on the property.
- Completed elopement risk assessments on all residents in the facility.
- Conducted impromptu QAPI meetings addressing resident elopement, binder use, behavior monitoring, swimming pool concerns, and staff assignment at fire door/egress monitoring.
- Began facility-wide education on emergency exit usage and alarm investigation for all departments; ensured staff not in-serviced would be in-serviced prior to their next shift with documentation.
- Completed facility-wide education on resident elopement/missing resident search procedure, proper notification, resident assessments, and resident monitoring; ensured staff not reeducated would be reeducated before their next shift; began elopement skills testing with documentation.
- Began facility-wide education on abuse and neglect (definitions, abuse coordinator, types, importance of timely notification); ensured staff not reeducated would be reeducated before their next shift; implemented abuse/neglect skills testing once per shift.
- Re-educated security/concierge staff on initial contact and verification of a wandering resident: ask identifying questions, check for identifying markers, call nurses’ stations to verify, and refer to the elopement binder; required retraining prior to returning to duty with documentation.
- Implemented additional communication protocol between nursing and front desk/security using walkie talkies: devices located/charged at concierge desk; at least one security associate and one direct care associate on each floor carry walkie talkies; one issued per floor with sign-out and return at end of shift; education completed prior to next shift with documentation.
- Educated night shift staff on security protocol, unfamiliar persons protocol, and abuse and neglect.
- Provided immediate re-education to all security and concierge staff on safety monitoring protocols: hourly walking rounds in pool and dog park areas, continuous monitoring of pool area via security cameras with feed visible at all times, prompt reporting of adverse findings to leadership, and accurate/timely documentation; documented on an in-service sheet.
- Re-educated the Healthcare Administrator on the facility abuse policy and elopement policy.
- Regional Director of Clinical Services educated the Executive Director and Healthcare Administrator on missing resident policy and swimming pool/spa policy.
- Provided ongoing oversight by the Executive Director and Healthcare Administrator to ensure adherence to protocols, with prompt corrective action and additional training for deviations.
- Placed a staff member at the emergency exit door between the dog park and pool area to redirect anyone attempting to exit unless there is an active emergency; maintained coverage until the gate could be reassessed and an appropriate locking mechanism installed.
- Scheduled a meeting with an approved technology company with the Administrator, Director of Maintenance, and Executive Director to assess and implement an appropriate locking mechanism for the gate between the dog park and pool area.
- Required security to complete hourly walking rounds of the pool and dog park areas; document and report any adverse findings to the Director of Resident Services, Executive Director, and Healthcare Administrator.
- Reviewed the pool area policy and reaffirmed that access is restricted to Independent Living residents and skilled care residents are not allowed access.
- Conducted monitoring observations and interviews across all shifts to verify in-service training completion and staff competencies/understanding, including reenactment drills and knowledge checks.
Penalty
Resources
Below are regulatory guidelines relevant to this citation:
Failure to ensure effective fall alarms and supervision: two residents had Smart Caregiver monitoring devices set to LOW volume, and one resident's bed alarm did not alert staff before the resident was found on the floor after an unwitnessed fall. One resident had dementia, osteoporosis, prior TIA, and cognitive impairment and was fully dependent on staff, while staff also found that a second resident's bed and recliner alarms did not activate properly during testing.
Failure to assess the safety of perimeter mattresses for two residents. Both residents had severely impaired cognition and significant mobility limitations, and both care plans included use of a perimeter mattress to define the edges of the bed. However, their Mobility, Physical Device, and Fall Risk assessments lacked documentation of a perimeter/defined edge mattress assessment. Staff interviews showed inconsistent understanding of the required order, IDT review, engineering review, and safety assessment before use.
Improper Mechanical Lift Transfers: A resident with dementia, spinal cord dysfunction, and dependence for transfers was supposed to be moved with a full-body mechanical lift and two staff members, but a TMA stated she transferred the resident alone. The resident reported that staff sometimes used only one person for lift transfers because of staffing shortages, while other staff and the DON stated this was unsafe and against policy.
Two residents were involved in accident-hazard deficiencies. One resident with cancer, PVD, and Alzheimer’s disease was observed in a wheelchair with feet extending past short footrests, with the lower legs resting against the hard footrests despite a care plan entry for padding. Another resident with dementia and a hx of falls had an unwitnessed fall, but ordered orthostatic BP monitoring was not completed accurately and staff reported no post-fall PT referral was received.
A resident was given a new electric wheelchair without a prior therapy assessment and could not stop the chair, causing it to strike a bed frame and resulting in a leg laceration, tibia/fibula fractures, and a syncopal episode from blood loss. Another resident with cognitive impairment and high fall risk continued to self-transfer and fall, but the care plan was not updated with new fall interventions after repeated incidents.
A CNA used a Hoyer lift alone to weigh one resident, and another CNA was observed using a Hoyer lift alone to weigh a second resident. One resident’s care plan called for a 2-assist Hoyer lift, and the facility’s lift competency checklist and policy both required two caregivers for mechanical lift use; the DON and Director of Therapy also stated that two staff members are always required.
Failure to Ensure Effective Fall Alarms and Supervision
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide adequate supervision and effective use of assistive fall-prevention devices for two residents who were reviewed for fall precautions. One resident had diagnoses including unspecified dementia, age-related osteoporosis, a history of transient ischemic attack, and cognitive impairment, and was described by the POA as weak, bedbound, and unable to participate in physical therapy after a prior right femur fracture. The resident was completely dependent on staff for eating, hygiene, mobility, and toileting, and the care plan included a bed alarm per orders. The resident was found on the floor next to the bed after an unwitnessed fall. The POA reported receiving a call from the facility that the resident had been found on the floor and was not injured, and stated the resident frequently forgot to ask for help and had tried to get up without assistance before. A nurse stated the bed alarm was not heard when the resident fell, and the facility was unable to provide evidence that the bed alarm functioned as intended or alerted staff before the resident was found on the floor. The event report identified the fall as unwitnessed and did not indicate that a bed alarm alerted staff. The facility also failed to ensure the Smart Caregiver sensor pad monitoring system used for another resident was functioning properly and set at an audible volume. Two Smart Caregiver monitor boxes at the nurses' station for that resident's bed and recliner were observed set to LOW volume, and the chime settings faced the back wall of the desk. When a CNA tested the recliner alarm from the resident's room, the monitor at the nurses' station did not illuminate or sound an alert on either attempt. The CNA changed the batteries but did not retest the device, and both CNAs stated they could hear alarms only if they were near the nurses' station and did not recall training on operation or testing of the devices. The facility director stated the facility did not perform preventive maintenance on the devices and relied on staff to ensure they functioned properly.
Failure to Assess Safety of Perimeter Mattresses
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that 2 residents with perimeter mattresses were assessed for safety. One resident had a significant change MDS showing severely impaired cognition, dementia, reduced mobility, muscle weakness, and need for assistance with bed mobility, sitting, standing, and transfers. That resident’s care plan identified limited physical mobility related to dementia with mood disturbance and anxiety, a genetic muscle disorder, spinal stenosis, and osteoarthritis, and included use of a perimeter mattress to help find the edges of the bed for bed mobility. However, the resident’s Mobility, Physical Device, and Fall Risk assessment lacked documentation of an assessment for a perimeter/defined edge mattress. The second resident’s annual MDS showed severely impaired cognition, dementia, multiple sclerosis, repeated falls, and need for partial to moderate assistance with bed mobility. The care plan identified limited physical mobility related to weakness, falls, incontinence, hypertension, renal disease, dementia, MS, depression, and delusional disorder, and included use of a bariatric sized bed with a perimeter mattress to define the edges of the bed. That resident’s Mobility Physical Device and Fall Risk assessment also lacked documentation of an assessment for a perimeter/defined edge mattress. During observation, the resident was in bed asleep with a perimeter mattress. Staff interviews showed differing understanding of whether a physician order, assessment, IDT review, engineering review, and safety assessment were required before use of a perimeter mattress, and the DON confirmed both residents’ most recent assessments lacked documentation of a perimeter/defined edge mattress assessment.
Improper Mechanical Lift Transfers
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure transfers were performed according to R24’s assessed needs, care plan interventions, and facility policy. R24’s records showed she had diagnoses including non-traumatic spinal cord dysfunction, diabetes, dementia, depression, heart failure, and asthma. She was dependent on staff for toileting and transfers, was frequently incontinent of bowel and bladder, and had care plan directions for assistance with transfers using a full-body mechanical lift and two staff members. During interviews, a TMA stated she transferred R24 with the full-body mechanical lift by herself because R24 needed to use the bathroom and she felt the transfer was safe. R24 stated staff sometimes transferred her with only one staff member and said they told her there was not enough staff. Other staff interviewed stated transfers with the full-body mechanical lift using one staff member were unsafe and should not occur. The facility policy for using a mechanical lift stated that at least two trained associates are needed to safely move a resident with a mechanical full-body floor-based lift or ceiling/overhead full-body lift.
Unsafe Wheelchair Fit and Incomplete Post-Fall Monitoring
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide an environment free from accident hazards for two residents. Resident 27 was readmitted with diagnoses including cancer, peripheral vascular disease, and Alzheimer's disease and was sometimes able to make needs known. On multiple observations, Resident 27 was seated in a slightly tilted back wheelchair with feet extending beyond the footrests, and the back of the lower legs rested against the hard footrests above the ankle/heel area. A pillow was observed either on the floor or behind the legs rather than padding the footrests. The focused care plan for skin integrity included padding to wheelchair footrests, and staff interviews confirmed the footrests were too short and needed adjustment or replacement, but staff had not notified therapy or otherwise addressed the wheelchair fit. Resident 50 was admitted with diagnoses including dementia, history of falls, and UTI and was sometimes able to make needs known. The care plan identified the resident as at risk for falls. After an unwitnessed fall in the 300 hallway, the incident investigation added interventions to monitor orthostatic blood pressures and refer to physical therapy. However, the record showed an orthostatic blood pressure order on 05/20/2026 was not completed, and subsequent orthostatic blood pressures recorded the same blood pressure and pulse for all three positions on 05/22/2026, 05/23/2026, and 05/24/2026. Staff later stated they had not received a post-fall therapy referral, and the DNS stated the resident should have had orthostatic blood pressures taken accurately to rule out orthostatic hypotension.
Failure to assess electric wheelchair use and update fall interventions
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to comprehensively assess a resident for the use of an electric wheelchair and failed to develop new interventions to reduce fall risk for another resident. The report states that the facility’s policies required a device evaluation before an electric wheelchair was initiated, resident education and consent, and an updated service plan identifying device use and other interventions. The fall management policy required individualized care plan updates, a systematic review after each fall, identification of root cause, and review of prior interventions when new interventions were implemented. Resident 73 was admitted with weakness and lymphedema and had an above-the-knee left leg amputation, requiring assistance with bed mobility, transfers, and locomotion. The resident’s record showed cognitive intactness, lower extremity impairment, supervision or touch assistance for bed-to-chair transfers, and use of a manual wheelchair. On 4/17/26, a newly issued electric wheelchair was delivered and the resident was assisted into it. The resident reported that the representative showed how the chair worked but not enough, and that the resident did not know how to stop it. The resident then returned to the room, could not stop the chair, and the chair continued forward into the bed, causing the resident’s right leg to strike the metal bed frame. The resident sustained a five-centimeter laceration to the right anterior lower leg, fractures of the right tibia and fibula, and a brief syncopal episode secondary to blood loss. The resident also received an anticoagulant, which contributed to significant bleeding. The clinical record contained no evidence that the resident had been assessed to safely operate the electric wheelchair before use. Resident 3 was admitted with a right total hip replacement with deep hardware removal and post-traumatic osteoarthritis of the right hip. The resident had a high fall risk on Morse Fall Scale assessments, cognitive impairment on OT evaluation, and a PT evaluation showing a score of zero on the Short Physical Performance Battery, indicating high fall risk and increased risk of mobility disability. The resident fell on 3/31/26 after getting up independently and sustained a right femur fracture requiring surgical repair, and fell again on 5/12/26 after getting up independently and sustained a skin tear to the right elbow. The care plan identified fall risk and included reminders to use the call light, non-skid socks, and one-person assistance for toileting and transfers, but revisions to the care plan did not add new or amended fall prevention interventions. Staff statements indicated the resident continued to self-transfer and toilet without assistance, staff believed the resident was independent, and the existing fall prevention interventions were ineffective.
Unsafe One-Person Use of Mechanical Lift
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure safe use of a mechanical lift for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for accidents. During an observation on 6/2/2026 at 8:42 AM, Resident #4 was lying on his bed on top of a Hoyer pad while CNA Staff K stood on the right side of the bed with a mechanical lift; the lift hand bags were observed over the resident, and no other staff member was in the room. Staff K stated that he was weighing Resident #4 and that normally only one person uses the Hoyer lift for weights, although the resident’s care plan documented a Hoyer lift with 2 assist. On 6/4/2026 at 10:15 AM, CNA Staff D was observed using a Hoyer lift alone to obtain Resident #13’s weight, with the resident lifted approximately 12 inches off the mattress in the sling and no other staff present. Staff D stated that he was performing weekly weights and most of the time did the weights using the Hoyer lift by himself. Resident #13’s MDS Section GG coded the resident as dependent, and the facility’s mechanical lift competency checklist stated that two caregivers are present, while the facility policy for using a mechanical lifting device stated that at least two nursing assistants are needed to safely move a resident with a mechanical lift. The DON and Director of Therapy both stated that a mechanical lift should always be used by two staff members.
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.