Failure to Provide Person-Centered Dementia Care and Behavior Management
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to assess, develop, and implement person-centered care plans and behavior management interventions for multiple residents with dementia and behavioral symptoms. Six residents with dementia (R1, R2, R3, R5, R7, and R8) lacked individualized behavior assessments identifying triggers and effective interventions, despite documented wandering, aggression, and resident-to-resident altercations. Care plans for these residents contained only generic directions such as cueing, reorienting, supervising PRN, and redirecting, without specific, individualized strategies based on each resident’s known preferences, histories, or observed behavior patterns. Activity assessments and preference evaluations documented that these residents enjoyed specific activities such as reading, outdoor time, music, work tasks, and social engagement, but these interests were not translated into targeted behavioral interventions. For R1, who had dementia with behavioral disturbances, the record showed repeated episodes of wandering into other residents’ rooms, taking belongings, attempting to tilt another resident from a chair, pushing staff, carrying tables, attempting to climb on tables, and trying to hit windows with a chair. R1 was involved in an altercation where another resident stomped on his face after R1 entered that resident’s room, and later engaged in escalating aggression that led to a 911 call and hospital transfer. Progress notes and staff interviews described ongoing exit-seeking, striking out at staff, unplugging cameras, threatening to damage equipment, and urinating in inappropriate places, while staff primarily responded with close supervision and redirection. Despite this pattern, there was no behavior assessment in the medical record to identify triggers or effective interventions, and staff reported that the care-planned approach of “follow and redirect” did not stop R1’s behaviors. R2, who had dementia with agitation and PTSD, was known not to like others in his room, and his care plan included general interventions to protect the rights and safety of others and redirect him. After an altercation in which another resident entered his room, staff attempted to use a mesh barrier with a stop sign across his doorway, but it was placed inside the closed door where it could not serve as a visible cue to others. R2’s record also lacked a behavior assessment to identify triggers or effective interventions, despite family reporting that staff had been informed of his preference to keep others out of his room. R3, who had dementia and a history of physical behaviors toward others, reported multiple incidents of another resident entering his room, attempting to take his pillow, urinating on his floor, and trying to get into his bed. R3’s care plan referenced a history of altercation when another resident walked into his room and included only broad language to protect rights and safety and divert attention PRN, with no documented behavior assessment to guide more specific preventive strategies. R5, with severe cognitive impairment and frequent physical behaviors and wandering, was observed repeatedly entering other residents’ rooms despite staff attempts to redirect him. The care plan again relied on general redirection, offering snacks or diversional activities, and monitoring whereabouts, but staff interviews confirmed that the primary intervention was to follow and redirect, which they stated did not stop his behaviors and required significant staff time. R7, who had severe cognitive impairment and wandering behavior, had no behavior assessment in the record, and family reported that they rarely saw activity staff on the unit and that R7’s interests in motorcycles, fishing, shopping, and being active were not reflected in activities offered; instead, he was usually observed lying in bed. R8, who had dementia and was dependent for ADLs, also had documented interests in social interaction, outings, music, and games, but family reported that some staff were not good at redirecting residents and allowed them to go where they wanted. During one observation, R1 loudly told R8’s visitors it was time to leave, causing them to move to another area, and staff did not intervene. Unit-wide observations showed that activity staff presence was inconsistent and that residents with dementia and wandering or behavioral symptoms were often minimally engaged. During a prolonged observation period, NAs were frequently seated at the nurse’s station with limited interaction with residents, while residents slept at tables, wandered toward exits, or moved around the kitchen area. Staff interviews confirmed that activities on the secured unit were infrequent, often did not occur as scheduled, and that the unit “almost never had activities” except when surveyors were present. Nursing staff, including NAs and nurses, reported feeling overwhelmed by the behavioral needs of residents, described frequent resident-to-resident conflicts related to wandering into rooms, and stated they needed specific, resident-tailored lists of behavioral interventions, which were not available. The DON and medical director acknowledged behavioral challenges and staffing limitations but there was no evidence in the record of completed behavior assessments or individualized, person-centered behavior management plans for the residents reviewed.
Penalty
Resources
Below are regulatory guidelines relevant to this citation:
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.