Yukon Kuskokwim Elder's Home
Inspection history, citations, penalties and survey trends for this long-term care facility in Bethel, Alaska.
- Location
- 1100 Chief Eddie Hoffman Hwy, Bethel, Alaska 99559
- CMS Provider Number
- 025037
- Inspections on file
- 16
- Latest survey
- January 31, 2025
- Citations (last 12 mo.)
- 0
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Yukon Kuskokwim Elder's Home during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
The facility did not have a full-time DON from late March through late May, as the previous DON resigned and the new DON did not assume the role until the end of May. During this period, the responsibilities of the DON, such as overseeing nursing services and ensuring compliance, were not formally assigned or fulfilled.
Surveyors found multiple expired and unlabeled food items in the kitchen's cooler, freezer, dry storage, and meal prep areas. Staff could not provide expiration dates for several products, and food rotation practices were not consistently followed, contrary to facility policy. These deficiencies had the potential to cause or spread foodborne illness among residents receiving food from the kitchen.
Staff did not provide hand hygiene to multiple residents before meals or after bathroom use, including a resident with dementia who was not offered hand hygiene after perineal care. Additionally, clean laundry was transported in uncovered bins through common areas and into residents' rooms, contrary to facility policy requiring covered containers.
Multiple residents with complex medical conditions were found to have bed rails in use without documented physician orders, risk and benefit assessments, or informed consent. Staff confirmed that no policy or formal process was in place for bed rail assessment or consent, and medical records did not reflect the use of bed rails despite direct observation.
Five residents with complex medical conditions were not examined in person by a medical provider within the required intervals, with gaps between visits ranging from 104 to 180 days. The DON reported that residents were seen on admission and quarterly, but there was no written policy for provider visits, and federal guidelines were not consistently followed.
A resident with multiple medical conditions sustained a superficial injury when their wheelchair tipped over during transport in the facility vehicle, despite being secured by two nurses. Review of staff records showed that several employees had not completed required training on the Q-Straint wheelchair restraint system, and facility leadership could not provide proof of training for those who claimed to be trained. Interviews confirmed that staff responsible for securing residents during transport lacked documented competency in the use of the restraint system.
Three residents with multiple chronic conditions did not have required monthly drug regimen reviews completed for two separate months, as confirmed by pharmacy consult note reviews and staff interviews. Pharmacists attributed the missed reviews to prior short staffing, despite facility policy mandating monthly MRRs.
Expired medical supplies, including syringes, bandages, pads, tubing, and distilled water, were found in a supply storage room. An LPN confirmed the items were expired, and the DON stated that LNs were expected to audit and discard such items each shift, primarily on the night shift. Facility policy required removal of expired products, but the expired items remained in storage.
The facility did not update care plans for two residents after significant changes in their conditions. One resident with a history of CHF and other diagnoses had ongoing leg edema documented and treated, but no care plan interventions addressed the edema. Another resident developed a UTI with new symptoms and was prescribed antibiotics, but the care plan was not revised to include this diagnosis or related interventions.
Failure to Designate Full-Time DON
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to designate a registered nurse to serve as the Director of Nursing (DON) on a full-time basis from the end of March 2024 through the end of May 2024. During this period, the previous DON, who was also the Chief Nursing Officer (CNO) at the Yukon Kuskokwim Delta Regional Hospital, resigned from the DON position effective mid-March 2024. Interviews confirmed that there was no designated full-time DON during this time, and the CNO did not provide a response when asked who was fulfilling the DON role. The new DON only accepted the position at the end of May 2024, and prior to that, worked as a charge nurse. Review of facility documentation showed that the responsibilities of the DON include overseeing the delivery of nursing services, ensuring adequate staffing, maintaining compliance, and keeping the administrator informed of changes. The job description for the charge nurse also indicated the need to report changes in resident condition to the DON, highlighting the importance of the DON role in daily operations. The absence of a full-time DON during the specified period meant that these responsibilities were not formally assigned or fulfilled.
Expired and Unlabeled Food Items Found in Kitchen Storage
Penalty
Summary
Surveyors observed that the facility failed to store, label, and prepare food in accordance with professional standards for food safety. During a kitchen tour, multiple expired food items were found in the walk-in cooler, walk-in freezer, dry storage, and meal prep areas, including expired dairy products, yogurt, chopped garlic, honey, peanut butter, cake mix, and food thickener. Additionally, several food items were not labeled or dated, such as bags of oxtail, duck, bread, and containers of flour and panko. Staff interviews revealed that food rotation practices were in place, but staff were unable to provide expiration dates or clarify how long unlabeled products were kept. The facility's own policies require that all food be procured, stored, handled, prepared, distributed, and served in accordance with safe food handling and storage practices established by state and federal agencies. However, observations showed that these policies were not consistently followed, as evidenced by the presence of expired and unlabeled food items in various storage areas. These practices had the potential to cause or spread foodborne illness to the facility's residents, all of whom received food from the kitchen.
Failure to Provide Hand Hygiene and Proper Laundry Transport
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to follow infection prevention and control practices, specifically in the areas of hand hygiene and laundry transport. During multiple dining observations, staff did not offer hand hygiene to several residents before meals. Certified Nurse Assistants (CNAs) and a Licensed Nurse (LN) were observed serving meals to residents without providing hand hygiene, despite facility policy requiring hand hygiene before and after meals. This was observed on several occasions, with residents being served food in the dining area without being offered the opportunity to clean their hands. Additionally, hand hygiene was not provided to a resident after bathroom use. On two separate occasions, a resident with dementia, anxiety, and insomnia was assisted to the bathroom by CNAs. After perineal care and changing of briefs, the resident was returned to the dining area and served lunch without being offered hand hygiene. In one instance, feces fell onto the bathroom floor and was picked up by a student CNA, but the floor was not cleaned and the resident was not given hand hygiene before returning to the dining area. The facility also failed to ensure that clean laundry was transported in a manner that prevented contamination. Clean laundry was placed in an uncovered blue bin and moved through common areas and into residents' rooms without a cover, contrary to facility policy which requires clean laundry to be delivered in a covered container. Staff interviews confirmed that the clean laundry bins were not covered during transport.
Failure to Obtain Consent and Assess Risks for Bed Rail Use
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to obtain informed consent and conduct accurate risk and benefit assessments prior to the use of bed rails for multiple residents. Record reviews, observations, and interviews revealed that for at least nine residents, bed rails were in use without any documented physician order, assessment of risks and benefits, or informed consent from the resident or their representative. This was confirmed through both direct observation of bed rails in use and review of medical records, which consistently lacked the required documentation. Residents affected had a range of diagnoses, including Alzheimer's disease, dementia, chronic kidney disease, type 2 diabetes mellitus, major depressive disorder, aortic valve regurgitation, gait disorder, seizure disorder, rheumatoid arthritis, Lewy body dementia, anxiety, insomnia, and benign prostatic hyperplasia. Despite these complex medical conditions and impaired activities of daily living, the facility did not complete the necessary assessments or obtain consent for bed rail use. In several cases, the most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments indicated that bed rails were not in use, contradicting direct observations. Interviews with facility staff, including the Director of Nursing and a Certified Nursing Assistant, confirmed that there was no policy in place for bed rail assessment, and that the facility did not obtain consent or complete risk and benefit assessments for side rail usage. The DON acknowledged the absence of a bedrail assessment policy, and the CNA stated that bed rails were used to promote mobility, but no formal process was followed to ensure resident safety or compliance with regulatory requirements.
Failure to Ensure Timely In-Person Physician Visits
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that five residents were examined in person by a medical provider within the required intervals, as mandated by federal guidelines. Record reviews revealed that these residents, who had complex medical conditions such as osteoarthritis, congestive heart failure, dementia, depression, chronic kidney disease, rheumatoid arthritis, peripheral vascular disease, diabetes mellitus, and cancer, did not receive timely in-person visits from their physicians. The intervals between physician visits for these residents ranged from 104 to 180 days, exceeding the required maximum of 60 days or no later than 10 days after the required visit date. During interviews, the DON stated that residents were seen on admission and quarterly, but could not provide a facility policy specific to provider visits. The DON later indicated that the medical director follows federal guidelines for visit timing, but this was not documented in a written policy. The lack of adherence to required visit intervals and absence of a formal policy resulted in residents not being seen in person by a medical provider as frequently as required.
Failure to Ensure Staff Competency in Wheelchair Restraint Use During Resident Transport
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that staff received proper education and training on the use of the Q-Straint QRT-1 Series Wheelchair Restraint system, which is used to secure wheelchair-bound residents during transport in the facility vehicle. Record review revealed that a resident with diagnoses including Alzheimer's disease, anemia, and atrial fibrillation sustained a superficial laceration to the right temple after their wheelchair tipped over while being transported in the facility vehicle. The incident occurred despite the wheelchair being secured by two licensed nurses, whose identities could not be confirmed by facility leadership during interviews. Further review of staff training records showed that several staff members assigned to complete the required transport restraint training had not done so, and active employees were working with residents without documented completion of this training. Interviews with the DON and a CNA indicated that only a few staff members had reportedly been trained, but no proof of this training could be produced. Additionally, one CNA who regularly secured residents in the transport vehicle stated they had not completed a HealthStream skills check-off for the Q-Straint system.
Failure to Complete Monthly Drug Regimen Reviews Due to Pharmacy Staffing Issues
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that monthly drug regimen reviews (MRRs) were completed for three residents, as required by facility policy. Record reviews for these residents showed that MRRs were not performed for the months of September and December 2024. The residents affected had multiple complex diagnoses, including osteoarthritis, congestive heart failure, dementia, depression, impaired mobility, rheumatoid arthritis, peripheral vascular disease, Lewy body dementia, anxiety, and insomnia. The absence of documented MRRs was confirmed through review of pharmacy consult notes covering January 2024 through January 2025. Interviews with two pharmacists revealed that the standard practice was to complete and document MRRs monthly in the residents' charts. Both pharmacists acknowledged that the MRRs for the specified months were not completed, attributing the lapse to previous short staffing in the pharmacy department. Review of the facility's policy confirmed the requirement for monthly drug regimen reviews of each resident's medical chart.
Expired Medical Supplies Not Removed from Storage
Penalty
Summary
Expired medical supplies were found in one of the facility's medical supply storage rooms during an observation. The expired items included syringes, self-adherent bandages, non-adhesive pads, non-adherent pad prepacks, suction connection tubing, and distilled water, all of which were past their labeled expiration or best by dates. These findings were confirmed by a licensed nurse during an interview, who acknowledged that the supplies were expired. The Director of Nursing stated that licensed nurses were expected to audit and discard expired medical supplies, with the primary responsibility falling on the night shift. However, the presence of expired items indicated that these audits were not being performed as required. A review of the facility's policy confirmed that designated staff were responsible for inspecting storage areas and removing expired or soon-to-expire products from inventory.
Failure to Update Care Plans for Edema and UTI
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to revise and update care plans for two residents following changes in their medical conditions. For one resident with a history of vascular dementia, stroke, seizure disorder, congestive heart failure, and asthma, multiple clinical notes and interviews confirmed the presence of bilateral lower extremity edema over a period of several months. Despite ongoing documentation of swelling and the administration of Furosemide for edema, the resident's care plan did not include any interventions specifically addressing edema. Observations also noted visible swelling in the resident's legs. For another resident with a history of malnutrition and stroke, clinical records and interviews indicated the onset of urinary symptoms, including difficulty urinating, incontinence, and suprapubic pain, which led to a diagnosis of urinary tract infection (UTI). Although the resident was prescribed antibiotics for the UTI, the care plan was not updated to reflect this new diagnosis or the interventions required. The facility's own policy required individualized, interdisciplinary care plans to address residents' medical needs, but in both cases, the care plans were not revised in response to significant changes in the residents' conditions.
Latest citations in Alaska
A resident with ESRD and dependence on hemodialysis did not receive post-dialysis care according to physician orders, the care plan, and facility policy. The post-dialysis pressure dressing on the AV fistula was not documented as removed within the ordered timeframe, despite dialysis center instructions specifying timely removal. Although an LN later reported that the access site was bleeding and a dressing change was performed, the TAR documented the site as clear and nursing notes did not reflect any dressing change. Required shift assessments of the fistula site for bleeding, redness, and tenderness were not accurately documented, and there was no evidence that the physician was notified of the bleeding access site, contrary to facility policy and referenced CDC dialysis safety standards.
The facility failed to obtain and document informed consent for psychotropic medications before administration for multiple residents with dementia, Parkinson’s disease, and related behavioral and psychotic disturbances. In several cases, residents had OPA guardians or other representatives as medical decision-makers, yet there was no evidence that risks, benefits, alternatives, or treatment options for medications such as divalproex, valproic acid, olanzapine, quetiapine, pimavanserin, and antidepressants were discussed or that representatives were given an opportunity to choose among options. For one resident, consent for quetiapine was signed after the first dose had already been given. Staff interviews showed confusion about who was responsible for obtaining informed consent, when it should occur, and which medications required it, and leadership acknowledged that consents obtained via email were not consistently placed in the medical record and that consent audits were irregular, despite facility policies and resident rights documents requiring that residents or representatives be advised of psychotropic risks and benefits and that this be documented.
The facility failed to maintain sufficient RN, LPN, and CNA staffing levels as defined in its own facility assessment, particularly on weekends, and frequently relied on float staff to cover cottages without regularly assigned nurses. Staff and a resident reported that only one nurse and one CNA sometimes covered an entire cottage, that CNAs from other cottages had to pick up assignments when someone called in, and that staff shortages caused rushing and concerns about care. One resident with quadriplegia, fully dependent for bathing and preferring showers, missed multiple scheduled showers over several weeks and instead received bed baths or no documented hygiene care, and reported long call-light response times and staff declining small assistance due to being too busy. Another resident with multiple sclerosis and functional quadriplegia, dependent on staff and an overhead lift for transfers, was not consistently gotten out of bed on the days specified in their care plan and grievance resolution, and reported that requests to get up were often denied or deferred because staff said they were shorthanded.
A resident with multiple medical and psychiatric diagnoses, under a full court-appointed guardianship granting the guardian authority over medical and mental health treatment, was sent to a behavioral health consultation without documented notification to the guardian. The consultation report noted the resident was unescorted, that there was documentation of a guardian/POA, and that the resident could not state why they were there, with a recommendation to obtain guardian contact. The Administrator and DON confirmed there was no documented guardian notification, and although the AA reported that transportation was provided and that the resident’s recent BIMS showed intact cognition, there was no chart documentation that the guardian had been informed of or consented to the mental health appointment.
Two residents did not receive ADL services as assessed and care planned. A resident with quadriplegia, fully dependent on staff and preferring showers, was care planned for twice-weekly showers using a Carendo chair, but logs and interview showed prolonged gaps without showers and missed scheduled shower days, with staff citing CNA shortages and long call-light response times. Another resident with multiple sclerosis and functional quadriplegia, dependent on staff for bed-to-chair transfers, had a care plan and CNA tasks specifying transfers to a chair multiple times per week, and had previously expressed concerns and filed a grievance about limited opportunities to get out of bed; however, task logs showed the resident was either not gotten up or only once per week over several weeks, and the resident reported staff often declined requests to get up due to staffing and workload.
Two residents were discharged without adequate planning, resulting in unsafe and inappropriate transitions. One was sent home to an inaccessible and unsafe environment without necessary support or services, leading to distress, a fall, and reliance on unplanned third-party assistance. Another was discharged despite unresolved behavioral and cognitive issues, without required mental health referrals or involvement of their representative, causing distress and confusion. The facility lacked documented discharge planning standards and failed to coordinate essential post-discharge care.
A resident with dementia, depression, anxiety, and other complex conditions was admitted without the PASRR Level II report being available or reviewed. The facility did not initiate specialized mental health services as required, delayed updating the care plan, and discharged the resident without addressing PASRR-identified needs or following recommended discharge options. This resulted in untreated behavioral symptoms and increased psychotropic medication use.
A resident with complex medical needs developed multiple pressure ulcers and infections due to the facility's failure to provide timely and consistent wound care interventions, delayed care planning, poor documentation of noncompliance, and lack of coordination for higher-level wound care referrals. Discrepancies between wound care provider recommendations and actual treatment orders, as well as improper antibiotic administration in relation to dialysis, contributed to persistent wound infection and ultimately led to hospitalization with sepsis and death.
Systemic failures in the QAPI program led to ongoing deficiencies in staffing, grievance procedures, activities, medication management, and therapy services. Residents experienced long wait times for assistance, were not properly informed about grievance processes, and were not consistently offered activities as documented in their care plans. Incomplete narcotic count documentation and lapses in therapy services further contributed to suboptimal care.
Two residents did not receive care according to physician orders and care plans. One resident with hypertension and heart failure had daily vital signs ordered but only had them documented twice over several months. Another resident with skin breakdown risk had orders for offloading boots and wound care that were not implemented, as observed during the survey. Facility policies required adherence to these orders and care plans.
Failure to Follow Post-Dialysis Orders and Document AV Fistula Complications
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to provide dialysis-related treatment and care in accordance with physician orders, the resident’s care plan, and facility policy for one resident dependent on hemodialysis with ESRD and PVD. Physician orders and the MAR directed that the post-dialysis pressure dressing on the resident’s AV fistula be removed after a specified number of hours, and dialysis communication from the dialysis center reiterated that the fistula dressing must be removed within a defined timeframe to prevent clotting or narrowing of the AV graft. Record review showed no documentation that the post-dialysis dressing was removed within the ordered timeframe, and there was no indication on the MAR or in nursing progress notes that a dressing change was performed during the relevant dates. The facility also failed to assess, document, and communicate the condition of the dialysis access site as ordered and per policy. The care plan required daily checks and dressing changes at the access site with documentation and monitoring for signs and symptoms of complications, and the TAR included an order to assess the fistula site every shift for clarity, tenderness, redness, and bleeding. A nurse reported that upon the resident’s return from dialysis, the access site was bleeding and a dressing change was performed, but the TAR documentation for that shift indicated the site was “clear,” and nursing progress notes contained no record of a dressing change. Additionally, despite facility policy requiring monitoring for complications and immediate physician notification for bleeding, the medical record contained no evidence that the physician was notified about the post-dialysis bleeding AV fistula. CDC dialysis safety guidelines cited in the report state that standards of care require reassessment of the access site after dressing removal for bleeding, redness, or swelling, with accurate documentation and timely communication of findings, which was not demonstrated in this case.
Failure to Obtain and Document Informed Consent for Psychotropic Medications
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to obtain and document informed consent for psychotropic medications prior to administration, thereby failing to ensure residents or their representatives were informed in advance of the risks, benefits, alternatives, and options for treatment. For Resident #1, who had severe dementia with psychotic disturbance, anxiety disorder, and depressive disorder, the record showed extensive use of multiple psychotropic medications, including divalproex, lorazepam, olanzapine, quetiapine, sertraline, and trazodone over a defined period. The resident had an Office of Public Advocacy (OPA) guardian as medical decision-maker, yet there was no documented informed consent for any of these medications. Emails to the guardian referenced that Depakote and other psychotropics had been ordered or adjusted, but did not include information on risks, benefits, alternatives, or options, nor did they document that the guardian was given an opportunity to choose a preferred option. The guardian later stated the facility had never reviewed risks, benefits, alternatives, or options for any medications and that such information would have guided decision-making. For Resident #3, who had vascular dementia and cerebrovascular disease and also had an OPA guardian, the medical record showed long-term administration of valproic acid and a period of mirtazapine use, totaling hundreds of psychotropic medication administrations. The record contained no documented informed consent for these medications. A progress note indicated that a licensed nurse was unable to reach the resident’s representative and mailed a copy of notes, including the addition of mirtazapine, but there was no further documentation of efforts to contact the representative to discuss medications or obtain informed consent. The facility was unable to provide any proof of informed consent for Resident #3’s psychotropic medications, and the guardian similarly stated that information on risks and benefits would have guided decision-making. For Resident #4, who had Parkinson’s disease with dyskinesia, dementia due to Parkinson’s disease with behavioral disturbance, hallucinations, and Lewy body dementia with psychotic disturbance, the record showed an order and ongoing administration of pimavanserin, an antipsychotic, over approximately 90 days. The resident had a representative who made medical decisions, but there was no documented informed consent for this psychotropic medication, and the facility could not provide any proof when requested. For Resident #5, diagnosed with dementia with behavioral disturbance and Parkinson’s disease, quetiapine was ordered and first administered before the facility obtained a signed Psychotropic Risk/Benefits Verification of Informed Consent form; the consent was dated one day after the first dose was given. This demonstrated that consent was not obtained prior to initial administration. Interviews with nursing staff and leadership revealed confusion and inconsistency regarding responsibility for obtaining informed consent, when it should be obtained, and where it was documented. One licensed nurse believed physicians were ultimately responsible for obtaining consent and was unsure where signed consents were stored. Another nurse did not know who was responsible, when to obtain consent, or how to verify its presence before administering a new medication, and believed only antipsychotics required consent. A third nurse assumed that if a physician wrote an order, informed consent had already been obtained, and identified psychotropics and antipsychotics as requiring consent that included discussion of risks and benefits. The DON and LTC nurse manager stated that bedside nurses were trained to obtain informed consent before the first dose of medications needing consent and that the facility did not obtain new informed consent for psychotropics if a resident was already taking the same medication on admission, assuming the resident already knew the risks and benefits. The LTC nurse manager also stated that consents were sometimes obtained via email to representatives or guardians, but copies of those emails were not placed in the medical record, and audits of consents had not been done regularly. These practices conflicted with the facility’s resident rights document and its psychopharmacological drug use policy, both of which required that residents or their representatives be advised of potential risks and benefits of psychotropic medications and that this be documented.
Insufficient Nursing Staff Leading to Missed ADLs and Transfers
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to provide sufficient nursing staff, including CNAs and licensed nurses, to meet residents’ needs as established in its own facility assessment. The assessment specified minimum staffing levels of 6–8 licensed nurses on day shift, 5–7 licensed nurses on night shift, 8–10 CNAs on day shift, and 7–8 CNAs on night shift. Review of staffing schedules for December 2025 and January 2026 showed that on multiple weekend days, the number of licensed nurses and CNAs scheduled fell below these minimums. On specific dates, day and night shifts were staffed with fewer licensed nurses than required, and several day and night shifts were staffed with fewer CNAs than the assessment’s minimums. Payroll Based Journal data further showed the facility triggered for low weekend staffing for all four quarters of federal fiscal year 2025, establishing a history of low weekend staffing. In addition to low numbers, staffing patterns showed that licensed nurses and CNAs frequently picked up resident assignments in cottages that did not have regularly assigned staff. Staff interviews confirmed that some cottages, such as Aniak, did not have a regular nurse assigned and instead relied on float nurses from other cottages. A CNA reported feeling unable to provide good quality care because of rushing and expressed concern about resident falls due to having only one nurse and one CNA in the cottage. Another nurse stated there was only one CNA caring for residents and that if that CNA called in sick, CNAs from other cottages would pick up assignments. An anonymous resident reported that staff shortages were a big problem, with shared nurses and CNAs, and described long waits and receiving bed baths instead of showers when CNAs did not have time. The insufficient staffing directly affected the provision of ADLs for specific residents. One resident with quadriplegia, dependent on staff for showers and whose care plan required showers every Sunday and Thursday night using a Carendo chair, did not receive showers as scheduled. Shower logs showed a 14-day gap between showers in December 2025, with bed baths documented instead on some scheduled shower days and no documentation of shower or bed bath on another scheduled day in January 2026. This resident stated they had not been showered for three weeks in December and again on a recent scheduled day because staff told them there were not enough CNAs, and also reported long waits for call light responses and staff declining to assist with small tasks due to being too busy. Another resident with multiple sclerosis, muscle weakness, and functional quadriplegia, who was dependent on staff for transfers and required one-person assistance with an overhead lift, experienced reduced opportunities to get out of bed. Social service documentation noted the resident’s interest in being transferred to a chair more than once a week and identified staffing concerns as a primary factor because the transfer was a two-person assist, leading to decreased participation in usual activities when left in bed. The resident later filed a grievance stating they were concerned about only being able to get out of bed once per week and had been told this limitation was due to staffing, requesting to get up three times per week. CNA task logs showed that over several weeks in December 2025 and early January 2026, the resident was not consistently gotten up on the scheduled days, including an entire week with no documented transfers out of bed. The resident reported that when they asked to get up, staff often responded that they would see, which usually meant no, citing being shorthanded or too many people getting up at once.
Failure to Notify Guardian of Behavioral Health Consultation
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure a court-appointed guardian was informed of and able to participate in care decisions for a resident with multiple complex medical and mental health diagnoses, including multiple sclerosis, renal tubule-interstitial disease, bipolar disorder, delusional disorder, and anxiety disorder. The resident had a LETTER OF GUARDIANSHIP dated 4/17/14 that appointed the Office of Public Advocacy as full guardian, with explicit authority over medical care, mental health treatment, physical and mental examinations, and approval of all medications, medical procedures, and psychotropic medications. Despite this, the resident was sent to a behavioral health consultation on 10/22/25, during which the consultation report documented that the patient was unescorted, that documentation at the time of the visit indicated a guardian/POA, and that the patient was unable to explain the reason for the visit. The consultant recommended obtaining more information about the reason for the visit and guardian contact. Interviews and document reviews showed there was no documented guardian notification regarding the scheduled psychiatric consultation. The Administrator and DON confirmed there was no documented guardian notification. The staffing schedule for the date of the appointment noted the resident needed an escort, but the DON could not verify who the escort was. An email from the Assistant Administrator stated that the facility’s driver provided transportation and ensured check-in, and referenced a recent BIMS indicating intact cognition, which the facility typically used to determine that an escort was not required. The same email and a follow-up email acknowledged that it was standard practice to notify residents and representatives of appointments, but there was no documentation in the chart confirming guardian notification for this mental health appointment. The guardian later stated it was possible they had been made aware but could not recall due to a large caseload, and there was no facility documentation verifying that notification or consent had occurred.
Failure to Provide ADL Care per Care Plans and Resident Preferences
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to provide activities of daily living (ADL) services in accordance with assessed needs, care plans, and resident preferences for two residents. One resident with quadriplegia was care planned to receive showers every Sunday and Thursday night using a Carendo chair and was documented on the MDS as being fully dependent on staff for bathing. The resident’s MDS also reflected a preference for showers. Progress notes reiterated the order for showers every Sunday and Thursday night with licensed nurse skin evaluations. Despite this, the December shower log showed the resident did not receive a shower between 12/18 and 12/28 and instead received bed baths on two of those days, and the January log showed missed scheduled showers on 1/1 and 1/5, with only a bed bath documented on 1/1 and no shower or bed bath documented on 1/5. During interview, this resident stated they were dependent on staff for ADLs such as showering and reported not receiving a shower for three weeks in December and again on the prior day because staff told them there were not enough CNAs available. The resident also reported long waits for call light responses, sometimes 30–40 minutes, and stated that staff told them they were too busy when the resident requested assistance with smaller tasks such as getting water or adjusting the TV volume, even when staff were already in the room. The Director of Nursing reported that showers were audited twice a week and discussed during rounds and that CNAs were supposed to notify a nurse or supervisor if a resident did not receive a shower. The second resident had multiple sclerosis, muscle weakness, and functional quadriplegia and was documented on the MDS as having upper and lower limb impairments and being dependent on staff for bed-to-chair transfers. The care plan required supervision and physical assistance with transfers using a one-person overhead lift. A social service note documented that the resident wanted to be transferred to a chair more than once a week, identified staffing as a barrier due to being a two-person transfer, and reported decreased participation in usual activities when left in bed. A grievance later documented the resident’s concern about only being able to get out of bed once per week and their request to get up on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. CNA task documentation directed staff to ensure the resident was up every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, but the task log showed that over several weeks in December and early January the resident was either not gotten up at all or only once per week on specified dates. In interview, the resident stated they did not get out of bed twice during December and that when they asked to get up, staff often responded that they would see, which usually meant no due to being short-handed or too many people getting up at once, despite the plan of care specifying three times per week.
Failure to Ensure Safe and Appropriate Discharge Planning
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that residents were discharged in a manner that protected their health, safety, and psychosocial well-being. Specifically, the facility did not develop or implement an effective discharge planning process for two residents, resulting in unsafe and inappropriate discharges. The facility lacked documented standards for discharge planning, relying instead on verbal expectations within the social services department. Discharge planning was limited to care conferences at admission and two weeks prior to discharge, with no ongoing reassessment or structured involvement of resident representatives. The facility also did not conduct home visits prior to discharge, and referrals for post-discharge services and equipment were inconsistently arranged or delayed. One resident was discharged to a home environment that was known to be unsafe and inaccessible, without adequate caregiver support or required services in place. The resident, who had a history of joint replacement surgery, infection, and a recent femur fracture, required wound care, mobility assistance, and ongoing medical follow-up. Despite the resident's home being multi-level, in disrepair, and infested with rodents, the facility proceeded with discharge planning that did not ensure safe access or adequate support. The resident was left reliant on unplanned third parties, such as the fire department and community members, for essential care and experienced distress, emotional harm, and physical compromise, including a fall after discharge. Another resident with cognitive impairment, acute behavioral changes, and a documented need for nursing facility level care and specialized mental health services was discharged without required referrals or representative involvement. The facility did not review or incorporate the resident's PASRR Level II findings into the discharge plan, nor did it address a documented change in condition on the day of discharge. As a result, the resident experienced distress, confusion, and loss of security, with the POA having to assume unplanned caregiving responsibilities to prevent harm. The failures in discharge planning led to actual physical and psychosocial harm for both residents.
Failure to Incorporate PASRR Level II Findings into Care and Discharge Planning
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to comply with PASRR (Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review) requirements by not incorporating the PASRR Level II determination into the assessment, care planning, and discharge planning for a resident with multiple mental health diagnoses. The PASRR Level II evaluation, which identified the need for continued nursing facility services and specialized mental health services, was not available at the time of admission and was not reviewed during the resident's stay or at discharge. The Level II report was only retrieved after the resident had already been discharged, and its recommendations were not integrated into the resident's care plan or discharge process. The resident in question had a complex medical history, including dementia, depression, anxiety, delirium, encephalopathy, and a recent femur fracture with surgical site infection. The PASRR Level II assessment specifically noted the need for specialized services to address mental health needs and provided recommendations for care and discharge options. Despite these findings, the facility did not order or initiate any specialized mental health services during the resident's stay. The care plan was delayed and, when eventually updated, did not include the specialized services recommended by the PASRR Level II evaluation. Throughout the resident's admission, there were documented episodes of aggression, combativeness, and non-compliance, which led to the initiation and escalation of psychotropic medications. The discharge summary and post-care instructions did not address the need for specialized mental health services or follow the recommended discharge options outlined in the PASRR Level II report. Facility staff acknowledged that the lack of access to and review of the PASRR Level II report negatively impacted the adequacy of care planning and discharge for the resident.
Failure to Provide Appropriate Pressure Ulcer Care and Timely Interventions
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide necessary treatment and services consistent with professional standards of practice for a resident with a facility-acquired pressure ulcer. The resident, who had significant comorbidities including end-stage renal disease and diabetes, developed multiple wounds during their stay, including a left iliac crest pressure injury and sacral wounds. There were significant delays and inconsistencies in wound assessment and treatment orders, with documented discrepancies between wound care provider recommendations and the actual orders transcribed and implemented by nursing staff. For example, wound care interventions recommended by the wound care team were not consistently reflected in the Treatment Administration Record (TAR), and antibiotics were not always administered as prescribed, particularly in relation to the resident's dialysis schedule, resulting in subtherapeutic dosing. Documentation revealed that wound care interventions were not promptly added to the resident's care plan, with a delay of 21 days after wounds were first identified. There was also a lack of documentation regarding the resident's reported noncompliance with repositioning and wound care, as noted by the wound care provider, with no corresponding nursing or CNA notes, risk/benefit documentation, or care plan updates to address these issues. Additionally, there was a failure to initiate and document referrals for higher-level wound care as recommended by external providers, and the facility did not coordinate or document efforts to ensure the resident attended outpatient wound care or follow-up appointments, despite family requests and external provider recommendations. Throughout the resident's stay, wound healing was minimal, and infections persisted despite multiple rounds of antibiotics, which were at times administered incorrectly or not as ordered. The lack of timely and appropriate wound care interventions, poor communication and documentation among staff, and failure to coordinate necessary higher-level care contributed to the resident's hospitalization with sepsis and subsequent death. The facility's actions and inactions directly resulted in a deficiency related to the provision of pressure ulcer care and prevention of new ulcers.
Systemic QAPI Failures Result in Multiple Deficiencies Across Facility Operations
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to develop, implement, and maintain an effective Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) program that identified, analyzed, and corrected systemic quality deficiencies. Despite collecting data from various sources such as electronic health records, staffing reports, maintenance logs, and resident council feedback, the QAPI committee did not effectively use this information to identify trends, prioritize high-risk issues, or implement and sustain corrective actions. This resulted in ongoing patterns of deficient practice in areas including staffing, grievance process, clinical care, activities, medication management, therapy services, discharge planning, environmental conditions, and care planning. Internal reports, resident council concerns, medical record documentation, staffing data, and direct observation all indicated these issues, but they were not recognized or acted upon through the QAPI process. Staffing deficiencies were evident, particularly on weekends, where staffing levels consistently fell below the facility's own assessment standards. Payroll Based Journal (PBJ) data and review of staffing schedules showed that the number of nurses, CNAs, and restorative aides scheduled was frequently less than the minimum required. Residents reported long wait times for assistance, with one resident waiting over two hours to be helped out of bed, and another experiencing delays in having a urinal emptied. Resident council meeting minutes repeatedly documented concerns about inadequate staffing and slow response times, with little evidence of effective facility response or improvement. The administrator and QAPI committee were not aware of the low weekend staffing, relying instead on reports that did not reflect actual staffing shortages. Additional deficiencies included failures in the grievance process, where residents were not properly informed of the current grievance officer, and posted information was outdated. Residents and council members were unaware of the new grievance officer, and there was no documentation of her introduction or updated contact information. The activities program was also deficient, with multiple residents reporting that they were not offered or able to participate in activities as documented in their care plans and assessments. Activity flowsheets showed minimal or no activity participation or offers for extended periods. Medication management was compromised by incomplete narcotic count documentation, with missing required signatures in narcotic logbooks across multiple units and months. Physical therapy services were not provided as ordered for a resident due to staff absence, with no evidence of alternative arrangements or continuity of care.
Failure to Follow Physician Orders and Care Plans for Vital Signs and Pressure Reduction
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide treatment and care according to physician orders and person-centered care plans for two residents. For one resident with a history of hypertension, heart failure, and transient ischemic attack, there was a physician's order for daily vital signs and an order for antihypertensive medication. However, record review showed that vital signs were only documented twice over a period of 177 days, despite the daily order. The acting DON confirmed that daily monitoring should have occurred, and facility policy required vital signs to be monitored as ordered for residents on antihypertensive medications. For another resident with diagnoses including weakness, mild cognitive impairment, and osteoarthritis, there were orders for wound care to leave the left heel open to air and to use offloading boots for the left lower extremity. Observation revealed the resident was lying in bed with both heels on the mattress and covered by non-skid socks, with no offloading boots in place. The care plan did not include interventions for keeping the left heel open to air or for the use of offloading boots, and a licensed nurse confirmed the order for heel boots. Facility policy required care plans to reflect services necessary to maintain the resident's highest practicable well-being and to follow recognized standards of practice.
Trusted data from CMS and state health departments
Every citation, penalty and Plan of Correction is sourced from public CMS records (latest release May 27, 2026) and official state health department websites — never guesswork.
Trusted by long-term care providers and associations.
