The Blossoms At Woodland Hills Rehab & Nursing Cen
Inspection history, citations, penalties and survey trends for this long-term care facility in Little Rock, Arkansas.
- Location
- 8701 Riley Drive, Little Rock, Arkansas 72205
- CMS Provider Number
- 045259
- Inspections on file
- 31
- Latest survey
- December 12, 2025
- Citations (last 12 mo.)
- 2
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at The Blossoms At Woodland Hills Rehab & Nursing Cen during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
A facility failed to ensure an LPN working through an agency held an active and unencumbered license, as required by state law and facility policy. The facility relied on the agency for credential verification and did not independently confirm the LPN's license status, resulting in the LPN working multiple shifts while the license was expired or encumbered, in violation of licensure restrictions.
A resident with diabetes did not receive required toenail care, resulting in excessively long and sharp nails, due to confusion among staff about responsibility and lack of podiatry follow-up. Another resident experienced a significant delay in call light response, with staff either on break or unaware of the call, despite the resident's risk for falls and reported pain. The DON and Administrator confirmed these lapses in care and response.
Surveyors observed dietary staff handling food and plates with bare hands and a food processor blade falling into pureed food during meal service. Staff acknowledged these actions as cross contamination, and the affected food was served to residents.
Two residents with cognitive impairments were repeatedly exposed due to lack of privacy curtains and inadequate clothing, resulting in visible exposure to staff and others. Staff acknowledged the dignity concerns, and documentation showed awareness of the residents' needs, but interventions to maintain privacy and dignity were not consistently implemented.
Two residents with cognitive impairments did not receive necessary ADL care, including facial hair removal and nail trimming, despite care plans requiring staff assistance. Over several days, one resident was observed with unshaved facial hair and another with long, jagged, and dirty fingernails, even while staff were present. Staff interviews confirmed that these care tasks were not completed as needed, citing staffing shortages as a contributing factor.
The facility did not properly secure cigarettes and lighters, allowing several residents—including those with cognitive impairments and seizure disorders—to possess and use smoking materials unsupervised. Staff observed residents lighting their own cigarettes and found smoking materials hidden in personal belongings, despite policies requiring secure storage and supervision. Staff interviews confirmed ongoing challenges with residents and families bringing in prohibited items and inconsistent enforcement of smoking policies.
Three syringes of an anti-anxiety medication for a resident with dementia and schizophrenia were not documented in the narcotic book as required. The medication was found in the medication room without proper logging, and staff were unable to locate any record of its receipt or transfer. The facility's policy did not address narcotic documentation, and staff interviews confirmed the expected process was not followed.
A box of over-the-counter medications was found left out in an unsecured central supply room with a broken door, making medications accessible to residents. Additionally, expired supplemental feeding bottles were not removed from the supply shelf, and staff were unaware of the unsecured storage and expired items. Facility policy required secure storage and removal of expired items, but these procedures were not followed.
The facility failed to provide a safe, clean, and homelike environment, as evidenced by broken tiles, unsecured cabinets with hazardous items, and rusted doorframes in the shower rooms. A CNA expressed concerns about potential dangers, including falls and ingestion of harmful substances. The Maintenance Supervisor was unaware of needed repairs, and the Maintenance Request Log was not being used. The Administrator acknowledged the issues, and additional hazards were noted, such as an exposed electrical outlet and peeling tabletop finish.
The facility failed to maintain appropriate food temperatures, resulting in cold meals being served to residents across multiple halls. Observations revealed that unheated food carts were left open during meal delivery, leading to significant temperature drops in food items. Residents consistently reported that their meals were often cold, indicating a systemic issue with food service delivery.
The facility was found deficient in maintaining kitchen cleanliness and proper hand hygiene. Observations revealed unclean kitchen surfaces, a non-operational garbage disposal, and chipped door frames. Dietary staff failed to follow hand hygiene protocols, contaminating gloves and not properly sanitizing equipment, contrary to facility policy.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment and mental health diagnoses was found with poor hygiene and overgrown toenails due to the facility's failure to provide adequate personal care. The resident's care plan required assistance with bathing and toenail checks, but staff did not follow procedures, leading to unaddressed hygiene needs. Interviews revealed a lack of documentation and awareness among staff regarding bathing and toenail care procedures.
A resident's anti-diarrhea medication was left at the bedside in a medicine cup, despite no authorization for self-administration. The liquid medication was identified by an LPN, although the physician's order specified pills. The DON confirmed the medication should not have been left in the room, as it posed a risk to other residents.
Failure to Verify Active LPN License for Agency Nurse
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) working in the facility held an active and unencumbered license, as required by state law and facility policy. The LPN in question was employed through an agency and later applied to work directly for the facility. The Administrator reported that the facility relied on the agency to verify the nurse's credentials and did not independently verify the license status of agency nurses. There was no policy in place for hiring agency nurses, and the facility did not maintain employee records for them. Documentation revealed that the LPN worked multiple shifts through the agency while the license was expired or encumbered, and the facility only confirmed the expired status after the LPN had already worked these shifts. Further review of records indicated that the LPN's license had been placed on probation by the Arkansas State Board of Nursing, with explicit restrictions prohibiting employment through a staffing agency. Despite this, the LPN continued to work in the facility via the agency. Facility policies required verification of licensure for all new hires, but this process was not followed for agency staff. The deficiency was identified through interviews, document reviews, and policy examinations, which collectively demonstrated the facility's failure to ensure compliance with licensure requirements for nursing staff.
Failure to Provide Nail Care and Timely Call Light Response
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide appropriate nail care for a resident with type 2 diabetes mellitus, who was admitted with orders to be evaluated and treated by a podiatrist as needed. Despite care plan interventions to check and trim fingernails and toenails, and to notify the nurse if the resident was diabetic, the resident reported that their toenails had not been cut since admission. Staff interviews revealed confusion regarding responsibility for nail care, with aides stating they did not cut the resident's toenails due to the diabetes diagnosis, and nursing staff indicating either the podiatrist or nurse was responsible. Observations confirmed the resident's toenails were excessively long, curved, and sharp, and the resident stated they could only wear open-toed shoes as a result. There was no documentation that the resident had seen a podiatrist since admission, and the DON confirmed the toenails were too thick for staff to cut and that the resident needed podiatry care. Additionally, the facility failed to ensure timely response to a resident's call light. The resident, who had moderate cognitive impairment and was at risk for falls, was observed with their call light on for an extended period while staff were either on break or unaware of the call. The resident reported waiting 30 minutes for assistance and stated that call lights sometimes went unanswered, especially at night. Staff interviews confirmed that the resident was asked to wait until after lunch to be put in bed, and that there was a lack of awareness among staff regarding coverage during breaks. The DON and Administrator both acknowledged that call lights should be answered immediately and that staff should not ask residents to wait for assistance.
Cross Contamination During Food Service
Penalty
Summary
During lunch service, multiple instances of cross contamination were observed in the facility's kitchen. A dietary aide was seen handling slices of cake with bare hands, both when bagging them and when preparing portions for puree diets. The aide had cake residue on all ten fingertips, and the cake was subsequently served to all diets in the facility. The aide later acknowledged that food should not be touched with bare hands but was unsure of the reason. Additionally, the blade from a food processor fell into pureed pasta, and the dietary manager removed it before continuing to use the puree. Another dietary staff member was observed repeatedly handling plates with bare hands, placing their entire hand in the middle of each plate while setting up the meal line. This practice continued throughout the lunch service. Both the dietary manager and the staff member later confirmed in interviews that these actions constituted cross contamination and could potentially lead to foodborne illness among residents. No specific residents or their medical conditions were mentioned in the report.
Failure to Maintain Resident Dignity Due to Lack of Privacy and Inadequate Clothing
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure a dignified existence for two residents with cognitive impairments, resulting in repeated exposure and lack of privacy. One resident with severe cognitive impairment and a history of removing clothing was observed multiple times lying in bed unclothed, with the hospital gown removed and blankets not covering the body. The resident's room lacked a privacy curtain, and the resident was visible from the hallway and to staff and other residents passing by. Staff interviews confirmed that the privacy curtain had not been in place for some time, and that the resident's exposure was recognized as a dignity issue. Another resident with moderate cognitive impairment and a history of dementia and depressive disorder was observed walking in the hallway wearing only a t-shirt and a hospital gown, with the lower body and brief exposed. The resident repeatedly asked for pants and attempted to cover the exposed area by holding the gown closed. Staff stated that the resident was low on clothes and that laundry had not yet delivered additional clothing. The resident remained exposed for an extended period, and staff acknowledged the situation as uncomfortable and embarrassing for the resident. Facility staff, including CNAs, LPNs, and the DON, acknowledged during interviews that the lack of privacy and exposure of residents was a dignity issue. Documentation and care plans indicated awareness of the residents' behaviors and needs, but interventions such as ensuring privacy curtains and adequate clothing were not consistently implemented, resulting in repeated instances where residents' dignity was not maintained.
Failure to Provide Adequate ADL Care: Facial Hair and Nail Care Deficiencies
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide adequate activities of daily living (ADL) care, specifically facial hair removal and nail care, for two residents who required assistance. One resident with moderate cognitive impairment and multiple diagnoses, including diabetes and dementia, was observed over several days with unkempt facial hair across the upper lip and chin, despite care plans indicating the need for cuing and supervision with ADLs. Documentation showed inconsistent recording of bath and care refusals, but there was no evidence that the resident refused facial hair care during the observed period. Another resident with severe cognitive impairment and a history of stroke was dependent on staff for all ADLs. This resident was observed repeatedly with long, jagged, and dirty fingernails, some with sharp edges and food matter underneath. The care plan required regular nail checks and trimming, but observations over multiple days showed no changes or improvement in nail condition. The resident was also seen using their hands to eat and scratch themselves, with staff present but not addressing the nail care needs. Interviews with staff, including a CNA and an LPN, confirmed that ADL care such as nail trimming and facial hair removal should be performed daily and on bath days. Staff acknowledged the negative outcomes of unkempt nails and facial hair, including hygiene and dignity concerns. Staffing shortages were cited as a reason for missed care, with one CNA reporting being the only staff member on the unit and unable to complete baths or grooming as scheduled.
Failure to Secure Smoking Materials and Supervise Resident Smoking
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that cigarettes and lighters were properly stored and that residents did not have access to these items without staff knowledge, resulting in multiple residents possessing and using smoking materials unsupervised. Several residents, including those with moderate cognitive impairment and diagnoses such as seizure disorder, aphasia, Huntington's disease, anxiety, schizophrenia, and stroke, were observed in the designated smoking area with cigarettes and lighters in their possession. Despite facility policy requiring all smoking materials to be stored securely and only provided during supervised smoke breaks, residents were found with full packs of cigarettes and lighters, and some were observed lighting their own cigarettes without staff assistance. Staff interviews revealed that residents and their families frequently brought in cigarettes and lighters, sometimes concealing them in personal belongings or drawers. Staff acknowledged that it was an ongoing challenge to prevent residents from obtaining and keeping these items, despite education efforts directed at both residents and families. The facility's policy and care plans specified that smoking materials should be stored in locked areas and that residents should not have unsupervised access, but these procedures were not consistently followed. In one instance, a resident was found with a cigarette and lighter in a personal case during a smoke break, and another resident was caught smoking in their room, prompting a discharge notice. Observations and interviews indicated that staff were aware of the policy but did not always enforce it, and residents were able to circumvent controls by receiving items from visitors or after outings. The facility's documentation showed that not all residents were accurately assessed for smoking status, and some residents' care plans were not updated to reflect changes in their smoking behavior. Staff also reported that they did not routinely search residents' belongings due to concerns about resident rights, which contributed to the ongoing issue of residents possessing prohibited smoking materials.
Failure to Document Receipt and Storage of Narcotic Medication
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that three syringes of a name brand anti-anxiety medication for a resident with dementia, schizophrenia, and urinary retention were properly documented in the narcotic book. During an observation, it was found that the syringes, which were labeled for the resident and dated, were present in the medication room but had not been logged in the narcotic book as required. The Unit Manager and DON were unable to locate any documentation of the medication in the narcotic books, and the DON confirmed that the medication had not been signed for or logged when received from the pharmacy. The DON also noted that the medication should have been transferred and documented when the resident moved between halls, but this was not done. Further review showed that the pharmacy manifest indicated the resident received four syringes of the medication, but there was no current order for the medication in the resident's Medication Administration Record. The facility's policy on drug storage did not address narcotic documentation, and an in-service on medication storage stated that all narcotic medication was to be accurately logged in and stored according to policy. Interviews with staff confirmed the expected process for receiving and documenting narcotics, which was not followed in this instance.
Medications and Expired Supplements Improperly Stored in Unsecured Supply Room
Penalty
Summary
Surveyors observed that the facility failed to ensure medications and biologicals were securely stored and inaccessible to residents. Specifically, a box containing various over-the-counter medications was found resting on a pallet in the central supply room, which had a broken doorknob and could not be closed, leaving the door ajar. The medications included items such as laxatives, sleep aids, zinc, aspirin, acetaminophen, vitamin D3, iron, NSAIDs, stool softeners, glucose gel, magnesium, and antacids, with one bottle of antacid found open. The Administrator confirmed these medications should have been locked at the nurse's station and acknowledged that residents should not have access to the room. The Director of Nursing confirmed that expired supplemental feeding bottles were available on the supply shelf and should have been removed, while a registered nurse admitted not noticing the door was open during her shift and acknowledged that residents could have accessed the medications left out in the open. The facility's policy required drugs and biologicals to be stored in a safe, secure, and orderly manner, with expired drugs returned to the pharmacy or destroyed. However, the central supply room was not secured due to the broken doorknob, and expired supplemental feeding was not removed from the shelf. The Medical Director was unaware that medications were being stored in an open box in the central supply room and expressed concern about potential diversion. There was no documentation indicating whether any residents had received the expired supplemental feeding.
Facility Fails to Maintain Safe and Clean Environment
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment for its residents, as evidenced by multiple deficiencies observed in the physical environment. The community shower room on E Hall was found with broken and missing tiles, rusted and unsecured doorframes, and black and brown grout between tiles. Additionally, the door to the shower room was left open, posing a risk of residents entering unsupervised. The unsecured cabinet in the shower room contained various personal care items with caution labels, which could be hazardous if accessed by residents. Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #8 expressed concerns about the potential dangers posed by the broken tiles and unsecured cabinet, noting that residents could fall or ingest harmful substances. The CNA also identified a brown spot on the shower bed as dried bowel movement, which could be infectious, and noted the presence of mold on another shower bed. The Maintenance Supervisor was unaware of the need for repairs and mentioned that the Maintenance Request Log was no longer being used, leading to unaddressed maintenance issues. The Administrator acknowledged the need for repairs in the shower room and expressed concern about the open door, which could allow residents to enter and sustain injuries. Additionally, Resident #4's over-the-bed tabletop was observed with peeling finish and exposed pressed board, and the tiles at the entrance to their bathroom were cracked and missing. An outlet under the sink in the shower room on D Hall was pushed into the sheetrock with large holes on both sides, and an electrical cord was hanging from a fan above the sink, indicating further safety hazards.
Failure to Maintain Appropriate Food Temperatures
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that hot foods were served hot and cold foods were served cold, affecting the palatability and nutritional intake of residents across multiple halls. Observations and interviews with residents revealed consistent complaints about the temperature of the food, with several residents stating that their meals were often cold. This issue was observed during both lunch and breakfast services on different days, indicating a systemic problem with food service delivery. During the lunch service, it was noted that food carts were unheated and left open while trays were being loaded and delivered to various halls. This practice resulted in significant temperature drops in the food items, as evidenced by temperature checks conducted immediately after the last trays were served. For instance, the temperature of breaded beef fried steak and carrots was recorded at 113 degrees Fahrenheit, which is below the recommended serving temperature for hot foods. Similarly, during breakfast service, the unheated food carts were again left open, leading to cold food being served to residents. Temperature checks showed that items like scrambled eggs and pancakes were served at temperatures as low as 78.9 degrees Fahrenheit and 75 degrees Fahrenheit, respectively. These findings highlight a failure in maintaining appropriate food temperatures, which is crucial for ensuring resident satisfaction and nutritional intake.
Deficiencies in Kitchen Cleanliness and Hand Hygiene
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain cleanliness and proper hygiene standards in the kitchen, as observed during a survey. The kitchen ceiling tiles, air vents, walls, storage racks, exhaustion fan, and garbage disposal were found to be unclean, with rust, black stains, and grease buildup. The garbage disposal was non-operational for about three weeks, leading to leftover food items and a strong odor. Additionally, door frames were chipped, exposing metal, and the metal shelf below the steam table was rusted and bent. These conditions were observed during a survey, indicating a lack of adherence to professional standards for food storage, preparation, and service. The dietary staff also failed to follow proper hand hygiene protocols. A dietary aide was observed contaminating gloves by not washing hands before putting them on and then handling clean plates. Another dietary staff member washed hands but contaminated them again by turning off the faucet with bare hands before handling food. Furthermore, the same staff member did not use soap or sanitize equipment properly when washing a blender blade, bowl, and lid, which were to be used for preparing food for residents requiring mechanical soft diets. These actions were contrary to the facility's hand washing policy, which requires hand washing at the start of a shift and after activities that contaminate the hands.
Failure to Provide Adequate Personal Care and Toenail Maintenance
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide adequate personal care, including bathing and toenail care, for a resident who required assistance with activities of daily living (ADL). The resident, who had severe cognitive impairment and multiple mental health diagnoses, was observed with dry, flaky skin and overgrown toenails that were not properly maintained. The facility's policy required that nails be checked on bath days and reported to the nurse if they needed trimming, but this was not followed. The resident's care plan indicated the need for partial assistance during bathing, yet the resident was observed with poor hygiene and untrimmed toenails. Interviews with staff revealed a lack of proper documentation and follow-up on the resident's bathing and toenail care. The Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) responsible for the resident's care was unaware of the procedures for providing showers on the closed unit and relied on personal care wipes instead. The Director of Nursing (DON) acknowledged that CNAs had stopped charting baths and showers, and the resident was not included on the podiatrist list for toenail care. The DON and CNA confirmed the resident's toenails were too long and needed attention, but there was no evidence of appropriate action being taken to address the resident's hygiene needs.
Medication Left at Bedside Poses Risk
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that medications were not left at the bedside, which could lead to accidents and injuries. This deficiency was identified for one resident who was not assessed to self-administer medications. The resident's care plan and physician orders did not authorize self-administration of medications. Despite this, a medicine cup containing a blue/green liquid was found on the resident's nightstand. The liquid was later identified by an LPN as the resident's anti-diarrhea medication, although the physician's order specified anti-diarrhea pills, not liquid. The incident was observed by a surveyor, who involved the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) and the Director of Nursing (DON) in the investigation. The ADON and DON confirmed that medications should not be left in the resident's room, as it posed a risk of other residents accessing it. The DON verified that the resident had not been assessed to self-administer medications and confirmed that the medication was left by an LPN, contrary to the facility's policy and the resident's care plan.
Latest citations in Arkansas
Two residents with moderate cognitive impairment and independent mobility were repeatedly seeking each other’s attention and were found by a CNA on the floor with their pants down, appearing to be engaged in consensual sexual activity. Staff separated them and returned them to secure units, and an LPN reported there was no plan for a consensual sexual relationship or private time, despite awareness of prior similar behavior. Both residents described themselves as being in a loving relationship, but the facility completed no assessments related to sexual activity, made no related care plan revisions, and obtained no orders for contraception, STD testing, or specialty consults. Conversations held by leadership with the residents about privacy and protection were not documented, and there was no facility policy addressing resident sexual relations, despite a general resident rights policy referencing self-determination and support in exercising rights.
The facility failed to develop and implement comprehensive care plans addressing sexual health and a consensual sexual relationship for two cognitively impaired, independently mobile residents with psychiatric and neurological diagnoses. Both residents were known to seek each other’s attention and had a prior relationship, yet their care plans only directed staff to separate and redirect them, without any individualized interventions for sexual health, privacy, or safe sex. A CNA later found the two residents on the floor with their pants down, appearing to engage in consensual sexual activity, and they were separated by staff. Subsequent staff interviews confirmed there was no documented assessment, no care plan revisions for sexual health or the relationship, no safe sex education, no established access to contraception, and no facility policy on resident sexual relations.
A resident with hemiplegia, hemiparesis, a below-knee amputation, moderate cognitive impairment, and wheelchair dependence was transported in a facility van by a CNA who had previously been in-serviced and skills-checked on van safety. During the trip, the CNA secured only three of the four required wheelchair floor locks, and a hold-down device had been removed from the van and not replaced. As the CNA drove over a road irregularity and braked, the incompletely secured wheelchair tilted backward, causing the resident to fall onto the van floor and report head pain with a nodule at the base of the skull. Facility policy required an environment free from accident hazards and staff competency in preventing avoidable accidents, but the missing tie-down and failure to fully secure the wheelchair led to this transport-related fall.
Surveyors found that the facility failed to follow physician orders for PICC line dressing changes, wound care, and catheter care for two residents. One resident with osteomyelitis, pressure ulcers, and an indwelling catheter had multiple missing entries on the TAR for ordered PICC line dressing changes, daily pressure ulcer treatments to the heel and coccyx, and catheter care every shift, with the DON confirming that blank TAR blocks indicated treatments were not completed. Another resident with a PICC line for antibiotic therapy had an order for weekly dressing changes, but the dressing was not changed as scheduled, the PICC site was left uncovered for several minutes during medication administration, and an LPN admitted initialing the TAR to indicate a dressing change that she had not performed, while the TN and APN confirmed the order required adherence to the weekly schedule.
A resident with MRSA colonization and a PICC line for IV antibiotics experienced multiple breaches in infection control by nursing staff. An LPN repeatedly double-gloved, handled room surfaces, trash can lids, and the medication cart, then donned new gloves without performing hand hygiene before preparing and administering oral and IV medications. During PICC access, the LPN wiped the access port for only a few seconds, allowed IV tubing to touch bedding, let the access port fall onto the resident’s arm, and then re-accessed the line without hand hygiene or glove changes. At another time, the PICC site was left uncovered while a treatment nurse prepared for a dressing change, and the LPN entered without prior hand hygiene, disconnected IV tubing, and flushed the line after only a brief alcohol wipe. Staff interviews showed uncertainty and inconsistency regarding required scrub times, glove use, and dressing change schedules, which conflicted with facility policies and stated expectations for aseptic PICC care and hand hygiene.
A resident with dementia, anxiety, depression, and on hospice had a Durable Power of Attorney, Living Will, and signed DNR order all specifying no CPR, and the face sheet reflected no CPR; however, physician orders, a MD progress note, and the MAR repeatedly listed the resident as full code from admission onward. Nursing staff and leadership (including a RN, LPN, ADON, DON, and the Administrator) acknowledged that while the advance directives and resuscitate/DNR form showed DNR status, the active orders and MAR still indicated full code, even though staff commonly rely on these documents to determine code status, contrary to facility policy requiring alignment of the care plan and physician orders with the resident’s documented treatment preferences.
A resident with depression, insomnia, and non-Alzheimer’s dementia experienced a documented decline from moderate to severe cognitive impairment on successive MDS assessments, but the care plan was not revised and continued to include an active "Sexual Expression" problem allowing engagement in sexual behavior with other consenting residents. This care plan had been initiated after an incident where two residents were found in bed together partially undressed and engaging in intimate behavior. The resident’s responsible party stated the resident was not capable of consenting to sexual activity, an LPN reported the resident could not express needs or make decisions about sexual relationships, and another LPN stated the care plan no longer reflected the resident’s needs due to steady decline. The Social Services Director had previously completed sexual consent questionnaires only at the time of the incident, and the Medical Director indicated that a sexual activity care plan was not appropriate for a resident with a very low BIMS score, while the Administrator acknowledged care plans were expected to be updated when MDS changes occurred.
A resident with traumatic brain injury, stroke history, and altered mental status was placed on a secured unit for elopement risk but had only general care plan interventions that were not updated when new wandering, exit‑seeking, and aggressive behaviors emerged. Over time, staff documented that the resident walked the halls at night, entered other residents’ rooms, voiced not living there, stated plans to leave through a window, followed staff through locked doors, and sought ways to get out after a home visit. Despite an elopement assessment and multiple behavior notes, no individualized elopement‑prevention interventions were added to the care plan. Eventually, during a night shift when a CNA reported dozing off and not re‑checking the room, the resident broke a bedroom window with furniture, left the building, and was later found off‑site by police after nearly being hit by a car, confirming that the care plan had not been effectively revised or implemented to address the resident’s exit‑seeking behaviors.
A resident with traumatic brain injury, altered mental status, and a history of wandering was housed on a locked unit with a care plan identifying elopement risk but focused mainly on therapeutic activities and medication monitoring. After returning from a home visit, the resident exhibited escalating behaviors over several days, including being up all night walking halls, entering other residents’ rooms, standing at locked exits, following staff out locked doors, voicing a desire to leave, and stating a plan to escape through a window. On the night of the incident, camera footage showed the resident moving between the room, day room, and bathroom until entering the room and not re-emerging, while the CNA on duty did not perform checks, reported that staff did not usually re-check the resident once in the room, and admitted to dozing off. The resident broke the bedroom window with furniture, left the building unnoticed, and was later found by police nearly two miles away after a citizen reported almost hitting the resident with a car, demonstrating that the facility failed to provide adequate supervision and monitoring during a period of increased exit-seeking.
Two residents with significant cognitive and neuromuscular/orthopedic conditions experienced falls when staff did not follow care-planned assistance and supervision requirements. One resident, care-planned for two-person assist with bed mobility, transfers, and personal hygiene, was found on the floor after a CNA attempted incontinent care alone. Another resident, care-planned for staff assistance with dressing and two-person assist for transfers with a slide board, was left seated at the edge of the bed and told to dress themself; the resident fell while unattended and was later found on the floor wearing a C-collar. CNAs reported relying on the electronic care plan/Kardex for instructions, but one CNA described unclear and brief initial training on accessing the system, while leadership stated CNAs were expected to verify care needs in the electronic care plan before each care episode.
Failure to Support and Assess Consensual Sexual Relationship Between Residents
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to support residents’ rights to engage in a consensual sexual relationship between two cognitively impaired residents. Both residents had documented moderate cognitive impairment on their MDS assessments (BIMS scores of 11 and 12) and were independent with mobility. Their care plans identified "inappropriate seeking of other individual's attention" with interventions limited to separating and redirecting them. There was no documented assessment of their capacity for sexual decision-making or sexual activity either before or after an incident in which they were found with their pants down on the floor together. On the date of the incident, a CNA discovered the two residents in a room with their pants down, appearing to be having sex, and reported that it looked like they were consenting and that she had been told they had a history together. The CNA notified an LPN, and the residents were separated and returned to their secure units. The LPN confirmed there was no plan in place to allow a consensual sexual relationship or to provide private time for the residents, despite being aware that similar behavior had occurred previously. Interviews with the residents indicated that they viewed themselves as being in a relationship, that they loved each other, and that they did not intend harm. Record review showed no orders for birth control, sexually transmitted disease testing, or referrals to specialized clinics or physicians for either resident. There was no documentation in progress notes of education or conversations with staff regarding the incident, and no assessments related to sexual activity were completed before or after the event. The MDS nurse and Administrator acknowledged speaking with the residents about the incident and the possibility of providing privacy and protection, but the MDS nurse stated that none of these discussions or interventions were documented and nothing was added to the care plans. The Administrator also stated the facility did not have a policy on resident sexual relations, despite a resident rights policy referencing residents’ rights to self-determination and to be supported in exercising their rights.
Failure to Care Plan for Residents’ Sexual Health and Consensual Relationship
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to develop and implement comprehensive, measurable care plans addressing sexual health and consensual sexual relationships for two cognitively impaired residents. Resident #3, admitted with traumatic brain injury, bipolar disorder, mood disorder, and an unspecified mental disorder, had a BIMS score of 11 indicating moderate cognitive impairment and was independent with mobility. Resident #4, admitted with schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder bipolar type, dementia, and psychosis, had a BIMS score of 12, also indicating moderate cognitive impairment, and was independent with mobility. Both residents’ care plans, updated on 03/11/2026, identified “inappropriate seeking of other individuals’ attention,” but the only interventions listed were to separate and redirect, with no individualized care plan addressing their sexual health, their ongoing relationship, or parameters for consensual sexual activity. On 03/11/2026, a CNA discovered Resident #3 and Resident #4 on the floor with their pants down, appearing to be engaged in consensual sexual activity. The CNA notified an LPN, and staff separated the residents and returned them to their secure units. Staff interviews revealed that there was no existing plan for a consensual sexual relationship, no plan for private time, and no documented assessment or care plan interventions related to sexual health, safe sex education, or contraception for these residents, despite knowledge of a prior relationship and the residents’ expressed desire and intent to engage in sexual activity. The MDS nurse and the Administrator acknowledged that no care plan revisions were made to address sexual health or the relationship, no documentation of related discussions or interventions was completed, and the facility had no policy on resident sexual relations and no established interventions for birth control.
Failure to Properly Secure Wheelchair During Van Transport Resulting in Resident Fall
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to ensure that a resident’s wheelchair was fully and properly secured with all required safety straps before transport in the facility van, resulting in the resident falling backwards in the van. The resident had physician orders for LTC admission and diagnoses including hemiplegia and hemiparesis affecting the right dominant side, as well as an acquired absence of the left leg below the knee. The resident’s MDS showed moderate cognitive impairment, functional limitations in lower extremity range of motion bilaterally, and use of a wheelchair for mobility. The care plan documented a self-care performance deficit requiring limited assistance by one staff for transfers and noted an actual fall earlier in the month, with an intervention for staff education on proper van transport. On the date of the incident, the resident was being transported in the facility van by a CNA who served as the van driver. According to the facility’s reportable and the CNA’s written witness statement, the CNA applied two back floor locks and one front floor lock to secure the wheelchair but did not secure all four required locks. During the drive, as the CNA approached a dip or hump in the road and applied the brakes, the resident’s wheelchair tilted backwards. The resident stated they were falling, and when the CNA stopped the van, she found the resident lying flat on their back on the van floor with the wheelchair also on the floor. Nursing documentation indicated the resident reported pain at the base of the skull, had a nodule on the back of the head, and declined transfer to the emergency room. Interviews and document reviews showed that the CNA had previously received in-service training and skills checkoffs on how to properly secure residents in the van and had signed best-practice forms stating that wheelchairs would be securely attached to the van body and kept centered during transport. The Administrator reported that the CNA admitted she did not use the correct number of straps to secure the wheelchair and that a hold-down device (tie-down/safety strap) had been removed from the smaller van to be used in a larger van and was not replaced. The Maintenance staff confirmed that a hold-down device for the back of the wheelchair was missing from the van used for the transport and that tie-downs were interchangeable between vans. Subsequent observation with other CNAs demonstrated that when all four locks and the seat belt were properly engaged, the wheelchair did not move, but loosening the front locks allowed the wheelchair to move, illustrating how incomplete securement could permit wheelchair movement during transport. The facility’s Safety and Supervision of Residents policy stated that the environment should be made as free from accident hazards as possible and that employees should be trained and demonstrate competency in identifying and preventing accident hazards. Despite this policy and prior in-services, the resident’s wheelchair was not fully secured with all required straps at the time of transport, and a necessary hold-down device was missing from the van, directly contributing to the resident’s fall inside the vehicle.
Failure to Follow Physician Orders for PICC Line, Wound, and Catheter Care
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to follow physician orders for PICC line dressing changes, wound care, and indwelling catheter care for two residents. One resident was admitted with osteomyelitis of the vertebra, sacral and sacrococcygeal region, type 2 diabetes mellitus, and a pressure ulcer, and had a BIMS score indicating moderate cognitive impairment. Physician orders included a PICC line dressing change every three days, daily dressing changes to an unstageable right heel pressure ulcer, daily cleansing and dressing of an unstageable coccyx pressure ulcer, and catheter care every shift and PRN with soap and water or wipes for wound healing. Review of the Treatment Administration Record (TAR) for June showed multiple dates where there were no initials or check marks to indicate that the PICC line dressing changes, right heel dressing changes, coccyx pressure ulcer treatments, and catheter care had been completed as ordered. The TAR for this resident showed no documentation of PICC line dressing changes on several specified dates, despite an active order for changes every three days. Similarly, the TAR lacked initials or check marks for the ordered daily dressing changes to the right heel pressure ulcer on multiple dates. For the coccyx pressure ulcer, there were two separate orders—one to cleanse and apply wet-to-dry dressings with a specific brand dressing and island dressing every day shift, and a later order to cleanse and apply wet-to-dry dressings with a specific brand dressing and foam dressing every day shift. On several dates, the TAR contained open blocks with no initials or check marks, indicating that these treatments were not completed. Additionally, the TAR showed that catheter care ordered every shift and PRN was not documented as completed on multiple day shifts over a series of days. The DON confirmed that open blocks on the TAR indicated treatments were not completed. For the second resident, who was admitted with infection and inflammatory reaction due to an internal left hip prosthesis, MRSA, and pain related to orthopedic prosthetic devices, there was an order for a PICC line dressing change to the left upper arm every Wednesday on the day shift. The March TAR reflected this order and showed documented dressing changes on two Wednesdays, with check marks and initials indicating the treatment had been administered. During a medication pass observation, an LPN examined the PICC line dressing and was unsure of the last dressing change date, noting that the handwritten date on the dressing was unclear and that PICC line dressings could only be changed by an RN. Later observation showed the treatment nurse at the bedside with the PICC line site uncovered after the dressing had been removed, while the LPN administered oral medications and hung an antibiotic through the PICC line, leaving the site uncovered for several minutes. The treatment nurse stated the dressing change had been due the previous day but was not completed because the dressing was not available, and also stated she signed the TAR after completing the dressing change. Further interviews revealed documentation discrepancies for this second resident. The DON’s nursing incident/accident note documented that the PICC line dressing change was not completed on the scheduled day and was instead changed the following day. The LPN later acknowledged that the initials on the TAR for the scheduled dressing change date were hers, and admitted she had not changed the dressing but had only looked at it after being told by the treatment nurse that the dressing was within a seven-day time frame. She stated she placed her initials in the TAR block to indicate she had looked at the dressing, even though the TAR coding indicated that initials in the block meant the treatment was given. The treatment nurse reported changing the dressing on one earlier date and, when changing it later, observed a written date on the removed dressing that did not match any documented TAR entry and could not identify whose initials were on that dressing. The treatment nurse and APN both confirmed that the physician’s order required the dressing to be changed every Wednesday and that, even if changed on another day, it still needed to be changed on Wednesday per the order. The DON confirmed that staff initials in a TAR block indicated the treatment was given, an X indicated the treatment was not ordered for that day, and an open block indicated the treatment was not completed.
Improper Hand Hygiene and PICC Line Management During MRSA-Positive Resident Care
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to ensure proper infection prevention and control practices during the care of a resident with a PICC line and MRSA colonization. The resident was admitted with diagnoses including infection and inflammatory reaction due to an internal left hip prosthesis, MRSA, and pain related to orthopedic prosthetic devices. The resident had a PICC line in the left arm for IV antibiotic therapy to treat the hip infection, and the care plan included contact isolation, use of gowns and gloves during physical contact, handwashing before leaving the room, and standard precautions for infection control. Orders and the TAR showed that PICC line dressings were to be changed weekly, and the MAR showed daily IV antibiotic administration. Surveyor observations on one morning showed that an LPN performed hand hygiene and donned two pairs of gloves along with other PPE before entering the resident’s room to obtain blood pressure and administer medications. The LPN entered the room multiple times, repeatedly double-gloving, and handled the blood pressure cuff, trash can lid, medication cart, and medication cards without performing hand hygiene between glove removal and donning new gloves. At one point, the LPN removed gloves, closed the trashcan lid with a gloved hand, then removed gloves and immediately donned a clean pair without hand hygiene before preparing and administering the resident’s oral medications. Later, when preparing to administer IV antibiotic through the PICC line, the LPN again donned PPE, placed supplies on paper towels on the overbed table, removed the cap from the PICC access port, and wiped the port with an alcohol pad for less than three seconds before flushing with normal saline. During this process, IV tubing touched the resident’s bedding, the access port fell back onto the resident’s arm, and the LPN discarded the contaminated tubing, obtained new tubing, and again wiped the access port for less than three seconds before attaching the tubing and starting the IV medication, without performing hand hygiene or changing gloves during the sequence. A subsequent observation the same day showed the treatment nurse at the bedside with the resident’s PICC line dressing removed, leaving the site uncovered while the resident looked at the open site and was not wearing a mask. The LPN entered without performing hand hygiene before donning PPE, administered oral medication, disconnected the IV tubing from the PICC line, wiped the access port for three seconds, and flushed with normal saline. The treatment nurse stated responsibility for PICC dressing changes and believed the last dressing change had occurred the prior week, but also reported that the dressing removed that day was marked with a date indicating it was due for change the previous day and that the dressing had not been changed because supplies had to be ordered. Facility records showed that the TAR had been signed for a PICC dressing change on a scheduled day, while later nursing documentation described that a dressing change ordered for a specific day had not been performed as ordered. Facility policies and CDC-based documents required hand hygiene before and after glove use, hand hygiene after glove removal, and disinfection of needleless access devices for at least 15 seconds, and the DON stated that the PICC port should be cleaned for 15 seconds and that the dressing should be in place before starting medication, which contrasted with the observed practices. Interviews with the LPN revealed that double gloving was used so gloves would not have to be changed as often, and the LPN acknowledged that hand hygiene should have been performed after removing gloves and before donning new ones. The LPN initially could not state the required length of time for scrubbing the PICC access port and later stated it should have been cleaned for at least 15 seconds, which differed from the observed practice of wiping for less than three seconds. The treatment nurse described limited availability of PICC dressing kits and that no specific person was responsible for ordering them, and reported having changed the resident’s PICC dressing two to three times since admission. The APN and DON both stated expectations that PICC sites and access ports be kept sterile or clean during medication administration and flushing, that staff use only one set of gloves at a time with handwashing between glove changes, and that the PICC port be cleaned for 15 seconds with alcohol swabs even when medicated caps are used. These expectations and policies contrasted with the observed failures in hand hygiene, glove use, PICC port disinfection, and maintaining an intact dressing prior to accessing the PICC line.
Inconsistent Documentation of DNR Status in Medical Record
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that one resident’s medical record accurately and consistently reflected the resident’s advance directive specifying no Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR). The resident had non-Alzheimer’s dementia, anxiety, depression, moderate impairment in decision-making, and was receiving hospice services. Documentation in the record included a Durable Power of Attorney for Health Care, a Living Will Declaration, and a Resuscitate/Do Not Resuscitate order, all indicating that CPR and chest compressions were to be withheld and that the resident was a Do Not Resuscitate (DNR). The resident’s face sheet also indicated an advance directive for no CPR. Despite these documents, multiple parts of the electronic health record and physician documentation identified the resident as a full code. Physician’s orders from admission onward, including after the resident was admitted to hospice, contained orders indicating full code status. A MD progress note also documented the resident as a full code, and the Medication Administration Record (MAR) for the reviewed period listed the resident as full code. These entries conflicted with the existing DNR orders and advance directive documents in the record. Interviews with nursing staff and leadership confirmed awareness of the discrepancy between the resident’s documented advance directives and the active physician orders and MAR entries. A RN, an LPN, the ADON, the DON, and the Administrator each acknowledged that the resident’s advance directives and resuscitate/do not resuscitate order indicated DNR status, while the current physician orders and MAR showed full code. Staff stated that code status is typically verified using the medical record, MAR, and face sheet, and they recognized that the inconsistency meant staff could rely on incorrect information about whether to initiate CPR. Facility policy required that advanced directives be respected, that the plan of care be consistent with documented treatment preferences, and that the physician be notified so appropriate orders could be documented in the medical record and care plan, which did not occur in this case.
Failure to Revise Sexual Expression Care Plan After Cognitive Decline
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to revise a resident’s comprehensive care plan after a significant decline in cognitive status and changes documented on the quarterly MDS. One resident with active diagnoses of depression, insomnia, and non-Alzheimer’s dementia had a BIMS score of 09 on the 07/30/2025 quarterly MDS, indicating moderate cognitive impairment, which later declined to a BIMS score of 03 on the 01/05/2026 quarterly MDS, indicating severe cognitive impairment. Despite this documented decline, the resident’s care plan continued to include an active problem of “Sexual Expression,” initiated on 08/15/2025 after an incident in which the resident was found in another resident’s bed with both residents partially undressed and engaging in intimate behavior. The care plan goal was to allow the resident to engage in sexual behavior with other consenting residents, with interventions focused on ensuring appropriate consent, providing privacy, and observing for changes in mood or cognition. Interviews and record reviews showed that the care plan was not updated to reflect the resident’s current cognitive status or capacity for consent. The resident’s responsible party stated that the resident was not capable of consenting to sexual relationships or activity and had not been capable for a long time, and identified themselves as the decision maker. An LPN familiar with the resident reported that the resident could not express needs or wants and did not believe the resident was ever capable of making decisions about a sexual relationship, despite what was documented on the care plan. Another LPN stated that the current care plan was not accurate due to the resident’s steady decline. The Social Services Director reported completing sexual consent questionnaires for both involved residents at the time of the original incident and determining they could consent, but acknowledged the form was not set to repeat on subsequent assessments. The Medical Director stated that a care plan for sexual activity for a resident with a BIMS score of 03 was not appropriate because sexual knowledge would be low, and the Administrator confirmed that care plans were expected to be updated quickly when the MDS reflected a change, underscoring that this did not occur for this resident’s sexual expression care plan.
Failure to Update Care Plan for New Exit-Seeking Behaviors Leading to Elopement
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to develop and implement an effective, updated comprehensive care plan with individualized interventions in response to new onset wandering, exit‑seeking, and elopement‑related behaviors for a resident on a secured unit. The resident had a history of traumatic brain injury, cerebral infarction (stroke), altered mental status, and was admitted to the secured unit due to traumatic brain injury and elopement risk. A quarterly MDS showed the resident was cognitively intact with a BIMS score of 12 and independent with ambulation, but a later BIMS showed a score of 2, indicating moderately impaired cognition. Despite these changes and the resident’s known elopement risk, the care plan initiated months earlier contained only general interventions such as therapeutic activities and medication monitoring, and no additional or revised interventions were added after 08/25/2025 to address later‑emerging behaviors or elopement attempts. On 01/13/2026, multiple progress notes documented significant behavioral changes and explicit exit‑seeking behavior. Early that morning, staff recorded that the resident was up all night walking the halls, refusing to go to bed, entering other residents’ rooms, and voicing that they did not live in the facility. The resident stated an intent to get out of the window. Later that day, another note documented that the resident had been seeking elopement since returning from a home visit, admitted a desire to leave, had been looking for ways to get out, and followed staff out locked doors, showing force when staff tried to return the resident to the unit. A further note that evening described the resident talking loudly, being aggressive toward staff, and again stating a desire to get out of the facility. Although an elopement assessment was completed at that time, there were no new care plan interventions put in place to guide staff in preventing exit‑seeking or managing the aggressive behaviors. In the weeks that followed, staff interviews and documentation showed that the resident continued to exhibit wandering and exit‑seeking behaviors without corresponding care plan revisions. Staff reported that after a family home visit, the resident began trying to leave the unit, walked door to door asking how to get out, watched staff to see if they were paying attention, and talked about leaving. On the night of the elopement, camera footage showed the resident repeatedly moving between the room, day room, and bathroom before entering the room and not re‑emerging. A CNA on duty stated that the resident had been going in and out of the room earlier in the shift, then went back to the room and was not checked on again; the CNA also reported dozing off during the shift and not hearing the window break. In the early morning hours, staff discovered the resident’s window busted and the resident missing, and a progress note documented that the resident had eloped by throwing an end table through the window. A police report and interviews confirmed that the resident was found off‑site after nearly being struck by a vehicle, having left the facility to find family. Throughout this period, the facility did not update the resident’s care plan with individualized, effective interventions to address the clearly documented new onset wandering, exit‑seeking, and elopement behaviors.
Removal Plan
- Revise Resident #1's care plan to include individualized elopement prevention interventions updated to include all interventions per the Plan of Removal.
- Complete new elopement risk assessments for residents residing on the secured unit.
- For any resident scoring moderate or high risk, review care plans to ensure individualized elopement interventions are present.
- Complete environment exit safety checks.
- Revise and update all secured unit residents' care plans based on the Plan of Removal.
- Provide in-service education to nursing and direct care staff on the elopement policy and missing resident procedures.
- Provide in-service education to nursing and direct care staff on the definition and examples of elopement and exit-seeking behaviors, early warning signs requiring interventions, and requirements to notify the nurse, administrator, or DON of new or increased behaviors.
- Provide in-service education to nurse management responsible for updating care plans on mandatory care plan revision following behavior changes with individualized interventions.
- Order shatter-resistant film for front-facing secured unit windows and install it.
- Implement monitoring for the DON or designee to review the 24-hour report to identify new or increasing exit-seeking behaviors.
- Implement monitoring for the DON or designee to complete audits to verify elopement risk assessments are completed, individualized interventions are present, and documentation reflects staff implementation, then transition to routine QAPI monitoring.
Elopement from locked unit due to inadequate supervision and response to exit-seeking behaviors
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to provide adequate supervision and maintain an environment free from accident hazards for a resident with known wandering and elopement risk, resulting in an elopement through a broken bedroom window. The resident had a history of traumatic brain injury, cerebral infarction, altered mental status, and wandering, and had been admitted to a secured unit due to elopement risk. An MDS assessment earlier in the year showed the resident as cognitively intact and independently ambulatory, but a later BIMS assessment showed moderately impaired cognition. The resident’s care plan identified the need for placement on a secured unit related to traumatic brain injury and elopement risk, with interventions focused on therapeutic activities and monitoring of psychotropic medications, but did not include enhanced supervision measures in response to escalating exit-seeking behaviors. In the weeks prior to the elopement, multiple progress notes and staff interviews documented increased exit-seeking and behavioral changes after the resident returned from a home visit. On one day, progress notes recorded that the resident was up all night walking the halls, going in and out of other residents’ rooms, voicing that they did not live in the facility, and stating an intention to get out through a window. Staff documented that the resident had been seeking elopement since returning from a home visit, had been looking for ways to get out, followed staff out locked doors, and showed force when staff tried to return the resident to the unit. Another note from the same day described the resident talking loudly, being aggressive toward staff, and repeatedly expressing a desire to leave the facility. An elopement assessment documented that the resident ambulated independently, had a history of following staff and others, and had been wandering halls and standing by locked exit doors after returning from home. On the night of the elopement, camera footage showed the resident repeatedly moving between the resident’s room, the day room, and the bathroom until entering the room at approximately 3:12 a.m. and not re-emerging. Staff interviews revealed that the CNA assigned to the unit acknowledged that the resident had been trying to start a fight with another resident for two days, that the resident typically went in and out of the room throughout the night, and that staff did not normally go back to check on the resident once the resident returned to the room. The CNA reported that she did not check on the resident after the last interaction around 9:30–10:00 p.m., that she sometimes could not take breaks due to staffing, and that she dozed off for about 30 minutes during the shift. The DON later stated that the CNA reported falling asleep and not hearing the window break. Staff discovered the broken window only when an LPN returned from break around 4:25 a.m., at which point the resident was found to be missing. Law enforcement records and interviews confirmed that the facility reported the resident missing in the early morning hours and that the resident was located off-site by police after a citizen reported almost striking the resident with a vehicle. The police officer stated that the resident was found near a school approximately 1.9 miles from the facility, requiring travel across an intersection and along areas without sidewalks. The resident told police they were walking to find family. Interviews with multiple CNAs and nurses indicated that the resident had been going door to door asking how to get out, watching staff to see if they were paying attention, and walking back and forth to doors after returning from a family visit. The DON and Administrator both stated they were not aware of prior elopement attempts beyond wandering and walking back and forth, and the MDS Coordinator reported she had not been informed of the January incident in which the resident voiced a plan to escape through a window. Facility policies required staff to know the location of residents under their care and to implement care plan strategies for residents at risk of wandering or elopement, but staff interviews showed that routine checks were not performed on the resident during the night of the incident and that the resident’s escalating exit-seeking behaviors were not effectively communicated or translated into increased supervision. A police incident report and witness statements further detailed that the resident exited the building by throwing an end table through the bedroom window. The facility’s own missing resident and wandering/elopement policies stated that staff are responsible for knowing residents’ whereabouts and that care plans for at-risk residents must include safety strategies and interventions. Despite documented behaviors such as wandering, standing at locked doors, following staff out locked exits, verbalizing intent to leave, and specifically stating a plan to get out through a window, there was no evidence in the record that supervision was increased or that staff adjusted monitoring practices during periods of heightened exit-seeking. Staff interviews also revealed that for several weeks there had often been only one CNA on the locked unit at night, and that the CNA on duty the night of the elopement positioned herself in a doorway with hall lights off and later admitted to dozing off. These actions and inactions resulted in the resident being able to break the window, leave the secured unit and facility, and travel a significant distance off-site before being located and returned by police.
Failure to Follow Care-Planned Assistance and Supervision Leading to Resident Falls
Penalty
Summary
Facility staff failed to follow care-planned interventions for assistance and supervision for two residents, resulting in falls. Resident #2, admitted with Alzheimer's disease, spastic hemiplegic cerebral palsy, and neuromuscular bladder dysfunction, had a care plan requiring assistance of two staff for bathing/showering, bed mobility, personal hygiene, toilet use, and transferring. On 06/04/2025, the DON and an LPN responded to Resident #2's room and found the resident on their back on the floor after CNA #1 attempted to perform incontinent care alone, contrary to the care plan specifying a two-person assist for bed mobility, transfers, and personal hygiene. CNA #1 later stated that, upon hiring, it was not made clear how to access the electronic care plan system and that initial training on the system was brief and difficult to see. Resident #3 was admitted with spinal stenosis of the cervical region, cervical disc disorder with radiculopathy, generalized muscle weakness, and was receiving surgical aftercare following nervous system surgery. The care plan required assistance of one staff member for toileting, bathing/showering, dressing, and bed mobility, and assistance of two staff members for transferring, including use of a sliding board with two-person assist. A progress note documented that on 01/15/2026, an LPN was called to Resident #3's room and found the resident lying face down on the floor wearing a cervical collar, after the resident reported being told to dress themself. The resident later recounted that a CNA had helped them to a seated position at the edge of the bed, then left the room with another staff member while the resident attempted to dress themself, during which time the fall occurred. Interviews with multiple CNAs and facility leadership confirmed that CNAs were expected to obtain resident care instructions from the electronic care plan/Kardex system and that Resident #3 required staff assistance for all tasks except meals. CNA #2 acknowledged leaving Resident #3 unattended while assisting another staff member, despite the electronic care plan indicating the resident did not perform tasks alone. Another CNA reported sometimes being the only staff member in the room when transferring Resident #3 with a slide board, even though the care plan required two staff. The DON and Administrator stated that aides were trained one-on-one on the electronic care plans after morning huddles and that CNAs were expected to verify care requirements in the electronic care plan before providing care. The Medical Director stated it was his expectation that orders were followed as written in the care plan. Standard of practice cited requires that residents receive treatment and care in accordance with professional standards, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and residents' choices.
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.
