Fountain View Subacute And Nursing Center
Inspection history, citations, penalties and survey trends for this long-term care facility in Los Angeles, California.
- Location
- 5310 Fountain Ave, Los Angeles, California 90029
- CMS Provider Number
- 055111
- Inspections on file
- 61
- Latest survey
- January 27, 2026
- Citations (last 12 mo.)
- 10
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Fountain View Subacute And Nursing Center during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
A resident with heart failure, intact cognition, and extensive ADL needs reported that a CNA touched her inappropriately in the vaginal area during perineal care and stated she informed the social worker but no action was taken. The SSW acknowledged receiving the abuse allegation and knowing the abuse reporting policy but did not notify the Administrator, DON, or other leadership, did not complete required SOC 341 documentation, and did not contact law enforcement or the Ombudsman. The DSD reported that the Ombudsman had previously relayed that the same resident said she had been touched inappropriately by staff, but the DSD did not obtain details, assumed it referred to back rubs, and did not initiate an investigation or remove the CNA from resident contact. The DON stated he was not informed at the time of the allegation, and review of facility policy showed abuse allegations must be reported within two hours and accused staff removed from resident contact, which did not occur.
A resident with heart failure and intact cognition, dependent on staff for most ADLs, reported that a CNA touched her inappropriately during perineal care. The resident informed the SSW, who acknowledged knowing the abuse reporting policy but did not notify the Administrator or DON, did not complete required SOC 341 documentation, and did not contact law enforcement or the Ombudsman. The DSD was told by the Ombudsman that the resident had reported being touched inappropriately by staff but did not obtain details, assumed it referred to routine back rubs, and did not initiate an investigation or remove the CNA from resident contact. Review of facility policy showed that abuse allegations must be reported within two hours to leadership and external agencies, and that accused staff must be placed on leave without resident contact, which did not occur.
A resident with heart failure, intact cognition, and extensive ADL needs reported that a CNA touched her inappropriately during perineal care and stated she informed the social worker, but no action was taken. The social services worker acknowledged receiving the abuse allegation and knowing the requirement to immediately report it to administration and outside agencies, yet did not notify the Administrator or DON, did not complete the SOC 341, and did not contact law enforcement or the Ombudsman. The DSD also learned of a similar allegation during an Ombudsman visit but did not obtain details, assumed it referred to routine back rubs, and did not initiate an investigation or remove the alleged perpetrator from resident contact. The DON and Administrator were unaware of the allegation, and review of facility policy showed that abuse allegations must be reported within two hours and that accused staff must be placed on leave, which did not occur.
A resident with heart failure, obesity, and reduced mobility requested a transfer to another facility but did not receive timely updates or follow-up from staff for about a month. The Social Services Worker admitted to not contacting the requested facility or informing the resident of the status, leading to the resident's frustration and dissatisfaction with communication and care.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment and complex medical needs missed multiple scheduled medical appointments due to lack of escort availability, transportation issues, and poor communication among staff. Additionally, nursing staff failed to document the resident's return from appointments and update new orders or follow-up care in the medical record, contrary to facility policy.
A resident with heart failure, obesity, and reduced mobility requested assistance with transferring to another facility but did not receive timely follow-up or communication from the Social Services Worker (SSW) for about a month. The resident experienced frustration and dissatisfaction due to the lack of updates, and records showed no documentation of contact with the requested facility or communication about the transfer status. The DON confirmed it was the SSW's responsibility to assist with such requests and keep residents informed.
The emergency tracheostomy ventilator unit box (e-kit) was found locked without documentation of its last check, and staff were unable to confirm when or by whom it was last maintained. The required monthly checks and documentation, as outlined in facility policy, were not completed, leaving the e-kit’s readiness for emergencies unverified.
The facility did not follow prescribed menu and portion sizes for residents on pureed, controlled carbohydrate, and soft and bite size diets. Residents on pureed diets received less food than required, those on CCHO diets received excessive rice, and soft and bite size diet meals were not prepared to the correct texture and size, as specified by facility policy and diet guidelines.
The facility failed to follow safe food storage and preparation practices by serving unpasteurized shell eggs to residents and storing pureed desserts without proper labeling or identification. Staff were unaware that the eggs used were not pasteurized, and prepared foods were not labeled according to policy, increasing the risk of foodborne illness for residents.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment and total dependence on staff had medication administered through a g-tube by an LVN without the privacy curtain being pulled, leaving the resident's abdomen exposed while a roommate was present. Both the LVN and DON confirmed that privacy should have been maintained during the procedure, in accordance with facility policy.
A resident with chronic respiratory failure, obesity, and encephalopathy who required ventilator and tracheostomy care did not have a care plan addressing these needs. Despite receiving oxygen therapy, suctioning, and mechanical ventilation, the facility did not create a care plan for ventilator/tracheostomy care, as confirmed by both the MDS Nurse and DON during interviews and record review.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment and a history of acute respiratory failure and epilepsy, who required a hand mitten restraint to prevent removal of invasive tubing, did not have their care plan updated quarterly as required. Despite facility policy and physician orders, the care plan had not been revised for several months, which could have led to missed nursing interventions.
A resident with a Stage 4 sacral pressure ulcer was found to have a Low Air Loss Mattress (LALM) set above the physician-ordered range, despite orders and manufacturer instructions to set the mattress based on the resident's weight. The resident reported discomfort, and staff confirmed the settings were incorrect, potentially impacting wound management.
A CNA failed to change PPE and perform hand hygiene between providing care to two residents on enhanced barrier precautions, both of whom had significant medical conditions and required full assistance. This lapse was observed and confirmed by facility staff, and was not in accordance with the facility's infection control policies.
Twelve resident rooms were found to provide less than the required 80 square feet per resident, based on facility records and direct measurement. Although staff were observed to have enough space to provide care and residents did not express concerns about room size, the documented square footage in these rooms did not meet regulatory standards.
A facility failed to follow care plan interventions for a resident with multiple medical conditions, including ESRD and diabetes. The care plan required vital signs to be recorded and Amoxicillin to be administered twice daily. However, a dose was missed, and vital signs were not consistently documented. The DON acknowledged documentation gaps, attributing them to new nursing staff.
The facility failed to maintain accurate medical records for two residents, leading to deficiencies in documentation. One resident's ventilator administration record contained inaccuracies, with procedures marked as completed despite the resident being discharged to a hospital. Another resident's vital sign summaries and nurse progress notes were incomplete and inaccurate, with errors in the recorded date of death. The DON acknowledged these issues, attributing them to staff errors and the need for improved documentation practices.
The facility failed to adhere to its staff meal-break policy, as confirmed by interviews with LVNs and the ADON. LVNs were scheduled for 12-hour shifts, but when the census was low, their hours were flexed, requiring them to take unpaid lunch breaks or leave early, resulting in less than 12-hour shifts. This practice violated the signed meal waiver agreement, which allowed waiving a second meal break only if working more than 10 but less than 12 hours.
The facility did not post the actual hours worked by nursing staff for two days, displaying only projected hours on the DHPPD board. Interviews with the DON and ADM confirmed that actual hours should have been posted, as required by the facility's policy.
A facility failed to implement effective infection control measures for scabies, leading to a potential risk of transmission among residents and staff. A resident with a skin rash was not placed on contact precautions when treatment began, and the diagnosis of scabies was confirmed later. The facility did not maintain contact precautions as per the physician's order, and the infection preventionist acknowledged that precautions were initiated late. This deficiency resulted in a potential risk of scabies transmission to 86 in-house residents, staff, and the community.
A facility failed to ensure its Infection Preventionist Nurse completed required annual training, leading to inadequate contact precautions for a resident diagnosed with scabies. The resident, with multiple health issues, was not properly isolated, risking the spread of infection. The Director of Nursing acknowledged the oversight in infection control measures.
The facility failed to ensure that a CNA's certification was up to date, allowing the CNA to work for over a month with an expired certificate. This lapse in following the facility's policy on licensure and certification could lead to inadequate resident care.
The facility failed to develop comprehensive care plans for four residents, leading to deficiencies in monitoring CVA and aspirin use, adverse effects of Lexapro, transmission-based precautions, and a skin disorder. This was confirmed by the DON and LVNs, who acknowledged the oversight and the importance of individualized care plans.
The facility failed to provide complete RNA treatments and proper documentation for three residents, leading to increased risk for contractures and decline in physical function. The residents did not receive the ordered PROM and AROM exercises, and the records were incomplete, with no documentation of treatment provided or refused on specific dates.
The facility failed to account for controlled substances for several residents, leading to discrepancies in medication counts and documentation. LVNs admitted to either not documenting administered medications or documenting medications that were not administered. Additionally, the DON failed to include verifying signatures on accountability logs, leading to potential inaccuracies and diversion risks.
The facility failed to maintain a medication error rate below five percent, resulting in a 7.69% error rate. Two residents received incorrect medications due to LVNs not verifying the correct form and dosage before administration, violating facility policies.
A facility failed to ensure safe storage of medications when an LVN left three medication cups unattended on a resident's bedside table. The LVN acknowledged the mistake, and the DON confirmed the failure, emphasizing the risk of unauthorized access and potential harm.
The facility failed to maintain proper infection control procedures for two residents. An LVN did not disinfect a nightstand or water tray, potentially leading to contamination and infections. Additionally, the facility did not post the required contact isolation sign for a resident with a history of CRE, increasing the risk of spreading microorganisms. The DON and IP confirmed these lapses in infection control.
The facility failed to ensure that a resident's call light was within reach, despite the resident's significant medical conditions and dependency on staff for daily activities. An observation confirmed the call light was not accessible, and the Director of Nursing acknowledged the issue, which contradicted the facility's policy.
The facility failed to ensure that a resident with severe cognitive impairment and multiple serious diagnoses had an Advance Directive on file in their medical record, as required by the facility's policy. This oversight was confirmed through record reviews and staff interviews, highlighting the importance of having the Advance Directive to ensure proper care and adherence to the resident's wishes.
The facility failed to include a CVA diagnosis in a resident's MDS assessment, despite the resident's clinical records and medication administration record indicating a history of CVA and a prescription for aspirin as a prophylactic measure. The DON confirmed the omission during an interview, acknowledging its potential impact on the resident's care plan.
A facility failed to properly assess and document a resident's schizophrenia diagnosis, leading to an inaccurate PASARR Level I screening. The error was acknowledged by the DON, who confirmed that the resident did not receive the necessary PASARR Level II assessment and follow-up for their mental condition, potentially affecting their treatment and care.
A resident at risk for skin breakdown developed a left heel pressure injury due to the facility's failure to complete weekly skin assessments, document the initial wound assessment, and obtain and document physician's orders for treatment. The resident did not receive necessary daily treatment and care for the pressure injury for several days.
The facility failed to provide necessary respiratory care services for two residents by not administering oxygen therapy as per the physician's orders. One resident received less than the ordered oxygen due to a malfunctioning concentrator, while another received double the prescribed oxygen flow rate. The facility's policies and procedures for oxygen administration were not followed, leading to deficiencies in care.
The facility failed to post the required daily actual hours worked by the staff for two out of 17 days in April 2024. On the day of observation, the posted hours were outdated, and the Director of Nursing confirmed that the information should have been updated daily. The Director of Staff Development also acknowledged the delay in posting the current day's hours.
The facility failed to monitor a resident's aspirin regimen for signs of bleeding for 36 days, lacking necessary documentation and care planning, as confirmed by staff and the Pharmacy Consultant.
The facility failed to ensure necessary hospice care for a resident, missing required twice-weekly visits from a hospice nurse and aide, and did not maintain a calendar of visits for April 2024. This led to a lack of documented visits and potential discomfort for the resident.
The facility failed to maintain a working call light system for a resident with severe cognitive impairment and multiple health issues. The call light did not illuminate when pressed, and the call light panel at the nurses' station did not indicate the resident's need for assistance, posing a risk of delayed care and falls.
The facility failed to meet the required 80 square feet per resident in multiple residents' bedrooms for 12 out of 36 rooms. Despite this, staff and residents reported no issues with space for care and movement. The facility has requested a waiver for these rooms, stating that they do not impede care or safety.
Failure to Immediately Report and Investigate Allegation of Sexual Abuse
Penalty
Summary
Facility staff failed to ensure a resident was free from abuse by not immediately reporting, investigating, and addressing an allegation of sexual abuse. The resident, who had heart failure, intact cognition, and required extensive assistance with ADLs including personal care and toileting, reported that about five days prior a CNA cleaned her perineal area and touched her inappropriately in her vagina. The resident stated she reported this to the social worker, but nothing was done. The resident’s MDS showed she was dependent on staff for lower body dressing, toileting, and footwear, and required maximal or partial assistance for other ADLs, indicating reliance on staff for intimate care. The Social Services Worker acknowledged that the resident reported the allegation of abuse to her on the evening of 1/26/2026 and that she was aware of the facility’s abuse reporting policy, but she did not report the allegation to the Administrator, DON, or other leadership, did not complete an SOC 341, and did not notify police or the Ombudsman. The Administrator confirmed she had not been informed of the allegation and stated it should have been reported the day it occurred. The DSD reported that several days earlier the Ombudsman had informed her that the resident said she had been touched inappropriately by a staff member, but the DSD did not seek further details and assumed the resident was referring to back rubs, and no investigation was initiated and the CNA was not suspended. The DON stated he was not made aware of the allegation when it was reported and that the failure to report prevented implementation of immediate protective interventions. Review of the facility’s abuse policy showed that all abuse allegations must be reported immediately (within two hours) to the administrator and appropriate agencies, and that any employee accused of abuse is to be placed on leave with no resident contact until the investigation is complete, which did not occur in this case.
Failure to Report and Investigate Alleged Sexual Abuse and Remove Accused Staff
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to implement its abuse prevention and reporting policies when a cognitively intact resident, admitted with heart failure and requiring extensive assistance with ADLs, reported being inappropriately touched in the perineal/vaginal area by a CNA during personal care. The resident stated the incident occurred several days prior and that she informed the social services worker (SSW), but nothing was done. The resident’s MDS showed she needed maximal to total assistance for most personal care tasks, including toileting and hygiene, and setup assistance for eating, indicating reliance on staff for intimate care. On the date the allegation was reported, the SSW acknowledged that the resident directly reported the alleged abuse to her but admitted she did not notify the Administrator, DON, or other leadership, did not complete the SOC 341, and did not contact law enforcement or the Ombudsman as required by facility policy. The Administrator and DON both stated they were unaware of the allegation at the time and confirmed that such an allegation should have been immediately reported and investigated. The Director of Staff Development (DSD) reported that the Ombudsman had previously informed her that the resident said she had been touched inappropriately by a staff member, but the DSD did not seek further details, assumed the resident was referring to back rubs, and did not initiate an investigation or remove the alleged perpetrator from resident contact. Review of the facility’s abuse reporting and investigation policy showed that all abuse allegations must be reported within two hours to the Administrator and appropriate agencies, and that any employee accused of abuse must be placed on leave with no resident contact until the investigation is complete, which did not occur in this case.
Failure to Immediately Report and Investigate Resident Abuse Allegation
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure an allegation of abuse involving one resident was immediately reported to facility administration and appropriate external authorities as required by policy and federal regulations. The resident, who had heart failure, required extensive assistance with ADLs, and had intact cognition, reported that about five days prior a CNA had cleaned her perineal area and touched her inappropriately in her vagina. The resident stated she reported this to the social worker, but nothing was done. The social services worker confirmed that the resident reported an allegation of abuse to her on the evening of 1/26/2026, acknowledged knowing the abuse reporting policy and the requirement to immediately report such allegations to administration, but did not notify the Administrator, DON, or other leadership, did not complete the SOC 341, and did not contact law enforcement or the Ombudsman as required by facility protocol. The Administrator stated she had not been informed of the allegation and confirmed that such conduct would be considered abuse and should have been reported the day it was reported to staff. The DSD reported that several days earlier, during an Ombudsman visit, the resident had also reported being touched inappropriately by a staff member, but the DSD did not seek further details and assumed the resident was referring to back rubs the resident usually requested; no investigation was initiated and the alleged perpetrator was not suspended. The DON stated he was not made aware of the allegation when it was reported and that the failure to report prevented the facility from implementing immediate protective interventions. Review of the facility’s abuse reporting and investigation policy showed that all reports of resident abuse were to be immediately reported to the administrator and appropriate agencies within two hours, and that any employee accused of abuse was to be placed on leave with no resident contact until the investigation was complete, which did not occur in this case.
Failure to Communicate and Follow Up on Resident Transfer Request
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure timely follow-up and communication regarding a resident's request to transfer to another facility. The resident, who had diagnoses including heart failure, obesity, and reduced mobility, was cognitively intact and required significant assistance with daily activities. Despite the resident's clear request for assistance with transferring, there was no documented evidence that the facility contacted the requested receiving facility or provided the resident with updates about the status of the transfer for approximately one month. The resident expressed frustration and dissatisfaction due to the lack of communication and support for his care preferences, and even stopped participating in physical therapy sessions in anticipation of the transfer. Interviews revealed that the Social Services Worker acknowledged failing to follow up on the transfer request and not providing updates to the resident. The Director of Nursing confirmed that it was the responsibility of the Social Services Worker to assist residents with grievances and requests, including communicating updates. Review of facility policy indicated that residents have the right to be informed of and participate in care planning, and to have the facility respond to grievances. The lack of timely follow-up and communication impeded the resident's request and negatively affected his experience.
Failure to Ensure Resident Attendance at Medical Appointments and Documentation of Follow-Up Care
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a resident with diagnoses including colon cancer, cognitive communication deficit, and epilepsy attended multiple scheduled physician appointments outside the facility. The resident, who had severely impaired cognition and required maximal to partial assistance with daily activities, missed several important medical appointments for colorectal surgery surveillance and neurology follow-up. The missed appointments were due to issues such as lack of available escorts, transportation staff declining responsibility, and facility staff being unaware of scheduled appointments. There was also a failure to document nursing progress notes following outside medical visits. Specifically, after the resident attended an appointment, the charge nurse did not document the resident's return, update new orders, or follow up in the resident's chart. The charge nurse acknowledged not ensuring a proper handoff to the next shift, which would have facilitated documentation and follow-up on new orders and appointments. The facility's process, as described by staff, included communication of appointments, documentation of departures and returns, and handling of new orders, but these steps were not consistently followed. Interviews with facility staff revealed gaps in communication and documentation practices. The social services worker, registered nurse supervisor, charge nurse, care coordinator, and director of nursing all described processes that were not effectively implemented, resulting in missed appointments and lack of documentation. The facility's policy required assistance with scheduling, transportation, and documentation of appointments and new orders, but these procedures were not adhered to in this case.
Failure to Communicate and Follow Up on Resident Transfer Request
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure timely follow-up and communication regarding a resident's request to transfer to another facility. The resident, who had diagnoses including heart failure, obesity, and reduced mobility, was cognitively intact and required maximal to total assistance with most activities of daily living. Despite the resident's request for assistance with transferring, there was no documented follow-up or communication from the Social Services Worker (SSW) for approximately one month. The resident expressed frustration and dissatisfaction due to the lack of updates and support for his care preferences, and even stopped participating in physical therapy sessions in anticipation of the transfer. Interviews revealed that the SSW acknowledged not contacting the requested receiving facility or providing the resident with updates about the status of the transfer request. Record review confirmed the absence of documentation regarding any actions taken to facilitate the transfer or communicate progress to the resident. The Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed that it was the SSW's responsibility to assist residents with grievances and requests, including providing updates. The facility's policy also indicated that social services staff are responsible for assisting with transitions of care and advocating for residents' rights.
Failure to Maintain and Document Emergency Tracheostomy Kit Checks
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that the emergency tracheostomy ventilator unit box (e-kit) was properly checked and maintained monthly according to its own policy and procedure. During an observation, the e-kit was found locked without any indication of when it was last checked, and the Respiratory Therapist Supervisor (RTS) was unable to state when the last check occurred or who was responsible for maintaining the equipment inside the e-kit. A review of the e-kit order form revealed it was blank, with no documentation of when it was last opened or checked. The e-kit contained essential emergency supplies such as a tracheostomy cuffed tube, syringes, and normal saline. Interviews with the RTS and the Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed that the e-kit should be checked and maintained regularly to prevent shortages of supplies in emergencies. The facility's policy, reviewed on 3/20/2025, specified that the equipment should be checked monthly by Respiratory Therapy, be operational, locked with an appropriate tag, and have a signed equipment checklist. These requirements were not met, as evidenced by the lack of documentation and uncertainty regarding responsibility for the e-kit’s maintenance.
Failure to Follow Menu and Diet Specifications for Specialized Diets
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to follow standardized recipes and menu instructions for residents on specialized diets during a lunch service. Six residents on a pureed diet received only half a cup of enchilada instead of the required one cup, as specified in the facility's portion and serving guide. The cook responsible for preparing the meal was unaware of the correct portion size and did not consult the spreadsheet, resulting in residents receiving less food than prescribed. Dietary staff responsible for reading and calling out diet orders also did not notice the discrepancy in portion size, and the registered dietitian confirmed that the meal tickets indicated the correct amount, which was not followed. For residents on a Controlled Carbohydrate (CCHO) diet, 23 individuals received four ounces of Spanish rice instead of the two ounces specified for their diet. Both the cook and dietary aide were unaware that the CCHO diet required a reduced portion of rice compared to the regular diet. The registered dietitian and dietary supervisor confirmed that the menu and spreadsheet clearly indicated the correct portion sizes, and the facility's policy emphasized the importance of adhering to these portions for blood sugar control. Additionally, six residents on a soft and bite size diet received cheese enchiladas that were not cut into the required ½ x ½ inch pieces, as per the facility's policy and IDDSI guidelines. The cook cut the enchiladas into inconsistent sizes using a spatula during service, rather than preparing them in advance to the correct specifications. The issue was identified during a tray check, and the trays were returned to the kitchen for correction. The registered dietitian and dietary supervisor confirmed that the food was not prepared to the required texture and size prior to service, as mandated by facility policy and international guidelines.
Improper Use of Unpasteurized Eggs and Inadequate Food Labeling
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure safe and sanitary food storage and preparation practices by storing and serving unpasteurized shell eggs and by improperly labeling and storing previously prepared pureed desserts. Observations revealed that unpasteurized shell eggs were kept in the reach-in refrigerator and used to prepare fried eggs for residents, despite facility policy and FDA Food Code requirements that only pasteurized eggs be used for soft-cooked egg items. The dietary staff, including the cook and Dietary Supervisor, were unaware that the eggs in use were unpasteurized, and the purchase order confirmed that regular shell eggs had been received and used. The Registered Dietitian also verified that the eggs were not pasteurized and emphasized the need for checking deliveries to ensure compliance. Additionally, seven single-serving containers of brown pureed food were found in the walk-in refrigerator without proper labeling, and the Dietary Supervisor could not identify the contents or confirm the correct storage period. The facility's policy required that all refrigerated, ready-to-eat TCS foods be labeled with a prepared date and a use-by date not exceeding seven days, but the pureed desserts were labeled with a 14-day range and lacked clear identification. These failures in food storage and preparation practices had the potential to result in harmful bacteria growth and cross-contamination, affecting the majority of residents who received food from the facility.
Failure to Provide Privacy During G-Tube Medication Administration
Penalty
Summary
A deficiency occurred when a Licensed Vocational Nurse (LVN) failed to provide privacy to a resident during the administration of medication through a gastrostomy tube (g-tube). The LVN did not pull the privacy curtain while administering the medication, resulting in the resident's gown being pulled up and the abdomen and g-tube site exposed. During this time, the resident's roommate was present and walking around the room, further compromising the resident's privacy. The LVN later acknowledged not pulling the curtain and stated that it was necessary to do so to provide privacy and uphold the resident's dignity. The resident involved had severe cognitive impairment and was dependent on staff for all activities of daily living, including feeding via a g-tube. The facility's policy required staff to promote and protect resident privacy, including bodily privacy during care and treatment procedures. Both the LVN and the Director of Nursing confirmed that the privacy curtain should have been pulled during the procedure to maintain the resident's dignity, as outlined in the facility's dignity policy.
Failure to Develop Care Plan for Ventilator/Tracheostomy Care
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to develop a care plan addressing ventilator and tracheostomy care for one resident who was admitted with chronic respiratory failure, obesity, and encephalopathy. The resident required ongoing interventions including oxygen therapy, suctioning, tracheostomy care, and invasive mechanical ventilation. Despite these needs, a review of the resident's care plans revealed that there was no care plan in place specifically for ventilator or tracheostomy care at the time of review. Interviews with the MDS Nurse and the Director of Nursing confirmed that the absence of a ventilator/tracheostomy care plan meant that essential aspects of care, such as monitoring suctioning, stoma management, and ventilator settings, were not formally addressed. The facility's policy required the interdisciplinary team to develop and implement a comprehensive, person-centered care plan for each resident, including measurable objectives and timeframes, but this was not done for the resident in question.
Failure to Update Care Plan Quarterly for Resident Using Hand Mitten Restraint
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to review and revise the care plan quarterly for a resident who used a hand mitten as a restraint to prevent the removal of invasive tubing. The resident, admitted with diagnoses including acute respiratory failure with hypoxia and epilepsy, was noted to have significant cognitive impairment and required daily use of a limb restraint. The Minimum Data Set confirmed the use of restraints, and a physician order specified the application of a hand mitten to the resident's left hand. However, the care plan, initially created at admission, had not been updated since October of the previous year, despite facility policy requiring quarterly updates. Interviews with the Registered Nurse Supervisor and the Director of Nursing confirmed that the care plan was overdue for revision and that any licensed nurse could perform updates. The facility's policies on comprehensive care planning and restraint use both required quarterly review and updates by the interdisciplinary team. The lack of timely care plan revision had the potential to result in the resident not receiving appropriate nursing interventions related to restraint use.
Failure to Maintain Correct Low Air Loss Mattress Settings for Pressure Ulcer Management
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain the appropriate settings on a Low Air Loss Mattress (LALM) for a resident who was re-admitted with a Stage 4 pressure ulcer of the sacral region. The physician's order specified that the LALM should be set between 250-280 lbs and checked every shift, based on the resident's weight of 250 lbs. However, during observation, the LALM was found set at 320 lbs, which was above the recommended range. The resident reported discomfort and stated that the mattress was too hard and was starting to hurt her bottom. Staff interviews confirmed that the LALM settings should match the resident's weight and that incorrect settings could impact wound healing. Further review of the operator's manual for the LALM confirmed that the pressure-adjust knob should be set according to the patient's weight. Multiple staff, including the Infection Preventionist, Treatment Nurse, and Director of Nursing, acknowledged that the settings were incorrect and that the mattress was firmer than intended, which could compromise its pressure-relieving function. The deficiency was identified through observation, interview, and record review, with direct evidence that the LALM was not set as ordered for wound management.
Failure to Adhere to Infection Control Protocols During Resident Care
Penalty
Summary
Certified Nursing Assistant 1 (CNA1) failed to follow proper infection prevention and control practices while providing care to two residents who were on enhanced barrier precautions. During an observation, CNA1 was seen emptying a urinal for one resident and then immediately assisting another resident without changing their gown or mask and without performing hand hygiene. This was confirmed by both the Infection Preventionist nurse and CNA1, who acknowledged that gloves are changed between resident care, but the gown, mask, and hand hygiene were neglected in this instance. Both residents involved had significant medical conditions requiring enhanced barrier precautions. One resident had chronic respiratory failure, a tracheostomy, and a gastrostomy tube, and was severely cognitively impaired and fully dependent on staff for care. The other resident had muscle wasting, a gastrostomy tube, dementia, and was colonized with a multidrug-resistant organism (ESBL). Both residents were always incontinent and required dependent assistance for personal hygiene, increasing their vulnerability to infection. Facility policies and care plans for both residents specified that staff must perform hand hygiene and change PPE, including gowns and gloves, before and after providing care, especially when moving between residents. The facility's own infection control policy and staff interviews confirmed these requirements. However, CNA1 did not adhere to these protocols during the observed care, which was recognized as an infection control issue by the Infection Preventionist nurse and the Director of Nursing.
Resident Rooms Below Minimum Square Footage Requirement
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide the required minimum of 80 square feet per resident in multiple occupancy rooms for 12 out of 36 resident rooms, as determined through observation, interviews, and record review. During an initial tour, nursing staff were observed to have enough space to provide care in each room, and residents attending a council meeting reported no concerns regarding room size. However, a review of the facility's Client Accommodation Analysis confirmed that rooms 2, 4, 6, 8, 14, 18, 20, 22, 24, 28, 30, and 37 did not meet the minimum square footage requirement, with each resident in these rooms having less than 80 square feet of space.
Failure to Follow Care Plan Interventions
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that care plan interventions were followed for a resident with multiple medical conditions, including end-stage renal disease, hemiplegia, and diabetes mellitus type two. The resident's care plan for a mouth lesion with a possible infection required vital signs to be taken and recorded, and an antibiotic, Amoxicillin, to be administered twice daily for five days. However, the Medication Administration Record indicated that a dose was missed on one day, and the Director of Nursing confirmed that vital signs were not consistently documented during the specified period. The facility's policies and procedures for nursing documentation and medication administration were not adhered to, as evidenced by the lack of timely and accurate documentation of vital signs and the missed administration of medication. The Director of Nursing acknowledged the documentation gaps and attributed them to the presence of many new nurses, indicating a need for reinforcement of proper documentation practices. This deficiency had the potential to negatively impact the delivery of care and services to the resident.
Inaccurate Medical Records for Two Residents
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure accurate and complete medical records for two residents, leading to deficiencies in documentation. For Resident 1, inaccuracies were found in the ventilator administration record, where various procedures and checks were marked as completed with checkmarks, despite the resident being discharged to a General Acute Care Hospital. The Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed that the documentation should have indicated the resident was away or in the hospital, and acknowledged that the respiratory therapist responsible for the documentation had not been working at the facility for over eight months. Resident 1 had a complex medical history, including ventilator-dependent respiratory failure, tracheostomy, gastrostomy, chronic atrial fibrillation, and functional quadriplegia. The resident was dependent on staff for various activities of daily living and had severe memory problems. The inaccuracies in the ventilator administration record included daily and weekly procedures such as changing the inner cannula, checking the heat moisture exchanger, and monitoring ventilator settings, which were incorrectly documented as completed. For Resident 3, the facility failed to maintain accurate vital sign summaries and nurse progress notes. The DON verified that the temperature summary was incomplete, with missing entries for several days. Additionally, there was an error in the nursing progress note, which inaccurately recorded the resident's date of death. Resident 3 had a medical history of end-stage renal disease, dependence on renal dialysis, hemiplegia, and diabetes mellitus type two. The resident required varying levels of assistance for daily activities and was cognitively intact. The inaccuracies in documentation were attributed to new nursing staff and the need for reinforcement of proper documentation practices.
Non-compliance with Staff Meal-Break Policy
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to comply with professional standards of care by not implementing and following its policy and procedure regarding staff meal-breaks. Interviews with three Licensed Vocational Nurses (LVNs) revealed that they were scheduled to work 12-hour shifts as full-time employees. However, when the census in the sub-acute area was low, their hours were flexed, resulting in them either taking an unpaid one-hour lunch break or going home early, which led to them working less than their scheduled 12-hour shifts. This practice was inconsistent with the facility's Employee Acknowledgement agreement, which allowed employees to waive a second 30-minute meal break only if they worked more than 10 hours but less than 12 hours in a day. The Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) and the Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed that the licensed nurses' hours were adjusted based on census levels, requiring them to take unpaid lunch breaks or leave early, thus not completing their 12-hour shifts. This was contrary to the signed meal waiver agreement, which was not being adhered to. A review of the facility's policy titled 'California Meal and Rest Periods' indicated that employees working over 10 hours but less than 12 hours must start their second 30-minute meal break by the end of the 10th hour unless they choose to waive it. The facility's failure to follow this policy infringed upon the employees' agreement and acknowledgment.
Failure to Post Actual Nursing Staff Hours
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that the actual hours worked by licensed and unlicensed nursing staff directly responsible for resident care per shift were posted for two sampled days. On both 10/15/2024 and 10/16/2024, observations revealed that only the projected hours were posted on the Direct Care Services Hours Per Patient Day (DHPPD) board, with no actual hours displayed. Interviews with the Director of Nursing (DON) and Administration (ADM) confirmed that the actual hours for the previous day should have been posted alongside the current day's projected hours, but this was not done. The facility's policy and procedure, reviewed on 3/21/2024, mandates the daily posting of nurse staffing data, including actual hours worked for each shift, which was not adhered to in this instance.
Failure to Implement Scabies Infection Control Measures
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to implement effective infection prevention and control measures for scabies, a highly contagious skin condition, as per their policy and procedure titled 'Scabies Identification, Treatment and Environmental Cleaning.' This deficiency was identified during a recertification survey and involved four residents who were sampled. The facility did not identify and detect symptoms of scabies in a timely manner for a resident who had a skin rash upon readmission. The resident was not placed on contact precautions when treatment with Elimite and Ivermectin began, and the diagnosis of scabies was confirmed days later. The facility also failed to maintain contact precautions as per the physician's order, which was issued after the scabies diagnosis. The resident was not isolated from roommates, and contact precautions were not implemented promptly, increasing the risk of transmission to other residents, staff, and visitors. The infection preventionist acknowledged that contact isolation precautions were initiated late and should have been in place when scabies was suspected. The deficiency resulted in a potential risk of scabies transmission to 86 in-house residents, staff, and the community. The facility's failure to adhere to its scabies policy and procedure led to an Immediate Jeopardy situation, as identified by surveyors, due to the threat posed to the health and safety of residents, staff, and family members.
Removal Plan
- Licensed Nurses completed skin assessments for Residents 1, 2, 3, and 4.
- Resident 1: Noted to have a generalized body rash secondary to diagnosis of eczematous dermatitis and will be re-assessed by a dermatologist after final treatment.
- Resident 2: Noted to have body rash on chest, abdomen, arms, back and thighs secondary to dermatitis.
- Resident 3: Noted to have a body rash on bilateral arm secondary to dermatitis.
- Resident 4: Noted to have body rash extending from back to abdomen secondary to dermatitis.
- Treatment Plan for Residents 1, 2, 3 and 4 included:
- Resident 1: Clobetasol Propionate External Cream 0.05% to generalize body topically daily, Permethrin External Cream 5% to neck and toes topically at bedtime every Thursday and Ivermectin 9 mg via GT every Wednesday.
- Resident 2: Refused treatment and was educated regarding risks of refusing treatment and the importance of receiving treatment. Resident 2 was subsequently placed in contact isolation pending test results.
- Resident 3: Clobetasol Propionate External Cream 0.05% to arms twice daily.
- Resident 4: Hydrocortisone Cream 0.1% and Clindamycin Phosphate External Gel I% to abdomen and back.
- Residents 2, 3, and 4 had skin scraping completed, pending results.
- Environmental Service completed a deep cleaning of the room for Residents 1, 2, 3, and housekeeping department will continue with deep clean schedule for all resident care areas. Work areas were also deep cleaned.
- The Infection Control committee, including the Medical Director held an ad hoc QAA meeting to review the IJ Removal Plan for further review and recommendations.
- The Infection Control Nurse and/or designee connected with the Public Health Nurse for further recommendations and validation to confirm that the facility took all necessary steps for Residents 1, 2, 3, and 4.
Inadequate Infection Control Training Leads to Scabies Outbreak
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that the Infection Preventionist Nurse (IP) completed the required specialized training related to infection control on an annual basis. This deficiency was identified during an interview and record review, where it was revealed that the IP had not completed the necessary continuing education units (CEUs) for 2023. The IP acknowledged the importance of continuous training to stay updated on changes and guidelines in infection control, which is crucial for preventing the spread of infections within the facility. The deficiency led to a failure in maintaining contact precautions for a resident diagnosed with scabies, a highly contagious skin condition. The resident was readmitted to the facility with multiple diagnoses, including chronic respiratory failure, pneumonia, and heart failure. Upon readmission, the resident was found to have a generalized body rash, which was later confirmed as scabies through a positive skin scraping. Despite the diagnosis, the facility did not implement the necessary contact precautions in a timely manner, as indicated by the lack of appropriate signage and protective measures for staff and visitors. The Director of Nursing (DON) admitted uncertainty about the CEU requirements for the IP but emphasized the importance of the IP being up-to-date with infection control issues. The DON also acknowledged that contact precautions should have been initiated earlier for the resident and their roommates to prevent the spread of scabies. The facility's policy on infection prevention and control, which aims to maintain a safe and sanitary environment, was not adequately followed, contributing to the deficiency.
Expired CNA Certification
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that the certification requirements for one of its certified nurse assistants (CNA 2) were up to date. CNA 2's certificate had expired, yet the CNA continued to work for over a month with an expired certificate. The Director of Staff Development (DSD) acknowledged that it was her responsibility to ensure that all CNAs were certified and that their credentials were current. Despite this, CNA 2 was hired with an expired certificate and continued to provide patient care without an active certificate. The Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) confirmed that CNAs should not work with expired credentials as it could lead to inadequate nursing care. A review of the facility's policy and procedure on licensure, certification, and registration of personnel indicated that recertifications must be presented to the human resources director or designee before the expiration of current certifications. This policy was not followed in the case of CNA 2, leading to a potential knowledge, training, and certification deficit among the CNA, which could result in inadequate resident care. The facility's failure to adhere to its own policy and ensure that CNA 2's certification was up to date represents a significant deficiency in maintaining proper staff qualifications.
Failure to Develop Comprehensive Care Plans
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan for four residents, leading to several deficiencies. For Resident 31, the care plan did not include measurable goals for monitoring cerebrovascular accidents (CVA) and the use of aspirin for CVA prophylaxis. This oversight was confirmed by both the Licensed Vocational Nurse (LVN) and the Director of Nursing (DON), who acknowledged the absence of monitoring for aspirin side effects such as bleeding and bruising. The Minimum Data Set Coordinator (MDSC) also admitted that the verification of the care plan was overlooked, resulting in a lack of patient-centered care for Resident 31. Resident 70's care plan was deficient in monitoring the adverse effects of the psychotropic medication Lexapro. Despite the resident's diagnosis of depression and the prescription of Lexapro, there was no individualized plan to monitor for potential adverse effects. This was confirmed by LVN 6 and the DON, who both acknowledged the importance of monitoring for adverse effects to ensure the resident's health was not negatively impacted. Resident 188's care plan did not include transmission-based precautions (TBP) despite the resident's history of carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (CRE) and immunocompromisation. The DON confirmed that the absence of a care plan for TBP increased the risk of spreading infections to other residents. Similarly, Resident 25's care plan failed to address a skin disorder, which was confirmed by the DON. The facility's policies and procedures were not followed, resulting in the lack of comprehensive care plans for these residents, which should have included measurable objectives and timetables to meet their medical, physical, mental, and psychosocial needs.
Failure to Provide RNA Treatments and Proper Documentation
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide complete Restorative Nursing Assistant (RNA) treatments as per physician's orders for three residents, leading to increased risk for contractures and decline in physical function. Resident 2, who had severe cognitive impairment and was dependent on staff for various activities, did not receive passive range of motion (PROM) exercises to the lower extremities on multiple occasions. The Restorative Administration Record and Weekly/Monthly Progress Report for Resident 2 were incomplete, with no documentation of treatment provided or refused on specific dates. Resident 53, who had diagnoses including neuropathy and hemiplegia, also did not receive PROM exercises to the left upper extremity and both lower extremities as ordered. The resident's records indicated that the RNA did not perform the exercises on several dates, and the Weekly/Monthly Progress Report lacked documentation for a specific week. Resident 53 confirmed that RNA services were not provided as frequently as ordered. Resident 71, who had reduced mobility and muscle weakness, did not receive ambulation using a platform walker and active range of motion (AROM) exercises to the upper extremities as ordered. The Restorative Administration Record and Weekly/Monthly Progress Report for Resident 71 were incomplete, with blank spaces indicating that the treatment was not documented. Interviews with staff confirmed that the documentation was not properly maintained, and the treatments were not consistently provided, putting the residents at risk for functional decline.
Failure to Account for Controlled Substances and Inadequate Documentation
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to account for controlled substances (CS) for several residents, leading to discrepancies in medication counts and documentation. During an observation, it was found that one dose of lorazepam was missing for a resident, and one dose of phenobarbital was missing for another resident. The Licensed Vocational Nurse (LVN) responsible admitted to administering the medications but failing to document the administration, which is against the facility's policy. This failure in documentation could lead to medication errors and potential harm to the residents involved. In another observation, it was found that there were extra doses of hydrocodone-acetaminophen and oxycodone in the medication bubble packs for two other residents. The LVN responsible had documented the preparation of these medications but did not administer them, again failing to follow the facility's policy. This inconsistency in documentation could lead to untreated pain and discomfort for the residents. Additionally, the facility's Director of Nursing (DON) failed to include verifying signatures on the Controlled or Antibiotic Drug Record accountability logs for two sampled months. This lack of verification could lead to inaccuracies in medication records and potential diversion of controlled substances. The DON acknowledged the failure to follow the facility's policy and the need for a consistent process to ensure accountability and prevent harm to residents.
Medication Administration Errors Result in 7.69% Error Rate
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure a medication error rate of less than five percent during medication administration, resulting in an overall error rate of 7.69%. Specifically, Resident 43 received vitamin D3 5000 iu instead of the prescribed vitamin D2 50000 iu, and Resident 83 received folic acid 400 mcg instead of the prescribed folic acid 1 mg. These errors were observed during medication administration and confirmed through interviews with the involved licensed vocational nurses (LVNs) and a review of the residents' Medication Administration Records (MARs). The LVNs acknowledged their mistakes and recognized that administering incorrect medications could lead to adverse effects for the residents. The Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed that the LVNs failed to verify the correct form and dosage of the medications before administration, which is a violation of the facility's policies and procedures. The facility's policy requires medications to be administered as prescribed and for the administering individual to check the medication label three times to ensure the right resident, medication, dosage, time, and route. The errors were attributed to the LVNs not adhering to these protocols, leading to the administration of incorrect medications to Residents 43 and 83.
Failure to Safely Store Medications
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure medications were safely stored as per their policy and procedures. During a medication administration observation, an LVN placed four medication cups on a resident's bedside table. After administering one medication, the LVN left the room to grab gloves, leaving the remaining three medication cups unattended. Upon returning, the LVN administered the remaining medications. This action was confirmed by the LVN, who acknowledged that medications should always be supervised and stored safely to prevent unauthorized access and potential harm. The Director of Nursing confirmed that the LVN failed to safely store and supervise the medications, emphasizing the risk of other residents gaining unauthorized access and potential harm. The facility's policy on medication storage requires all drugs and biologicals to be stored in a safe, secure, and orderly manner, with only authorized personnel having access. The policy also mandates that nursing staff maintain medication storage and preparation areas in a clean, safe, and sanitary manner.
Infection Control Deficiencies
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain proper infection control procedures for two residents. For one resident, a Licensed Vocational Nurse (LVN) did not disinfect a nightstand before placing a syringe cap on it, and did not clean or disinfect a water tray after it was contaminated with residual droplets from a gastrostomy tube (G-tube) procedure. The LVN admitted to these lapses in infection control, acknowledging that these actions could lead to contamination and potential infections for the resident. The Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed that these actions were indeed infection control issues that could harm the resident by causing G-tube infections. For another resident, the facility failed to post the correct transmission-based precautions sign for contact isolation, despite the resident having a history of carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (CRE) and being immunocompromised. The Infection Preventionist (IP) confirmed the absence of the required contact isolation sign, and the DON stated that the lack of such a sign posed a risk of spreading microorganisms to staff and other residents. The facility's policies and procedures were reviewed and found to require proper cleaning, disinfection, and posting of isolation signs to prevent the spread of infections. The facility's policies on cleaning and disinfection of resident-care items and equipment, as well as standard precautions, were not followed in these instances. The failure to adhere to these policies increased the risk of infection for the residents and potentially for other residents and staff in the facility. The DON and IP both acknowledged the deficiencies and the potential for harm due to these lapses in infection control practices.
Call Light Accessibility Deficiency
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that the call light was within reach for Resident 7, who was dependent on staff for various activities of daily living. Resident 7 had significant medical conditions, including acute respiratory failure with hypoxia, COPD, epilepsy, and a tracheostomy, and used a ventilator to breathe. Despite the care plan indicating that the call light should always be within reach, an observation on 4/15/2024 revealed that the call light was hanging on the right side of the bed and was not accessible to the resident. Registered Nurse 1 confirmed that Resident 7 could not reach the call light. Further interviews and record reviews supported this finding. The Director of Nursing acknowledged that if the call light is not within the resident's reach, the resident would not have access to assistance when needed. The facility's policy and procedures, dated 9/2022, also stipulated that the call light should be accessible to the resident when in bed, from the toilet, from the shower or bathing facility, and from the floor. This failure had the potential to delay services and not address the needs of Resident 7.
Failure to Ensure Advance Directive in Resident's Medical Record
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that one of three sampled residents had an Advance Directive on file as part of the resident's medical record, as required by the facility's policy and procedures. Resident 67, who was admitted with severe cognitive impairment and multiple serious diagnoses, including traumatic brain injury, cerebral infarction, and quadriplegia, did not have a copy of their Advance Directive in their medical record. This oversight was identified during a review of the resident's records and confirmed through interviews with the Case Manager/Social Services and the Director of Nursing, who both acknowledged the importance of having the Advance Directive in the chart to ensure proper care and adherence to the resident's wishes in case of an emergency. The absence of the Advance Directive in Resident 67's medical record was noted despite the resident's representative having signed an Advance Healthcare Directive Acknowledgement Form. The facility's policy, dated 3/23/2022, mandates that a copy or scan of the Advance Directive be placed in the resident's medical record by the Admission Staff or designee. The failure to comply with this policy could potentially affect the resident's care and psychosocial well-being, as the facility staff would not have the necessary information to carry out the resident's healthcare wishes accurately.
Omission of CVA Diagnosis in MDS Assessment
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to accurately complete the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment Section I for a resident by omitting a diagnosis of cerebrovascular accidents (CVA). This omission was identified during a review of the resident's clinical records, which indicated a history of CVA and a prescription for aspirin as a prophylactic measure. The resident's Admission Record and General Acute Community Hospital discharge records both documented the CVA diagnosis, but it was not included in the MDS assessment initiated on 03/10/2024. During an interview, the Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed that the CVA diagnosis was missed and overlooked in the MDS assessment. The DON acknowledged the importance of accurately reflecting residents' needs in the MDS and comprehensive assessments to maintain their highest level of functionality and quality of life. The failure to include the CVA diagnosis in the MDS assessment had the potential to negatively affect the resident's plan of care and delivery of necessary services.
Failure to Properly Assess and Document Resident's Mental Disorder
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure proper assessment and documentation for a resident with a diagnosis of schizophrenia, leading to an inaccurate PASARR Level I screening. The resident was initially admitted and later readmitted with diagnoses including schizophrenia, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and dysphagia. However, the PASARR Level I screening incorrectly indicated that the resident did not have a serious diagnosed mental disorder. This error was acknowledged by the Director of Nursing (DON) during a review and interview, who confirmed that the schizophrenia diagnosis was missed, resulting in the resident not receiving a PASARR Level II assessment and subsequent follow-up for their mental condition. The facility's policy and procedures require all new admissions and readmissions to be screened for mental disorders, intellectual disabilities, or related disorders as part of the PASARR process. The admission coordinator was responsible for completing the PASARR forms, but the DON confirmed that the form was filled out inaccurately. This oversight could affect the resident's treatment and generalized care while in the facility. The facility's policy also states that the admitting nurse should notify the social services department when a resident is identified as having a possible or evident mental disorder, intellectual disability, or related disorder, which did not occur in this case.
Failure to Provide Pressure Ulcer Care
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide skin and pressure ulcer preventative care consistent with professional standards of practice and per physician's orders for one resident. The resident, who was at risk for skin breakdown, developed a left heel pressure injury while residing in the facility. The facility did not complete weekly skin assessments, did not document the initial wound assessment upon discovery, and failed to obtain and document physician's orders for treatment of the pressure ulcer from the time it was discovered until several days later. This resulted in the resident not receiving the necessary daily treatment and care for the pressure injury during this period. The resident was admitted with diagnoses including adult failure to thrive, muscle wasting and atrophy, and depression. The resident's Braden Scale assessment indicated a moderate risk for pressure ulcers, and the care plan included interventions such as weekly skin assessments and preventative skin care. However, there were no documented skin assessments or progress reports for the month of February, and the resident's care plan was not updated to reflect the new pressure injury until after it was discovered. Interviews with facility staff revealed that the treatment nurse did not document the weekly skin assessments and failed to transcribe the physician's order for wound treatment. The Director of Nursing confirmed that physician orders should have been transcribed and carried out, and that weekly wound assessments were required to monitor the wound's progress. The facility's policies and procedures for pressure ulcer care and the treatment nurse's job description were not followed, leading to the resident's pressure injury going untreated for several days.
Failure to Administer Oxygen Therapy as Ordered
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide necessary respiratory care services for two residents by not administering oxygen therapy as per the physician's orders. Resident 238, who had severe cognitive impairment and multiple diagnoses including metabolic encephalopathy and dementia, was observed with an oxygen concentrator set incorrectly at 3 liters per minute (lpm) instead of the ordered 2 lpm. The concentrator's red status indicator light was illuminated, indicating a malfunction, and the resident was receiving less than 0.5 lpm of oxygen. Licensed Vocational Nurse 1 (LVN 1) confirmed the malfunction and replaced the concentrator with an oxygen tank. The Director of Nursing (DON) acknowledged that staff should have identified the issue and taken appropriate action sooner to prevent the resident from not receiving the correct amount of oxygen, which could lead to severe health risks. Maintenance Supervisor stated that it was the nurse's responsibility to notify the respiratory therapist for servicing the concentrator when it failed. The facility's policy and procedures for oxygen administration were not followed correctly in this instance, leading to the deficiency in care for Resident 238. Resident 5, who had diagnoses including schizophrenia, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and dysphagia, was observed receiving oxygen therapy at 4 lpm instead of the ordered 2 lpm. Licensed Vocational Nurse 2 (LVN 2) confirmed the incorrect oxygen flow rate and acknowledged that the resident should have been on 2 lpm. The DON verified the physician's order and stated that licensed nurses were responsible for ensuring the correct oxygen therapy. The facility's policy and procedures for oxygen administration were not adhered to, resulting in the resident receiving an incorrect oxygen flow rate, which could lead to adverse health effects. The facility's policies and procedures for oxygen administration, including verifying the physician's order, setting the correct flow rate, and ensuring the equipment is functioning properly, were not followed in both cases. This led to deficiencies in the respiratory care provided to Resident 238 and Resident 5, putting them at risk for serious health complications. The DON emphasized the importance of following the physician's orders for oxygen administration to prevent such deficiencies in care.
Failure to Post Daily Nurse Staffing Information
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to post the federally required daily actual hours worked by the staff in an area accessible to the public for two out of 17 days in April 2024. On 4/17/2024, it was observed that the Census and Direct Care Service Hours Per Patient Day (DHPPD) for the skilled nursing facility (SNF) and Sub-Acute unit were dated for 4/15/2024, not the current date. The Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed that the DHPPD should have been updated daily to reflect the most current hours worked by the staff, which was not done on the day of observation. The Director of Staff Development (DSD) also confirmed that the DHPPD was supposed to be posted by 9 AM each day, but the actual hours for 4/17/2024 had not yet been posted at the time of the surveyor's visit. The facility's policy and procedures, revised in August 2022, indicated that nurse staffing data should be posted daily for each shift within two hours of the beginning of each shift. This data should include the number of licensed nurses and unlicensed nursing personnel directly responsible for resident care. The DSD mentioned that the facility had a new process of posting the actual hours from the previous day instead of projections and actual hours together. However, this process was not followed correctly, leading to the deficiency noted by the surveyors.
Failure to Monitor Aspirin Side Effects
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to include appropriate monitoring to ensure that a resident's drug regimen was free from unnecessary medications. Specifically, Resident 31 was prescribed aspirin to prevent cerebrovascular accidents but did not have monitoring for signs and symptoms of bleeding for 36 days. This oversight was identified through interviews and record reviews, which revealed that the resident's clinical record lacked documentation for monitoring the side effects of aspirin, such as bleeding and bruising. Additionally, there was no care plan with measurable goals for the use of aspirin and the prevention of cerebrovascular accidents. During interviews, both the Licensed Vocational Nurse and the Director of Nursing confirmed the absence of necessary monitoring and care planning for Resident 31. The Pharmacy Consultant also corroborated that monitoring for side effects should have started when the aspirin was prescribed. The facility's policy and procedures for Medication Regimen Review were not followed, as they require thorough reviews to prevent and resolve medication-related problems, including inadequate monitoring for adverse consequences.
Failure to Provide Consistent Hospice Care and Documentation
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure necessary care was provided consistently for a resident receiving hospice services. Specifically, the facility did not provide the required hospice licensed nurse and hospice aide visits twice a week as per the integrated hospice and facility plan of care. Additionally, the hospice agency did not provide a calendar of visits for the month of April 2024. These deficiencies were identified for Resident 27, who had diagnoses including senile degeneration of the brain, kidney failure, and encephalopathy. The resident was admitted to hospice care with a physician's certification effective from April 6, 2024, to June 4, 2024, and the plan of care required twice-weekly visits from both a hospice nurse and aide for patient assessment and personal care, respectively. Upon review, it was found that there was no calendar for April in Resident 27's hospice binder, and no documented visits from the hospice nurse or aide from April 6 to April 17, 2024. Interviews with facility staff, including a Licensed Vocational Nurse (LVN) and the Director of Nursing (DON), confirmed the absence of the required documentation and visits. The facility's policy and procedures indicated that it was the facility's responsibility to coordinate with the hospice provider to meet the resident's needs, including maintaining communication and documentation. The lack of adherence to these protocols had the potential to lead to Resident 27 experiencing unnecessary pain and discomfort due to the missed hospice services.
Failure to Maintain Working Call Light System
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain a working call light system for Resident 69, who had severe cognitive impairment and was dependent on staff for various activities of daily living. During an observation, it was noted that the call light in Resident 69's room did not illuminate when pressed, requiring multiple attempts by a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) to activate it. Additionally, the call light panel at the nurses' station did not indicate that the call light was on, as confirmed by the Maintenance Supervisor (MS). This malfunction was corroborated by the Director of Nursing (DON), who acknowledged that the faulty call light system posed a risk of delayed care and falls for Resident 69. Resident 69's medical history included congestive heart failure, anoxic brain injury, repeated falls, and asthma. The resident's care plan specifically included interventions to prevent falls, such as placing the call light within reach and reminding the resident to use it. However, the malfunctioning call light system compromised these preventive measures. The facility's policy on the call system, revised in September 2022, emphasized the importance of timely responses to residents' needs, which was not adhered to in this case.
Facility Fails to Meet Minimum Room Size Requirements
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to meet the required 80 square feet per resident in multiple residents' bedrooms for 12 out of 36 resident rooms. Specifically, rooms 2, 4, 6, 8, 14, 18, 20, 22, 24, 28, 30, and 37 did not meet the minimum space requirement, providing less than 80 square feet per resident. This deficiency was identified during an initial tour of the facility and confirmed through a review of the facility's Client Accommodation Analysis. Despite the space constraints, nursing staff were observed to have enough space to provide care, and no concerns were raised by residents during a council meeting regarding the room sizes. Additionally, individual interviews with residents and staff indicated that they did not experience difficulties in moving around or providing care within the rooms, even those that were undersized according to the regulations. The facility had submitted a room waiver letter requesting an exemption for the identified rooms, stating that there were no obstructions interfering with the free movement of wheelchairs and other devices. The letter also indicated that the rooms provided adequate space for each resident's care, dignity, and privacy, and would not adversely affect the residents' health and safety. Observations confirmed that the rooms had privacy curtains and direct access to corridors, and staff were able to maneuver medical equipment and assist residents without difficulty. However, the deficiency remains due to the rooms not meeting the specified square footage requirements.
Latest citations in California
Two residents with dementia, schizoaffective disorder, and major depressive disorder, both with moderately impaired cognition and needing moderate ADL assistance, were found unclothed together in one resident's bed. One resident later stated she did not want sexual activity and did not consent, while the other resident could not recall the encounter. An LVN reported that both residents verbally consented at the time but acknowledged no assessment had been done to determine their capacity to consent to sexual activity. The DON identified the incident as sexual abuse and confirmed that allowing sexual activity without prior capacity assessment was inconsistent with facility policy and that the resident was not protected from sexual abuse.
Two residents with dementia, schizoaffective disorder, major depressive disorder, and moderately impaired cognition, both needing moderate assistance with ADLs, were found unclothed together in one resident’s bed. The resident later stated she did not consent to sexual contact, while the other resident did not recall any sexual activity. An LVN documented the incident and acknowledged it constituted sexual abuse that should have been reported immediately to the abuse coordinator and appropriate agencies, but did not report it. The administrator, who serves as the abuse coordinator, stated she relies on staff to notify her immediately of such allegations so they can be reported to CDPH, law enforcement, and the Ombudsman, but this did not occur, resulting in the allegation not being reported as required.
A resident with Parkinson’s disease, osteoporosis, and osteoarthritis reported being punched in the face by another resident, resulting in facial bruising. The resident’s MDS showed intact cognition, and a change in condition evaluation documented the assault; however, the MD was not notified until more than a day later. The care plan directed licensed nurses to assess the resident’s body, and staff observed a purplish bruise on the right lower eyelid/orbital area, but this was not documented in the progress notes. Required every-shift monitoring for 72 hours after the change in condition was not documented on multiple day shifts. The DON confirmed lack of awareness of the bruise and acknowledged missing documentation and monitoring, despite facility policies requiring immediate provider notification and complete, accurate charting of changes in condition.
A nurse left a medication cart unlocked and unattended in the hallway while administering insulin to a resident with diabetes, cardiac, and post-surgical conditions. The cart was out of the nurse's direct line of sight, contrary to facility policy requiring medication carts to be locked when not in use. The DON confirmed that medications should be secured to prevent unauthorized access.
A resident’s legal representative requested copies of the resident’s medical records through a faxed request from a law office’s third-party service, but the records were not provided within the required timeframe. The MRD confirmed receiving the request and stated he had forwarded the documents to the DON for review over a month earlier and had not received them back to release. Upon review of federal requirements for record access, the ADON acknowledged that the facility did not comply with the regulation requiring provision of copies within two working days of request.
Two CNAs violated privacy and confidentiality requirements when one CNA used a personal cell phone to record and photograph two residents during a perceived altercation and then sent the video to another CNA. The residents, who had significant medical conditions including paraplegia, seizures, dysphagia, and severe cognitive impairment, were dependent on staff for ADLs. The second CNA reported that a family member later took her phone without permission, accessed the contents, and transmitted the videos and photos to facility leadership. Facility staff, including an LVN, the DSD, and the administrator, stated that HIPAA rules and facility policies prohibit staff from recording residents on personal devices and allow resident photographs only with consent and for medical purposes as part of the chart, and that the facility’s "Stop and Watch" process requires observation and reporting, not filming.
A resident with a stage 4 sacrococcygeal PI, Parkinson’s disease, hypertension, moderate cognitive impairment, and high assistance needs was not provided care consistent with the facility’s pressure injury prevention policy. Although the care plan included daily wound treatment and use of a LAL mattress, it lacked an individualized repositioning schedule and did not document education or reminders about repositioning. Facility documentation showed only that the resident was assisted to roll each shift, with no evidence of q2h turning in bed or of how often incontinence briefs were checked and changed. After the resident refused Foley catheter reinsertion, the IDT did not identify incontinence as a risk factor or add new wound-protective or moisture-preventive interventions, and the subsequent care plan for non-compliance omitted such measures. The TXN and DON confirmed that repositioning and protection of the wound from incontinence were not clearly implemented or reflected in the care plan, despite policy requirements.
A resident with Parkinson’s disease, cognitive impairment, and significant assistance needs for mobility and toileting experienced two early-morning falls resulting in head injuries. After the first fall, the IDT documented potential interventions such as a bed alarm and floor mat but did not identify the cause of the fall, did not obtain a physician order for the floor mat, and did not ensure the care plan addressed supervision or bed alarm function. Before and after the falls, the care plan lacked interventions for supervision despite poor safety awareness and failure to use the call light, and the second fall occurred when the resident slid from bed while reaching for a snack bag placed on the bedside table. IDT follow-up documentation for the second fall was incomplete, and staff acknowledged that fall causes were not identified and resident-centered interventions were not fully implemented.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment and multiple neurological diagnoses was dependent on staff for hygiene and mobility. During an IDT meeting, the resident’s family member communicated specific care preferences, but facility staff did not develop or update a comprehensive person-centered care plan to include these preferences. Review of care plans over several months showed no documentation of the communicated preferences, despite facility policy requiring the IDT to create a measurable, time-framed care plan based on assessed needs and expressed preferences.
A resident with COPD and severely impaired cognition, dependent on staff for all ADLs and mobility, had a physician order for continuous supplemental O2 at a fixed rate of 2 L/min. During observations, the resident was found receiving O2 at 3 L/min. An LVN recognized the discrepancy and reported it to an RN supervisor, but there was no documentation of any clinical rationale for the increased flow, no physician notification, and no order change. The care plan directed staff to administer O2 as ordered, and facility policy required verification of the order, documentation of flow rate and rationale, and appropriate reporting, which were not followed.
Failure to Protect Cognitively Impaired Resident From Sexual Abuse
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure a resident was free from sexual abuse when two cognitively impaired residents were found unclothed together in one resident's bed without prior assessment of their capacity to consent to sexual activity. One resident had dementia, schizoaffective disorder, and major depressive disorder, with documentation of fluctuating capacity to understand and make decisions and a Minimum Data Set (MDS) indicating moderately impaired cognition and a need for moderate assistance with ADLs. During an interview at her bedside, this resident stated she did not want to engage in sexual activity and did not consent to sexual contact with the other resident. The second resident involved also had dementia, schizoaffective disorder, and major depressive disorder, with an MDS showing moderately impaired cognition and a need for moderate assistance with ADLs. In an interview, he stated he liked women and liked to socialize with women but could not recall whether he engaged in sexual activity with the first resident. An LVN reported observing both residents unclothed in the first resident's bed and stated that, at the time of the incident, both residents verbally consented to sexual activity, but she was not aware of any assessment having been performed to determine either resident's capacity to consent. The DON stated the incident was considered sexual abuse, that it was not the facility's practice to allow sexual activity without appropriate assessment, and that the facility failed to ensure the resident was protected from sexual abuse, contrary to the facility's abuse prevention policy.
Failure to Report Alleged Sexual Abuse Between Cognitively Impaired Residents
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to report an allegation of sexual abuse between two residents to the State Survey Agency, Ombudsman, and local law enforcement as required by federal regulations and the facility’s own abuse reporting policy. A nurse documented that one resident (Resident 2) and another resident (Resident 4) were found unclothed together in Resident 2’s bed, and the nurse acknowledged that this situation constituted sexual abuse and should have been reported immediately to the abuse coordinator and appropriate agencies, but she did not report the incident. The facility’s policy stated that all staff are mandated reporters and must notify appropriate authorities within two hours of becoming aware of abuse and immediately notify the Abuse Prevention Coordinator and their supervisor. Resident 2 had dementia, schizoaffective disorder, major depressive disorder, fluctuating capacity to understand and make decisions, and moderately impaired cognition, and required moderate assistance with ADLs. During an interview at her bedside, Resident 2 stated she did not consent to sexual contact with Resident 4. Resident 4 also had dementia, schizoaffective disorder, major depressive disorder, moderately impaired cognition, and required moderate assistance with ADLs, and stated he did not recall engaging in sexual activity with any residents. The Administrator, who served as the abuse coordinator, stated she was responsible for reporting all abuse allegations to CDPH, law enforcement, and the Ombudsman, and that staff were responsible for notifying her immediately of sexual abuse allegations so they could be reported and investigated. The failure of staff to notify the Administrator and report the incident resulted in the sexual abuse allegation not being reported as required, causing a delay in an onsite investigation by CDPH.
Failure to Assess, Notify, and Monitor Resident After Facial Trauma
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to follow professional standards of nursing practice in assessing and monitoring a resident after a reported change of condition related to facial trauma. The resident was admitted with Parkinson’s disease, age-related osteoporosis, and osteoarthritis, and had intact cognitive skills for daily decision-making per a recent MDS. On the evening of 3/26/2026, a Change in Condition Evaluation documented that another resident hit this resident on the nose and both cheeks. The evaluation showed that the attending physician was not notified until 10 p.m. on 3/27/2026, approximately 26.5 hours after the reported incident, and the physician’s recommendation was to monitor the resident’s nose and cheeks for any changes and pain. The resident’s care plan, initiated on 3/26/2026, documented the report that another resident hit him on the nose and both cheeks and included an intervention for licensed nurses to check and assess the resident’s body. In an interview, the resident described that the other resident came into the room, stood on the left side of the bed, and punched him in the face. A photograph taken two days after the alleged incident showed a purplish-blue bruise on the right lower orbital area, although the resident declined to provide a copy of the picture. A CNA later reported observing a purple bruise on the resident’s right lower eyelid on 3/27/2026, described as extending from the inner to the middle lower eyelid and about the size of the tip of her fifth digit. During record review and interviews, an LVN stated that on 3/27/2026 the resident’s right lower eyelid had a dime-sized purplish bruise, but there was no documentation of this bruise in the progress notes. The LVN also stated that the resident should have been monitored every shift for 72 hours after the change of condition, yet there was no documented evidence of monitoring on the 7 a.m. to 3 p.m. shifts on 3/27/2026, 3/28/2026, and 3/29/2026. The DON reported not being made aware of the right eyelid bruise, confirmed that the resident should have been monitored every shift for at least 72 hours following the change of condition, and acknowledged there was no confirmed documentation of monitoring on the identified shifts. Facility policies required immediate physician consultation for significant changes in condition and complete, accurate documentation of changes and services provided, but the facility failed to identify, document, and monitor the resident’s change of condition in accordance with these policies.
Plan Of Correction
Facility Response Submission of the Plan of Correction does not constitute admission or agreement by the Provider of the truth of the facts alleged or conclusion set forth in this statement of deficiencies. The Plan of Correction is prepared and/or executed solely because it is required by the provision of Federal and State laws. This Plan of Correction constitutes the facility's credible allegation of compliance Corrective Action On 4/7/2026 Resident 1 was reassessed by LVN 3 and no skin issue was identified. On 4/7/2026 LVN 3 received one-on-one in-service by DON regarding importance of documenting details about resident's change of condition and monitoring every shift for 72 hours. Identification of other residents and corrective action On 4/8/2026 DON and/or designee reviewed audits provided by medical records for all change of condition in month of April to ensure proper documentation and monitoring are in place. No other deficient practice noted. Measures to prevent recurrence On 4/7/2026 LVN 3 received one-on-one in-service by DON regarding importance of documenting details about resident's change of condition and monitoring every shift for 72 hours. On 4/8/2026 Licensed nurses received in-service by DON regarding importance of documenting details about resident's change of condition and monitoring every shift for 72 hours. Monitoring and incorporation into the QA system HID will audit change of conditions using Change of Condition Audit form daily Monday-Friday and will report any finding during daily stand-up meeting Monday-Friday on-going. DON or designee will review change of conditions from prior day during daily clinical meetings (Monday -Friday) on going to ensure the nurse notified the attending physician regarding resident's significant change of condition and documented. Any deficient finding will be reported to DON and/or administrator for further corrective action/recommendation. Any trend of deficient finding(s) will be documented on Change of Condition Audit Form and will be reviewed during the monthly QA meeting for further review and/or recommendation(s). Administrator who will then report to the Quality Assurance (QA) team during monthly Quality Assurance (QA)/Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) for further evaluation/recommendation and to provide feedback and program modification if needed x3 months or until compliant. Date Corrective action to be completed: 4/8/2026
Medication Cart Left Unlocked During Medication Pass
Penalty
Summary
During a medication pass for a resident with a history of surgical aftercare, cardiac arrest, heart failure, and type 2 diabetes mellitus, a licensed nurse prepared and administered Novolog insulin using a pen-injector. The nurse left the medication cart unlocked and unattended in the hallway, approximately two feet outside the resident's bedroom doorway, while administering the injection inside the room. The cart was out of the nurse's direct line of sight during this time. The nurse acknowledged that the cart was left unlocked and should have been secured when not in direct view. Facility policy and procedure documents reviewed indicated that medication carts must be kept closed and locked when out of sight of the medication nurse or aide, and that compartments containing drugs and biologicals are to be locked when not in use. The Director of Nursing confirmed that medications should be locked and secured to prevent unauthorized access by unlicensed staff and residents. The failure to lock the medication cart during the medication pass was observed and confirmed through interviews and record review.
Plan Of Correction
From 4/4/2025 through 4/7/2025, the DON, DSD, and ADSD completed 1:1 inservices with licensed staff regarding the facility policy and procedure titled Storage of Medications. Medication carts must be kept locked when unattended. DON, IP, MDS, ADSD, or DSD will monitor medication carts being locked when unattended 3 times a week for 2 weeks. DON, IP, MDS, ADSD, or DSD will monitor medication carts being locked when unattended 2 times a week for 2 weeks. DON, IP, MDS, ADSD, or DSD will monitor medication carts being locked when unattended 1 time a week for 2 weeks. DON, IP, MDS, ADSD, or DSD will random monitor medication carts being locked when unattended for 1 month. System effectiveness will be evaluated during the facility's monthly Quality Assurance Performance Improvement Committee meetings for three (3) months.
Failure to Timely Provide Resident Medical Records Upon Request
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide timely access to medical records as required under 42 CFR 483.10(g)(2) for one resident. The resident’s face sheet showed an admission date of November 18, 2025, with multiple diagnoses, but no additional clinical details were provided. A legal representative’s office faxed an initial request for the resident’s medical records on February 26, 2026. As of March 26, 2026, the legal representative’s staff reported that the office had not yet received the requested records from the facility. On April 2, 2026, the Medical Record Director (MRD) confirmed documentation that a third-party service for the law office had requested the resident’s medical records on February 26, 2026. The MRD stated he had submitted the requested documents to the Director of Nursing (DON) for review over a month prior but had not received them back to proceed with releasing the records. During a concurrent interview and record review, the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) reviewed the State Operations Manual Appendix PP guidance on residents’ rights to access personal and medical records, which requires that copies be provided within two working days of request. The ADON acknowledged that this regulatory requirement was not followed by the facility.
Plan Of Correction
F0573 Right to Access/Purchase Copies of Records What corrective action(s) will be accomplished for those Residents found to have been affected by the deficient practice? Medical Records Director (MRD) released medical records for Resident 1 as requested by the legal representative (Legal Staff) on April 21, 2026. How will other individuals with the potential to be affected by this deficient practice be identified and protected? No other Resident was identified to have been effected by the deficient practice. What systemic changes will be implemented to ensure that the deficient practice does not recur? The Quality Assurance Committee met on April 14, 2026 to review the Policy and Procedure which was then forwarded to the Knolls West Post Acute legal team for further evaluation. Revision of the policy will be discussed and approved by the Quality Assurance Committee to ensure the facility meets all Federal and State Regulations. F0573 Right to Access/Purchase Copies of Records (CONT.)The Administrator and the Medical Records Director (MRD) are responsible for informing the requesting party for the demand for payment for the requested medical documentation being provided and until payment is received the facility will hold the chart copies.How corrective action(s) will be monitored to ensure solutions are being achieved and sustainedThe Resident's Responsible Party will be notified upon receipt of the Medical Records Request and review in the presence of the facility representative. Records will be provided if it does not pertain to any legal matters after payment is received. The Administrator and/or Designee is responsible for reporting to the Quality Assurance Committee on a monthly basis and monitoring to ensure that corrective action is implemented and evaluated for its effectiveness. The same will be reviewed on a quarterly basis to the Quality Assurance Committee meeting x 3 quarters or until 100% compliance is achieved and sustained.Date of CompletionApril 23, 2026
Unauthorized Resident Recording and Disclosure Violating Privacy and Confidentiality
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves a failure to protect residents’ privacy and confidentiality when a CNA used a personal cell phone to record and photograph two residents without their knowledge or consent, and then shared that content with another CNA. One resident had paraplegia, depression, muscle weakness, dorsalgia, and polyneuropathy, was cognitively intact, and dependent on staff for ADLs. The other resident had diagnoses including seizures, dysphagia, acute kidney dysfunction, and muscle weakness, was able to make needs known but could not make medical decisions, had severely impaired decision-making, and was also dependent on staff for ADLs. Both residents were therefore in a position of dependence on staff for care at the time of the incident. According to CNA 2, on a specific date she recorded a video of the two residents because one resident started an altercation with the other. She stated she recorded the incident for “evidence” and to show CNA 1, acknowledging that recording residents was not part of facility policy and that she should not have recorded or taken photographs of them. CNA 1 confirmed that she received the video on her personal cell phone from CNA 2 and stated that the recording was made for “safety purposes” due to a situation that was perceived as potentially escalating to physical aggression. CNA 1 reported that she did not share or post the video on social media or distribute it to others, but that a family member took her phone without permission and accessed its contents. CNA 1 further stated that this family member sent the video and pictures of the two residents to the facility, and that she notified the facility that her phone had been taken but did not disclose that it contained videos or photographs of the residents because she was unaware that the family member had accessed or distributed them. The DSD reported receiving a text message from an unknown number containing approximately two videos and an undetermined number of photographs of the two residents, along with the names of CNA 1 and CNA 2. The DSD, LVN 2, and the Administrator each stated that staff were required to follow HIPAA regulations, that staff were not permitted to record or possess videos or photographs of residents on personal devices, and that any photographs of residents required consent and had to be for medical purposes as part of the medical record. Facility policies on confidentiality, residents’ rights, and dignity stated that unauthorized release, access, or disclosure of resident information, including video or audio, was prohibited and that staff must protect resident privacy and treat residents with dignity and respect. The videos received by the DSD did not show an altercation between the residents, and staff interviews confirmed that filming residents was not part of the facility’s “Stop and Watch” process, which instead required observation, intervention, and reporting of changes in condition or behaviors to nursing staff.
Plan Of Correction
This Plan of Correction is the facility's credible allegation of compliance. Preparation and/or execution of this plan of correction does not constitute admission or agreement by the provider of the truth or facts alleged, or conclusions set forth in the statement of deficiencies. The plan of correction is prepared and/or executed solely because it is required by the provisions of federal and state law. F0583 Personal Privacy/Confidentiality of Records How corrective action(s) will be accomplished for those residents found to have been affected by the deficient practice: Corrective actions were immediately implemented for Resident 1 and Resident 2 upon identification of the deficient practice. The facility initiated an investigation on 03/23/2026 and conducted immediate interviews with staff and residents utilizing structured interview tools to assess scope, impact, and additional potential concerns. Interviews confirmed the incident was isolated and no additional residents reported privacy violations or concerns. The staff members involved were removed from duty immediately. Following completion of the investigation, both employees were terminated in accordance with facility policy due to violation of resident rights, HIPAA, and facility confidentiality policies. Both employees completed formal Declarations and Attestations of Deletion of Unauthorized Recordings, confirming removal of all recordings and non-distribution of content. Documentation includes: Ashley Zelaya, CNA – Declaration executed 03/30/2026 at 9:21 AM, attesting deletion of all recordings and acknowledgment of policy violation Leslie Bram Reyes, CNA – Declaration executed 03/26/2026 at 10:42 AM, attesting deletion of all recordings and acknowledgment of policy violation Residents and/or responsible parties were notified. Social Services completed assessments with no identified psychosocial harm. All corrective actions were completed by 03/26/2026. How the facility identifies other residents having the potential to be affected by the same deficient practice and what corrective action will be taken. A facility-wide audit was initiated on 03/25/2026 using the Briarcrest Comprehensive Privacy, Recording, and Resident Rights Audit Tool. The audit included direct observation, staff interviews, and resident interviews to evaluate compliance with privacy practices, personal device use, and HIPAA requirements. Interviews were conducted using standardized staff and resident interview tools to ensure consistency and thoroughness in data collection. Findings from the audit confirmed that no additional residents were affected by the deficient practice and no additional incidents of unauthorized recording or disclosure were identified. Staff were immediately re-educated by Director and staff development on HIPAA Privacy Rule requirements, the facility's prohibition on personal device recordings, and the appropriate use of the Stop and Watch process for reporting changes in resident conditions. This corrective action was completed by 03/27/2026. What measures will be put into place or what systemic changes will the facility make to ensure that the deficient practice does not recur. The facility implemented systemic changes to prevent recurrence of the deficient practice by reinforcing a zero-tolerance policy for unauthorized recordings and strengthening staff accountability related to resident privacy and confidentiality. Staff completed mandatory re-training by the Director of Staff Development on Resident Rights, HIPAA, and Privacy/Confidentiality requirements. Staff were required to re-acknowledge facility policies related to confidentiality and personal device use. The facility implemented routine supervisory rounding to monitor compliance with personal device restrictions. In addition, the facility installed visible signage at the receptionist area clearly articulates that video recording is strictly prohibited inside resident rooms and in any facility areas where residents are present. The facility also posted signage throughout the entire facility, in both English and Spanish, indicating that video recording is not allowed to ensure clear communication to staff, visitors, and all individuals entering the facility. Privacy and HIPAA compliance were further integrated into new employee orientation, annual competencies, and ongoing in-service education. The Director of Staff Development completed initial re-education by 03/27/2026, and staff completed required training by 04/05/2026. How the facility plans to monitor its performance to make sure that solutions are sustained. To ensure sustained compliance, the facility incorporated privacy and confidentiality monitoring into its Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) program. The facility implemented an ongoing monitoring system beginning on 03/25/2026 utilizing the established audit tool, which confirmed that no additional residents were affected, and no further incidents occurred during the initial audit period. The facility will continue monitoring through weekly audits for four consecutive weeks, followed by monthly audits for three months. These audits will include direct observation of staff practices, verification of compliance with personal device policies, and evaluation of adherence to HIPAA and privacy requirements. Audit findings will be documented using standardized tools and reviewed by the Director of Nursing, with results reported to the Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) Committee for analysis and trending. If any issues are identified, immediate corrective action will be implemented, including re-education and progressive discipline as appropriate. If no trends or repeat deficiencies are identified after the monitoring period, the facility will discontinue routine auditing and remove the issue from active QAPI monitoring. Dates when corrective action will be completed. 4/17/2026
Failure to Implement Repositioning and Moisture Management for Stage 4 Pressure Injury
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to provide care and services to prevent deterioration of a stage 4 sacrococcygeal pressure injury in accordance with its own pressure injury prevention policy. The resident had a documented stage 4 PI of the sacral region, Parkinson’s disease, hypertension, moderate cognitive impairment, and required substantial/maximal assistance with toileting hygiene, rolling, and transfers. A Braden Scale score of 16 identified the resident as at risk for pressure injury. The Skilled Evaluation Nurse note indicated a pressure-reducing device for the bed but did not indicate that the resident was to be turned and repositioned every two hours. The resident’s care plan for the stage 4 sacrococcyx PI included cleansing with normal saline, applying Santyl ointment, and covering with dry and foam dressings daily, as well as providing pressure relief and a low air loss mattress to support body alignment and position. However, the care plan did not include an individualized repositioning schedule or education and reminders about the importance of repositioning. Documentation from the facility’s records showed that the resident was assisted to roll left and right every shift, but there was no documentation that the resident was turned and repositioned every two hours while in bed, nor was there documentation of the frequency of incontinence brief checks and changes after each episode. After the resident refused reinsertion of a Foley catheter, nursing progress notes documented the refusal but the IDT wound management conference record did not identify incontinence as a risk factor affecting healing of the stage 4 PI and did not document any new recommendations following the catheter refusal. A subsequent care plan addressing the resident’s potential for worsening condition related to non-compliance with Foley catheter reinsertion did not include wound protective measures or moisture-preventive interventions. During interviews, the treatment nurse acknowledged uncertainty about how often the resident was turned/repositioned or how frequently incontinence briefs were checked and changed, and confirmed that the care plan did not include measures to ensure turning at least every two hours or effective measures to protect the sacrococcyx PI. The DON stated that staff were supposed to ensure turning at least every two hours and protection of the wound dressing from incontinence, and that the IDT did not address this risk, so the care plan was not revised, despite facility policy requiring prompt cleaning after incontinence, use of barrier products, individualized repositioning schedules, and ongoing review of interventions for effectiveness.
Failure to Identify Fall Causes and Implement Supervision and Safety Interventions
Penalty
Summary
Surveyors identified a deficiency in the facility’s failure to keep the environment free from accident hazards and to provide adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents for a resident with significant fall risk. The resident had diagnoses including stage 4 sacral pressure ulcer, Parkinson’s disease, and hypertension, and was assessed as moderately cognitively impaired, with poor decision-making and a need for assistance with toileting, transfers, and ambulation. On one occasion, the resident was found on the floor at approximately 4:05 AM with a right forehead laceration requiring transfer to an acute care hospital for suturing. Following this first fall, the IDT Fall Management Follow-Up record listed interventions such as a medication regimen review, bed in lowest position, landing floor mat, and bed alarm, but there was no documented evidence identifying the cause of the fall. The resident’s care plan addressing strength and safety awareness deficits did not include supervision for safety despite poor safety awareness and not remembering to use the call light. The care plan for the actual fall with minor injury did not include ensuring that the bed alarm was functioning. Additionally, physician orders from 9/10/2025 to 1/29/2026 did not contain an order for a floor mat, despite this intervention being recommended in the IDT record. A second fall occurred at around 4:10 AM when the resident was again found on the floor next to the bed, holding a snack bag. The resident, described as alert but forgetful, stated that she had been trying to reach a snack bag on the bedside table and slid down from the bed, and redness was observed on the left side of the forehead after reportedly hitting the bedside table. The IDT Fall Management Follow-Up record for this second fall was incomplete, with no checked interventions. Interviews with the MDS nurse and DON confirmed that the IDT records should have identified the causes of the falls, that frequent monitoring and supervision were not care planned despite the resident’s cognitive impairment and poor safety awareness, and that the recommended floor mat was never ordered or applied, contrary to the facility’s own policies on assessing falls and developing comprehensive person-centered care plans.
Failure to Incorporate Resident Care Preferences Into Person-Centered Care Plan
Penalty
Summary
Surveyors identified a failure to develop a comprehensive person-centered care plan that incorporated a resident’s specific care preferences. The resident was readmitted on 8/31/2025 with multiple diagnoses, including metabolic encephalopathy, Alzheimer’s disease, blindness in the right eye, a history of TIA, and cerebral infarction without residual deficits. An MDS dated 10/30/2025 documented that the resident’s cognition was severely impaired and that the resident was dependent on staff for oral hygiene, toileting hygiene, personal hygiene, and movement. On 3/17/2026, the IDT met with a family member, who communicated specific care preferences for the resident. During interviews, the SSD and DSD confirmed that the family member had provided detailed care preferences at the 3/17/2026 IDT meeting, but a review of the resident’s care plans from 8/31/2025 to 3/31/2026 showed no documented care plan addressing those preferences. The DSD stated that a care plan should have been developed to reflect the resident’s care preferences, that it is the MDS nurse’s responsibility to develop the care plan, and that the absence of such a care plan could result in the preferences not being honored. The Administrator stated that the care plan is essential as it is used by staff as a guide to understand and implement the resident’s plan of care. The facility’s policy on Comprehensive Person-Centered Care Plans required the IDT to develop a comprehensive person-centered care plan with measurable objectives and time frames to meet identified needs, which was not done in this case.
Failure to Administer Oxygen Therapy as Ordered
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to administer oxygen therapy as ordered by the physician for a resident with COPD. The resident was admitted with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and had severely impaired cognition, requiring total staff assistance for all ADLs and mobility. A physician’s order dated 3/27/2026 directed that the resident receive continuous supplemental oxygen at a fixed rate of 2 L/min, with no indication that staff could adjust the flow rate. The resident’s care plan for altered respiratory status related to COPD instructed staff to administer oxygen as ordered. On 3/31/2026, during observations at the bedside at 8:45 a.m. and 9:40 a.m., the resident was noted to be receiving oxygen at 3 L/min, which did not match the physician’s order. An LVN reported that the resident was on 3 L/min when he checked vital signs that morning and stated this was not the ordered rate; he said he reported this to the previous shift’s RN supervisor but was unsure what action was taken. Another RN supervisor confirmed there was no documentation in the record to support an increased flow rate or any notification to the physician about the change from 2 L/min to 3 L/min, and reiterated that the order was for a fixed rate of 2 L/min. During a concurrent observation and interview, the prior RN supervisor acknowledged the resident was on 3 L/min and that the flow rate needed to be corrected to match the order. The facility’s oxygen administration policy required staff to verify a physician order, document the flow rate and rationale, and report information per professional standards, which was not followed in this instance.
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.



