Dade City Health And Rehabilitation Center
Inspection history, citations, penalties and survey trends for this long-term care facility in Dade City, Florida.
- Location
- 37135 Coleman Ave, Dade City, Florida 33525
- CMS Provider Number
- 105320
- Inspections on file
- 26
- Latest survey
- December 17, 2025
- Citations (last 12 mo.)
- 7 (4 serious)
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Dade City Health And Rehabilitation Center during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
A resident with a documented DNR order was given CPR after being found unresponsive, as staff failed to verify code status before initiating resuscitation. The DNR order was present in both the medical record and code status binder, but the RN and other staff did not check these sources prior to starting CPR. Staff interviews revealed inadequate training on DNR and code status procedures, leading to the resident's end-of-life wishes not being followed.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment and a valid DNR order was found unresponsive and without a pulse. A RN initiated chest compressions before being informed of the DNR status and stopping. Staff interviews revealed inadequate training on DNR and CPR procedures, and the required verification process for code status was not followed, resulting in neglect of the resident's advance directive.
A resident with a documented DNR order and severe cognitive impairment was found unresponsive and without a pulse. An RN initiated CPR without verifying the resident's code status, performing chest compressions before being informed of the DNR. Staff interviews confirmed that code status was not checked as required by facility policy, resulting in the resident's wishes not being honored.
A nurse initiated CPR on a resident with a valid DNR order after failing to verify the resident's code status, despite clear documentation in the medical record and code status binders. The nurse had not received adequate training on DNR procedures or locating code status information, leading to resuscitation efforts that were not in accordance with the resident's wishes.
Three residents with significant fall risks experienced multiple falls resulting in injuries, with facility staff failing to promptly assess, document, and update care plans or interventions after each event. Post-fall neuro checks were inconsistently performed or recorded, IDT reviews were delayed, and care plan updates were either missing or lacked specificity. Documentation inconsistencies and lack of follow-through on recommended interventions contributed to the deficiency.
The facility did not properly hold, secure, or manage a resident's personal money that was deposited with the facility, resulting in a failure to follow required procedures for safeguarding resident funds.
A resident's family member, acting as power of attorney, repeatedly raised concerns about the resident's trust account, including questions about deposits, refunds, and monthly allowances. Despite multiple communications and a formal grievance, facility staff did not provide a timely resolution or adequate documentation of an investigation, leaving the grievance unresolved for several months.
The facility failed to maintain accurate and complete documentation for four residents, leading to discrepancies in wound care and skin integrity records. A resident's records showed inconsistencies between physician orders and LTC notes, while another had delayed wound care initiation and incomplete baseline care plans. Two other residents experienced similar documentation issues, indicating systemic problems in the facility's record-keeping practices.
A resident with multiple health issues, including skin breakdown, did not receive timely wound care upon admission to the facility. The facility delayed starting prescribed treatments and failed to document wound care consistently due to system limitations and policy gaps. The DON acknowledged these deficiencies, which were contrary to the facility's wound treatment management policy.
A resident admitted with multiple skin issues, including a stage III pressure ulcer, did not receive timely wound care due to the facility's failure to obtain orders and start treatment promptly. Documentation inconsistencies and incomplete records further contributed to the deficiency, as staff failed to accurately document the resident's wounds and care provided. Interviews revealed a lack of communication and adherence to wound care protocols, leading to a delay in treatment.
The facility failed to honor the advance directives of two residents, leading to inappropriate medical interventions. One resident with a signed DNR order was subjected to CPR, and another resident's DNR wishes were not documented or verified promptly. These deficiencies highlight lapses in communication and adherence to protocols.
The facility failed to ensure accurate PASRR documentation for ten residents, including those with Alzheimer's, bipolar disorder, and schizoaffective disorder. The DON acknowledged that the PASRRs were not updated to reflect the residents' current diagnoses, leading to deficiencies.
The facility failed to store, prepare, and document food temperatures according to professional standards. Observations revealed unlabeled and undated food items in the walk-in refrigerator and East Dietary Pantry, and the Dietary Manager did not document food temperatures while preparing residents' food trays. The facility's policies on food storage and labeling were not followed, leading to these deficiencies.
The facility failed to ensure a medication administration error rate of less than five percent and proper storage, labeling, and dating of food and beverages. An LPN incorrectly primed insulin injector pens without attaching a needle, and multiple food items were found improperly stored or labeled in the kitchen and dietary pantries.
The facility failed to implement proper infection control measures, including providing hand hygiene before meals, identifying and managing residents on isolation precautions, and ensuring proper storage and cleaning of medical equipment. These deficiencies were observed during meal services, room inspections, and medication passes, affecting multiple residents with various medical conditions.
The facility failed to enforce its smoking policy and provide adequate supervision for three residents, leading to unsupervised smoking and possession of smoking materials. One resident with moderate cognitive impairment was found smoking unsupervised, another resident with intact cognition kept personal cigarettes and a lighter, and a third resident with chronic respiratory failure had cigarettes in their room.
The facility failed to maintain a medication error rate below 5%, resulting in a 20% error rate. Errors included improper insulin priming, incorrect documentation of vital signs, and late medication administration. Facility policies on medication administration and nebulizer therapy were not followed.
The facility failed to assess two residents for self-administration of treatments and medications. One resident with multiple diagnoses was observed with various treatment items at the bedside and had dressed a wound themselves. Another resident was found with an opened bottle of Nystatin Topical Powder at the bedside. The facility's policy requires an interdisciplinary team assessment and proper documentation for self-administration, which was not followed.
The facility failed to complete the smoking assessment for a resident who was observed smoking on the designated patio. Despite being listed as a smoker and having a care plan requiring supervision, the resident's medical record lacked a completed smoking assessment. The DON confirmed the assessment was overlooked at admission, contrary to the facility's policy.
A facility failed to assess, obtain physician orders, and provide treatments for a resident with skin conditions unrelated to pressure injuries. The resident self-dressed wounds and reported dissatisfaction with the wound care nurse. Staff interviews revealed a lack of awareness and follow-up on the resident's wounds, and observations confirmed undated dressings and an open, possibly infected area. The facility's policies on skin assessment and dressing changes were not followed, leading to inadequate wound care and documentation.
A resident with a pressure ulcer did not receive necessary care and services to promote healing and prevent infection. The resident's request for a bandage and medicine was denied by an LPN due to being too busy and understaffed. Observations confirmed the ulcer was not bandaged, and the facility's policy on pressure injury prevention was not followed.
The facility failed to ensure timely and accurate completion of physician-ordered lab work for a resident with a history of UTIs. Despite the POA's request, the urinalysis took over a week, and the culture and sensitivity test was delayed, leading to a delay in treatment. The DON acknowledged the missed order, and staff interviews revealed lapses in following the facility's policy for handling physician orders.
The facility failed to ensure accurate documentation for refrigerator/freezer temperature logs in two dietary pantries. Observations revealed incomplete logs with multiple missing entries in April 2024, which were later filled in after initial observations. The DON confirmed that nursing staff should complete these logs daily and acknowledged the discrepancy.
Failure to Honor Resident's DNR Order Resulting in Unwanted CPR
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to honor a resident's Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) order, resulting in the initiation of Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) against the resident's documented wishes. On the date of the incident, a registered nurse (RN) found the resident unresponsive and without a pulse. The RN instructed a certified nursing assistant (CNA) to call a code and began chest compressions. After performing two compressions, the RN was informed that the resident had a DNR order in place and discontinued CPR. The DNR order was present in the resident's medical record and in the code status binder at the nurses' station, and the resident's care plan clearly indicated the existence of a DNR order. The resident involved had significant medical conditions, including dementia with severe cognitive impairment, Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, vascular implants, osteoarthritis, chronic kidney disease, anxiety, depression, insomnia, hypertension, and Hodgkin's Lymphoma. The resident's DNR order was fully executed and documented in both the electronic health record and the physical code status binder. Despite these clear directives, staff failed to verify the resident's code status before initiating CPR, which was contrary to the resident's end-of-life wishes and facility policy. Interviews with staff revealed gaps in training and knowledge regarding code status verification and DNR procedures. The RN involved reported that orientation did not include education on Code Blue or DNR procedures, nor was she trained on how to locate a resident's code status in the electronic health record. Other staff members confirmed that the code status was not checked prior to the initiation of CPR. Facility policy required verification of code status by two nurses before starting CPR, but this protocol was not followed, resulting in the resident's DNR wishes not being honored.
Removal Plan
- Audit of the code status binders to validate DNR forms are in the appropriate binder.
- Audit to verify residents' DNR forms are present in the electronic medical record, physician orders are in place, and care plans are reflective of residents' code status.
- Staff education instructing licensed nurses to evaluate residents for absence of vital signs, and if vital signs are absent, to follow residents' Advanced Directive. If the resident has DNR orders, notify the provider for further orders.
- Staff education on Abuse and Neglect, with emphasis on the importance of following residents' wishes regarding code status.
- Education completed by all staff, excluding those on leave from work.
- Process initiated for newly hired facility staff to receive the above education during orientation and prior to working any assignment.
- Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) committee meeting conducted with the Medical Director, Administrator, Director of Nursing, and Interdisciplinary team members to review adherence to policy and procedure for advance directives, code status in the electronic health record, code status binders, following physician orders, and results of the root cause analysis.
- QAPI committee reviewed the plan viability of the advance directives process, code process, code status binder process, and audit results.
- QAPI committee reviewed education completion rates for licensed nurses and all other staff; staff on leave will be educated upon return.
- QAPI committee discussed ongoing monitoring audits including education validation; all staff interviewed answered questions appropriately.
- Code Blue drills continue until all nursing staff participate.
- QAPI committee reviewed ongoing audits, including validation of code status for new/re-admissions and staff education during general orientation.
- QAPI committee continued review of ongoing monitoring audits including education validation, code status validation for new/re-admissions, and orientation education.
- Completed audits titled 'Code staff education validation' observed; no issues identified.
- Licensed nurses received additional education regarding two nurses confirming the absence of vital signs and notifying the health care provider by telephone, not text, for orders and to clearly document in the medical record.
- Director of Nursing and Unit Manager designees began educating licensed nurses on evaluating residents for the absence of vital signs. Staff instructed that if vital signs are absent, they must follow the residents' Advanced Directive. For residents with DNR orders or if death occurs in the facility, the physician must be notified for further orders. Staff are also required to notify the DON when a resident is noted to be absent of vital signs. Education emphasized that, per the Nurse Practice Act, only a physician may pronounce death; a licensed nurse (RN or LPN) cannot do so.
- All nurses received an electronic copy of the education. Licensed nurses are required to sign the education acknowledgment sheet before working.
- Verification of the facility's removal plan conducted by the survey team through interviews with CNAs and licensed nurses to verify education related to their role during a Code Blue, the Stop, Think, and Perform process, resident rights, participation in Code Blue drills, and education on resident rights.
- In-service attendance signature sheets and a log of electronic communications reviewed, which confirmed that nurses received the in-service training about the new processes.
Failure to Honor DNR Order and Verify Code Status
Penalty
Summary
A deficiency occurred when staff failed to honor a resident's Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) order during a medical emergency. The resident, who had severe cognitive impairment and multiple medical diagnoses including dementia, diabetes, and chronic kidney disease, was found unresponsive and without a pulse. Despite the presence of a valid DNR order in both the medical record and the facility's designated binder, a registered nurse initiated chest compressions before being informed of the resident's DNR status and subsequently discontinued resuscitation efforts. Interviews revealed that the nurse involved had not received adequate training on CPR or DNR procedures, nor on how to locate a resident's code status in the electronic health record or the physical binder. Other staff members, including CNAs and LPNs, were unclear about their roles during a code situation and the process for verifying code status. The facility's policy required two nurses to verify code status before initiating CPR, but this protocol was not followed in this incident. Documentation confirmed that the resident's care plan and medical orders clearly indicated a DNR status, and the facility's policies emphasized the right of residents to refuse treatment and have their advance directives honored. However, the failure to verify and adhere to the resident's DNR order resulted in the initiation of unwanted resuscitative measures, constituting neglect as defined by the facility's own policies and federal regulations.
Removal Plan
- Audit of the code status binders to validate DNR forms are in the appropriate binder.
- Audit to verify residents' DNR forms are present in the electronic medical record, physician orders are in place, and care plans are reflective of residents' code status.
- Staff education provided instructing licensed nurses to evaluate residents for absence of vital signs, and if vital signs are absent, to follow residents' Advanced Directive. If the resident has DNR orders, notify the provider for further orders.
- Staff received education on Abuse and Neglect, with emphasis on the importance of following residents' wishes regarding code status.
- Process initiated for newly hired facility staff to receive the above education during orientation and prior to working any assignment.
- Ad hoc Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) committee meeting conducted with the Medical Director, Administrator, Director of Nursing, and additional IDT members to review adherence to policy and procedure for advance directives, code status in the electronic health record, code status binders, following physician orders, and results of the root cause analysis.
- QAPI committee reviewed the plan viability of the advance directives process, code process, code status binder process, and audit results.
- QAPI committee reviewed education completion rates.
- QAPI committee discussed ongoing monitoring audits including education validation.
- Code Blue drills continue until nursing staff participate.
- QAPI committee reviewed ongoing audits, including validation of code status for new/re-admissions and staff education during general orientation.
- QAPI committee continued review of ongoing monitoring audits including education validation, code status validation for new/re-admissions, and orientation education.
- Completed audits titled 'Code staff education validation' observed.
- Licensed nurses received additional education on two nurses confirming the absence of vital signs and notifying the health care provider by telephone, not text, for orders and to clearly document in the medical record.
- Director of Nursing and Unit Manager designees began educating licensed nurses on evaluating residents for the absence of vital signs. Staff instructed that if vital signs are absent, they must follow the residents' Advanced Directive. For residents with DNR orders or if death occurs in the facility, the physician must be notified for further orders. Staff are also required to notify the DON when a resident is noted to be absent of vital signs. Education emphasized that, per the Nurse Practice Act, only a physician may pronounce death; a licensed nurse (RN or LPN) cannot do so.
- Nurses received an electronic copy of the education. Licensed nurses must complete the education prior to starting their next shift.
- Licensed nurses are required to sign the education acknowledgment sheet before working.
- Interviews conducted with CNAs working across all shifts to verify education related to their role during a Code Blue, the Stop, Think, and Perform process, resident rights, participation in Code Blue drills, and education on resident rights.
- Licensed nurses received additional education on two nurses confirming the absence of vital signs, notifying a physician by telephone, do not text for orders, and to clearly document in the medical record.
- Licensed nurses received additional education on confirming the absence of vital signs and for residents with a DNR order nurses are required to notify the physician or Medical Director for additional orders.
- Interviews conducted with licensed nurses working across all shifts to verify training and knowledge about the new policies and processes, completed code status competencies, and participation in code blue drills.
- In-service attendance signature sheets and a log of electronic communications reviewed, which confirmed that nurses received the in-service training about the new processes.
Failure to Honor DNR Order and Verify Code Status Prior to CPR
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to honor a resident's Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) order when staff initiated cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) without first verifying the resident's code status. The incident involved a resident with severe cognitive impairment and multiple comorbidities, including dementia, diabetes, vascular implants, osteoarthritis, chronic kidney disease, anxiety, depression, insomnia, hypertension, and Hodgkin's Lymphoma. The resident had a fully executed DNR order documented in both the medical record and the facility's code status binder, as well as a valid state DNR form. On the day of the incident, the resident was found unresponsive and without a pulse. A registered nurse (RN) instructed a certified nursing assistant (CNA) to call a code and began chest compressions before being informed by staff that the resident had a DNR order. The RN discontinued compressions after performing one or two chest compressions. Multiple staff interviews confirmed that the code status was not checked prior to initiating CPR, and that the expectation was for two nurses to verify code status in both the electronic health record (EHR) and the code status binder before starting resuscitative measures. Facility policy required adherence to residents' advance directives and DNR orders, with clear procedures for verifying and documenting code status upon admission and during care. Despite these policies, staff failed to follow the established process, resulting in the resident's wishes not being honored at the time of death. The deficiency was identified as Immediate Jeopardy due to the failure to respect the resident's advance directive.
Removal Plan
- Audit of the code status binders to validate DNR forms are in the appropriate binder.
- Audit to verify residents' DNR forms are present in the electronic medical record, physician orders are in place, and care plans are reflective of residents' code status.
- Provide staff education instructing licensed nurses to evaluate residents for absence of vital signs, and if vital signs are absent, to follow residents' Advanced Directive. If the resident has DNR orders, notify the provider for further orders.
- Provide staff education on Abuse and Neglect, with emphasis on the importance of following residents' wishes regarding code status.
- Initiate a process for newly hired facility staff to receive the above education during orientation and prior to working any assignment.
- Conduct ad hoc Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) committee meetings to review adherence to policy and procedure for advance directives, code status in the electronic health record, code status binders, following physician orders, and results of the root cause analysis.
- QAPI committee to review the plan viability of the advance directives process, code process, code status binder process, and audit results.
- QAPI committee to review education completion rates and ongoing monitoring audits including education validation.
- Continue Code Blue drills until 100% of nursing staff participate.
- QAPI committee to review ongoing audits, including validation of code status for new/re-admissions and staff education during general orientation.
- Provide licensed nurses with additional education on two nurses confirming the absence of vital signs and notifying the health care provider by telephone, not text, for orders and to clearly document in the medical record.
- Director of Nursing and Unit Manager designees to educate licensed nurses on evaluating residents for the absence of vital signs.
- Instruct staff that if vital signs are absent, they must follow the residents' Advanced Directive. For residents with DNR orders or if death occurs in the facility, the physician must be notified for further orders.
- Require staff to notify the DON when a resident is noted to be absent of vital signs.
- Emphasize in education that, per the Nurse Practice Act, only a physician may pronounce death; a licensed nurse (RN or LPN) cannot do so.
- Provide 100% of the nurses with an electronic copy of the education. Require licensed nurses to sign the education acknowledgment sheet before working.
- Conduct verification of the facility's removal plan.
- Conduct interviews with CNAs to verify education related to their role during a Code Blue, the Stop, Think, and Perform process, resident rights, participation in Code Blue drills, and education on resident rights.
- Provide licensed nurses with additional education on confirming the absence of vital signs and for residents with a DNR order nurses are required to notify the physician or Medical Director for additional orders.
- Conduct interviews with licensed nurses to verify training and knowledge about the new policies and processes, completed code status competencies, and participation in code blue drills.
- Review in-service attendance signature sheets and a log of electronic communications to confirm nurse training completion.
Failure to Honor DNR Order Due to Staff Incompetency in Code Status Verification
Penalty
Summary
Nursing staff failed to verify and honor a resident's Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) order when the resident was found unresponsive and without a pulse. Despite the presence of a valid DNR order in the medical record and code status binders, a registered nurse initiated chest compressions before being informed of the resident's DNR status, at which point resuscitation efforts were discontinued. The incident occurred after the nurse instructed a CNA to call a code and began CPR, only stopping after being notified of the DNR order. The resident involved had multiple diagnoses, including dementia, Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, vascular implants, osteoarthritis, chronic kidney disease, anxiety, depression, insomnia, hypertension, and Hodgkin's Lymphoma. The resident's care plan and medical record clearly indicated a DNR order, and the resident was severely cognitively impaired, as evidenced by a low BIMS score. Staff interviews revealed that the nurse involved had not received specific training on CPR or DNR procedures, nor on how to locate code status information in the facility's systems or binders during orientation. Further review of facility policies, job descriptions, and orientation materials showed that while procedures and competencies regarding code status and DNR orders existed, they were not effectively communicated or implemented with all staff. The nurse involved was unaware of the location of DNR documentation and the process for verifying code status, leading to the failure to honor the resident's advance directive at the time of the emergency. This deficiency resulted in the determination of Immediate Jeopardy.
Removal Plan
- Audit code status binders to validate DNR forms are in the appropriate binder.
- Audit to verify residents' DNR forms are present in the electronic medical record, physician orders are in place, and care plans are reflective of residents' code status.
- Provide staff education instructing licensed nurses to evaluate residents for absence of vital signs and to follow residents' Advanced Directive if vital signs are absent.
- If the resident has DNR orders, staff are to notify the provider for further orders.
- Provide staff education on Abuse and Neglect, with emphasis on the importance of following residents' wishes regarding code status.
- Initiate a process for newly hired facility staff to receive the above education during orientation and prior to working any assignment.
- Conduct QAPI committee meetings to review adherence to policy and procedure for advance directives, code status in the electronic health record, code status binders, following physician orders, and results of the root cause analysis.
- QAPI committee to review the plan viability of the advance directives process, code process, code status binder process, and audit results.
- QAPI committee to review ongoing monitoring audits including education validation; ensure staff interviewed answer questions appropriately.
- Continue Code Blue drills until all nursing staff participate.
- QAPI committee to review ongoing audits, including validation of code status for new/re-admissions and staff education during general orientation.
- QAPI committee to continue review of ongoing monitoring audits including education validation, code status validation for new/re-admissions, and orientation education.
- Provide licensed nurses additional education on two nurses confirming the absence of vital signs and notifying the health care provider by telephone, not text, for orders and to clearly document in the medical record.
- Director of Nursing and Unit Manager designees to educate licensed nurses on evaluating residents for the absence of vital signs and following the residents' Advanced Directive.
- For residents with DNR orders or if death occurs in the facility, notify the physician for further orders.
- Require staff to notify the DON when a resident is noted to be absent of vital signs.
- Emphasize in education that, per the Nurse Practice Act, only a physician may pronounce death; a licensed nurse (RN or LPN) cannot do so.
- Distribute an electronic copy of the education to all nurses.
- Require licensed nurses to sign the education acknowledgment sheet before working.
- Conduct interviews with CNAs and licensed nurses to verify education related to their role during a Code Blue, the Stop, Think, and Perform process, resident rights, participation in Code Blue drills, and education on resident rights.
- Review in-service attendance signature sheets and a log of electronic communications to confirm training completion.
Failure to Provide Adequate Supervision and Post-Fall Interventions
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide adequate supervision and implement appropriate interventions to prevent falls for three residents with known fall risks. For one resident with dementia and muscle weakness, multiple falls occurred, including incidents where the resident attempted to transfer without assistance and sustained injuries such as a bruised elbow and a laceration above the eyebrow. Documentation revealed that post-fall assessments and neuro checks were inconsistently completed, with missing times for monitoring and lack of new neuro checks after subsequent falls. The Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) did not review fall events promptly, and care plan interventions were either vague or not updated to address the specific circumstances of each fall. Another resident with a history of cerebral infarction, muscle weakness, and lack of coordination experienced a witnessed fall after rolling out of bed while drowsy. The post-fall evaluation noted poor lighting as an environmental factor and documented a significant bruise. However, the IDT post-fall review was delayed by several days, and the care plan interventions were not clearly documented or tailored to the resident's needs at the time of the fall. There was also confusion in the documentation regarding whether the fall was witnessed or unwitnessed, and staff education provided as an intervention was not recorded in the medical record. A third resident with Huntington’s disease, dementia, and a history of falls was found on the bathroom floor with abrasions and redness after an unwitnessed fall. The post-fall evaluation and IDT review contained discrepancies in the timing of the fall, and no new interventions were added to the care plan following the incident. The recommended medication regimen review was not documented as completed, and there was no evidence that neuro checks were performed as required. These deficiencies demonstrate a lack of timely assessment, documentation, and individualized intervention following fall events, contrary to the facility’s own policies for accident prevention and supervision.
Failure to Properly Manage Resident Personal Funds
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to properly hold, secure, and manage each resident's personal money that was deposited with the nursing home. This deficiency indicates that the required procedures for safeguarding and accounting for residents' funds were not followed as specified.
Failure to Promptly Resolve Grievance Regarding Resident Trust Account
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to promptly resolve a grievance submitted by the family member of a resident with dementia, muscle weakness, and a need for personal care. The family member, who held power of attorney for financial and care matters, raised concerns regarding the resident's patient trust account, including a $400 deposit, an $1800 refund, and the monthly posting of a $160 personal allowance. These concerns were first communicated in February and continued through multiple emails and a formal grievance submitted in June. Despite repeated requests for an accounting of the resident's funds and documentation of specific transactions, the issues remained unresolved as of mid-July. Interviews with facility staff, including the Social Service Director, Assistant Business Office Manager, and Business Office Manager, confirmed that the grievance was ongoing and had not been addressed. The grievance form indicated that the Business Office Manager was assigned to investigate the matter, but there was no evidence of an investigation or a plan to resolve the complaint. The facility's own policy required prompt efforts to resolve grievances, but documentation and staff statements showed that the family member's concerns about the resident's trust account were not resolved in a timely manner.
Inaccurate and Incomplete Resident Documentation
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure accurate and complete documentation of resident medical records, specifically regarding skin and wound care, for four residents. Resident #1's records showed discrepancies between physician orders and LTC notes, with a noted absence of wound documentation despite the presence of a stage 4 pressure ulcer. This inconsistency highlights a lack of adherence to professional standards in maintaining accurate medical records. Resident #2's documentation was incomplete and inconsistent, with missing progress notes and delayed initiation of wound care. Despite being admitted with multiple skin issues, including a pressure ulcer, the records lacked detailed descriptions and timely wound care orders. The baseline care plan was also incomplete, missing crucial information about the resident's skin integrity and necessary interventions. For Resident #3, the facility's records showed a delay in starting ulcer care and a lack of consistent documentation in the Skilled Nursing Notes. The Weekly Skin Evaluations were inconsistent with the actual condition of the resident's skin, failing to address existing wounds. Similarly, Resident #4's records were missing necessary LTC Nurse Notes, and the documentation did not adequately address the resident's wounds. These deficiencies indicate a systemic issue in the facility's documentation practices, impacting the quality of care provided to residents.
Failure to Provide Timely Wound Care and Documentation
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to obtain timely wound care orders and perform wound care for a resident, leading to a deficiency in care. The resident was admitted with multiple diagnoses, including congestive heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and diabetes, and had existing skin issues such as a deep tissue injury to the left buttocks and scabs on the bilateral lower extremities. Despite these conditions, the facility did not start the prescribed wound care until three days after the resident's admission, even though the orders were received earlier. The facility's documentation practices contributed to the deficiency. The Treatment Administration Record (TAR) showed inconsistencies in documenting wound care, with some treatments not recorded on the day they were performed due to system limitations. Additionally, the Skilled Nursing Notes lacked documentation of the resident's wounds, and the care plans did not adequately address pressure ulcer interventions. Interviews with staff revealed that the facility's policy did not require wound measurements until the consultant wound nurse's visit, which could be delayed by several days. The Director of Nursing (DON) acknowledged the lapses in documentation and care, noting that the wound care should have started on the day of admission and that the lack of documentation could lead to negative outcomes. The facility's policy on wound treatment management emphasized the importance of evidence-based treatments and timely documentation, but these guidelines were not followed, resulting in a failure to provide appropriate care according to the resident's needs and physician orders.
Failure to Provide Timely Pressure Ulcer Care
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide timely pressure ulcer care for a resident, leading to a deficiency in care. The resident was admitted with multiple skin issues, including a stage III pressure ulcer on the sacrum, red heels, and a skin tear on the left elbow. Despite these conditions being noted upon admission, the facility did not obtain wound care orders or start treatment until several days later. The Treatment Administration Record (TAR) showed no care was provided for the sacrum pressure ulcer, bilateral heels, or skin tear on the left elbow on the initial days following admission. The facility's documentation was inconsistent and incomplete, contributing to the deficiency. The Weekly Skin Evaluation and Skilled Nurse Notes failed to accurately document the resident's wounds and the care provided. For instance, the Weekly Skin Evaluation on 10/31/2024 did not describe the open areas, and the Skilled Nurse Notes repeatedly indicated no wounds were present, despite the resident having documented pressure ulcers and a skin tear. The Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed that wound care was not started until 11/03/2024, and there were no progress notes for the initial days of the resident's stay. Interviews with staff revealed a lack of communication and follow-through on wound care protocols. Staff A, an LPN, acknowledged that wound care orders should have been obtained on 10/31/2024, but they were not. The DON also verified that the care plans were not followed, and the admission documentation did not include a description of the resident's wounds. The facility's policy on pressure injury prevention and management was not adhered to, as evidenced by the lack of timely assessment, treatment, and documentation of the resident's pressure ulcers.
Failure to Honor Advance Directives
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to honor the advance directives of two residents, leading to inappropriate medical interventions. Resident #109, who had a signed Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) order, was subjected to cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) for three minutes before the staff realized and confirmed the DNR status. The incident occurred because the nurse on duty, Staff AA, RN, did not verify the resident's code status before initiating CPR and insisted that the DNR order was pending despite being informed otherwise by another nurse, Staff DD, LPN. The Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed the timeline of events, which showed a delay in stopping CPR due to the miscommunication and failure to check the resident's medical records promptly. Resident #212, who was legally blind and had expressed a wish to be a DNR, did not have a DNR order documented in his medical record. Despite the resident wearing a purple bracelet indicating his DNR status and verbally expressing his wishes, the staff failed to obtain the necessary physician order. Staff F, LPN, admitted to flagging the progress note but did not follow through with obtaining the order immediately, believing it could wait until the next day. The DON confirmed that the admitting nurse should have verified the resident's wishes and obtained the physician's order promptly. The facility's policy on advance directives and code status was not followed correctly in both cases. The policy requires the admitting nurse to verify the resident's code status upon admission and obtain the necessary physician orders. In the case of Resident #109, the failure to check the code status before initiating CPR led to unnecessary resuscitation efforts. For Resident #212, the lack of timely documentation and verification of the resident's DNR wishes resulted in a failure to honor his advance directive. These deficiencies highlight significant lapses in communication and adherence to established protocols within the facility.
Inaccurate PASRR Documentation for Multiple Residents
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure the Level I Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) was accurate upon admission for ten residents. For instance, Resident #16 was admitted with diagnoses including Alzheimer's Disease, major depressive disorder, and generalized anxiety disorder. However, the PASRR did not reflect the anxiety disorder diagnosis. Similarly, Resident #34's PASRR did not include diagnoses of epilepsy and generalized anxiety disorder, which were present in the medical record. The Director of Nursing (DON) acknowledged that these PASRRs were incorrect and should have been updated to reflect the residents' current status. Resident #48 was admitted with diagnoses including bipolar disorder and generalized anxiety disorder, but the PASRR failed to include the bipolar disorder diagnosis. Resident #13's PASRR did not indicate any qualifying diagnoses, despite the resident having schizoaffective disorder and major depressive disorder. The DON confirmed that these PASRRs were inaccurate and should have been corrected upon admission. Additionally, Resident #33, #78, and #97 had PASRRs that did not reflect their respective diagnoses of dementia, major depressive disorder, and bipolar disorder. The facility's policy mandates that all applicants be screened for serious mental disorders or intellectual disabilities in accordance with the State's Medicaid rules. The policy also requires that any resident who experiences a significant change in status be referred for a Level II PASRR evaluation. Despite this, the facility failed to maintain accurate PASRR documentation for multiple residents, as evidenced by the discrepancies found during the survey. The DON admitted that the PASRRs were not updated as required, leading to the deficiencies noted in the report.
Deficiencies in Food Storage and Temperature Documentation
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to store, prepare, and appropriately document food temperatures in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. During an observation, a walk-in refrigerator contained unlabeled and undated food items, including a bag of orange shredding solid substance, a metal container of fruit-like half-moon shaped substance, a head of lettuce that was brownish/red in color, and a mushy cucumber. Additionally, a bag of lettuce was left open and not properly sealed. Staff H, a Dietary Aide, confirmed that all food in the walk-in refrigerator should be labeled and dated, and acknowledged that the head of lettuce and cucumber were rotting and should have been discarded. In the East Dietary Pantry, a pizza box was found unlabeled and undated, and a container of prune juice had a use-by date that had already passed. Photographic evidence was obtained for these observations. Further observations revealed that Staff J, the Dietary Manager, did not document food temperatures while preparing residents' food trays. Although Staff J stated the temperatures of the food items, the lunch food temperature log showed no recorded temperatures. Staff I, the Regional Dietary Consultant, confirmed that not recording food temperatures in the log book was not best practice and mentioned that Staff J had only been recently hired. The facility's policies on food brought in by family or visitors and food storage were reviewed, indicating that all food items should be labeled, dated, and stored properly to prevent cross-contamination. The facility's failure to adhere to these policies led to the identified deficiencies in food storage and temperature documentation.
Medication Administration and Food Storage Deficiencies
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure a medication administration error rate of less than five percent. During an observation of medication administration, a Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) incorrectly primed insulin injector pens without attaching an insulin needle, resulting in a medication administration error rate of 20%. The LPN was unaware that a needle needed to be applied to the injector pen prior to priming and had not received proper education on the use of insulin pens. This error was observed in the administration of insulin to a resident with type 2 diabetes mellitus and other serious health conditions, including diabetic chronic kidney disease and metabolic encephalopathy. Additionally, the facility failed to ensure proper storage, labeling, and dating of food and beverages in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. Observations revealed multiple instances of improperly stored and labeled food items in the facility's kitchen and dietary pantries. Items such as lettuce, milk, bread, and various other food products were found without proper labeling or with expired dates. The Certified Dietary Manager (CDM) acknowledged these deficiencies and discarded the improperly stored items. Interviews with facility staff, including the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) and Director of Nursing (DON), revealed that the facility's Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) had discussed the findings and areas of concern identified by the survey team. However, the facility's Quality Assessment and Assurance (QAA) committee failed to identify, monitor, and implement effective action plans to correct these deficiencies, leading to repeated issues in medication administration and food storage practices.
Infection Control Deficiencies
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to implement proper infection prevention and control measures, leading to several deficiencies. Staff did not provide hand hygiene to residents before meal service, as observed during breakfast and lunch tray passes. Multiple residents confirmed that they had never been offered hand hygiene before meals. Interviews with CNAs revealed inconsistent practices regarding hand hygiene, and the Director of Nursing confirmed that all residents should be provided hand hygiene prior to meals. The facility's policy on hand hygiene was not followed, contributing to the spread of infections among residents with various medical conditions, including Type II Diabetes Mellitus, Chronic Respiratory Failure, and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. The facility also failed to properly identify and manage residents on isolation precautions. Resident #416, who had a physician order for contact isolation due to ESBL in urine, did not have transmission-based precautions signage or PPE available at the room entrance. Staff interviews revealed a lack of adherence to the facility's policy on transmission-based precautions, which requires signage and PPE for residents on contact precautions. Additionally, Resident #214's room lacked proper signage indicating the type of precautions, and the PPE caddy was inadequately stocked. The resident's urinary catheter drainage bag was found lying on the floor, contrary to infection control standards. Furthermore, the facility did not ensure the proper storage of nebulizer masks and the cleaning of reusable equipment. Observations showed that nebulizer masks for two residents were not stored in appropriate storage bags, and staff interviews indicated a lack of compliance with the facility's policy on nebulizer therapy. Additionally, a staff member failed to clean a manual blood pressure cuff and stethoscope between uses for different residents, increasing the risk of cross-contamination. The facility's policies on infection control and equipment cleaning were not followed, leading to multiple deficiencies in maintaining a safe and sanitary environment for residents.
Failure to Enforce Smoking Policy and Supervision
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to adhere to the smoking assessment and policy for Resident #79, who was observed smoking unsupervised at the main entrance of the facility. The resident had a history of moderate cognitive impairment and multiple respiratory conditions, yet was found with a pack of cigarettes and reported that staff had become lax about enforcing the smoking policy. The resident also mentioned that it sometimes took 45-60 minutes to be let back into the facility after smoking outside, indicating a lack of adequate supervision and timely assistance from staff. Resident #9, who had intact cognition and was the Resident Council President, was found to possess personal cigarettes and a lighter, despite the facility's policy requiring supervision while smoking. The resident admitted to keeping these items due to previous instances of missing cigarettes when stored by the facility. The resident was observed smoking in the designated smoking area but acknowledged not being supposed to have a lighter. Resident #213, who had intact cognition and chronic respiratory failure, was found with a pack of cigarettes on the bedside dresser. The resident reported not having been outside to smoke since admission and stated that the belongings were recently brought over. The facility's policy required all smoking materials to be kept by nursing staff for residents needing supervision, yet this was not adhered to. Staff P, the Activities Assistant, admitted to allowing residents to keep their smoking materials to avoid arguments, further indicating a lack of enforcement of the smoking policy.
Medication Error Rate Exceeds Acceptable Threshold
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure the medication error rate was less than 5%, resulting in a 20% error rate based on observations, record reviews, and interviews. Thirty medication administration opportunities were observed, and six errors were identified for four residents. These errors included improper insulin priming techniques, incorrect documentation of vital signs, and failure to administer medications within the prescribed time frame. One incident involved a Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) administering insulin to a resident without properly priming the insulin pen, as per the manufacturer's guidelines. The LPN held the pen at a 45-degree angle instead of upright, leading to potential air bubble injection. Another LPN administered medications to a resident and documented vital signs that were actually from the resident's roommate, failing to ensure the resident rinsed their mouth after a nebulizer treatment as required. Additional errors included administering insulin to a resident more than an hour late and holding a medication without notifying the physician, despite the absence of parameters to hold the medication. The facility's policies on medication administration and nebulizer therapy were not followed, contributing to the high medication error rate observed during the survey.
Failure to Assess Residents for Self-Administration of Medications
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that two residents were assessed for self-administration of treatments and medications. Resident #79, who has diagnoses including Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus with diabetic chronic kidney disease, cellulitis of the left lower limb, and End Stage Renal Disease, was observed with various treatment items at the bedside, including nasal spray, wound cleanser, and Betadine. The resident had dressed an open wound on the left upper leg by themselves. The Director of Nursing (DON) acknowledged the presence of these items but did not remove them after the resident refused. The resident's care plan did not indicate an assessment for self-administration of medications or treatments, nor did it authorize keeping medications at the bedside. Resident #213, who has diagnoses including encounter for orthopedic aftercare following surgical amputation and Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus with hyperglycemia, was observed with an opened bottle of Nystatin Topical Powder and a medication cup with a powder substance on a bedside bookcase. The treatment administration record indicated the use of the antifungal powder, but there was no documentation of an assessment for self-administration of medications. The DON confirmed awareness of the antifungal powder at the resident's bedside. The facility's policy requires an interdisciplinary team assessment and proper documentation for residents to self-administer medications, which was not followed in these cases.
Failure to Complete Smoking Assessment for Resident
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to complete the smoking assessment for one resident out of four sampled. An observation revealed the resident actively smoking on the designated smoking patio during a specified smoking time. Interviews with the resident and the Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed that the smoking assessment was not completed at the time of admission, as required by the facility's policy. The DON acknowledged that the assessment was overlooked and should have been completed immediately upon admission to ensure resident safety and provide education on safe smoking practices. The resident was admitted with multiple diagnoses, including Bipolar Disorder, generalized anxiety, major depressive disorder, cellulitis of the right lower limb, lymphedema, and unspecified cirrhosis of the liver. Despite being listed as a smoker in the facility records, the resident's medical record lacked a completed smoking assessment. The care plan indicated that the resident must smoke with supervision and had been revised to reflect this requirement. The facility's smoking policy mandates that each resident be evaluated upon admission to determine their smoking status and ability to smoke safely, which was not adhered to in this case.
Failure to Assess and Treat Resident's Skin Conditions
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to assess, obtain physician orders, and provide treatments for a resident with skin conditions unrelated to pressure injuries. The resident was observed with wound care supplies within reach and undated foam dressings on the upper left arm and left thigh. The resident reported self-dressing the wounds and expressed dissatisfaction with the facility's wound care nurse. A review of the resident's medical record revealed a noted skin tear but no further information or physician orders for the dressings. The facility's incident log did not document any skin tear incidents for the resident during the specified period. Interviews with staff revealed a lack of awareness and follow-up on the resident's wounds. The wound care nurse stated that the assigned nurse would have assessed the area, notified the physician, obtained treatment orders, and performed the treatments. However, the wound care nurse admitted to not following up on the resident's wounds. An agency LPN confirmed that no dressings were scheduled for the resident's shift. Observations with the Director of Nursing confirmed the presence of undated dressings and an open area on the resident's left thigh, which appeared to be infected. The resident's care plan included interventions for skin breakdown and actual skin breakdown related to surgical sites, but the facility failed to monitor and document the resident's skin conditions adequately. The facility's policies on skin assessment and clean dressing changes were not followed, leading to a lack of proper wound care and documentation for the resident. The Director of Nursing attempted to remove wound care supplies from the resident's room, but the resident refused to allow it, further complicating the situation.
Failure to Provide Necessary Pressure Ulcer Care
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a resident with a pressure ulcer received necessary care and services to promote healing, prevent infection, and prevent new ulcers from developing. During an interview, the resident reported that their heel hurt and they requested a bandage and pressure ulcer medicine from an LPN, who refused due to being too busy and understaffed. Observations confirmed that the resident's right heel pressure ulcer was not bandaged, and photographic evidence was obtained. The resident's medical history included Type II Diabetes Mellitus, Chronic Respiratory Failure, and other conditions, and a physician's order required daily cleaning and dressing of the pressure ulcer, which was not followed as observed during the survey. Further interviews revealed that the LPN admitted to not replacing the bandage due to time constraints and being the only nurse on duty. The Director of Nursing stated that it was expected for the nurse on duty to complete the care or at least pass the information to the morning shift nurses. The facility's policy on Pressure Injury Prevention and Management emphasized the commitment to preventing avoidable injuries and providing treatment to heal pressure ulcers, which was not adhered to in this case.
Failure to Timely Complete Physician-Ordered Lab Work
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure physician-ordered lab work was completed accurately and in a timely manner for a resident with a history of recurrent urinary tract infections (UTIs). The resident's Power of Attorney (POA) alerted nursing staff about the resident's unusual behavior and requested a urinalysis (UA). Despite this, it took over a week to complete the UA, and the culture and sensitivity (C&S) test was not initially requested as ordered, causing further delays in treatment. The Director of Nursing (DON) acknowledged that the order was missed and should have been addressed immediately upon receipt on 04/05/24. Interviews with staff revealed that the process for handling physician orders involves immediate entry into the system and scheduling lab pick-ups within 24 hours. However, in this case, the UA was not completed until 04/11/24, and the C&S test was only done on 04/16/24. The resident's medical record showed signs of confusion and agitation, and the resident was eventually treated with Macrobid for Enterococcus faecalis. The facility's policy mandates that all physician orders be followed as prescribed and documented if not followed, which was not adhered to in this instance.
Inaccurate Documentation of Refrigerator/Freezer Temperature Logs
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure the accuracy of documentation for refrigerator/freezer temperature logs in two dietary pantries. Observations revealed incomplete temperature logs with blank spaces for multiple dates in April 2024. Specifically, the [NAME] Dietary Pantry had missing entries from 04/05/24 to 04/14/24 and 04/16/24 to 04/21/24, while the East Dietary Pantry had missing entries on 04/06/24, 04/12/24, 04/13/24, 04/17/24, 04/18/24, and 04/19/24. Photographic evidence was obtained to support these findings. Subsequent observations showed that the logs were later fully completed with no blank spaces, indicating that the entries were filled in after the initial observation. During an interview, the DON confirmed that the nursing staff was responsible for completing the temperature logs daily. The DON reviewed the photographic evidence and acknowledged that the logs should not have been retroactively completed. The facility's policy on employee conduct emphasizes the importance of honest communication and adherence to professional standards, which was not followed in this instance. The nursing staff's failure to complete the logs daily and the subsequent filling in of blank spaces led to the deficiency.
Latest citations in Florida
Surveyors found that the facility failed to comply with 42 CFR 483.73(a) by not conducting the required annual review and update of its Emergency Preparedness (EP) plan. During record review, no documentation showed that the EP plan had been reviewed or updated within the past year, and the Administrator confirmed that the Emergency Management Plan had not been reviewed or revised as required.
Surveyors found that smoke/fire-rated enclosures were not properly maintained, with penetrations in smoke barriers in several general storage rooms across multiple smoke compartments. The Maintenance Director stated that insulation and fiberglass were used to pack and cover these holes but could not confirm that the materials were approved for fire-rated construction. Inspectors observed penetrations covered with fiberglass and noted a hole in one fiberglass panel in a storage room, resulting in a deficiency under NFPA 101 requirements for smoke barrier construction.
Surveyors found that fixed patient-care electrical equipment was not properly maintained or inspected in accordance with NFPA 99. In one room, a bedside remote had mismatched insulation and exposed wiring, and in another room, a call button receptacle had exposed low-voltage conductors. The Maintenance Director acknowledged both issues and reported that new bed remotes had been received but not yet installed.
Surveyors found that the facility failed to maintain a safe, clean, and homelike environment, with strong, persistent urine and feces odors noted throughout multiple halls and confirmed by staff. On two nursing units, hallways and resident rooms contained torn flooring, food debris, broken blinds, dirty and leaking toilets and sinks, rusted and corroded fixtures, missing outlet covers with oxygen concentrators plugged in, exposed light sockets, unmade and visibly soiled beds, and black, mold-like substances on walls and around toilet bases. Bathrooms had missing ceiling tiles, cracked door facings with brown stains, used briefs and torn toilet paper on floors, and toilets with brown or rust-like buildup. Outside, the patio and fencing area had broken and rotted railings, exposed rusted nails, fallen palm fronds, and overgrown vegetation, and the Administrator acknowledged the area was not safe for residents. Housekeeping and maintenance staff described daily cleaning and a work-order process, but the Maintenance Director reported being unaware of many of the observed issues, and the DON confirmed there was no specific environmental cleaning policy despite job descriptions and a general policy requiring a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment.
A resident exited the building through a bedroom window, walked off the property, and was observed and redirected by staff with assistance from law enforcement, who encountered the resident down the road and helped escort the resident back. The facility’s internal documentation lacked staff or witness statements and characterized the event as the resident remaining on facility grounds without injury. Despite the resident’s account, a police report, and a maintenance staff report confirming that the resident left the premises and that law enforcement responded, the DON did not report the incident to required state and federal agencies, even though the DON acknowledged that any incident involving law enforcement response must be reported.
A resident with moderate cognitive impairment and a history of stroke was repeatedly observed over several days in visibly soiled clothing and bedding, with a strong urine odor, despite stating multiple times that he had requested assistance with changing and hygiene. Documentation indicated he was independent with toileting and personal hygiene and only occasionally incontinent, but his care plan lacked detail on the level of assistance needed, while an LPN reported he actually required staff help with bathing, grooming, toileting, and care. Laundry practices involved leaving clean, labeled clothing bagged in the linen room for nursing staff to distribute rather than returning it directly to rooms, and the DON reported that staff were expected to round every two hours and as needed to keep residents clean and dry, although there were no written ADL or resident care policies in place.
Surveyors observed four full O2 cylinders on one nursing unit stored unsecured directly on the floor under a sign labeled "FULL CYLINDERS" instead of in a secured storage rack. The ADON confirmed the cylinders were full and should not be on the ground. Reference to NFPA 99 showed that freestanding cylinders must be protected from damage and properly chained or supported in a stand or cart. The DON and Maintenance Director both acknowledged that O2 cylinders are required to be stored in a secure rack, should never be on the floor, and that unsecured cylinders on the floor present a safety risk.
A resident with multiple cardiopulmonary conditions and a documented full code status was found unresponsive without pulse or respirations during the night shift. A CNA notified the RN, who either instructed CNAs to clean and cover the resident or, per her and an LPN’s account, called a code blue and performed CPR with the LPN for about 20 minutes before stopping, without calling 911. The RN believed the resident was on hospice and did not verify code status, then notified the DON, provider, and family instead of EMS. Several hours later, after the DON called the facility and asked whether 911 had been contacted, the RN called 911 and briefly reinitiated CPR shortly before EMS arrived and pronounced the resident deceased, documenting postmortem changes. The facility’s investigation and root cause analysis found that staff failed to follow policy requiring immediate EMS activation and continuous CPR for full code residents until EMS arrival, leading to an Immediate Jeopardy finding.
A resident with full code status was found unresponsive without respirations or pulse during the night shift. An RN and an LPN initiated CPR but did not activate EMS, and they discontinued CPR after about 20 minutes. The RN, who lacked documented orientation and competency assessment and had obtained BLS certification through a fully online, non–instructor-led course, pronounced the resident deceased without authority and later stated she believed the resident was on hospice and did not verify code status. The LPN’s BLS certification was expired, and a CNA with an expired BLS certification performed several chest compressions despite facility policy that CNAs were not to perform CPR. The RN had not participated in documented code blue drills, and leadership confirmed that required clinical orientation and skills competencies had not been completed for her, leading surveyors to determine that staff were not adequately trained or competent to respond to a cardiopulmonary arrest for a full code resident, resulting in an Immediate Jeopardy finding.
Surveyors found multiple instances of improper use of relocatable power taps (RPTs) and extension cords during a facility tour with the Maintenance Director. In the social services office, an RPT was plugged into another RPT connected to a wall outlet, with the cord running across a walkway and taped to the floor. In the multipurpose room, a television was plugged into an extension cord, and in the MDS office, an RPT was plugged into another RPT with an outlet adapter in use. These conditions did not comply with NFPA 101, NFPA 99, and NFPA 70 standards governing electrical equipment, power strips, and extension cords.
Failure to Annually Review and Update Emergency Preparedness Plan
Penalty
Summary
Surveyors identified a deficiency related to the facility’s Emergency Preparedness (EP) Program under 42 CFR 483.73(a). During record review at 4:00 PM, surveyors examined the facility’s EP documentation and found no evidence that the emergency preparedness plan had been reviewed or updated on an annual basis as required. The regulation mandates that LTC facilities develop and maintain an emergency preparedness plan that is reviewed and updated at least annually to comply with applicable Federal, State, and local emergency preparedness requirements. In an interview, the Administrator acknowledged that the facility’s Emergency Management Plan had not been reviewed or updated. No documentation was provided to show that the required annual review and update of the EP plan had occurred. The deficiency is based solely on the lack of documented annual review and update of the emergency preparedness plan by facility administration; no specific resident cases or clinical events were described in the report.
Plan Of Correction
Preparation and/or execution of the Plan of Correction does not constitute admission or agreement of the provider of the truth of the 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 provision of Federal and State law. Facility EP was reviewed and signed off on by the DON, Maintenance Director and Administrator. The facility has determined that all residents have the potential to be affected. An in-service education program will be conducted by the administrator. The administrator will conduct monthly random checks to verify completed documentation.
Improper Repair of Smoke Barrier Penetrations in Multiple Smoke Compartments
Penalty
Summary
Surveyors identified a deficiency in the facility’s maintenance of smoke/fire-rated enclosures, specifically related to penetrations in smoke barriers in multiple smoke compartments. During an interview, the Maintenance Director reported that insulation was used to pack holes and then covered with fiberglass in general storage rooms in smoke compartments 1, 2, and 3, but was unable to confirm whether these materials were approved for use in fire-rated walls. Subsequent observation showed that the penetrations were indeed covered with fiberglass, and one general storage room in smoke compartment 2 had a hole in one of the fiberglass panels. The report states that this failure to properly maintain penetrations through smoke/fire-rated construction could allow smoke and flammable gases to spread to other areas and cause the smoke/fire-rated construction to fail to perform as designed.
Failure to Maintain and Inspect Patient-Care Electrical Equipment
Penalty
Summary
Surveyors identified a deficiency in the facility’s compliance with NFPA 99 requirements for testing and maintaining fixed patient-care electrical equipment. During an observation in one resident room, the bedside remote was found to have two different types of insulation and exposed wiring. In another resident room, the call button receptacle was observed with exposed low-voltage conductors. These conditions were noted during a survey of two of six smoke compartments. During an interview conducted at the time of the observations, the Maintenance Director stated that the facility had just received a new shipment of bed remotes and had not yet replaced the existing ones. The Maintenance Director also acknowledged the issue with the exposed conductors at the call button receptacle. The surveyors cited this as a failure to properly inspect and maintain fixed patient care electrical equipment in accordance with NFPA 99 (2012 Edition), sections 10.3 and 10.5.2.1.
Widespread Odors and Environmental Disrepair in Resident Care Areas
Penalty
Summary
Surveyors identified that the facility failed to provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment as required by 42 CFR 483.10(i). Upon entrance to the building on multiple days, surveyors noted a strong, pungent odor of urine and feces throughout the facility, with the odor particularly strong on the 200, 300, and 400 halls. Staff interviews confirmed that the building "usually smells like" urine, and staff attributed the odor to residents defecating and urinating on the floor, an old building structure, and cleaning products that sanitize but do not deodorize. Housekeeping staff reported that they clean resident rooms daily but that nursing staff must first clean fecal and urine waste before housekeeping can sanitize, and delays by nursing staff in doing so postponed housekeeping’s ability to address the odors. On the 300 unit, surveyors observed multiple environmental and sanitation issues in resident rooms and bathrooms. The hallway had torn flooring, food particles, and a butter knife on the floor. Individual rooms had food debris, a straw on the floor, and broken blinds. Bathrooms contained dark brown stains on walls, rusted ceiling tile trim, toilets with brownish substances inside, and wet floors around toilets. Trim was missing around toilet bases, exposing a black, mold-like substance. Corroded and rusted sink faucet handles, leaking faucets, rusted pipes under sinks with buildup of corrosion, and rusted sprinklers were observed. Some toilets and three-in-one commodes had duct tape on them, and bathroom walls had black, mold-like substances. Doors and door facings showed rust, scrape marks, chipped and peeling paint, and exposed wood. In some rooms, electrical outlets had no covers while oxygen concentrators were plugged into them, boards covered windows, light fixtures over beds lacked covers with sockets exposed, and one fixture had only one bulb. A resident bed appeared dirty with a black substance on it, and dresser drawers were broken with drawer fronts on the floor. On the 400 unit, surveyors again noted a strong odor of urine upon entry and found additional environmental deficiencies. Bathrooms had missing ceiling tiles, broken emergency light covers with no pull strings, and toilet tank covers that did not fit properly, exposing the inside of the tank. In one bathroom, torn toilet paper and used briefs were lying in the corner of the floor, and toilets had brown, rust-like substances inside the bowls. Door facings appeared cracked with brown substances along the sides, and toilets had brownish-black buildup around the bases with broken, peeling trim. Light bases on walls had rust-like appearances, multiple rooms had broken or missing blinds, and some outlets lacked covers while oxygen concentrators were plugged into them. Some rooms had unmade beds, exposed wires at outlets, toilets with dark brown-black rings around the base and flooring, uncovered light fixtures, leaking sinks with rusted pipes, loose flooring, loose toilet seats, and dry red substances on door frames. Surveyors also observed deficiencies in the outdoor patio area adjacent to the locked unit. The gate code was broken, and a resident lock was placed on the gate. The patio and surrounding fencing had fallen palm fronds on the grass, broken and rotted wooden fence railings, unsteady railings, and multiple exposed rusted nails protruding from the railings where boards were broken or detached. Overgrown trees and bushes from the perimeter extended through the fence railings. When asked, the Administrator acknowledged that the area was not safe for residents and stated that they planned to have it redone in the future. The Maintenance Director reported that he and one other maintenance person relied on work orders and verbal reports to identify needed repairs and stated he was not aware of the specific room and equipment issues on the 300 and 400 units. Housekeeping staff stated they would report broken items via a work order book or text to maintenance, but one housekeeper, who cleaned the 400 unit daily, denied noticing stains or biohazard-like materials on walls and door frames despite the surveyors’ observations. Review of facility documents showed that the housekeeper job description required staff to maintain assigned work areas in a clean, safe, comfortable, and attractive manner and to report maintenance problems noted during cleaning. A facility policy titled "Policies and Practices - Control" stated that the facility must maintain a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment for personnel, residents, visitors, and the public. The DON stated that blinds had been changed out and new cabinets and door handles purchased, and that staff were directed to use standard precautions when cleaning rooms, but also stated there was no policy specific to cleaning the environment. These observations and interviews demonstrated that the facility did not maintain sanitary, orderly, and comfortable interior conditions, did not adequately control offensive odors, and did not ensure that the physical environment, including resident rooms, bathrooms, and outdoor areas, was maintained in a safe, clean, and homelike condition as required by regulation.
Failure to Report Elopement Incident Involving Law Enforcement
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to report an elopement incident to required state and federal agencies as mandated by 42 CFR 483.12(c). On the referenced date, Resident #5 exited the building through his bedroom window around 12:15 PM and walked across the facility property toward the perimeter fence. A CNA observed the resident outside and called for assistance, after which staff redirected and escorted the resident back into the building and placed him on one-to-one supervision. The facility’s internal incident documentation noted the window exit and subsequent maintenance inspection of the window seals but did not include any staff or witness statements. The DON later stated that the resident never left facility grounds and was returned without injury, and therefore the incident was not considered reportable. However, interviews and external records showed that the resident did leave the facility premises and that law enforcement was involved. Resident #5 recalled being outside the facility, being brought back by staff and a “police man,” and being told by the officer not to leave again. A police report from the local police department confirmed an encounter with the resident outside the facility and that an officer assisted staff in escorting him back. Maintenance staff (Staff G) also reported that the resident climbed out the window, left the facility property, and was stopped “down the road,” then redirected back with law enforcement assistance. In interviews, the DON initially denied that law enforcement had been notified or involved, then later acknowledged that law enforcement had responded but asserted they did not come into the facility. The DON also confirmed awareness that any incident in which law enforcement investigates or responds is required to be reported, yet the elopement and law enforcement involvement were not reported to the State Survey Agency or other required officials within the required time frames.
Failure to Provide Timely ADL and Hygiene Care to a Dependent Resident
Penalty
Summary
Surveyors found that the facility failed to provide necessary ADL care, including grooming and hygiene, to a dependent resident over multiple days. The resident was repeatedly observed in visibly soiled clothing with a strong odor of urine, first standing in his doorway holding onto a wheelchair with wet navy pants saturated down to his calves, stating he had been waiting for staff to change his clothes. More than an hour later the same day, he remained in the same soiled pants and shirt while seated in a wheelchair near the nurses’ station. The following day, he was again observed wearing the same soiled clothes, smelling of urine, with his shirt stained with food and a dark liquid. His room had a strong urine odor, his bed was soiled with urine, and only two pairs of pants were seen on a chair with no other clothing available in the room. On a subsequent observation, he was seated on the edge of his bed wearing different pants and no shirt, with yellow-stained sheets beneath him and his previously soiled clothes on the floor; he reported that he had requested assistance but no staff had come, so he changed himself. Record review showed the resident had a history of stroke and repeated unspecified conditions, with a recent Quarterly MDS indicating moderate cognitive impairment (BIMS score of 10). The MDS documented him as independent for toileting, showering, personal hygiene, and related ADLs, and only occasionally incontinent, but his care plan did not specify the level of assistance he required for incontinence care and other ADLs. In contrast, an LPN familiar with the resident stated he required staff assistance with bathing, grooming, toileting, and care, and that he did not refuse such assistance and appropriately requested help. The LPN also explained that personal clothing was laundered at the facility and left bagged in the linen room for nursing staff to distribute, rather than being returned directly to resident rooms. The DON stated that staff were expected to follow best practices, including rounding every two hours and as needed to keep residents clean and dry, and acknowledged that all residents required some level of assistance with ADLs. The DON further stated the facility had no written ADL, resident care, or quality of care policies, despite these expectations.
Unsecured Storage of Full Oxygen Cylinders on Nursing Unit
Penalty
Summary
Surveyors found that the facility failed to ensure safe storage of oxygen cylinders on the West 1 unit. At 9:03 a.m., four full oxygen cylinders were observed stored unsecured directly on the ground rather than in the designated secured cylinder storage rack, under a sign labeled "FULL CYLINDERS." Photographic evidence was obtained of this condition. At 9:18 a.m., the ADON confirmed that the four cylinders were full and acknowledged they should not be stored on the ground. Review of NFPA 99 (2021) 11.6.2.3(11) indicated that cylinders must be protected from damage and that freestanding cylinders must be properly chained or supported in a proper stand or cart. Later that day, the DON stated that oxygen cylinders should be stored in a secure rack and never directly on the ground, and acknowledged that unsecured cylinders on the floor were a safety risk. The Maintenance Director also confirmed that oxygen cylinders should be in a secure rack and never stored directly on the ground, stating that cylinders stored on the floor can tip over and cause damage. These observations and interviews demonstrated noncompliance with regulatory and NFPA standards for safe storage of oxygen cylinders.
Plan Of Correction
This plan of correction constitutes a written allegation of compliance for the deficiency cited. Submission of this plan of correction is not an admission that the deficiency exists or that one was cited correctly. This plan of correction is submitted to meet the requirements established by the State and Federal law. The four unsecured [R] cylinders on the West 1 unit were secured. The Nursing Department completed a baseline audit of [R] cylinder storage within the facility to ensure all [R] cylinders were secured and stored properly. Ongoing education will be completed with current facility staff regarding the facility's [R] storage policy and procedure; and will be completed during new hire and agency orientation to the facility by ADON/designee. Audits will be completed by the Director of Nursing/designee regarding adherence to the facility's [R] storage policy and procedure twice weekly x 4 weeks, then weekly x 4 weeks, then monthly x 4 months, or until continued substantial compliance has been met. Results of audits will be reported to the QAPI Committee on a monthly basis by the Director of Nursing/designee.
Failure to Provide Required CPR and Activate EMS for Full Code Resident
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to provide immediate and appropriate basic life support, including CPR, to a resident with a documented full code status when the resident was found unresponsive. The resident had diagnoses including a slow-progressing circulatory condition involving narrowing or blockage of vessels, a condition that restricts airflow and makes breathing difficult, and other listed conditions. The physician’s order specified “Full Code,” and the care plan documented that the resident was under court-ordered guardianship with wishes honored as full code. The facility’s policy required that in the event of cardiac or respiratory arrest, staff immediately call for assistance, overhead page a code, begin CPR in the absence of a valid DNR, and continue CPR until EMS assumes responsibility or the resident responds. On the night of the incident at approximately 2:00–2:07 a.m., a CNA found the resident unresponsive in bed and notified the RN on duty. One CNA’s written statement indicated that the RN said she already knew the resident was going to die and instructed the CNA to clean and cover the resident. Another CNA’s account stated that the RN came to the room, took vital signs, and then instructed her to clean the resident. The RN’s own written statement and interview indicated that she called a code blue, that an LPN brought the crash cart, and that they performed CPR for approximately 20 minutes. The LPN’s statement corroborated that a code blue was called, that he brought the crash cart, and that CPR was performed for about 20 minutes before the RN stopped and stated that the resident was gone or words to that effect. The RN acknowledged that the resident had no vital signs but was warm and not responding, and she stated that she believed the resident was on hospice and therefore did not call 911. After CPR was discontinued, the RN did not activate EMS and instead notified the DON, the provider, and the resident’s family. The DON documented receiving a message from the RN that the resident had no pulse and no blood pressure and that the assigned nurse had initiated CPR but was unable to revive the resident. The DON later received a text from the RN that the resident had expired. The DON stated that at approximately 6:00 a.m. she called the facility and asked if 911 had been called, and upon learning it had not, she instructed the RN to call 911. The RN then reinitiated CPR at around 6:00 a.m., approximately four hours after the resident was first found without pulse or respirations, and stated that they tried to do something until EMS arrived because EMS had to see them doing CPR. EMS records showed activation at 6:18 a.m., arrival at 6:27 a.m., and pronouncement of death at 6:31 a.m., with documentation that CPR was not attempted by EMS because it was considered futile and that the resident exhibited postmortem changes. The Medical Director confirmed that the resident was full code and stated that staff should have started CPR and called 911 and that CPR should not be done four hours after a resident is pronounced dead. The facility’s investigation and a root cause analysis concluded that the RN and LPN did not follow the facility’s established policy and procedure to call 911 and administer CPR to a full code resident until EMS arrival. The root cause was identified as the nurse’s belief that the resident was on hospice and her failure to check the resident’s code status as outlined in facility policy. The surveyors determined that the failure to immediately activate EMS and to continue CPR until EMS arrival for this full code resident constituted noncompliance with the requirement to provide basic life support and resulted in an Immediate Jeopardy determination.
Plan Of Correction
This plan of correction is submitted as required under Federal and State regulations and statutes applicable to long term care providers. This plan of correction does not constitute an admission of liability on the part of the facility, and such liability is hereby specifically denied. The submission of this plan does not constitute agreement by the facility that the surveyors' findings or conclusions are accurate, that the findings constitute a deficiency, or that the scope or severity regarding any of these deficiencies cited are correctly applied. Resident #1 no longer resides in the facility as of 4.7.26. This has the potential to affect all residents in the facility. All codes to 1.1.26 were reviewed to ensure protocol was followed. No outliers were noted. All licensed nurses received education from the Director of Nursing and/or nursing management on [R] policy and procedure and Florida [R] policy. This includes where to find the code status. Education addressed what to do for full code hospice residents. Education completed with CNA's that protocol is that they do not assist with [R] or breaths during a [R] event. All education will be added to new hire orientation. Code drills will occur 3 x weekly x 4 weeks, followed by 2 x weekly x 4 weeks, followed by 1 x weekly x 4 weeks. Results will be brought to QAPI to determine need for ongoing auditing.
Removal Plan
- Educated licensed nurses on CPR policy and procedure and Florida Do Not Resuscitate (DNRO) policy, including where to find code status and what to do for full code hospice residents; emphasized initiating emergency services immediately when resident is full code, continuing CPR until EMS arrives, and that nurses cannot pronounce death or stop CPR on a full code resident unless instructed by EMS.
- Implemented emergency response “Code Blue” drills on all three shifts, including full code and full code hospice scenarios, with emphasis on calling 911 immediately.
- Educated licensed nurses and CNAs on the facility abuse and neglect policy, including resident rights.
- Required licensed nurses to complete a CPR post-test; restricted staff who have not completed education/testing from working until completion.
- Educated licensed nurses regarding change in condition.
- Placed laminated instructions on how to overhead page during a code at all nursing station phones and other designated phones.
- Held a Quality Improvement Performance Committee meeting to review root cause analysis findings and approve recommendations.
- Held a Quality Improvement Performance Committee meeting to review progress of the plan and approve recommendations.
- Completed a “like resident” audit of all expired residents and rehospitalizations for a defined period to determine whether involved staff were the same as the code event and whether proper procedure was followed.
Failure to Provide Competent CPR Response and Verify Code Status for Full Code Resident
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to ensure that nursing staff possessed and demonstrated the competencies required to respond appropriately to a cardiopulmonary emergency for a resident with full code status. Resident #1, who was designated as full code, was found unresponsive and without respirations or pulse at approximately 2:07 a.m. Clinical staff, consisting of an RN (Staff A) and an LPN (Staff B), initiated CPR but did not activate Emergency Medical Services (EMS) as required by facility policy for a full code resident. After approximately 20 minutes of CPR, the RN and LPN stopped resuscitation efforts without EMS involvement. The RN, without authority to do so, pronounced the resident deceased based on the absence of vital signs and did not verify the resident’s code status before discontinuing CPR. The RN later stated she believed the resident was on hospice and therefore did not call 911, and that she was confused about which residents were hospice and which were full code. The LPN reported that he assumed the RN had called 911 and continued CPR for about 20 minutes until the RN “called the code” and left, and he acknowledged that he knew CPR should continue until EMS arrival but did not speak up. Four hours after CPR was stopped, at approximately 6:00 a.m., the RN restarted CPR and activated EMS after receiving instructions from the DON. The investigation further identified that the RN had no documented orientation, onboarding education, or skills competency assessments since hire, despite being promoted to weekend supervisor. Her BLS certification had been obtained through a fully online course without an instructor or live feedback. The LPN’s BLS certification was expired, and a CNA who performed several chest compressions also had an expired BLS certification, even though facility policy did not permit CNAs to perform CPR. Facility records showed that monthly code blue drills had been conducted, but there was no documentation that the RN had ever participated in these drills. Leadership interviews confirmed that required clinical orientation and competency evaluations had not been completed for the RN, and that she had failed tests for a clinical manager position but was nonetheless functioning in a supervisory role. These actions and omissions led surveyors to determine that staff were not adequately trained or competent to respond to cardiopulmonary arrest for residents with full code status, resulting in an Immediate Jeopardy determination. The facility’s own root cause analysis, as reflected in meeting minutes, identified that the nurse did not check the resident’s code status and lacked knowledge about when CPR could be discontinued and when 911 should be called. The analysis documented that the nurse believed the resident was hospice and therefore did not start or continue CPR appropriately or call EMS when the resident was found without respirations and pulse. The facility assessment tool and policies referenced the need for staff training and competencies in identifying changes in condition, end-of-life care, advance care planning, and adherence to the CPR policy, but the documented events showed that these expectations were not met in practice for the staff involved in this incident. Surveyors concluded that the failure to ensure nursing staff were trained and competent to respond appropriately to cardiopulmonary arrest for a full code resident, including immediate initiation and continuation of CPR and activation of EMS, constituted noncompliance with requirements for sufficient and competent nursing staff. The failure affected Resident #1 and placed other full code residents at risk, leading to an Immediate Jeopardy finding that was later reduced in scope and severity after verification of an acceptable Immediate Jeopardy removal plan.
Plan Of Correction
This plan of correction is submitted as required under Federal and State regulations and statutes applicable to long term care providers. This plan of correction does not constitute an admission of liability on the part of the facility, and such liability is hereby specifically denied. The submission of this plan does not constitute agreement by the facility that the surveyors' findings or conclusions are accurate, that the findings constitute a deficiency, or that the scope or severity regarding any of these deficiencies cited are correctly applied Resident # 1 no longer resides in the facility as of 4.7.26. This has the potential to affect all residents in the facility. All licensed nurses were audited to ensure current [R] certification. Facility will ensure [R] certification through a [R] provider whose training includes a [R] on session either in a physical or virtual instructor-led setting in accordance with accepted national standards. Human resources, or designee, will audit monthly to ensure all licensed nurses have a current [R] certification.Education was completed with licensed nurses on initiating [R] services immediately when a resident is full code. Education included that [R] is to continue on a full code resident until [R] arrives and that the nurse cannot pronounce [R] on the full code resident and/or stop [R] until instructed by [R].Education will be added to new hire orientation.7 random licensed nurses will complete a knowledge quiz related to code events. Per week x 4 weeks, followed by 5 nurses x 4 weeks, then 3 nurses x 4 weeks. Results will be brought to QAPI to determine need for ongoing auditing.
Removal Plan
- Regional Director of Clinical Services educated the Administrator and Director of Nursing regarding the CPR policy and the need to immediately contact emergency medical services (911) in the event of a full code; Administrator and DON signed the education
- Regional Director of Clinical Services provided documented education to the Administrator and Director of Nursing regarding the CPR policy and the need to immediately contact emergency medical services (911) in the event of a full code
- Director of Nursing and/or nursing management educated all licensed nurses on the CPR policy and procedure, including where to find code status and what to do for full code hospice residents
- Reinforced through education that CPR must be initiated immediately for full code residents, continued until EMS arrives, and that nurses cannot pronounce death or stop CPR on a full code resident unless instructed by EMS
- Conducted an Ad Hoc Quality Improvement Performance Committee meeting to review root cause analysis recommendations related to the incident; recommendations approved
- Conducted a follow-up Ad Hoc Quality Improvement Performance Committee meeting to review progress on the plan; recommendations approved
Improper Use of Power Strips and Extension Cords in Multiple Facility Areas
Penalty
Summary
Surveyors identified deficiencies related to the use and maintenance of relocatable power taps (RPTs) and extension cords that did not comply with NFPA 101, NFPA 99, and NFPA 70 requirements. During a facility tour conducted between 11:00 a.m. and 3:30 p.m. with the Maintenance Director, surveyors observed in the social services office an RPT plugged into another RPT, which was then plugged into a wall outlet, with the cord running across a walkway and taped to the floor. In the multipurpose room, a television was found plugged into an extension cord, contrary to standards that prohibit using extension cords as a substitute for fixed wiring and require temporary extensions to be removed immediately after use. Further observations included the MDS office, where an RPT was plugged into another RPT and an outlet adapter was in use. These configurations did not meet the NFPA 99 provisions governing the proper use of power strips and extension cords, including requirements that power strips be appropriately rated and used only as intended, and that extension cords not be used as permanent wiring. During concurrent interviews, the Maintenance Director acknowledged these findings as they were observed by the surveyors.
Plan Of Correction
The RPT observed plugged into an RPT plugged into an outlet in the Social Services Office was removed. The extension cord used to plug in the television in the multipurpose room was removed. The RPT plugged into an RPT and outlet adapter in the MDS office was removed. Additional offices and resident care areas will be reviewed for the improper use of plug adapters, power strips and extension. The Executive Director/designee will educate the Maintenance Director on the importance of NFPA 101 Electrical Equipment- Power and Extension specific to the improper use of plug adapters, power strips, and extension and will continue to monitor in accordance with NFPA standards. Any findings will be reported to the monthly QAPI Committee for further review. The RPT observed plugged into an RPT plugged into an outlet in the Social Services Office was removed. The extension cord used to plug in the television in the multipurpose room was removed. The RPT plugged into an RPT and outlet adapter in the MDS office was removed. Additional offices and resident care areas will be reviewed for the improper use of plug adapters, power strips and extension. The Executive Director/designee will educate the Maintenance Director on the importance of NFPA 101 Electrical Equipment - Power and Extension specific to the improper use of plug adapters, power strips, and extension and will continue to monitor in accordance with NFPA standards. Any findings will be reported to the monthly QAPI Committee for further review.
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.



