Pruitthealth - Athens Heritage
Inspection history, citations, penalties and survey trends for this long-term care facility in Athens, Georgia.
- Location
- 960 Hawthorne Avenue, Athens, Georgia 30606
- CMS Provider Number
- 115509
- Inspections on file
- 19
- Latest survey
- September 4, 2025
- Citations (last 12 mo.)
- 6
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Pruitthealth - Athens Heritage during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
The facility failed to ensure that food stored in the main kitchen and unit kitchenettes was properly labeled, dated, and not expired. Several items in the walk-in refrigerator and nourishment rooms were found without use-by dates or were expired. The Dietary Manager confirmed that all items should be dated with a use-by date and that no outdated items should remain in the refrigerators.
The facility failed to provide a Skilled Nursing Facility Advanced Beneficiary Notice (SNFABN) or Notice of Medicare Non-Coverage (NOMNC) for two residents who were discharged from Medicare Part A services but remained in the facility. Despite the facility's policy requiring written notification about liability for non-covered services, there was no documentation in the electronic medical record (EMR) indicating that these notices were issued. The Administrator confirmed the absence of these notices in the residents' records.
The facility failed to document that pneumococcal and influenza vaccines had been offered, given, or previously received outside of the facility for five residents. Interviews with staff confirmed that immunizations were not up to date and there was no system in place to document them upon admission.
The facility failed to evaluate a resident for self-administration of medications. An LPN left medications unattended in the resident's room without an order for self-administration. Interviews confirmed the resident did not have an order to self-administer medications, violating facility policy.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment and multiple medical conditions was repeatedly observed without the call light within reach, despite her care plan requiring it to be accessible. Staff interviews confirmed the resident's ability to use the call light, but it was often found on the bed or floor, out of reach.
The facility failed to perform nail care for a resident requiring substantial assistance, resulting in long fingernails with brown debris. Staff interviews revealed confusion about responsibility for nail care, and the facility lacked a specific policy on activities of daily living.
A resident with diabetes, hypertension, and frequent falls had long and unkept toenails, causing discomfort. Despite staff awareness and a process for scheduling podiatry services, the resident had not seen a podiatrist since admission.
A resident with multiple documented food allergies was served foods containing allergens, despite clear documentation in the EMR and care plan. Interviews revealed a lack of awareness and adherence to the resident's allergies among staff, and no facility policy addressing resident allergies.
Failure to Properly Label and Date Food Items
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that food stored in the main kitchen and unit kitchenettes was properly labeled, dated, and not expired. During an initial kitchen tour, several items in the walk-in refrigerator were found without use-by dates, including a bag of shredded cheese, a block of cheese, and three bags of sliced ham. Additionally, nineteen cartons of chocolate milk, four half-gallons of buttermilk, and various containers of food items were either expired or lacked proper labeling. The Dietary Manager (DM) confirmed that all items should be dated with a use-by date and that no outdated items should remain in the walk-in refrigerator. The DM also stated that leftovers should be saved for only 72 hours and have a discard date on them, and that staff should follow the storage diagram for items in the walk-in refrigerator. Further observations revealed expired and unlabeled items in the nourishment rooms on units one and two. These included a carton of chocolate milk, a quart of prune juice, an opened tube feeding bottle of Nepro 1.8, and two cartons of yogurt with no visible date. The DM stated that the nourishment rooms should be checked daily for cleanliness by the dietary staff and confirmed that outdated items should not have remained in the refrigerators. The DM was not aware of the outdated items in the nourishment rooms and confirmed that they should have been discarded.
Failure to Provide Required Medicare Non-Coverage Notices
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide a Skilled Nursing Facility Advanced Beneficiary Notice (SNFABN) or Notice of Medicare Non-Coverage (NOMNC) for two residents who were discharged from Medicare Part A services but remained in the facility. The facility's policy requires that residents be informed in writing about their liability for payment of services not covered by Medicare. However, for two residents, there was no documentation in the electronic medical record (EMR) indicating that these notices were issued. One resident was discontinued from skilled therapy services on January 24, 2024, and the other on February 22, 2024, both having exhausted their Medicare benefit days. Despite the facility's policy, there were no records of the required notifications being provided to these residents or their representatives. During an interview, the Administrator confirmed the absence of these notices in the residents' records and mentioned that the responsibility for completing the notifications had shifted from the Social Worker to the Business Office Manager. The Social Worker claimed to have provided the notifications but did not have any copies, and there were no notes in the residents' records to indicate if or when the notices were provided.
Failure to Document Pneumococcal and Influenza Vaccinations
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide documentation that pneumococcal and influenza vaccines had been offered, given, or previously received outside of the facility for five residents. The review of the electronic medical records (EMR) for these residents revealed no documentation under the Immunizations tab for either vaccine. The facility's policies stated that all residents should receive these vaccines unless contraindicated or refused, but there was no evidence that this process was followed for the five residents reviewed. Interviews with the Infection Preventionist (IP) and the Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed that the immunizations were not up to date and that there was no system in place to document immunizations upon admission. The IP mentioned that no one in the facility had access to the Georgia Registry of Immunization Transactions and Services (GRITS), and the DON acknowledged that the former IP had not completed the work on immunizations before leaving. The Administrator also confirmed that immunizations need to be offered and documented if refused, but this was not being done.
Failure to Evaluate Resident for Self-Administration of Medications
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to evaluate and determine if it was appropriate for a resident to self-administer medications. This was observed during a medication administration when an LPN left the resident's eye drops, cough medicine, and inhaler on the over-the-bed table while stepping out to get another medication. The LPN acknowledged that there was no order for the resident to self-administer medications and admitted that the medications should not have been left in the room unattended. Interviews with the Director of Health Services and the MDS nurse confirmed that the resident did not have an order to self-administer medications. The facility's policy requires that a licensed nurse and physician determine if self-administration is safe for the resident and others, but this evaluation was not conducted for the resident in question. The resident, who was cognitively intact with a BIMS score of 15 out of 15, had multiple medications prescribed, including dextromethorphan-guaifenesin liquid, dorzolamide solution, and Wixela inhaler.
Failure to Ensure Call Light Accessibility for Resident
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure the call button to activate the emergency call light was accessible for one resident. This resident, who had severe cognitive impairment and required total assistance with various activities, was observed multiple times without the call light within reach. On one occasion, the call light was found on the bed, out of the resident's reach, and on two other occasions, it was found on the floor behind the bed. Interviews with staff confirmed that the resident was capable of using the call light and had done so on occasions, but it was not consistently placed within her reach as required by her care plan. The resident's medical history included heart disease, chronic kidney disease, hemiplegia, hemiparesis, contracture of the right knee, dysphagia, ataxia, aphasia, vascular dementia, mood disturbance, anxiety, depression, and PTSD. The care plan specifically noted the need to place the call light within reach to mitigate the risk of falls due to her decreased mobility and high fall risk. Despite this, the call light was repeatedly found out of reach, indicating a failure to follow the care plan and ensure the resident's safety and ability to call for assistance.
Failure to Perform Nail Care for Resident Requiring Assistance
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to perform nail care for a resident (R38) who required substantial or maximal assistance from staff for personal hygiene needs. R38, who had diagnoses including diabetes, hypertension, and frequent falls, was observed on two separate occasions with long fingernails and brown debris under them. The resident's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) indicated moderate cognitive impairment and a need for substantial assistance with personal hygiene. However, there was no documentation regarding nail care in R38's care plans. Interviews with staff revealed a lack of clarity and responsibility regarding nail care. An LPN stated that it was the CNA's responsibility to ensure the resident's fingernails were cut or trimmed, while a CNA expressed uncertainty about whether they could cut the resident's nails. The Director of Health Services confirmed the resident's fingernails were long and had brown debris under them and stated that CNAs were responsible for cleaning and filing the resident's fingernails as needed. The facility did not have a specific policy on activities of daily living but had a procedure for nail care.
Failure to Provide Podiatry Services
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide podiatry services to a resident (R38) who had been readmitted with diagnoses including diabetes, hypertension, and frequent falls. The resident's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) indicated moderate cognitive impairment and a need for substantial or maximal assistance with personal hygiene. Observations on two separate days revealed that R38's toenails were long and unkept. Interviews with staff, including a Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) and a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA), confirmed that R38's toenails were too long and causing her discomfort. The CNA reported the issue to the nurse, who stated that R38 would be put on the list to see the podiatrist during the next visit. However, the Director of Health Services (DHS) later confirmed that R38 had not seen the podiatrist since her admission and would be scheduled for a visit in June. The deficiency was further highlighted during an interview with the DHS, who could not recall the last time R38 had seen the podiatrist. The DHS explained the process for adding residents to the podiatrist list, which involves CNAs reporting issues to nurses, who then add the residents to the list or inform the social worker to do so. Despite this process, R38 had not received the necessary podiatry care, leading to prolonged discomfort and potential health risks related to her foot condition.
Failure to Accommodate Resident's Documented Food Allergies
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to accommodate a resident's documented food allergies, resulting in the resident being served foods that could potentially cause an allergic reaction. The resident, who had intact cognition, was admitted with multiple diagnoses including COPD, type II diabetes, depression, anxiety, Parkinson's disease, and renal dialysis. The resident's allergies to black pepper, cayenne pepper, onions, and strawberries were clearly documented in the Electronic Medical Record (EMR) and care plan. Despite this, the resident reported receiving strawberry shortcake and chicken chili, both containing ingredients he was allergic to. The meal tray ticket and Consistency Census Report also failed to accurately reflect all of the resident's allergies, leading to inappropriate food being served on multiple occasions. Interviews with the resident, the Director of Health Services (DHS), and the Dietary Manager (DM) revealed a lack of awareness and adherence to the resident's documented allergies. The DM acknowledged that staff should be aware of residents' allergies and ensure that meal trays do not contain any allergens. However, the DM was unaware that strawberries and onions had been served to the resident. Additionally, there was no facility policy addressing resident allergies, although the DHS expected all allergies to be documented in the resident charts. This lack of proper documentation and communication among staff led to the resident being served foods that could cause allergic reactions, highlighting a significant deficiency in the facility's food service practices.
Latest citations in Georgia
The facility failed to follow its abuse investigation policy when responding to an allegation that a male resident wandered into a female shared room, allegedly sat on a resident’s bed, inappropriately touched her leg, stared at another resident, and opened the bathroom door to watch a third resident brushing her teeth. The allegation was reported by a cognitively intact resident and involved residents with varying levels of cognitive impairment. The investigation, conducted by the Administrator and former DON, relied only on interviews with a RN and a CNA, did not obtain required written, signed, and dated witness statements, and did not include interviews with other residents to assess their sense of safety. Despite these omissions and incomplete documentation, the facility’s final report concluded the allegation was unsubstantiated.
A resident with protein calorie malnutrition and a terminal prognosis was admitted on hospice with corresponding physician orders and a care plan, but hospice services were not coded on either the admission or quarterly MDS assessments. The MDS Coordinator and two MDS LPNs confirmed that, despite the resident receiving hospice care, Section O of both MDS assessments incorrectly indicated the resident was not on hospice, which the Administrator and DON acknowledged resulted in inaccurate MDS data.
Surveyors found that PTAC unit filters in two resident rooms on one hallway were not maintained free of visible grey, fuzzy debris, despite facility policy requiring regular inspection and cleaning or replacement at least every three months. Across multiple observations on different days, the condition of the dirty filters remained unchanged. The Maintenance Director reported he is responsible for monthly cleaning and checks, including spot checks and inspections in construction areas, and did not dispute the observed dust accumulation when shown. The Administrator confirmed that maintenance staff are responsible for monthly PTAC filter cleaning as part of preventative maintenance and acknowledged that this issue could negatively affect residents’ health and well-being.
A resident with intact cognition and known skin integrity risks reported being left on a bedpan for an extended period and not being adequately cleaned by a CNA. The following shift, another CNA found the resident on soiled linens with a blister on the left upper thigh but did not report this new skin issue to the charge nurse or DON. Subsequent documentation showed development of an open area on the thigh associated with pain, and later NP evaluation identified a larger wound requiring sharp excisional debridement. These events show failure to provide adequate incontinent care and to promptly assess and report a new wound, contrary to the facility’s abuse/neglect prevention policy and CNA responsibilities.
A cognitively intact resident with skin-related diagnoses reported delayed and inadequate incontinent care after using a bedpan, describing prolonged waits for staff response and feeling not properly cleaned by a CNA. The next morning, another CNA found feces-soiled linen and a blister on the resident’s left upper thigh, later documented as a new open area. The resident texted the Administrator stating that a CNA had left feces on her and that she had developed a painful blister, but the Administrator did not report this allegation of neglect to the State Survey Agency as required by facility policy.
A resident with lymphedema and identified risk for pressure ulcers developed a new open wound on the upper thigh, documented by a NP with specific wound measurements. Although the existing care plan included interventions to observe and document skin changes, the care plan was not updated to include this new wound. The Wound Care Nurse and the resident confirmed the wound location, while the MDS Coordinator reported not receiving recent weekly wound reports and only recently learning of the wound. The MDS Coordinator confirmed that the care plan had not been revised in real time as required by facility procedures, resulting in a failure to implement care plan interventions for the newly developed pressure ulcer.
The facility did not complete a required Georgia Criminal History Check System (GCHEXS) fingerprint background check for a CNA, as identified during review of ten employee files with a census of eighty residents. The facility’s abuse-prevention policy required criminal background checks for all employment candidates, but there was no documentation of a fingerprint records check for this CNA. The HR manager, who is responsible for background and fingerprint checks and maintaining employee files, confirmed that the GCHEXS fingerprint check had not been conducted, resulting in a deficiency under F-Tag 600.
Surveyors found that four of six resident shower rooms were not kept free of hazards or adequately cleaned. On one floor, razors were on the floor, dirty gloves and a comb were on a shower bed, floors were stained, an opened gallon of bath soap and a bottle of chemical-resistant spray were present, and a razor and hair clippers were in a bag on the floor along with a shower cap and toothbrush. On other floors, surveyors observed multiple opened containers of skin and hair cleaner, conditioner, and skin ointment, along with a strong urine odor. Unit managers and the Environmental Senior Director stated that CNAs were responsible for cleaning after each resident and that environmental services cleaned shower rooms daily, and acknowledged that items should not be left on the floor and that product containers should be closed.
Surveyors found that staff did not follow standard and transmission-based precautions when handling ice on two floors. On one floor, the ice scoop cover on top of the ice machine had visible black specks near the end of the scoop used to dispense ice. On another floor, the ice scoop was observed submerged in ice and water inside the cooler used to serve residents, despite the unit manager acknowledging that the scoop should not be left in the cooler. The Maintenance Director reported that maintenance cleaned and checked ice machines regularly, while nursing staff were responsible for cleaning scoops and covers. The SDC/Infection Control nurse stated that all staff had been in-serviced on hand hygiene and ice scoop protocol, including that scoops should be stored in a holder after use and never left in the ice.
A resident with multiple serious conditions, moderate cognitive impairment, and total dependence for ADLs was placed in bed with side rails intended to assist with positioning, despite the MDS indicating no bed rail use. Facility records showed no evidence of safe rail spacing or regular inspection of the bed and rails. The assigned CNA, who came on duty late in the evening, last saw the resident around the start of the shift and did not check on him again for several hours, relying on the resident to use a call light. In the early morning, the CNA and an RN found the resident partially out of bed, entrapped in the half side rail, requiring multiple staff to free and reposition him. The resident was unresponsive except for moaning, with altered mental status and respiratory failure documented by EMS and the ER, and later expired at the hospital. The facility’s failure to provide required monitoring and to ensure safe side rail use resulted in neglect and Immediate Jeopardy.
Failure to Thoroughly Investigate Allegation of Sexual Abuse
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to conduct a thorough investigation of an allegation of sexual abuse in accordance with its policy titled “Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation or Misappropriation-Reporting and Investigating.” The policy required that all allegations be thoroughly investigated, including reviewing documentation and evidence, interviewing any witnesses, interviewing staff on all shifts who had contact with the resident, and completely documenting the investigation, with written, signed, and dated witness statements. A facility-reported incident documented that a male resident was wandering into a female three-bed room, allegedly inappropriately touching one resident, staring at another for a length of time, and then opening the bathroom door and staring at a third female resident while she was brushing her teeth. The allegation was initially reported by a cognitively intact resident (BIMS score 15) and involved another resident with moderate cognitive impairment (BIMS score 8) and a resident with severe cognitive impairment (BIMS score 99). The Administrator reported that the investigation of this incident was conducted by the former DON and herself after the allegation was reported by a RN. She stated that this was not the first time the alleged male resident had wandered into other residents’ rooms and described the allegation as the male resident entering a resident’s room, sitting on the resident’s bed, and allegedly touching the resident’s leg. Staff interviews for the investigation were limited to the RN and a CNA, and the Administrator acknowledged that no written witness statements were obtained, contrary to facility policy. She also confirmed that no additional residents were interviewed to assess their sense of safety following the incident. The facility’s final investigation report concluded that the allegation was unsubstantiated, despite the lack of comprehensive interviews, written statements, and full documentation required by the facility’s abuse investigation policy.
Failure to Accurately Code Hospice Services on MDS Assessment
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to ensure accurate completion of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) for a resident receiving hospice services. The facility’s policy on Certification of Accuracy of the MDS requires that appropriate health professionals correctly document residents’ medical, functional, and psychosocial problems using the Resident Assessment Instrument. The resident in question was admitted with diagnoses including protein calorie malnutrition and had a care plan dated 01/09/2026 indicating a terminal prognosis and admission to hospice, with a goal to honor advance directives and provide comfort with dignity. Physician’s orders dated 12/09/2025 also included an order to admit the resident to hospice. Despite this, review of the admission MDS and a subsequent quarterly MDS showed that hospice services were not coded in Section O (Special Treatments, Procedures and Programs), even though both assessments documented a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of five, indicating severely impaired cognition. Interviews with the MDS Coordinator and two MDS LPNs confirmed that the resident had been on hospice since admission and that both the admission and quarterly MDS assessments were incorrectly coded as not on hospice. The MDS Coordinator acknowledged that the MDS should present an accurate clinical picture for a given period and stated that this was a clerical error, resulting in CMS not receiving correct hospice coding for the resident. The Administrator and DON stated their expectation that MDS assessments accurately reflect residents’ services and confirmed that failure to code hospice in the MDS results in an inaccurate reflection of the data.
Failure to Maintain Clean PTAC Unit Filters in Resident Rooms
Penalty
Summary
Surveyors identified a deficiency related to the facility’s failure to maintain Packaged Terminal Air Conditioner (PTAC) unit filters in a safe, clean condition in two resident rooms on the Sapphire Hallway. The facility’s written policy titled "Instructions" requires that air filters be removed and inspected for cleanliness, washed or replaced if dirty, and at a minimum replaced or thoroughly cleaned every three months. During multiple observations in one room on 3/22/2026, 3/24/2026, and 3/25/2026, the PTAC unit filter was noted to have visible grey, fuzzy debris accumulation, with no change in condition across all three observations. Similar repeated observations on those same dates in another room showed the PTAC unit filter also contained visible grey, fuzzy debris accumulation that remained unchanged. In an interview, the Maintenance Director stated he is responsible for cleaning and checking the PTAC filters monthly, including conducting monthly checks and random inspections in areas where construction is occurring, and confirmed that the maintenance department is responsible for ensuring filters are clean and functioning properly. He also stated that expectations include spot checks of PTAC units. However, during an observation of one of the affected rooms in his presence, dust accumulation was again observed on the PTAC unit filter, and he did not dispute the finding. In a separate interview, the Administrator stated that the maintenance department is responsible for cleaning PTAC filters, which are supposed to be cleaned monthly, and that her expectation is for preventative maintenance to be completed monthly and as needed, noting that a potential negative outcome is the impact on residents’ health and well-being.
Neglect of Incontinent Care and Delayed Wound Reporting Leading to Thigh Wound
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to prevent neglect and to assess and provide timely wound and incontinent care to a cognitively intact resident with known skin integrity risks. The resident, who had diagnoses including a disorder of the skin and subcutaneous tissue and lymphedema, was care planned as being at risk for pressure ulcer development and skin integrity issues, with interventions directing staff to observe, document, and report any changes in skin status. On a night shift, the resident reported being left on a bedpan for approximately an hour and a half. When the CNA on that shift (CNA BB) assisted with post-toileting care, the resident told her she did not feel adequately cleaned; CNA BB did not recheck or further clean the resident and left the room. The next morning, the resident reported burning in the left upper thigh and informed another CNA (CNA EE) that she had not been cleaned well. During morning care, CNA EE found the pad under the resident soiled with feces and wet with urine and observed a blister on the resident’s left upper thigh, but did not report the new blister to the charge nurse or DON. A subsequent Skin Wound Note documented a new open area on the left posterior thigh with the resident reporting pain while sitting on the bedpan. Later, an NP wound care consult documented that the thigh wound had been present for approximately two weeks per nursing report and measured 3.5 cm x 4.0 cm x 0.2 cm, requiring sharp excisional debridement to remove necrotic tissue and decrease bacterial burden. On observation by the surveyor with the Wound Care Nurse, the left upper thigh area was open to air, shiny pink and granular, about the size of a half dollar. These findings demonstrate that the facility did not follow its abuse/neglect prevention policy and CNA job responsibilities to provide necessary care and to report changes in condition, resulting in neglect of incontinent care and delayed wound assessment and treatment for this resident.
Failure to Report Allegation of Neglect to State Survey Agency
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to timely report an allegation of neglect to the State Survey Agency (SSA) as required by its own abuse and neglect reporting policy. The facility’s policy, dated 1/2025, states that any complaint, allegation, observation, or suspicion of resident neglect must be immediately communicated to the Abuse Coordinator and promptly investigated and documented, and that all alleged violations involving mistreatment, abuse, or neglect will be thoroughly investigated under the direction of the Administrator in accordance with state and federal law. Despite this, the Administrator acknowledged that an allegation of neglect reported by a resident was not reported to the SSA. The resident involved was cognitively intact, with a BIMS score of 15, and had diagnoses including a disorder of the skin and subcutaneous tissue and lymphedema. The resident reported that during a night shift she requested assistance for incontinent care after using a bedpan and experienced multiple delays before a CNA assisted her. She stated that when the CNA finally provided care, she did not feel adequately cleaned, and the CNA did not verify cleanliness before leaving. The next morning, another CNA found soiled linen with feces and a blister on the resident’s left upper thigh, which the resident reported as burning. A subsequent skin/wound note documented a new open area on the left posterior thigh. The resident texted the Administrator describing that a CNA had left feces on her and that she had developed a painful blister. The Administrator confirmed receiving this text but did not report the allegation of neglect to the SSA, despite being aware it should have been reported.
Failure to Update and Implement Care Plan for Newly Developed Pressure Ulcer
Penalty
Summary
Surveyors identified a failure to implement and update the care plan for a newly developed pressure ulcer for one resident. The facility’s policy "RAI Care Planning Management" requires a comprehensive, accurate assessment and real-time modification of the care plan when changes occur. The resident was admitted with diagnoses including a disorder of the skin and subcutaneous tissue and lymphedema. A recent MDS quarterly assessment showed the resident was cognitively intact (BIMS 15), at risk for pressure ulcer development, and had no unhealed pressure ulcers at that time. The existing care plan, dated 6/6/2024, identified potential for pressure ulcer development and skin integrity issues related to immobility and lymphedema, with interventions to observe, document, and report changes in skin status, including wound size, stage, and signs of infection. Subsequently, a NP wound report documented a new open wound on the resident’s thigh that had been present for approximately two weeks, with specific measurements recorded. During observation and interview, the Wound Care Nurse and the resident confirmed the wound was on the left upper thigh, which differed from the NP report that referenced the right thigh. The MDS Coordinator reported she previously received weekly wound sheets from the Wound Care Nurse but had not received one in about a month, and that the DON was now responsible for emailing the weekly wound report. She verified that the last wound report she received did not include this resident and stated that new wounds should be discussed in the morning management meeting and the care plan updated in real time. The MDS Coordinator confirmed she only recently became aware of the upper left thigh wound and that the resident’s care plan had not been updated to reflect this new wound, resulting in a failure to implement care plan interventions for the newly developed pressure ulcer.
Failure to Complete Required GCHEXS Fingerprint Check for CNA
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a Georgia Criminal History Check System (GCHEXS) fingerprint check was conducted for one CNA among ten employee files reviewed, despite a census of eighty residents and a written policy requiring criminal background checks for all employment candidates. The policy titled "Freedom of Abuse Abuse Prevention Fast Alert" dated 1/2025 states that, as part of pre-employment screening, all candidates must authorize a criminal background check for conviction of crimes. During record review with the Human Resources Manager (HRM), there was no documentation of a fingerprint records check for CNA BB, and the HRM confirmed that this CNA did not have a GCHEXS fingerprint check conducted. The HRM also stated that she is responsible for background checks, fingerprint checks, reference checks, and maintaining employee files. This failure to complete the required fingerprint background check for CNA BB resulted in noncompliance cited under F-Tag 600. No resident-specific medical histories, conditions, or direct resident care events were described in the report related to this deficiency.
Failure to Maintain Safe and Clean Conditions in Multiple Resident Shower Rooms
Penalty
Summary
Surveyors identified a deficiency related to accident hazards and inadequate environmental controls in multiple resident shower rooms. On the 4th floor, observation with the Unit Manager showed four razors on the floor, dirty gloves and a dirty comb on a shower bed, stained/dirty floors, an opened gallon bottle of complete bath soap, and a bottle of chemical resistant spray in the shower room. A razor and hair clippers were found in a black bag on the floor, and a shower cap and toothbrush were lying on the floor. The 4th floor Unit Manager stated that CNAs were supposed to clean up before showering residents and acknowledged that the items found should not be on the floor. The Environmental Senior Director reported that shower rooms were cleaned daily, with responsibilities including cleaning high-touch areas, sweeping and mopping floors, removing linen, and cleaning the area, and stated there had been no complaints about showers not being cleaned. On the 3rd floor, observation with the Unit Manager revealed an open bottle of skin and hair cleaner, an open bottle of conditioner, and an open bottle of skin ointment in the resident shower room. The 3rd floor Unit Manager stated that items in the shower room should be closed and that CNAs were to clean after each resident. On the 2nd floor, observation with the Unit Manager revealed two opened gallon containers of skin and hair cleaner and a strong urine odor in the shower room. The 2nd floor Unit Manager stated that the soap should have a top on it and that CNAs were responsible for cleaning after each resident. These observations and interviews showed that four of six resident shower rooms were not maintained free of hazards and were not cleaned as expected by facility staff, creating the potential for injury and spread of infection as stated in the report.
Improper Ice Scoop Handling and Storage Breaches Infection Control Protocol
Penalty
Summary
Surveyors identified a deficiency in the facility’s infection prevention and control program related to improper handling and storage of ice scoops on two of four floors. On the 4th floor, observation of the ice scoop and scoop cover showed black specks near the end of the scoop used to put ice in cups, and the scoop cover was located on top of the ice machine. The 4th floor Unit Manager stated that kitchen staff cleaned the scoops once a week and acknowledged that the scoop should be clean. On the 3rd floor, observation of the ice chest/cooler used to serve residents revealed the ice scoop submerged in ice and water. The 3rd floor Unit Manager later confirmed that the ice scoop was not supposed to be left in the cooler. The Maintenance Director reported that maintenance staff were responsible for cleaning the ice machines, which were checked weekly and monthly, while nursing staff were responsible for cleaning the ice scoops and covers. The Staff Development Coordinator/Infection Control staff stated that all staff had been trained in infection control procedures, including hand hygiene and handling of the ice scoop and holder, and that staff had been educated that the ice scoop should be placed in the scoop holder after use and never left in the ice. Documentation in the maintenance logbook showed monthly checks and cleaning of all four ice machines, and the ice machine cleaning log showed that the ice machines on the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th floors and in the kitchen had been cleaned on specific dates. Staff training records indicated that an in-service on handwashing and ice scoop protocol had been provided for all staff.
Neglect Related to Inadequate Supervision and Unsafe Side Rail Use Leading to Entrapment
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to protect a resident from neglect related to inadequate supervision and oversight of side rail use, resulting in entrapment. Facility policies on Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation required protections to prevent neglect, defined as failure to provide goods and services necessary to avoid physical harm, pain, mental anguish, or emotional distress. The policy on Proper Use of Bed Rails required a person-centered approach, attempts at alternatives before bed rail use, and ensuring correct installation, use, and maintenance of bed rails, including attention to entrapment risk. For this resident, the Medicare 5-day MDS indicated moderate cognitive impairment (BIMS score of 8), total dependence on staff for all ADLs, and documented that bed rails were not used, while an admission assessment documented side rails were placed to assist with movement in bed. Facility records showed no evidence that safe rail spacing and regular inspection of side rails and beds had been completed. The resident had multiple serious medical diagnoses, including acute and subacute infective endocarditis, end stage renal disease, hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction, bacteremia, and cervical disc degeneration, and was dependent on staff for all ADLs. Nursing staff last observed the resident at 12:46 am when a sponge bath was provided; there was no documented monitoring or ADL assistance between 12:46 am and 4:30 am. The assigned CNA reported coming on duty at 11:00 pm, seeing the resident up with the bed in a low position, placing the call light in the resident’s hands, and not seeing or checking the resident again until approximately 4:30–5:00 am, stating that the resident did not press the call light during that time. Around 5:00 am, the CNA requested help from the RN, reporting that the resident needed assistance. The RN found the resident with the lower part of his body hanging off the bed and the upper body still on the bed, with his elbow wedged into the half side rail, requiring three staff to reposition him back into bed. The RN stated the resident, who was quadriplegic, was no longer as alert as when put to bed, did not respond to sternal rubs, had open but unfocused eyes, and was not verbally interactive. The CNA described finding the resident on his knees, all the way out of bed, with one hand tangled in the side rail, and noted that he was moaning but not talking after being returned to bed. Progress notes documented that EMS was called for evaluation and treatment due to the resident’s condition, and hospital ER records indicated he arrived with altered mental status and respiratory failure, agonal respirations, and a GCS of 3. The facility’s Maintenance Director stated bedrails had been checked the prior year but could not provide proof, and requested documentation of safe rail spacing and regular inspection was not provided.
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.
