Summerhill Elderliving Home & Care
Inspection history, citations, penalties and survey trends for this long-term care facility in Perry, Georgia.
- Location
- 500 Stanley Street, Perry, Georgia 31069
- CMS Provider Number
- 115430
- Inspections on file
- 19
- Latest survey
- January 23, 2026
- Citations (last 12 mo.)
- 15
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Summerhill Elderliving Home & Care during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
A resident with Parkinson's and dementia was physically abused by a CNA, who grabbed her hand tightly and took her call light, causing bruising. The resident, assessed as cognitively intact, consistently reported the incident, which was confirmed by an investigation. The facility's abuse prevention policy was not effectively implemented, leading to the CNA's termination.
A facility failed to report an abuse allegation involving a resident with bruising to law enforcement, as required by their policy. The resident, with multiple diagnoses including dementia, alleged that a CNA caused the bruising. Although the physician, responsible party, and ombudsman were notified, law enforcement was not informed until after surveyor inquiry.
A resident fell and was injured when a CNA provided ADL care alone, contrary to the care plan requiring two staff members. Another resident received the wrong medications due to an LPN's identification error, leading to hospital admission for observation. Both incidents resulted in harm and were confirmed by facility investigations.
A facility failed to update a resident's care plan to include actual skin impairment, specifically bruising on the right hand, despite a policy requiring revisions as conditions change. The bruising was identified following an alleged staff-to-resident abuse incident. The MDS Coordinator confirmed that the care plan should have been updated, with responsibility lying with the treatment nurse or RN supervisor.
A resident, who was cognitively impaired and dependent on staff for ADL care, fell from the bed and sustained a laceration to the forehead due to unsecured bed bolsters and inadequate staffing. The resident's care plan required two staff members for assistance, but a CNA provided care alone, leading to the accident. The resident was hospitalized and received sutures for the injury.
A resident received the wrong medications due to an LPN's error, and the facility failed to promptly notify the physician or nurse practitioner as required by policy. The error was identified, but there was a delay in notifying the RN Supervisor and no immediate notification to the physician, leading to the resident being hospitalized for monitoring.
A medication administration error occurred when an LPN administered the wrong medications to a resident after misidentifying him. The resident was hospitalized for monitoring. The LPN documented administering medications after being relieved of duties, despite the resident being at the hospital. This discrepancy highlights a failure to meet professional standards of quality in medication administration and documentation.
A resident in an LTC facility was mistakenly given another resident's medications by an LPN who failed to verify the resident's identity properly. The error led to the resident being hospitalized for observation after experiencing a vasovagal syncope episode. The Medical Director confirmed the error was significant but not life-threatening.
A resident was found with topical medications at their bedside without an assessment or physician orders for self-administration, contrary to facility policy. Staff interviews confirmed that medications should not be left unsecured without proper authorization, highlighting a lapse in adherence to medication management protocols.
Resident Abuse by CNA
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to protect a resident's right to be free from physical abuse by a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA). The incident involved a resident with a diagnosis of Parkinson's disease, polyneuropathy, adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety and depression, and dementia, who was assessed as cognitively intact. On the night of the incident, the resident reported that the CNA grabbed her hand tightly and took her call light, resulting in bruises and discoloration on the first three fingers of her right hand. The resident consistently reported the incident to multiple staff members, and the investigation confirmed the occurrence of the abuse. The facility's Abuse Prohibition Policy and Procedures, which were in place to prevent such incidents, were not effectively implemented in this case. The policy defined abuse as the willful infliction of injury or punishment with resulting physical harm or pain. Despite the policy, the CNA's actions led to physical harm to the resident. The facility's documentation and investigation revealed that the CNA was removed from the schedule and subsequently terminated following the confirmation of the abuse.
Failure to Report Abuse to Law Enforcement
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to report an allegation of abuse to law enforcement as required by their Abuse Prohibition Policy and Procedures. The policy mandates that any reasonable suspicion of a crime be reported to the State Agency and law enforcement. An incident involving a resident, who had been admitted with diagnoses including Parkinson's disease, polyneuropathy, adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety and depression, and dementia, was documented. The incident report noted bruising on the resident's right hand, which was alleged to have been caused by a staff member. Although the physician, responsible party, and ombudsman were notified, law enforcement was not informed of the incident. The Director of Nursing confirmed during an interview that law enforcement was not notified. The Administrator explained that the decision not to report to the police was based on the belief that the incident did not result in serious bodily injury. However, after the surveyor's inquiry, the facility contacted law enforcement, and the incident was reported as Abuse of Elderly. This oversight in reporting to law enforcement constitutes a deficiency in adhering to the facility's abuse reporting policy.
Staffing and Medication Errors Lead to Resident Harm
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide the appropriate number of staff for Activities of Daily Living (ADL) care as care planned for a resident, resulting in actual harm. The resident, who had impaired cognition, a self-care deficit, and was at risk for falls, required total assistance from two staff members to turn and reposition in bed. However, on the day of the incident, a CNA provided care alone, leading to the resident falling from the bed and sustaining a laceration to the forehead. The resident was sent to the hospital for evaluation and received sutures for the injury. In another incident, the facility failed to administer medications as care planned and ordered for a resident with multiple diagnoses, including hemiplegia, aphasia, and cardiovascular issues. An LPN administered the wrong medications to the resident after incorrectly identifying him, leading to the resident being admitted to the hospital for observation due to potential side effects from the medication error. The LPN had asked the resident if his name was another resident's last name, and the resident, who was known to joke, confirmed the incorrect name. Both incidents highlight deficiencies in following care plans and ensuring proper medication administration, resulting in harm to the residents involved. The facility's investigation confirmed these failures, with staff acknowledging the errors and the Director of Nursing confirming the deviations from the care plans.
Failure to Revise Care Plan for Skin Impairment
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to revise the care plan for a resident, identified as R3, to include actual skin impairment, specifically bruising on the right hand. This deficiency was identified through observations, interviews, and record reviews. The facility's policy on comprehensive care plans requires that care plans be revised as the resident's condition changes. However, despite R3 being at risk for skin integrity impairment, the care plan did not reflect the bruising identified on 12/18/2024. A Facility Incident Report Form documented an allegation of staff-to-resident abuse on 12/17/2024, noting bruises on R3's right hand. During an interview, the MDS Coordinator confirmed that such information should be included in the care plan and stated that the treatment nurse or RN supervisor was responsible for updating the care plan with this information.
Failure to Secure Bed Bolsters and Provide Adequate Staffing Leads to Resident Injury
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that bed bolsters were secured and that Activities of Daily Living (ADL) care was provided by the appropriate number of staff, leading to an accident involving a resident. The resident, who was cognitively impaired and dependent on staff for ADL care, including bed mobility, fell from the bed and sustained a laceration to the forehead. The resident's care plan required total assistance from two staff members for turning and repositioning in bed, but a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) provided care alone, contrary to the care plan. During the incident, the CNA attempted to change the resident, who had a bowel movement, by positioning her on her side. However, the bolster, which was not secured to the bed, slid off, causing the resident to fall to the floor. The resident was found with a cut above the right eyebrow and a scrape to the right knee, with noticeable bleeding. The incident was reported, and the resident was sent to the hospital for evaluation, where she received sutures for the laceration.
Failure to Promptly Notify Physician of Medication Error
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure timely notification of a significant medication error to the physician or nurse practitioner for a resident. On 12/19/2024, an LPN administered the wrong medications to a resident, who was cognitively intact with a BIMS score of 15 out of 15. The error involved administering 14 medications intended for another resident. The LPN identified the error at 10:15 am but did not notify the RN Supervisor until 11:00 am, and there was no evidence that the resident's physician or nurse practitioner was notified immediately. The facility's policy on Adverse Consequences and Medication Errors required immediate action and prompt notification of the attending physician in the event of a significant medication error. The Medical Director confirmed that the LPN should have notified him or the nurse practitioner right away, considering five to ten minutes as prompt notification. The delay in notification was not in compliance with the facility's policy, and the resident was sent to the hospital for monitoring of potential side effects.
Medication Administration Error and Documentation Discrepancy
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that services provided by a licensed nurse met professional standards of quality, resulting in a significant medication error. On 12/19/2024, an LPN administered the wrong medications to a resident, R2, after incorrectly identifying him as another resident, R6. The LPN relied on a verbal confirmation from R2, who mistakenly confirmed R6's last name, and a photograph on the Medication Administration Record (MAR) that she believed resembled R2. This error led to R2 being sent to the hospital for monitoring due to potential side effects from the incorrect medications. Further investigation revealed discrepancies in the documentation of medication administration. After the error was discovered, the LPN was relieved of her medication cart duties at 11:50 am and sent home. However, the LPN later documented administering medications to R2 at 12:44 pm, despite R2 being at the hospital by 12:15 pm. This documentation included signing off on ten medications that were scheduled for 9:00 am. Interviews with the RN Supervisor and the Director of Nursing confirmed that the LPN did not indicate administering R2's own medications and that the documentation was likely completed before leaving the facility.
Significant Medication Error Leads to Resident Hospitalization
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a resident was free from significant medication errors, resulting in actual harm. On December 19, 2024, an LPN administered the wrong medications to a resident, identified as R2, after failing to properly verify the resident's identity. The LPN asked R2 if his name was R2 or another resident's last name, R6, to which R2 incorrectly responded with R6's last name. The LPN then administered R6's medications to R2, which included a range of drugs such as allopurinol, amiodarone, and gabapentin, among others. Following the medication error, R2 experienced a fall in the bathroom and was subsequently sent to the hospital for evaluation. The hospital's emergency department determined that R2 had a vasovagal syncope episode while having a bowel movement, with additional differential diagnoses including medication error and polypharmacy. R2 was admitted for observation and remained hospitalized until December 24, 2024, after testing positive for influenza. Interviews with facility staff revealed that the LPN realized the error when she went to administer medications to R6 and found him in his room, wearing different clothing from the resident she had previously identified as R6. The LPN then checked on R2 and took his vital signs, which were normal, before reporting the incident to the RN Supervisor. The Medical Director later confirmed that the medication error was significant but not life-threatening for R2, and that the syncope episode was unrelated to the medication error.
Failure to Assess Resident for Self-Administration of Medication
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a resident was assessed for self-administration of medication before leaving medications at the bedside. The facility's policy requires that drugs brought into the facility by residents or family must be verified and meet specific conditions before use, including physician orders for self-administration. However, a review of the resident's records showed no such orders, and observations revealed containers of topical medications at the resident's bedside. Interviews with facility staff, including LPNs and an RN, confirmed that medications should not be at a resident's bedside without proper assessment and physician orders. The staff acknowledged that daily rounds are conducted, and medications at the bedside should have been noticed and addressed. The presence of unsecured medications at the bedside posed a potential risk for unauthorized access by other residents and visitors.
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.
