Alden Estates Of Orland Park
Inspection history, citations, penalties and survey trends for this long-term care facility in Orland Park, Illinois.
- Location
- 16450 South 97th Avenue, Orland Park, Illinois 60467
- CMS Provider Number
- 145963
- Inspections on file
- 35
- Latest survey
- March 19, 2026
- Citations (last 12 mo.)
- 6 (1 serious)
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Alden Estates Of Orland Park during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
A cognitively impaired resident with known exit-seeking behavior eloped from the facility after leaving through the front door while wearing an electronic alert band, but staff did not hear the door alarm because it sounded only between closed double doors and was not audible at the nurse’s station. The resident’s care plan identified elopement risk and called for use of the electronic alert band, yet staff were unaware the resident had left until police returned the resident. In addition, several residents dependent on staff for transfers and identified as fall risks had care plans requiring two-person mechanical lift transfers and beds maintained in the lowest position, but a CNA was observed performing a stand-lift transfer alone due to short staffing, and two residents were found in beds elevated to waist height despite care-planned low-bed interventions.
Two residents with dementia, impaired cognition, unsteady gait, and documented fall risk were not adequately supervised or visually monitored in accordance with their assessed needs and care plans. One resident on a locked memory unit, known to be restless and to attempt unsafe ambulation, accessed a staff bathroom through a nurse’s closet and sustained an unwitnessed fall with a head laceration, then later stood from a locked wheelchair in the dining room, walked around a table without staff intervening in time, and fell, causing a femur fracture. Another resident, who staff stated required frequent monitoring and should not be left alone in her room unless asleep, was left unsupervised, ambulated without her rollator, and sustained an unwitnessed fall in her room with head, lip, and arm injuries, including a supracondylar humerus fracture and intracerebral hemorrhage. These events occurred despite facility fall policies and care plan interventions calling for close supervision, environmental safety, and monitoring for unsafe ambulation.
A resident with multiple complex medical conditions did not receive scheduled doses of Carvedilol and Lokelma as ordered, with no documentation or explanation provided in the MAR. Nursing staff and the DON confirmed that facility policy requires immediate documentation of medication administration or reasons for omission, but no such documentation was found, and staff could not recall or explain the missed doses.
A resident with significant cognitive impairment and multiple medical conditions was left unsupervised in the dining room after lunch, despite being identified as a fall risk. Staff responsible for monitoring the area were not present in the dining room and were unaware of the resident's fall risk status. The resident was later found on the floor with a hip fracture, and the care plan interventions for supervision and removal from common areas were not followed.
The facility did not ensure that the designated Infection Preventionist, who also served as the ADON, attended required QAA/QAPI meetings, as confirmed by review of meeting sign-in sheets and staff interviews. This failure was inconsistent with facility policy and job descriptions, and affected all residents in the facility.
A resident with multiple chronic conditions, who was cognitively intact, reported that a CNA became upset and shook the resident's bed while providing care to a roommate. The incident was captured on video, and the resident reported it to facility leadership. Although the staff member was identified, the allegation was not substantiated, and the CNA was reassigned. The facility's policy affirms residents' rights to be free from abuse.
A resident fell from a wheelchair, sustaining injuries and requiring hospital evaluation. The facility failed to notify the resident's family immediately after the fall and hospital transfer, only informing them after the resident's return. The DON confirmed that immediate notification is required by policy.
A resident fell out of bed and was moved back without a nurse's assessment or proper documentation. The facility lacked a specific post-fall procedure, and the incident was not recorded in the resident's clinical records, contrary to the facility's Fall Risk Assessment Policy.
A facility failed to schedule a resident's doctor appointments as ordered by the physician. The resident, with a history of major depressive disorder and chronic pain syndrome, had orders to follow up with a pain specialist, which were not fulfilled. Staff interviews confirmed the oversight, despite the facility's policy to assist in scheduling appointments.
The facility failed to maintain proper food storage and labeling practices, risking foodborne illness for 152 residents. Observations revealed unlabeled and undated food items in the walk-in cooler and freezer, dented cans in dry storage, and inadequate sanitization logs. Staff were unable to specify expiration periods, and the facility lacked policies for dating opened food items.
The facility failed to provide adequate ADL assistance and personal hygiene care for residents, as evidenced by unmet needs such as improper incontinence care, unaddressed facial hair, and dirty fingernails. Despite residents' requests and facility policies requiring the use of water for perineal care and regular grooming, staff did not consistently perform these tasks, leading to skin irritation and hygiene issues.
The facility failed to properly store medications and remove expired medications, affecting five residents. Issues included mixing oral and rectal medications, expired intravenous antibiotics, unsupervised access to nicotine gum, and unsecured zinc oxide and Nystatin powder. These deficiencies indicate a failure to adhere to medication storage policies, potentially compromising resident safety.
The facility failed to follow infection control practices during blood glucose monitoring and dining services. An LPN did not clean the glucometer between residents, and a CNA handled multiple residents' food and utensils without performing hand hygiene. These actions violated the facility's policies, risking cross-contamination and infection spread.
The facility failed to ensure call lights were within reach for three residents, including one with functional quadriplegia and another at risk for falls due to hemiplegia. Despite being able to use the call lights, they were often found on the floor or under the bed, making them inaccessible. Staff frequently left rooms without ensuring call lights were within reach, contrary to facility policy.
The facility failed to provide written bed hold notifications to residents and/or their representatives during hospital transfers, affecting three residents. The facility's policy requires such notifications and communication with the Ombudsman, but these steps were not completed, as confirmed by interviews with the Administrator and DON.
A resident with multiple diagnoses, including post-surgical amputation care and acute osteomyelitis, received intravenous antibiotics administered by LPNs instead of RNs, contrary to facility policy. The MAR showed multiple instances of LPNs administering Daptomycin and Ceftriaxone, despite the Director of Nursing stating that only RNs should handle IV medications.
A resident with a history of heart failure, COPD, and diabetes experienced worsening skin alterations due to incontinence, which were not assessed by a physician. Despite expressing discomfort and having visible skin issues, the facility staff failed to notify a doctor or document a recent evaluation. The resident's care plans lacked specific interventions for the skin condition, contrary to the facility's policy requiring weekly documentation and care plan development for skin integrity issues.
A resident was not provided with restorative services as recommended in their admission assessment. Despite being assessed for therapy, the resident did not receive any PROM, AROM, or bed mobility programs. The Restorative RN acknowledged the lack of services and mentioned the resident's alertness as a reason for not participating, but there was no documentation of refusal. The care plan and EHR lacked documentation of restorative therapies being offered or refused, contrary to facility policy.
The facility failed to ensure a safe environment for three residents, leading to potential accident hazards. A resident was found without non-skid socks despite being a fall risk, another had a cluttered room impeding safe movement, and a third had disinfectant spray cans within reach, violating chemical storage policy.
A resident with a PICC line had a soiled dressing that was not changed as required by facility policy and physician orders. Despite the presence of bloody drainage, the dressing remained unchanged from its original date, leading to a deficiency in care. Interviews with staff confirmed the dressing should have been changed weekly or as needed, but this was not adhered to.
A resident with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and dependence on supplemental oxygen did not receive oxygen as ordered by the physician, leading to a blue tongue and shallow respirations. The oxygen compressor was found set to 0 liters instead of the prescribed 4 liters per minute. The RN assigned to the resident was unaware of who turned off the oxygen supply. Facility policy states that only RNs, LPNs, or RTs should administer oxygen.
A facility failed to maintain an accurate Record of Receipt for a controlled medication for a resident. A handwritten note in the Controlled Drug Receipt/Record/Disposition Form book lacked essential information such as the medication's name and licensed nurses' signatures. The resident had a box of Morphine Sulfate, but the narcotic count sheet was incomplete. The Director of Nursing acknowledged the error, highlighting the importance of proper documentation to prevent medication errors.
A cognitively impaired resident with a history of exit-seeking behavior eloped from a locked unit twice without staff supervision. The resident was found in a nearby parking lot on both occasions. The facility failed to implement adequate safety measures, including proper monitoring and activation of door alarms, leading to Immediate Jeopardy.
A resident with a history of falls and requiring assistance to ambulate fell and fractured her nasal bone due to the facility's failure to provide stand-by assistance. Despite the care plan indicating the need for supervision, staff were not adequately informed or did not adhere to this requirement, leading to the incident. The resident's medical history included conditions such as Alzheimer's and atrial fibrillation, and the facility's fall management policy was not effectively implemented.
Failure to Prevent Elopement and Implement Fall Prevention Interventions
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to ensure an environment free from accident hazards and to provide adequate supervision and assistive devices to prevent accidents, including elopement and falls. One cognitively impaired resident with known exit-seeking behavior was allowed to elope from the facility without staff awareness, and multiple residents at risk for falls did not have care-planned fall prevention interventions consistently implemented. The elopement resident had a BIMS score of 6 indicating severe cognitive impairment, diagnoses including dementia, and a documented history of exit-seeking and wandering behaviors. The resident had an electronic alert band ordered and applied due to exit-seeking behavior, and the care plan identified the resident as at risk for elopement with an intervention to utilize an electronic alert band. Despite this, the resident was last seen in bed around 2:15–2:30 a.m. and subsequently left the building through the front door without staff knowledge. Police found the resident walking alone on a nearby street and returned the resident to the facility around 3:36 a.m., at which time staff documented that the facility had been unaware the resident had left. Staff interviews and observations revealed that the electronic alert system did not function effectively as an audible warning at the nurse’s station. A CNA reported not hearing any alarm when the resident exited, explaining that the sound of the alarm was located between a set of double doors and could not be heard when those doors were closed. The CNA confirmed that the last time she saw the resident, the resident was in bed with eyes closed and appeared to be sleeping. A former LPN stated she only became aware of the elopement when police arrived at the front desk and informed her that the resident had been found outside the facility. The administrator confirmed that the root cause of the elopement was that the electronic alert alarms could not be heard at the nurse’s station and acknowledged that when the system was initially tested, staff only checked the alarm audibility while standing between the double doors, and no one had checked whether the alarm could be heard outside those doors. The social services director confirmed that the resident’s elopement risk care plan had been initiated months earlier due to comments about wanting to leave and wandering behavior, and acknowledged that the interventions in place were not effective since the resident was able to elope. The facility also failed to implement fall prevention interventions as care-planned for several residents at risk for falls and dependent on staff for transfers. One resident with diagnoses including CHF, Type 2 DM, and dependence on enabling machines and devices had an MDS indicating dependence for sit-to-stand and toilet transfers, and a care plan requiring two staff and use of a total body (Hoyer) lift for transfers. Despite this, a CNA was observed transferring this resident from a wheelchair to a toilet using a stand lift alone, and she acknowledged that two staff should perform the transfer but stated she proceeded alone due to short staffing. The restorative nurse and PTA confirmed that if a resident is care-planned for two-person mechanical lift transfers, that plan must be followed for safety. Additional residents at risk for falls were observed with their beds at waist height despite care-planned interventions requiring beds to be maintained in the lowest appropriate position. One resident with hemiplegia and hemiparesis, dependent on staff for transfers and identified as at risk for falls, had a care plan specifying mechanical lift for transfers and ensuring the bed is in the lowest position. During observation, this resident was found lying in a bed at waist height. When questioned, the LPN confirmed the resident was a mechanical lift transfer and acknowledged that the bed was elevated to waist height and should be in the lowest position for safety. Another resident with paraplegia, dependent on staff for chair/bed transfers and at risk for falls, also had a care plan intervention to ensure the bed is in the lowest position. This resident was likewise observed in a bed at waist height, and the LPN confirmed the bed height. The DON stated that beds are to be in low position but noted that some residents prefer higher beds and do not allow staff to lower them, indicating that care-planned fall prevention interventions were not consistently maintained as required by facility policy and resident care plans.
Removal Plan
- Reassessed R75 for elopement risk after the elopement occurred and determined resident remained an elopement risk.
- Located R75 and returned resident to the facility.
- Completed a head-to-toe assessment for R75 with no signs of injury noted.
- Updated R75’s care plan to address the elopement event.
- Notified R75’s family member and Primary Care Physician/Medical Director of the elopement.
- Reviewed facility policies related to the occurrence (Elopement, Routine Resident Checks, Incidents/Accidents, Alarms, electronic alert band, Wanderers, Changes in Condition).
- Updated the Wanderguard policy to include considering alternative interventions in the event of equipment failure (e.g., room change to a more secure floor).
- Updated assessments and care plans for residents at risk for elopement.
- Placed R75 on 1:1 supervision pending move to a more secured unit.
- Moved the only other resident requiring electronic monitoring to a higher/more secured unit.
- Reassessed all residents for elopement risk.
- Implemented a process that all new admissions will have an elopement risk assessment completed per MDS schedule (within 7 days of admission, annually, and as needed).
- Reviewed and updated care plans for residents identified at risk for elopement on admission.
- Placed pictures of at-risk residents in binders at all nursing stations and the receptionist desk.
- Evaluated at-risk residents with active exit-seeking behaviors for possible room change to a more secured unit to limit access to the front entrance door.
- Evaluated at-risk residents to determine whether an electronic monitoring bracelet is appropriate.
- Conducted staff interviews to identify further potential risk.
- Conducted Code drills on all shifts to assess staff knowledge and preparedness.
- Reeducated all staff and managers on routine resident checks, exit seeking, incidents/accidents, elopement policy/procedure, and location of elopement-risk binders.
- Administered staff competency quizzes on elopement.
- Reeducated staff and managers on elopement risk and reporting behaviors/changes related to elopement risk to the appropriate discipline.
- Reeducated reception staff on monitoring front doors, resident safety, and proper Code Green procedure.
- Educated all staff on the electronic monitoring system.
- Implemented monitoring of exit doors by staff when unalarmed.
- Assigned receptionist to monitor the front entrance door.
- Required the receptionist to arm the door and required first-floor nurses to monitor the door when the receptionist is not present.
- Implemented alarm panel checks with a signed monitoring sheet by first-floor staff to ensure door alarms are activated when doors are not monitored by staff.
- Implemented weekly checks of exterior door alarms by the Maintenance Director and EVS Supervisor to ensure alarms are working and doors are secured.
- Met with R75’s daughter to discuss and implement new interventions.
- Initiated a work order to add an annunciator panel to the first-floor nurses station to amplify the alarm.
- Added elopement training to annual abuse training to ensure staff knowledge of elopement plans.
- Started QAA compliance audits using an elopement and door-check audit tool with review at monthly QAPI meetings.
- Assigned IDT members to complete audits and submit them to the Administrator for oversight of completion.
- Started review of audit results regarding elopement and door alarm working condition with the IDT with review at monthly QAPI.
- Implemented an Administrator daily audit to confirm the exterior front door alarm is activated each day by the receptionist prior to leaving.
- Added to new-hire orientation education on elopement and administration of competency quizzes.
- Established that the facility Quality Assurance Team/IDT will meet at least monthly to review elopement-risk residents, trends/patterns, and implement action steps.
- Held an emergency QA meeting with the IDT and Medical Director to discuss the elopement and approve the Removal Plan.
- Assigned ongoing monitoring of the Removal Plan to the Administrator, DON, ADON, and Social Services.
Failure to Adequately Supervise High Fall-Risk Residents Resulting in Multiple Injuries
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to provide adequate supervision and monitoring, including maintaining visual oversight, for residents assessed as at risk for falls, in accordance with their care plans and assessed needs. One resident with dementia, a history of falls, orthostatic hypotension, syncope, and severely impaired decision-making was housed on a locked dementia unit and identified as at risk for falls. This resident had an unsteady gait, wandered, and exhibited behaviors of trying to get up and walk unassisted. Despite being at the nurse’s station in a wheelchair prior to the first fall, the resident was later found on the floor in a staff bathroom located within a locked nurse’s closet that required a code to enter. Staff reported that the closet door was usually kept closed and coded, and a nurse stated that someone must have left the door open. The fall was unwitnessed, and the resident sustained a scalp laceration requiring staples. Subsequently, the same resident experienced another fall in the dining room. The resident’s care plan identified her as at risk for falls due to history of falls, weakness, impaired balance and mobility, impaired cognition, wandering, and hypotension, with interventions including monitoring for attempts to get out of a chair or ambulate without an assistive device and cueing the resident accordingly. Progress notes and behavior charting documented that the resident was restless, crying, yelling, attempting to ambulate unsafely without staff assistance, and that interventions such as walking her around the unit and offering activities did not fully resolve these behaviors. On the day of the dining room fall, staff brought the resident to the dining area in a wheelchair and locked the wheelchair at the table. Multiple staff were present in the dining room but reported they did not actually see the fall. Statements indicated that the resident stood up from the wheelchair, walked around the table, and fell before staff could reach her, resulting in a left femur fracture. Another resident with dementia, impaired short- and long-term memory, unsteady gait, use of a rollator, history of falls, and multiple risk factors including hypertension medications, antidepressants, seizure history, COPD, and occasional incontinence was also assessed as at risk for falls. This resident required supervision or touching assistance for sit-to-stand transfers and, according to a nurse, required monitoring every fifteen minutes and should not be left alone in her room unless asleep. The nurse reported that the resident was kept near the nursing station for monitoring and that the resident was forgetful and needed encouragement to use her rollator. On the day of the incident, the nurse last saw the resident in her room sitting on the bed or rollator seat, then later heard the resident yelling and found her on the floor by the window, with a hematoma on the top of her head, lip bleeding, and complaints of arm pain. The fall was unwitnessed, the resident’s walker was not near her, and she stated she had been going to answer a telephone that was not present in the room. Hospital records documented an unwitnessed fall with head injury, lip laceration, scalp abrasion, a right supracondylar humerus fracture, and intracerebral hemorrhage. These events occurred despite facility policies stating a commitment to proactively identify residents at risk for falls, plan preventive strategies, and assess and monitor the resident’s environment to manage potential hazards. The facility’s fall management policies stated that hazards and risks would be assessed, plans of care developed and implemented, and the environment monitored to minimize fall incidents and injuries. However, in these cases, residents with known dementia, impaired cognition, unsteady gait, and documented fall risk were able to access unsafe areas or ambulate without adequate supervision. The first resident accessed a staff-only bathroom through a coded nurse’s closet and fell without staff present, and later ambulated around a dining room table and fell while staff were in the room but without continuous visual oversight. The second resident, who staff acknowledged should not be left alone in her room unless asleep and required frequent monitoring, was left unsupervised in her room, ambulated without her rollator, and sustained an unwitnessed fall with significant injuries. These circumstances demonstrate that the facility did not consistently maintain the level of supervision and environmental control described in residents’ assessments, care plans, and facility policies for fall prevention.
Failure to Document and Administer Physician-Ordered Medications
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to administer medications as ordered by the physician for one resident, who had multiple complex medical diagnoses including chronic kidney disease, heart failure, dementia, and other serious conditions. The resident was not cognitively intact, as indicated by a BIMS score of 6. Review of the medication administration record (MAR) for October showed that scheduled doses of Carvedilol and Sodium Zirconium Cyclosilicate (Lokelma) were not documented as given on two separate dates. The MAR had blank boxes for these medications, with no documentation indicating whether the medications were administered or the reason for omission. Interviews with nursing staff and the Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed that facility policy requires immediate documentation of medication administration or the reason for withholding a dose. Staff acknowledged that a blank box on the MAR means the medication was not given, and if a medication is held, the reason must be documented. The DON and staff could not provide a reason for the missing documentation or confirm whether the medications were actually administered. Progress notes for the relevant dates did not contain any entries explaining the omissions, and the assigned nurses either could not recall the events or admitted to possibly forgetting to document. Facility policies and job descriptions reviewed by surveyors further confirmed the requirement for accurate and timely documentation of medication administration and reasons for any missed doses. Despite these policies, there was no evidence in the resident's records to explain the missed or undocumented doses, and staff interviews did not clarify the circumstances. The deficiency was identified based on the lack of documentation and failure to follow established procedures for medication administration and record-keeping.
Failure to Provide Adequate Supervision in Dining Room Leads to Resident Fall and Injury
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure effective supervision and monitoring of residents in the dining room, resulting in an accident involving a resident assessed to be at risk for falls. The resident, who had multiple diagnoses including chronic hepatic failure, hepatic encephalopathy, Alzheimer's disease, dementia, and impaired mobility, was left unsupervised in the dining room after lunch. Staff interviews revealed that there was no clear protocol requiring staff to remain in the dining room for supervision, and the LPN assigned to monitor the area was seated at the nurse station, unable to maintain visual supervision of the resident. The resident was found on the floor in the dining room by another staff member, with no staff present in the room at the time of the fall. The resident was alert but in pain and was subsequently sent to the hospital, where she was diagnosed with a right femoral neck fracture. The care plan for this resident identified her as a fall risk, with interventions including supervision and removal from common areas after meals, but these interventions were not followed at the time of the incident. Staff interviews indicated a lack of communication regarding the resident's fall risk status, and the LPN monitoring the dining room was not informed of the resident's specific needs. The facility's fall management policy emphasized proactive identification and supervision of residents at risk for falls, but this policy was not effectively implemented, leading to the unwitnessed fall and injury.
Infection Preventionist Failed to Participate in QAA/QAPI Meetings
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that the designated Infection Preventionist (IP), who also served as the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON), participated in the Quality Assessment and Assurance (QAA) Committee meetings as required. Record review of QAA meeting sign-in sheets for several dates showed no documented attendance by the IP, despite the individual having assumed the IP role months prior. This was confirmed by the Assistant Administrator, who acknowledged the absence of the IP from these meetings and affirmed that participation is a standing requirement for the IP. Facility policy and the job description for the Infection Preventionist Nurse both specify participation in QAA meetings as a responsibility. The facility census indicated that 174 residents resided in the facility at the time of the deficiency. The lack of IP participation in QAA/QAPI programming was identified through interviews and record review, with the Assistant Administrator confirming the deficiency and its inconsistency with both facility policy and regulatory requirements.
Failure to Protect Resident from Physical Abuse by Staff
Penalty
Summary
A resident with multiple diagnoses, including encephalopathy, end stage renal disease, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, who was cognitively intact, reported an incident involving a certified nursing assistant (CNA) while care was being provided to his roommate. The resident stated that the CNA entered between the beds to turn off the call light, became upset when questioned, and shook the side of the resident's bed. The resident recorded the incident on video, which showed an unseen person shaking the bed for several seconds, followed by an argument between the resident and the individual. The resident reported the incident to facility leadership, and a police report was filed. A roommate confirmed being present in the room but did not witness the event, only hearing the resident yelling. The facility's initial and final reports indicated that the staff member involved was identified, but the allegation could not be substantiated, and the CNA was allowed to return to work on a different unit. The facility's abuse policy affirms residents' rights to be free from abuse, including physical actions such as those described in the incident.
Failure to Timely Notify Family After Resident Fall
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to timely notify a resident's family after a fall that required transportation to a local hospital for evaluation. The incident involved a resident who fell from his wheelchair, resulting in a bruise to the right side of his head, an abrasion to his face, and blood on his lips/mouth area due to biting his lip during the fall. The resident was transported to the hospital for evaluation on the night of the incident. However, the resident's mother was not notified of the fall or the hospital transfer until several hours later, after the resident had already returned to the facility. The Director of Nursing confirmed that family should be notified immediately after a resident falls and if a resident is being sent to the hospital for a change in condition. The facility's policy on change of condition also mandates that the responsible party be notified of changes in a resident's condition. Despite these protocols, the Licensed Practical Nurse on duty only notified the resident's mother after the resident had returned from the hospital, failing to inform her at the time of the fall and subsequent hospital transfer.
Failure to Assess and Document Resident Fall
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure proper assessment and documentation following a fall incident involving a resident, identified as R2. On 12/18/24, R2 was observed on video falling out of bed at 10:20 AM. Two staff members, including a Wound Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA), entered the room and moved R2 back to bed without conducting a nurse assessment. The CNA involved did not recall notifying a specific nurse, and there was no documentation of the fall or any assessment in R2's clinical records for that day. The Director of Nursing (V2) stated that all falls should be documented, and a nurse should perform a full body assessment before moving the resident. However, the facility lacked a specific policy or procedure for staff to follow after a resident falls. The facility's Fall Risk Assessment Policy from 8/2020 requires a nurse to complete an Occurrence Report and initiate post-occurrence documentation, which was not adhered to in this case.
Failure to Schedule Resident's Doctor Appointments
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to schedule a resident's doctor appointments as per the physician's orders for one of the residents reviewed for quality of care. The resident, who was admitted with diagnoses including major depressive disorder, chronic pain syndrome, history of traumatic brain injury, and injury to the peripheral nerves of the thorax, had specific orders from their physician to follow up with a pain specialist at a rehabilitation hospital. These orders were documented on 10/18/23 and again on 1/10/24, yet the facility did not schedule the required appointments. Interviews with facility staff, including the Unit Manager and the Administrator, confirmed that the appointments were not scheduled as ordered. The resident's Primary Care Physician and Nurse Practitioner for Pain Management both expressed expectations that the facility would arrange these appointments. The facility's appointment policy indicates that assistance should be provided to residents in scheduling appointments, yet this was not adhered to in this case.
Deficiencies in Food Storage and Sanitization Practices
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain proper food storage and labeling practices in the kitchen, which could lead to foodborne illness among the 152 residents receiving dietary services. During an inspection, it was observed that the walk-in cooler contained several food items, such as shredded cheese, liquid eggs, and various pureed foods, that were not labeled or dated. Additionally, some items were stored improperly, with raw foods placed above cooked foods. The kitchen supervisor acknowledged the importance of labeling and dating food items but was unable to specify the expiration periods for different foods. The facility lacked a policy on how to date opened food items or determine their expiration. In the dry storage area, several dented cans of food were found, including cans of sliced pears, fruit cocktail, chocolate pudding, and tomato sauce. The corporate executive and kitchen supervisor both stated that dented cans should not be used as they could pose a risk of contamination. However, the facility's policy on dented cans was not being followed, as these compromised cans were not separated or marked as unusable. The walk-in freezer also contained several items without proper labeling or dates, such as pie crusts, pastries, waffles, and chicken tenders. A non-English speaking staff member was unable to answer questions about proper food storage and labeling. Additionally, the facility's sanitization practices were inadequate, with only one log being maintained for both the three-compartment sink and the red sanitization buckets, despite the need for separate logs. The dietary aide confirmed that only one log was used, and the corporate executive noted that separate logs should be maintained to ensure proper sanitization levels.
Deficiencies in ADL Assistance and Personal Hygiene Care
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide adequate care for residents dependent on staff for activities of daily living (ADLs), as evidenced by multiple observations and interviews. One resident, who was cognitively intact and dependent on staff for toileting hygiene, reported that staff skipped washing her perianal area during incontinence care, leading to a diaper rash. Despite the resident's request for water to be used during cleaning, staff continued to use wipes, which the resident believed contributed to her skin irritation. The facility's policy required the use of water and soap for perineal care, but this was not followed, resulting in reddened and inflamed skin for the resident. Other residents were observed with unmet personal hygiene needs, such as facial hair and dirty fingernails. One resident had an accumulation of chin hairs, while another had a dark substance under her fingernails, both of whom required substantial assistance for personal hygiene. The Director of Nursing acknowledged that female residents should not have facial hair and that fingernails should be clean to prevent infections. However, these hygiene tasks were not consistently performed, as evidenced by the continued presence of facial hair and dirty fingernails over several days. Additional residents were found with long, dirty fingernails and facial hair, indicating a lack of regular personal hygiene care. One resident had long, jagged fingernails with a brown substance underneath, and another had a full beard despite expressing a desire to have it shaved. These observations highlight the facility's failure to adhere to its policies on nail care and shaving, which require residents to have clean, well-trimmed nails and facial hair removed to improve appearance and morale. The facility's inaction in providing necessary ADL assistance resulted in multiple residents experiencing unmet hygiene needs.
Medication Storage and Expiration Deficiencies
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to properly store medications and remove expired medications from stock, affecting five residents. During an observation, it was noted that a resident's oral and rectal medications were stored together in the same drawer, which is against infection control protocols. Both the Assistant Director of Nursing and a Registered Nurse confirmed that rectal medications should not be stored with oral medications due to potential infection control issues. The resident had an active order for a rectal medication, which should have been stored separately in the treatment cart. Another deficiency was observed when a bag of Daptomycin, an intravenous antibiotic, was found in the medication room refrigerator with an expiration date that had already passed. The Assistant Director of Nursing acknowledged that expired medications should be sent back to the pharmacy and that the expired medication was still being administered to a resident for osteomyelitis. The facility's policy requires that medications be stored under proper conditions and that expired medications be removed. Additional issues included a resident having unsupervised access to nicotine gum, which was not securely stored, and another resident's zinc oxide medication being left on a bedside table instead of being locked in the medication cart. Furthermore, a bottle of Nystatin powder was found in a resident's room without an order for it to be stored there, and the Director of Nursing confirmed that medications should be secured unless there is a specific order allowing bedside storage. These observations indicate a failure to adhere to medication storage policies, potentially compromising resident safety.
Infection Control Lapses in Glucose Monitoring and Dining Services
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to adhere to infection control practices during blood glucose monitoring and dining services, affecting five residents. On October 1, 2024, an LPN did not clean the glucometer after testing a resident's blood glucose level before using it on another resident. This practice was contrary to the facility's policy, which required cleaning and disinfecting the glucometer after each use to prevent cross-contamination. Interviews with other staff members, including another LPN and the Director of Nursing, confirmed that the glucometer should be cleaned between residents to prevent infection, especially since blood is involved. During a lunch service, a CNA was observed handling multiple residents' food and utensils without performing hand hygiene between tasks. The CNA touched a resident's plate and glass, refilled the glass from a communal carton of thickened water, and then proceeded to serve other residents without cleaning her hands. This action violated the facility's hand hygiene policy, which mandates handwashing after contact with potentially contaminated items and between resident interactions. The facility administrator acknowledged that the CNA should have cleaned her hands to prevent the spread of infectious organisms.
Failure to Ensure Call Lights Within Reach for Residents
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that call lights were within reach for dependent residents, affecting three residents in the sample. One resident, who was diagnosed with functional quadriplegia and cognitive communication deficit, was found with her call light on the floor, making it inaccessible. Despite being able to use the call light, she could not find it. The Director of Nursing confirmed that call lights should be within reach, as per the facility's policy. Another resident, with a care plan indicating a risk for falls due to weakness and hemiplegia, repeatedly had his call light under the bed and out of reach. Nurses entered and exited his room without ensuring the call light was accessible. A third resident, who required assistance with daily activities and was at risk for falls, was left without her call light within reach after being assisted to bed by a CNA. She reported that this was a recurring issue, forcing her to yell for help when she could not reach the call light.
Failure to Provide Bed Hold Notifications for Hospital Transfers
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide written documentation of bed hold notifications to residents and/or their representatives when residents were transferred to the hospital. This deficiency was identified in three out of five residents reviewed for discharge and hospitalization. Specifically, the facility did not provide bed hold notifications for residents who were transferred to the hospital for various medical conditions, including elevated troponin levels, sepsis, and complications from a fall. The facility's policy requires that a bed hold notification be given to the resident or their representative at the time of transfer and that the Ombudsman be notified via a monthly transfer log. Interviews with the facility's Administrator and Director of Nursing revealed that the required bed hold assessments were not completed for the affected residents, and there was uncertainty as to why the nurses did not perform this task. The facility's policy, dated December 2018, mandates that the bed hold policy be documented and communicated to the resident and their representative within 24 hours of transfer. Additionally, the Ombudsman should be informed of all hospital transfers and therapeutic leaves. The failure to adhere to these procedures resulted in a deficiency in the facility's compliance with its own policies and regulatory requirements.
Unqualified Staff Administering IV Medications
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that intravenous medications were administered by qualified staff, specifically Registered Nurses (RNs), as per their policy. A resident, identified as R165, was admitted with several diagnoses including orthopedic aftercare following surgical amputation, acute osteomyelitis, type 2 diabetes, and cellulitis. The resident had physician orders for intravenous antibiotics, Daptomycin and Ceftriaxone. However, these medications were administered by Licensed Practical Nurses (LPNs) instead of RNs, which is against the facility's policy. The Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed that only RNs should handle intravenous medications, yet multiple LPNs were documented as having administered these medications over several dates. The Medication Administration Record (MAR) for R165 showed that LPNs administered Daptomycin and Ceftriaxone on numerous occasions throughout September and October. This included instances where LPNs flushed the midline PICC and changed the cap, tasks that should have been performed by RNs. The facility's policy, dated January 2022, clearly states that administration of intravenous fluids through central venous access should be done by a licensed nurse trained in the procedure, implying RNs. This discrepancy between policy and practice led to the deficiency noted in the report.
Failure to Assess and Manage Resident's Skin Alteration
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to have a skin alteration worsening assessed by a physician for a resident, identified as R16, who was reviewed for quality of care. On October 1, 2024, R16 reported having a diaper rash, and during incontinence care, CNAs observed reddened and inflamed skin from R16's lower back to upper thigh areas, including the perineal area and folds. Despite applying barrier cream to the perianal area, the CNAs did not apply it to the perineal area or folds. R16 expressed discomfort, describing a burning sensation. The Wound Care Coordinator, V34, noted that R16 was not being seen for wound rounds and emphasized the need for CNAs to alert the staff nurse for evaluation. V34 identified the condition as incontinence-related and suggested notifying the doctor for treatment evaluation. The LPN, V21, who had been caring for R16, admitted to not notifying a doctor about the skin alteration, despite the area not improving. V21 was unable to find any progress notes regarding the last physician evaluation of the wound. Although the doctor was aware of the rash and had ordered creams, there was no documentation of a recent physician assessment. The Wound Care Physician, V44, confirmed not being consulted for R16 and stated that MASD is usually managed by the primary care provider unless it does not improve, in which case he would be consulted. R16's medical history includes heart failure, COPD, and Type 2 diabetes mellitus, with a cognitive status noted as intact. The resident's care plans lacked specific interventions for the skin condition, despite a care plan indicating potential for skin integrity alteration. The facility's policy requires documentation of non-pressure skin alterations weekly and the development of a care plan for actual or potential skin integrity issues, which was not adhered to in R16's case.
Failure to Provide Restorative Services to Resident
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide restorative services to a resident as recommended in the admission restorative nursing assessment. The resident, identified as R152, was admitted to the facility and had been there for about four months without receiving any therapy services, despite being assessed for restorative therapy. The assessment indicated that R152 had no impairment in his extremities but was completely dependent on staff for toileting hygiene and bed mobility, with goals to improve to only requiring substantial assistance. The Restorative Nursing assessment recommended Passive Range of Motion (PROM), Active Range of Motion (AROM), and Bed Mobility/Walking programs, but the resident's Minimum Data Set (MDS) showed he received no such services in the previous seven days. The Restorative Registered Nurse (V7) acknowledged that R152 was not on any restorative programs and mentioned that the resident did not want to participate regularly because he was alert. However, there was no documentation of the resident's refusal of services. The resident's care plan indicated an ADL Functional Performance Deficit with goals to improve functioning, but it did not document any restorative therapies being offered or refused. Additionally, the Electronic Health Record (EHR) task section did not show any reference to restorative therapy programs being ordered, offered, or refused. The facility's policy requires that residents be assessed and provided with individualized restorative programs, which were not documented or implemented for R152.
Failure to Ensure Resident Safety and Supervision
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide a safe and supervised environment for three residents, leading to potential accident hazards. One resident, identified as R221, was observed in a wheelchair without non-skid socks or eyeglasses, despite being a fall risk due to conditions like metabolic encephalopathy and Parkinson's with dyskinesia. The staff acknowledged the oversight, as the resident was supposed to have non-skid footwear for safety. Another resident, R222, was found in a cluttered room with furniture and a mat improperly placed, which could impede safe movement. This resident, who has cognitive deficits and poor balance, was at risk for falls, and the care plan required a floor mat next to the bed, which was not followed. Additionally, a third resident, R142, who has moderate cognitive impairment and multiple health issues, was found with disinfectant spray cans within reach, contrary to the facility's policy on chemical storage. The policy mandates that chemicals be kept inaccessible to residents, stored in locked areas, or under constant supervision. The presence of these chemicals in the resident's bed and on the overbed table posed a safety risk, as they were not secured or monitored by staff.
Failure to Change Soiled PICC Line Dressing
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to appropriately manage the dressing of a PICC line for a resident, identified as R165, who was admitted with multiple diagnoses including orthopedic aftercare following surgical amputation, acute osteomyelitis, type 2 diabetes, and cellulitis. The resident's physician orders required a transparent sterile dressing change weekly and as needed, with checks on the IV site every eight hours for signs of infection. However, observations on October 1st and 3rd revealed that the PICC line dressing, dated September 29th, was soiled with bloody drainage, indicating it had not been changed as required. Interviews with facility staff, including an LPN and the Director of Nursing, confirmed that the dressing should be changed weekly or as needed if soiled. The facility's own IV Care Reference Guide and policy on Central Venous Access Catheter Device: Dressing Change also stipulated that dressings should be changed daily if covered with gauze and not visible. Despite these guidelines, the dressing remained unchanged, leading to a deficiency in the care provided to the resident.
Failure to Administer Oxygen as Ordered
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide oxygen supplementation as ordered by the physician for a resident, identified as R42, who was admitted with diagnoses including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and dependence on supplemental oxygen. The physician's order specified oxygen at 4 liters per minute via nasal cannula continuously. On October 1st, R42 was observed in bed with a nasal cannula connected to an oxygen compressor set to 0 liters, resulting in a blue tongue and shallow respirations. The assigned RN, V6, stated she did not turn off the oxygen supply and was unaware of who did. By October 3rd, the oxygen was set correctly at 4 liters, and R42's condition improved with a pink tongue and regular breathing. The facility's policy allows only RNs, LPNs, or RTs to administer oxygen, while CNAs may only adjust or reapply the nasal cannula or mask.
Inaccurate Record of Receipt for Controlled Medication
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain an accurate Record of Receipt for a controlled medication for a resident, identified as R324. During an observation of the medication cart, a handwritten note was found in the Controlled Drug Receipt/Record/Disposition Form book, which lacked essential information such as the medication's name, quantity on hand, quantity received, and licensed nurses' signatures. The resident had a box of Morphine Sulfate 30 mL in the locked box on the medication cart, but the narcotic count sheet was incomplete. The Director of Nursing acknowledged the absence of the appropriate narcotic count sheet and emphasized the importance of including the medication name to prevent medication errors. R324 was admitted with diagnoses including palliative care, vascular dementia, atherosclerotic heart disease, atrial fibrillation, and hypertension. The resident had an active order for Morphine Sulfate Solution 20 mg/mL to be administered as needed for moderate pain. The facility's Controlled Drug Documentation Policy requires a proof-of-use form for each controlled medication, which was not properly followed in this instance. The policy also mandates that controlled substances be counted and verified every shift by two licensed nurses, with any discrepancies reported to the Director of Nursing immediately.
Failure to Prevent Resident Elopement
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to implement adequate safety measures for a resident at risk for wandering, resulting in the resident eloping from a locked unit and exiting the facility without supervision on two separate occasions. The resident, who was cognitively impaired with diagnoses including moderate vascular dementia and unspecified psychosis, was able to leave the facility unnoticed by staff. On the first occasion, the resident left the facility, walked past a pond and across a thoroughfare, and was found in a movie theater parking lot over an hour later. The facility was unaware of how the resident managed to exit the locked unit. The resident's history showed a pattern of exit-seeking behavior, including standing by the elevator and attempting to board it. Despite being assessed as at risk for elopement, the facility did not effectively monitor or prevent the resident from leaving the premises. On the second occasion, the resident again managed to leave the facility, walking past the receptionist and into the parking lot. The receptionist did not notice the resident leaving and failed to call a code green for resident elopement. The facility's policies and procedures for managing elopement and monitoring residents at risk were not adequately followed or enforced. The resident's care plan and risk assessments were not updated in a timely manner to reflect the resident's exit-seeking behaviors. The lack of supervision and failure to activate door alarms contributed to the resident's ability to elope from the facility, resulting in Immediate Jeopardy being declared.
Removal Plan
- Resident was reassessed for elopement risk after the elopement occurred and deemed an elopement risk. The resident elopement risk assessment was reviewed by Memory Care Director with no changes warranted.
- Resident was located and returned to the facility. A head-to-toe assessment was completed by the assigned nurses, with no signs of injury on either occurrence.
- The Resident care plan was updated pertaining to the elopement that occurred, by the Memory Care Director and further reviewed and updated by the MCD.
- The DON, Administrator, ADON, and Medical Director reviewed the facility policies related to the occurrence: Elopement, Routine Resident Checks, Exit Seeking, and Incidents/Accidents. No changes were made.
- The Memory Care Director and Social Service Director updated the assessments and care plans for elopement risk residents. The assessments were completed.
- The Administrator initiated further education that a resident exhibiting exit seeking behaviors should be placed on enhanced monitoring including 15 minute checks and 1:1 supervision until the behavior subsides or alternate measures are put into place. Staff were educated to alert the nurse of exit seeking behaviors who would then implement increased intervention.
- All residents were reassessed for elopement risk and completed.
- All new admissions will have an elopement risk assessment that will be completed within 24 hours upon admission and interim care plan will be initiated based off the assessment, and will be reassessed every three months, and as needed by MCD.
- All residents that are identified as-risk for elopement during admission had a review of their care plan and updates were made where applicable, completed and further reviewed.
- Pictures of at-risk residents were placed in a binder on all nursing stations and the receptionist desk which was completed and reviewed by MCD.
- All residents determined to be at-risk for elopement and with active exit-seeking behaviors will be evaluated for a possible room change to the secured unit to limit access to the front entrance door.
- Interviews were conducted by the Administrator with staff to determine further potential risk and completed. Additional interviews were initiated and completed to further identify any potential risk factors.
- All staff and managers are being reeducated on routine resident checks, exit seeking, incidents/accidents, elopement policy and procedure and where to locate the at risk of elopement binders. The reeducation was provided and was completed.
- All staff and managers are being reeducated on elopement risk and reporting behaviors or changes in factors related to elopement risk to appropriate discipline. This was started and completed.
- All reception staff were reeducated on monitoring the front doors and resident safety and proper procedure for code green completed.
- Exit doors will be monitored by staff when unalarmed. The receptionist will monitor the front entrance door. Door will be armed by receptionist and monitored by 1st floor nurses through the duration of that time.
- Exterior door alarms will be checked daily by the maintenance director and EVS Supervisor to ensure they are in working order and secured. Completed and checked again.
- After initial elopement resident was placed on 15 minute checks for 24 hours. During that time the facility met with daughter and discussed new interventions. A plan was established and implemented.
- 1:1 Visual monitoring was initiated by staff for the resident. Intervention will remain in place until the facility's wandering management system is installed and determined to be effective to prevent further incident.
- Elevator monitor was initiated. Elevator will remain monitored 24 hours a day until wandering management system is installed and determined to be effective to prevent further incident.
- A review of compliance using Quality Assurance Audit tool for elopement started by the Administrator. The Audits will be done daily for two weeks then twice weekly for four weeks, then monthly, and evaluated at the monthly QAPI meeting to determine compliance. Audits to be completed by members of the IDT team and turned into Administrator who will ensure audits are being completed.
- A review of results of audit regarding elopement and door alarm working condition with the facility's interdisciplinary team started. Audits will be done weekly for four weeks, then monthly, and then randomly by Administrator/designee until goal is attained. Results of these audits will be reviewed at the monthly QAPI to determine compliance.
- Administrator to Audit daily that exterior front door alarm is being activated each day by receptionist prior to leaving.
- A facility wandering management system install was initiated.
- During orientation of new hires, the facility Business Office Manager will educate newly hired staff on elopement and conduct competency quizzes.
- The facility Quality Assurance Team/ IDT including Medical Director, Administrator, Social Services, DON, ADON and facility consultant shall meet at least monthly to review elopement risk residents, trends, patterns and develop and implement action steps as necessary.
- The QA meeting is held monthly, then quarterly and as needed. An emergency QA meeting was held by the Administrator with the Interdisciplinary Care Team and Medical Director. The Elopement from the facility were discussed along with the Removal Plan. The Medical Director and Interdisciplinary Care Team approved this Removal Plan. This will be monitored by the Administrator, DON, ADON, and Social Services.
Failure to Provide Stand-by Assistance Leads to Resident Fall
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide stand-by assistance to a resident who required assistance to ambulate, resulting in the resident falling and fracturing her nasal bone. The resident, who had a history of falls and was at risk for further incidents, was ambulating in the dining room with a rolling walker when she tripped and fell, striking her nose on the floor. Despite the resident's care plan indicating the need for supervision during ambulation, staff members were not adequately informed or did not adhere to the requirement for stand-by assistance. The resident's medical history included conditions such as hypertension, Alzheimer's disease, atrial fibrillation, type 1 diabetes mellitus, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The care plan, initiated prior to the incident, highlighted the resident's risk for falls and included interventions such as monitoring changes in her ability to navigate the environment and encouraging the use of a wheelchair. However, these interventions were not effectively communicated or implemented by the staff, leading to the resident's fall and subsequent injury. Interviews with staff members revealed a lack of awareness and communication regarding the resident's need for stand-by assistance. Several staff members, including CNAs and memory care aides, were not informed of the requirement to walk alongside the resident during ambulation. The facility's policy on fall management emphasized the need to assess hazards, develop a care plan, and implement appropriate interventions, but these measures were not adequately followed, contributing to the deficiency.
Latest citations in Illinois
A resident with end stage renal disease on dialysis, right below-knee amputation, osteoporosis, muscle weakness, dementia, and Alzheimer’s disease, who was care planned as high risk for falls, slid from a high-back wheelchair and sustained a left femur fracture. The care plan called for proper seating, posture reminders, and use of a non-skid/dycem pad in the wheelchair, but on the day of the fall the RN found the resident on the floor with the chair in an upright position and no non-slip pad in place. CNAs described differing routines for how the resident was transferred and positioned after dialysis and dinner, including expectations that the chair be slightly reclined and the resident monitored in a TV room, while the DON’s investigation did not confirm whether required fall-prevention devices were in use and acknowledged the resident had previously slid from his wheelchair.
A resident with hemiplegia, gait abnormalities, lack of coordination, and cognitive deficit, who required substantial assistance with ADLs including turning in bed, fell from bed during peri-care when a CNA asked the resident to turn onto her side and the resident’s legs went over the bed edge. Staff later reported that residents should be positioned in the middle of the bed before turning to prevent falls. An RN assessed the resident after the fall, and the resident was subsequently evaluated by an NP and sent to the hospital, where an intertrochanteric femur fracture associated with a traumatic event was diagnosed.
Two cognitively intact residents reported separate incidents in which CNAs used profane, disparaging, and humiliating language toward or about them during personal care. In one event, a male CNA providing incontinence care to a roommate refused to close the room door, argued with a resident about the request, and repeatedly used the term “mother f***er” in reference to that resident while care was being given. In another event, two CNAs entered a resident’s room after a recent hospice bath, with one CNA stating the resident “stinks” and that no one, including hospice, wanted to care for him because he always complained. Both residents had no documented history of making false abuse allegations, and the reported staff statements are inconsistent with the facility’s abuse policy defining mental and verbal abuse as including humiliation, harassment, and disparaging or derogatory terms.
A resident with ESRD on dialysis, right BKA, osteoporosis, dementia, and Alzheimer’s fell in his room and was assisted back to bed by an RN and CNA. The RN documented an assessment and later gave PRN tramadol, while the CNA reported the resident said “Oww” when his left leg was moved and screamed during care. The next day, a CNA reported that the resident screamed that his left leg hurt when being dressed and informed two RNs, and another CNA later heard the resident repeatedly say he was in pain but did not notify a nurse. Despite multiple pain complaints, documentation shows only one PRN tramadol dose and no thorough assessment of the left leg pain or MD notification for change in condition. The resident was later sent from dialysis to the ER for leg pain, where an X-ray showed a distal femur fracture requiring surgical repair, and the hospital record noted it was unclear if any evaluation had been done after the fall.
A resident had an active order for enhanced barrier precautions due to a PICC, with signage posted instructing staff to wear gloves and a gown during device care and use. A RN was observed performing PICC care and disconnecting the resident from IV antibiotic therapy while wearing gloves but no gown. The infection control nurse confirmed that enhanced barrier precautions require both gloves and a gown for PICC handling, and facility policy specified glove and gown use for high-contact device care activities.
A resident re-admitted after right femur fracture repair, with dementia and multiple comorbidities, had a PRN order for oxycodone 5 mg q4h for moderate to severe pain. Nursing documentation later that day described the resident yelling, screaming, and exhibiting severe pain, but the MAR shows no pain medication was given at that time, and only acetaminophen 325 mg was administered hours later. The RN and DON acknowledged that the resident was non-verbal, that oxycodone was ordered and available from the emergency supply, and that acetaminophen alone was not adequate for post-surgical pain, yet the narcotic was not administered until many hours after delivery from the pharmacy, contrary to the facility’s pain management policy.
Two residents experienced failures in required physician and family notification. For one resident on Lithium with multiple comorbidities, staff did not notify the psychiatrist of a documented high Lithium level and continued administering Lithium at the increased dose until the resident became lethargic and was later hospitalized with Lithium toxicity. For another resident with Parkinson’s disease and high fall risk who requires total assistance with ADLs, staff did not document physician or family notification after unwitnessed falls that resulted in bruising to the buttock, hip discoloration, and a head abrasion, despite internal policy requiring immediate notification for significant changes in condition and injuries.
Two residents experienced deficiencies in assessment and monitoring when staff did not adequately evaluate or document significant changes in condition and post-fall injuries. One resident with multiple chronic conditions and on lithium became markedly lethargic, unable to sit upright, and had difficulty swallowing, with CNAs repeatedly reporting these changes to an RN who documented only a bruise and no detailed assessment or frequent monitoring; a previously elevated lithium level had not been reported to the psychiatrist. Another resident with Parkinson’s disease and high fall risk had an unwitnessed fall and was later found by CNAs to have a large dark purple bruise covering most of the right buttock, but nursing staff either assessed only exposed skin or gave conflicting accounts of having noted the bruise, and documentation and post-fall assessments did not reflect this injury as required by facility policy.
A resident with multiple chronic conditions, moderate cognitive impairment, and independent ambulation was placed in a Geri-chair by a CNA who was not assigned to the resident, and a sheet was tied around the resident’s waist and the back of the chair, preventing the resident from getting up. The CNA stated she used the sheet as a seat belt and safety precaution because the resident was wandering into other residents’ rooms and disturbing them, acknowledging that tying a sheet in this way is considered a restraint and is not allowed. The resident, who does not use a wheelchair or Geri-chair and normally ambulates without assistive devices, remained in the chair until discovered by a day-shift CNA, who noted the resident could not get up as usual and saw the sheet restraining the resident. Facility leadership, including the administrator, DON, physician, and social services, confirmed that the Geri-chair and tied sheet constituted a physical restraint applied without assessment, IDT involvement, physician order, consent, or documented medical symptoms warranting restraint, contrary to facility policies prohibiting such use and requiring immediate reporting of potential abuse. A subsequent skin assessment documented discoloration/bruising to the resident’s upper and lower extremities.
Staff failed to follow the facility’s mandatory gait belt policy and individual transfer care plans for multiple cognitively impaired residents with conditions such as DM, CHF, Parkinson’s disease, dementia, cerebral infarction, and Alzheimer’s disease. CNAs repeatedly transferred residents between bed, wheelchair, and toilet without gait belts, instead lifting under the axillae, pulling on clothing, and moving wheelchairs into place while residents were partially supported. In one instance, a wheelchair was not locked during a transfer, causing a resident to end up on the edge of the bed and nearly fall. CNAs later acknowledged that gait belts are supposed to be used for transfers, and facility policy specifies that gait belts are mandatory for all physical assist transfers.
Failure to Implement Fall-Prevention Interventions for High-Risk Resident
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to implement and maintain fall prevention interventions for a resident identified as high risk for falls, resulting in the resident sliding from a high-back wheelchair and sustaining a left femur fracture. The resident had multiple diagnoses, including end stage renal disease with dialysis dependence, right below-knee amputation, osteoporosis, muscle weakness, lack of coordination, abnormal posture, anxiety, dementia, and Alzheimer’s disease. The resident’s care plan identified him as high risk for falls and included interventions such as reminding him of good posture in the wheelchair, redirecting him to bed if slouching or fatigued, ensuring he was properly seated, and placing a non-skid mat/dycem non-slip pad in the wheelchair to prevent sliding. On the evening of the fall, the RN responded to the resident yelling and found him on the floor between his recliner (high-back wheelchair) and nearby furniture; the resident stated he had been sleeping in the recliner in front of the heater and slid down. The RN observed that the wheelchair was in the upright position rather than reclined as usual and that there was no non-slip pad on the chair. Interviews and record review showed inconsistent implementation of the resident’s fall-prevention plan and lack of clear follow-through on the circumstances of the fall. One CNA reported that on the day of the fall, the resident returned from dialysis already in his chair, likely transferred there by transport staff using a sheet, and that she did not transfer him into the chair herself. Another CNA, who routinely cared for the resident, stated that transport staff typically placed him in bed on return from dialysis and that staff would later transfer him to his high-back wheelchair with a mechanical lift before dinner, recline the chair slightly after dinner, and position him in the TV room so staff could monitor him and prevent him from falling asleep and sliding out. The DON, who investigated the fall, did not recall speaking with the RN or the CNA involved, did not know whether a non-slip pad was in place at the time of the fall, and acknowledged that the resident had slid out of his wheelchair in the past. The DON identified sliding from the wheelchair as the root cause of the fall and stated that the resident’s left leg fracture was from this fall.
Failure to Maintain Bed Safety During Peri-Care Resulting in Resident Fall and Fracture
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to ensure a resident’s safety during incontinence/peri-care, resulting in a fall from bed and a fracture. The resident had been readmitted with diagnoses including hemiplegia and hemiparesis affecting the right dominant side, multiple neoplasm sites, lack of coordination, and abnormalities of gait and mobility. A recent Minimum Data Set indicated the resident had a cognitive deficit and required partial to substantial assistance with ADLs such as turning in bed, bathing, toileting, dressing, and personal hygiene. During peri-care, a CNA reported completing cleaning of the resident’s front and then asking the resident to turn onto her side; the resident turned onto her right side, her legs went over the side of the bed, and she fell out of the bed. Another CNA stated that when providing peri-care, staff should ensure the resident is in the middle of the bed before turning them so they do not go too far and fall out. Following the fall, an RN reported being informed by the CNA that the resident had fallen out of bed while being cleaned and was asked to assess the resident. After the resident was returned to bed, the RN noted the resident nodded when asked if she had pain. A nurse practitioner later saw the resident in her wheelchair and noted she did not show signs of pain until her right hip and thigh were palpated, after which the resident’s power of attorney requested hospital transfer. Hospital records showed the resident was admitted with an intertrochanteric right femur fracture and was transferred to another hospital for surgery. The medical director stated that this type of fracture is associated with a traumatic event.
Failure to Protect Residents From Verbal and Mental Abuse by CNAs
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to protect residents from verbal and mental abuse by CNAs. One cognitively intact resident, R1, reported that on a morning the prior week, a Black male CNA entered the shared room around 5:55 AM to provide incontinence care to R2 and left the door open. When R1 told the CNA the door needed to be closed, the CNA replied that he does not close doors when working. After R1 stated he could make a complaint to the state, the CNA responded, “Do what you have to do mother f***er.” R1 then got out of bed, closed the door himself, and went to the bathroom. R1 reported this incident that morning to the Activity Director (V3), describing that an African American male CNA had used unkind words toward him related to his request to close the door. R2, who is also cognitively intact, corroborated the incident, stating that while he was receiving perineal care from a CNA, R1 and the CNA argued about the door being closed. R2 reported that during the care, while the CNA was wiping his perineal area, the CNA called R1 a “mother f***er.” After R1 closed the door and went to the bathroom, R2 stated that the CNA continued talking about R1 and referred to him as a “mother f***er” multiple times, with the term directed toward R1. The Administrator (V1) later interviewed the Black male CNAs and contacted an agency CNA (V10) who had worked that night; V10 admitted to swearing in the room while providing care to R2, stating he hit his foot and yelled out profanity, but denied swearing at residents. R1’s care plan and staff interviews indicated he had no history of making false abuse statements, and R2’s records similarly showed no history of false abuse allegations. A second incident of verbal and mental abuse involved R2 and two CNAs, V7 and V8. R2 stated that on a day shortly after a hospice aide had given him a bath, V7 and V8 entered his room to clean him and get him up. According to R2, V7 said, “You stink.” When R2 responded that he should not smell because he had just received a bath the day before, V7 allegedly stated, “Everyone in this place hates taking care of you.” R2 reported that these comments made him upset and feel bad about himself. R1, who was present in the room, stated that as soon as V7 entered, she told R2 that he stinks, and when R2 replied that he had just had a bath, V7 said, “No one want to take care of you, you are always complaining, not even hospice.” The facility’s abuse policy defines mental abuse as including humiliation and harassment, and verbal abuse as the willful use of disparaging and derogatory terms to residents or within hearing distance, which aligns with the language reported in both incidents.
Failure to Timely Assess and Treat Post-Fall Leg Pain Leading to Delayed Fracture Diagnosis
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to ensure a resident received timely medical evaluation and treatment after a fall resulting in a fractured leg. The resident had multiple diagnoses including end stage renal disease with dialysis dependence, right below-knee amputation, osteoporosis, muscle weakness, lack of coordination, abnormal posture, anxiety, dementia, and Alzheimer’s disease. According to the fall incident note, the resident fell in his room and was found on the floor between his recliner and nearby furniture. The RN who responded reported performing a full assessment, including range of motion, and stated the resident could not move his left leg very much but considered this baseline and noted no pain complaints. She administered PRN tramadol later that night, documented for pain at a level 3, but stated she sometimes gives tramadol and melatonin to help him sleep and was unsure why pain was marked on the MAR. A CNA present after the fall reported that when the RN moved the resident’s left leg, he said “Oww” and began cussing, and that he screamed during incontinence care, though this was described as normal for him. On the following day shift, a CNA reported that when attempting to dress the resident, he screamed that his left leg hurt and stated he had fallen the previous day. The CNA immediately informed two RNs, who, according to the CNA, acknowledged the prior fall and said they were taking care of it; one RN later stated she did not recall being told about pain, and the other said she was leaving at end of shift after being told the resident had leg pain. Another CNA caring for the resident later that day and night reported the resident repeatedly said “don’t touch me, I’m in pain,” but she did not report this to a nurse because she believed it was normal for him to yell. Progress notes and records from this period show only one PRN tramadol dose given and no documented assessment of the resident’s left leg pain or notification of the physician regarding a change in condition between the fall and his transfer out. The next day, at the dialysis center, the resident appeared agitated and pointed to his left leg, prompting transfer to the ER, where imaging revealed a minimally displaced distal femur fracture requiring intramedullary nailing. The hospital history and physical noted it was unclear if any evaluation had been performed after the fall at the facility.
Failure to Use Required PPE During PICC Care Under Enhanced Barrier Precautions
Penalty
Summary
Surveyors identified a deficiency in the facility’s infection prevention and control program when staff did not follow required personal protective equipment (PPE) use for a resident on enhanced barrier precautions. The resident (R4) had a physician order dated 3/31/26 for enhanced barrier precautions related to a peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC), with a start date of 3/26/26. An enhanced barrier precaution sign was posted on the resident’s bathroom door, instructing staff to wear gloves and a gown during device care and use. On 3/31/26 at 11:12 AM, a registered nurse (V16) was observed in the resident’s room handling the PICC line and disconnecting the resident from an antibiotic while wearing gloves but no gown. During an interview, the infection control nurse (V7) stated that enhanced barrier precautions are used to help limit infections and that staff are required to wear both gloves and a gown when handling a PICC. The facility’s Enhanced Barrier Precautions Protocol, revised 7/26/21, specified that gloves and gowns were to be used during high-contact care activities, including device care or use. This sequence of observations, interviews, and record review showed that despite existing orders, signage, and policy requiring both gloves and gowns for high-contact device care under enhanced barrier precautions, the registered nurse did not wear a gown while performing PICC care for the resident.
Failure to Administer Ordered PRN Narcotic for Severe Post-Surgical Pain
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to provide ordered pain medication to a resident following right femur fracture repair. The resident was re-admitted with diagnoses including peripheral vascular disease, late-onset Alzheimer’s disease, unspecified dementia, falls, diabetes, and osteoarthritis. Physician orders dated December 2025 included oxycodone 5 mg every 4 hours as needed for moderate or severe pain. On 12/27/25 at 1:38 PM, nursing notes documented the resident exhibiting yelling and screaming behaviors and severe pain, with interventions listed as scheduled pain medication and PRN medication administration. However, the Medication Administration Record for December 2025 shows no pain medication was administered at 1:38 PM, and instead acetaminophen 325 mg was given later at 3:34 PM. During interviews, the RN stated the resident was confused and non-verbal, with pain indicated by facial grimacing and behaviors, and confirmed the resident had scheduled acetaminophen and PRN oxycodone available, noting that if waiting for pharmacy delivery, narcotics could be pulled from the emergency supply. The DON reported that discharge instructions from the hospital included narcotic prescriptions and that oxycodone was available in the emergency supply box. The DON confirmed the resident arrived at 10:27 AM, that the nurse’s note at 1:38 PM documented severe pain, and that no pain medication was administered at that time despite an order for oxycodone 5 mg for moderate to severe pain. The DON also stated that acetaminophen alone would not be adequate for pain control following hip surgery and was unsure why nursing did not administer the narcotic. The controlled substance record shows oxycodone was delivered to the facility at 10:00 PM and first administered at 1:00 AM the following day. The facility’s pain management policy states that pain management will be provided to residents who require such services, consistent with professional standards of practice and the person-centered care plan.
Failure to Notify Physician and Family of Abnormal Labs and Post-Fall Injuries
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to notify a physician of an abnormal laboratory result for a resident receiving Lithium, as well as failure to notify a physician and family of injuries following unwitnessed falls for another resident. One resident, a 65-year-old with multiple medical diagnoses including paranoid schizophrenia, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, atherosclerotic heart disease, anxiety disorder, and restlessness/agitation, had a physician order for Lithium that was increased over time to 300 mg twice daily as of early March 2026. A laboratory result dated March 10, 2026, showed a Lithium level of 1.40 mmol/L, flagged as high, with no documentation that the physician was notified of this abnormal result. The MAR shows that staff continued to administer Lithium 300 mg twice daily from March 5 through March 15, 2026, without documented physician notification or dose adjustment in response to the elevated level. On March 15, 2026, progress notes document that this resident became very lethargic, unable to stand or transfer, and unable to answer questions, with continued lethargy and inability to respond even to simple questions later that evening. The notes indicate that the physician and DON were contacted at that time and that the resident was sent to the hospital via emergency services. Hospital records show the resident was admitted with a primary diagnosis of Lithium toxicity and that a subsequent Lithium level was critically high at 1.73. The resident’s psychiatrist later stated he was not aware of the elevated Lithium level obtained on March 10, 2026, and that facility staff were expected to notify him of high or low Lithium levels so that medication doses could be adjusted and the resident monitored for changes in condition. The deficiency also includes a second resident, a 64-year-old with multiple diagnoses including altered mental status, Parkinson’s disease, lack of coordination, muscle wasting and atrophy, and difficulty walking, for whom the facility failed to notify the physician and family of injuries after unwitnessed falls and subsequent bruising. This resident requires total assistance for toileting, hygiene, and dressing. An incident report dated March 20, 2026, documents a fall by the nurses’ station with no initial injury noted and physician and family notification at that time; however, a large dark purple bruise covering most of the right buttock was later observed, and the post-fall follow-up assessment dated March 23, 2026, does not show documentation that the physician or family were notified of this bruise. Staff interviews show inconsistent accounts regarding when the bruise was noticed and who was informed, and a CNA reported that the bruise had been observed and reported to the nurse. Additionally, an earlier incident report dated February 23, 2026, documents an unwitnessed fall with yellow discoloration to the left hip and an abrasion to the posterior head, with no progress note documentation that the physician or family were notified of these injuries, despite facility policy requiring immediate notification of the physician and family for significant changes in condition or injuries.
Failure to Assess Change in Condition and Complete Post-Fall Body Assessment
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to adequately assess and respond to a change in condition for one resident (R1) and to perform a complete post-fall body assessment for another resident (R5). R1, a 65-year-old with multiple medical diagnoses including hypotension, hypertension, coronary artery disease, paranoid schizophrenia, urinary retention, anxiety disorder, and restlessness/agitation, was documented on the MDS as alert and oriented and requiring substantial to maximum assistance with ADLs. On the morning of March 15, 2026, R1’s nurse (V5) observed her leaning to one side in her wheelchair after breakfast and instructed CNAs to put her to bed to prevent a fall. V5 noted a bruise on R1’s left shoulder but did not document any further assessment of her condition. Despite multiple CNAs (V8, V9, V10) recognizing that R1 was very lethargic, leaning forward and to the side, unable to sit upright, having difficulty swallowing food and water, gagging, and appearing in a daze, there was no detailed nursing assessment or frequent monitoring documented for R1 during the morning shift. Later that day, during shift change, another nurse (V7) observed R1 to be very lethargic, barely responsive to her name, and unable to stand or transfer. V7 had not been informed of any change in condition and was unfamiliar with R1’s baseline. After R1’s family expressed alarm at her condition, V7 confirmed with CNAs that R1 usually got up with assistance and used a bedside commode but was now unable to get up or sit on the commode even with assistance from three staff. V7 obtained vital signs, which were stable, but R1 remained lethargic. V7 notified the physician and the DON and arranged for R1 to be sent to the hospital via emergency services. Progress notes from the evening documented that R1 was very lethargic, moaning but unable to speak or answer even simple questions. Hospital records showed R1 was admitted with a primary diagnosis of lithium toxicity, with a critically high lithium level of 1.73 mmol/L. A prior lab result from March 10, 2026, showed an elevated lithium level of 1.40 mmol/L, with no documentation that the physician was notified. R1’s psychiatrist (V14) stated he was not aware of the elevated lithium level and that facility staff were expected to notify him of high or low lithium levels so that dosing and monitoring could be adjusted. The deficiency also includes the facility’s failure to conduct and document a complete post-fall body assessment for R5, a 64-year-old with altered mental status, Parkinson’s disease, lack of coordination, muscle wasting and atrophy, difficulty walking, dysphagia (oral phase), and cognitive communication deficit. R5 required total assistance for toileting, hygiene, and dressing. An incident report dated March 20, 2026, documented that R5 had an unwitnessed fall by the nurses’ station, was on a blood thinner, and was sent to the hospital, with no injury initially noted. Upon R5’s return from the hospital on March 22, 2026, a progress note stated that a full body assessment was conducted and no new skin issues were noted, and subsequent post-fall assessments through March 23, 2026, also documented no skin issues. However, CNAs (V16 and V17) later observed a large dark purple bruise covering almost the entire right buttock during a full body assessment on March 23, 2026. CNA V17 reported seeing this bruise the evening of March 22, 2026, when assisting R5 to the toilet and stated she immediately notified nurse V6. CNA V21 confirmed being informed of the bruise during shift change. Nurse V5, who cared for R5 on the morning of March 23, 2026, stated he only assessed exposed skin and did not see the bruise. V6 initially stated she was unaware of the bruise but later changed her statement to say she had done a complete body check on admission and noted the bruise. The ADON (V20) stated that when a bruise is found, staff must document its size, location, color, tenderness or pain, and notify the physician of injuries or changes in condition. The facility’s Accident and Incident Policy requires documentation of the extent of injury, assessment, and at least 72 hours of daily documentation after an incident, which was not reflected in R5’s records regarding the buttock bruise.
Resident Improperly Restrained in Geri-Chair With Sheet and No Medical Justification
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves a resident who was physically restrained in a Geri-chair using a sheet without a physician’s order, consent, or documented medical justification. The resident is an older adult with multiple medical diagnoses including type 2 diabetes mellitus with hyperglycemia, COPD, hypertensive heart disease without heart failure, hyperlipidemia, urinary incontinence, edema of unspecified eye, and bipolar disorder. The MDS documented a BIMS score of 9, indicating moderate cognitive impairment, and showed the resident required only supervision or touching assistance for sit-to-stand and ambulation tasks, did not use a wheelchair or scooter, and was ambulatory without assistive devices. The care plan documented the resident as an adult with chronic health conditions and co-morbidities living in LTC, with recognition that such circumstances may be viewed as a form of trauma, but did not document any history of being a perpetrator or recipient of mistreatment, abuse, neglect, or exploitation. On the night in question, a CNA who was not assigned to the resident placed the ambulatory resident into a Geri-chair on the third floor and tied a sheet around the resident’s waist and the back of the chair, using it as a seat belt. The CNA stated she did this around 3:30 a.m. because the resident was walking from room to room, entering other residents’ rooms, pulling on residents while they were sleeping, and other residents were getting upset. The CNA reported that the resident was awake, clapping, able to move arms and legs, but could not get out of the Geri-chair because it was reclined “like a couch.” The CNA acknowledged that wheelchairs do not come with seat belts, that tying a sheet over a resident who does not use a Geri-chair is considered a restraint, and that using a sheet in this way is not allowed, but stated she believed she was helping and using it as a safety precaution to keep the resident from falling out and to keep the resident with her while she went from room to room. The resident remained in the Geri-chair with the sheet tied until discovered by a day-shift CNA after 7:00 a.m., who found the resident in the dining room, noted that the resident could not get up as usual, and on closer inspection saw the sheet restraining the resident from getting out of the chair. The day-shift CNA reported the situation to a nurse and the resident was removed from the chair around 7:10–7:15 a.m. Subsequent review of security footage by the administrator and DON confirmed the resident sitting in the hallway in a Geri-chair with a sheet tied over the lap, and multiple staff, including the administrator, DON, attending physician, and social services director, identified the Geri-chair and tied sheet as a restraint, noting that the resident is ambulatory and does not utilize a Geri-chair. A skin/shower worksheet dated several days later documented skin discoloration/bruising to the resident’s upper and lower extremities. The facility’s written policies state that physical restraints are to be used only as a last resort after alternatives have been tried and failed, based on assessment and IDT determination, and that the facility prohibits abuse, neglect, exploitation, and mistreatment, with employees required to immediately report any incident, allegation, or suspicion of potential abuse or neglect to the administrator or an immediate supervisor who must immediately report it to the administrator. In this incident, the resident was restrained without assessment, IDT involvement, physician order, consent, or documented medical symptoms warranting restraint, and the restraint was applied solely at the CNA’s discretion. Additional staff interviews further described the circumstances and staff awareness. The DON confirmed that the resident is ambulatory, does not use assistive devices, does not utilize a Geri-chair, and is able to transfer independently, and stated that placing the resident in a Geri-chair and tying a sheet over the resident would be considered a restraint. The attending physician stated that someone took it upon themselves to place the resident in a Geri-chair and used a sheet to tie the resident down, described this as wrong and never okay, and characterized it as the aide’s misguided independent action. The social services director stated the resident ambulates independently with moderate cognitive impairment, does not require a wheelchair or Geri-chair, and that having something wrapped around the resident’s legs or thighs in this manner is technically a restraint. The administrator stated that the Geri-chair was considered a restraint because it was not assigned to the resident, and the sheet was also a restraint because it was tied over the resident’s lap, and confirmed that the resident is mobile and does not use a chair or other devices. The report also details staff knowledge and recognition of the restraint and the reporting chain. The CNA who discovered the resident in the morning stated she had received abuse prevention training and knew that use of restraints is prohibited and considered abuse, and that there are different levels of restraints. She reported the situation to a nurse but did not directly notify the administrator. The house supervisor LPN stated she was told by the CNA that the resident was in a Geri-chair and was wet, but she did not hear that the resident was tied with a sheet; she stated that if she had heard that the resident was restrained, she would have immediately assessed the resident and notified the administrator, acknowledging that restraints are not allowed and that the resident ambulates independently and does not use a Geri-chair. The night-shift LPN assigned to the resident stated he saw the resident in the Geri-chair, with hands visible and no distress, but did not see the sheet tied around the waist and was not aware the resident was restrained; he stated he had received abuse prevention and restraint education. Another CNA on orientation reported seeing the resident rolled into the dining room and giving the resident water but did not see the sheet being tied and acknowledged that such use would be considered a restraint. Facility documentation, including the final incident investigation report and policy excerpts, confirms that the resident was physically restrained in a Geri-chair using a sheet, without physician orders, consent, or medical justification, and that this constituted inappropriate use of a physical restraint and a failure to protect the resident from abuse and to follow facility policies on restraint use and abuse prevention.
Failure to Use Gait Belts and Follow Transfer Care Plans
Penalty
Summary
Surveyors identified a deficiency in which staff did not follow the facility’s mandatory gait belt transfer policy or residents’ care plans requiring gait belt use for physical assist transfers. One resident with Type 2 DM, CHF, severe cognitive impairment, and a care plan requiring a walker, gait belt, and one-person assist for transfers was observed being transferred from wheelchair to bed by a CNA who did not use a gait belt, instead pulling under the resident’s arm and by the waistband of his pants. Another resident with Parkinson’s disease, severe cognitive impairment, and a care plan requiring a gait belt and walker or sit-to-stand device with one-person assist for transfers was transferred to and from the toilet by a CNA without a gait belt or walker; the CNA used one hand to guide the resident’s hip and the other to pull the wheelchair into position behind the resident. A third resident with dementia, cerebral infarction, severe cognitive impairment, and a care plan requiring a gait belt, sit-to-stand device, and one-person assist for transfers was repeatedly transferred without a gait belt. The CNA lifted the resident under both axillae from bed to a high-back wheelchair, then into and out of the bathroom using the handrail and lifting under one axilla, again without a gait belt. During a subsequent transfer from wheelchair to bed, the CNA did not lock the wheelchair and did not apply a gait belt; as the resident grabbed the bed rail and the CNA lifted under the axilla, the wheelchair rolled away, leaving the resident sitting on the edge of the bed and nearly falling before the CNA was able, after several attempts, to get the resident’s legs and feet onto the bed. A fourth resident with Alzheimer’s disease, severe cognitive impairment, and a care plan requiring a gait belt and walker with one-person assist for transfers was transferred between wheelchair and toilet by a CNA who did not use a gait belt, instead pulling the resident up by her pants and under her arm and then holding onto the pants while pulling the wheelchair into position. Multiple CNAs later stated that gait belts are used for transferring residents, and the facility’s written policy states that use of a gait belt for all physical assist transfers is mandatory.
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.



