Grove Of Northbrook,the
Inspection history, citations, penalties and survey trends for this long-term care facility in Northbrook, Illinois.
- Location
- 263 Skokie Boulevard, Northbrook, Illinois 60062
- CMS Provider Number
- 145809
- Inspections on file
- 23
- Latest survey
- July 30, 2025
- Citations (last 12 mo.)
- 0
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Grove Of Northbrook,the during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
A resident with mild cognitive impairment and other medical conditions eloped from a facility due to staff failing to follow the Code Yellow (elopement) Policy. The door alarm was canceled without initiating the protocol, and staff were unable to hear the alarm due to various reasons. The resident was discovered missing when her lunch tray was untouched, and a search was delayed.
A resident with bipolar disorder became aggressive, injuring another resident by pushing her wheelchair, causing her to fall and hurt her back. Despite being on one-to-one supervision, the aggressive resident head-butted a staff member and caused disturbances, leading to delayed staff response and inadequate monitoring, resulting in harm to the injured resident.
The facility failed to update abuse assessments and care plans after resident-to-resident physical altercations, affecting three residents with significant mental health diagnoses and histories of trauma. Despite the facility's policy requiring such updates, the necessary revisions were not made, highlighting a lapse in abuse prevention measures.
A resident with multiple diagnoses was not given medications, treatments, and care as ordered by the physician due to a routine sleeping pattern. The nursing staff did not administer morning medications or conduct daily blood sugar tests, and the interdisciplinary team was not informed of the missed doses. The facility's policies on missed medications and physician orders were not followed, leading to a deficiency in the quality of care.
The facility failed to follow up on a pharmacy recommendation and document the physician's response for a resident with multiple diagnoses, including Schizoaffective disorder and Bipolar disorder. The resident's prescriptions for Depakote ER and Valporic Acid lacked clinical indication, and the consultant pharmacist's recommendation to clarify the orders was not addressed. The responsible staff did not document the follow-up actions in the medical record, violating the facility's policy on medication regimen review.
The facility failed to keep the medication cart locked during administration and did not store medications as per manufacturer recommendations. A nurse left the cart unlocked while administering medications, and controlled substances were improperly stored in the cart instead of the refrigerator. The DON confirmed these practices were against facility policies.
Failure to Follow Elopement Policy Leads to Resident Elopement
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to adhere to its Code Yellow (elopement) Policy, which resulted in a resident eloping from the facility. The resident, who had a history of mild cognitive impairment and other medical conditions, was able to leave the facility without being noticed. The facility is located near an outdoor mall and bordered by retail outlets and a major expressway, with exit doors equipped with alarm monitors. However, the alarm system was not effectively monitored, as the door alarm was canceled by staff without initiating the Code Yellow protocol. On the day of the incident, several staff members were unable to hear the door alarm due to various reasons, including being occupied with other duties or being in areas where the alarm was not audible. The receptionist, who was responsible for monitoring the security cameras, did not see the resident leave and assumed the situation was resolved when the alarm was silenced. Additionally, a CNA admitted to turning off the alarm without checking the outside area or notifying anyone, as he was in a rush to assist another resident. Interviews with staff revealed a lack of immediate response to the door alarm and a failure to conduct a head count promptly. The resident was eventually discovered missing when her lunch tray was found untouched. The facility's Code Yellow protocol, which includes conducting a head count and notifying the administrator or DON, was not followed, leading to a delay in initiating a search for the missing resident.
Removal Plan
- Facility staff immediately called a Code Yellow when facility determined that resident was missing. Staff conducted a search inside the facility including outside of facility premises.
- A Police Report was immediately filed for a missing resident, R1, to Officer (name, badge#) of the (city) Police Department.
- The CNA who responded to the alarm door was immediately educated not to turn off the alarm until a visual check/search is completed. This training was conducted by the Asst. Administrator.
- The Receptionist assigned was educated to make sure to look at the monitor to make sure no resident had exited, and not to turn off the alarm until a visual check/search is completed. Training was conducted by Assistant Administrator. The in-service included proper Alarm Response and utilization of the zone panel & camera system. Discussed appropriate times to call Code Yellow and to not cancel the alarm until given the 'all clear' following a head count. Emphasized the scope of receptionist responsibilities as the 'security station' of the facility.
- All employees were in serviced to ensure an immediate response to an exit door alarm is done, educated not to turn off the alarm until a visual check/search is completed. A head count is also to be completed to ensure that all residents are accounted for. If a resident is noted missing, staff to follow the facility protocol on missing residents. This in service will also be provided for every newly hired staff moving forward. The training was initially conducted by Social Services and Assistant Administrator for those present. The training continued both in person and over the phone for the remaining employees and was conducted by Food Services Director, CNA Supervisor, Social Services, Assistant Administrator, and Administrator. HR Manager printed out a complete facility roster which was cross-referenced to ensure all employees were educated.
- The Maintenance Director conducted an immediate check of the facility exit alarmed doors. All exit doors are alarmed and functioning. This check will continue checking daily.
- A facility wide audit to identify residents at risk for elopement, those at-risk for elopement must have photos in the elopement list posted on the bulletin board on each unit and at the reception desk for quick reference. Currently, there are 15 residents identified at risk for elopement. Audit was completed by Assistant Administrator/Social Services Director. Resident photos are taken upon admission to the facility and Elopement List is posted at each nursing station (both in a binder and on bulletin board for quick reference) and at the reception desk. Staff were in-serviced that bulletin boards will be used as the central location point in which to reference the elopement list at each nurse's station.
- The Social Service Department reassessed residents identified for elopement and elopement care plan was reviewed and updated. This was completed by Social Services.
- A facility door alarm drill was conducted to ensure staff are appropriately responding to an exit alarmed door and not to turn off the alarm until a visual check/search is completed. A facility protocol was put in place to ensure a head count is conducted after the visual check/search is done to ensure all residents are accounted for. This in-service was initiated by Social Services.
- The facility has identified approximately 25 (city) & surrounding area hospitals which facility staff continue to call daily in search of R1. This is ongoing.
- (Electric company) was called in to provide extra sound devices to project a more amplified sound to ensure staff can hear & respond to an alarm. (Electric company) will complete the work order to install necessary devices to address the concern.
- (Electric company) arrived and installed 7 new sound devices throughout the facility which project a more amplified sound to ensure staff better hear the door alarms. (Electric company) has also placed an order for dome lights to be installed at each exit door.
- All receptionists were in-serviced on Alarm Response and Utilization of Camera System to ensure camera is checked thoroughly before canceling the alarm system. Training was conducted by Assistant Administrator. The in-service included proper Alarm Response and utilization of the zone panel & camera system. Also discussed were appropriate times to call Code Yellow and to not cancel the alarm until given the 'all clear' following a head count. Lastly, we emphasized the scope of their responsibilities as representing the 'security station' of the facility.
- An additional in-service was conducted to all employees of the new amplified alarm devices to ensure staff are familiar with the amplified sound and respond immediately to the alarm. All staff were also in serviced on the purpose and locations of the zone panels should an exit alarm be sounded to determine location of alarm if uncertain. Staff were also in serviced on the location of the elopement risk residents' list that is posted on the bulletin board in every nurse's station for quick reference. Training was initiated by our two Social Services Designees and our Social Services Director for those employees who were present. The training continued both in person and over the phone for the remaining employees and was conducted by the Food Services Director, CNA Supervisor, Social Services/Assistant Administrator, Administrator and Guest Relations. The HR Manager printed out a complete facility roster which was cross-referenced to ensure that all employees were educated.
- A QA (Quality Assurance) audit tool was initiated to ensure the main exit door alarm system and the (electronic monitoring) system are checked for functionality daily and documented by maintenance. This will be done daily x14 days and 3x/week x2 weeks and weekly x 8 weeks.
- A QA audit was initiated to ensure staff are following door alarm drill, and all residents are accounted for. This audit will be done daily x7 days and 3x/week x3 weeks and weekly x 8 weeks.
- The QA audit tool that was initiated was revised after the additional amplified alarms were installed by (electric company) to ensure the exit door alarm system remains amplified. This will be conducted daily x7days, 3x/weekly x 8 weeks.
- A QA Audit was initiated to ensure receptionists are responding to an alarm system by initiating a 'Code Yellow' and checking the camera thoroughly before canceling the alarm system. This QA will be completed daily x 7 days and 3x/week x8 weeks.
- The elopement policy was reviewed and revised, which included specifying types of door alarms and defining them, as well as creating a centralized location at each nurse's station for quick reference of the elopement list. Policy was also revised to reflect the facility's specific protocols on Routine Procedure for Wandering Residents and Prevention of Missing Residents/Elopement. Training on the revised Elopement Policy was initiated by Social Services for those employees who were present. The training continued both in person and over the phone for the remaining employees and was conducted by the Food Services Director, CNA Supervisor, Social Services/Assistant Administrator, Administrator and Guest Relations. The HR Manager printed out a complete facility roster which was cross-referenced to ensure that all employees were educated.
- The QA trends will be discussed in QAPI scheduled and then monthly.
- The facility Medical Director was notified of the basis of abatement plan, and has approved.
Inadequate Supervision Leads to Resident Injury
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to adequately monitor a resident, R3, during a change in mental condition, leading to an incident where R3 injured another resident, R1. R3, a male resident with diagnoses including major depressive disorder and bipolar disorder, became agitated and aggressive, resulting in physical altercations with staff and residents. Despite being on a one-to-one supervision, R3 managed to head-butt a staff member and subsequently pushed R1's wheelchair aggressively, causing her to fall and injure her back. R1, a female resident with diagnoses including schizoaffective disorder and paranoid schizophrenia, was alert at the time of the incident. She attempted to intervene when R3 was yelling and causing disturbances, which led to R3 pushing her wheelchair into a bathroom door, tipping it over and causing her to fall. R1 sustained injuries to her back and arm, as noted in a subsequent assessment. The incident was not directly witnessed by staff, and the response to the situation was delayed, with staff taking approximately five minutes to assess the situation. The facility's failure to provide adequate supervision and timely intervention during R3's behavioral escalation resulted in harm to R1 and highlighted deficiencies in monitoring residents with known mental health conditions.
Failure to Update Abuse Assessments and Care Plans
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to implement its abuse prevention policy by not completing abuse assessments and updating abuse care plans after allegations of resident-to-resident physical altercations. This deficiency affected three residents. In one incident, a resident attempted to take another resident's remote control, leading to a physical altercation where the first resident fell. Despite the altercation, the abuse assessments and care plans for both residents were not updated as required by the facility's policy. Both residents had significant mental health diagnoses and histories that placed them at risk for abuse, yet their care plans were not revised to reflect the incident. In another case, a resident reported being hit on the shoulder by another resident while passing in the hallway. The resident was assessed and monitored, but no physical injuries were found. However, the abuse assessment and prevention care plan for this resident were not updated following the incident, contrary to the facility's policy. The resident had a history of serious trauma and was identified as at risk for abuse, making the lack of updated care plans a significant oversight. The facility's policy on abuse and neglect mandates the identification, assessment, care planning, and monitoring of residents with behaviors that might lead to conflicts or neglect. Despite this, the facility did not follow through with the necessary updates to the abuse assessments and care plans after the incidents, as confirmed by the Social Service Director. This failure to adhere to the policy was observed and documented during the survey, highlighting a significant lapse in the facility's abuse prevention measures.
Failure to Administer Medications and Treatments as Ordered
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a resident received medications, treatments, and care as ordered by the physician. The resident, who has multiple diagnoses including Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, Hypertension, Chronic Kidney Disease, and several psychiatric disorders, was observed sleeping throughout the day with meals left untouched at the bedside. The nursing staff, including an LPN and CNAs, reported that the resident has behavioral issues and a routine sleeping pattern of being awake at night and sleeping during the day. Despite this, no individualized care plan interventions were formulated to address the resident's needs, such as adjusting the timing of medications and treatments. The resident's Medication Administration Record (MAR) indicated that medications were marked as given even though the resident was observed sleeping. The LPN admitted to not administering the morning medications because the resident was asleep and did not notify the physician of the missed doses. Additionally, daily blood sugar tests were not conducted as ordered, and there were discrepancies in the documentation of restorative programs and treatments. The interdisciplinary team, including the physician, nurse practitioner, dietitian, and pharmacist, were not informed of the resident's missed medications, treatments, and meals. The facility's policies on missed medications and physician orders were not followed. The policies require that missed medications be documented and the physician be notified to determine any necessary changes. However, the resident's medical records lacked documentation of missed medications and treatments, and there was no evidence that the physician or nurse practitioner was informed of these omissions. The facility did not provide the necessary care, treatment, and services as per the physician's orders, leading to a deficiency in the quality of care provided to the resident.
Failure to Follow Up on Pharmacy Recommendations and Document Physician Response
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to follow up with a pharmacy recommendation review and document the physician's response in the resident's medical record. This deficiency affected one resident (R28) out of a sample of 24 reviewed for pharmacy medication review. R28 was admitted with multiple diagnoses, including Schizoaffective disorder, Bipolar disorder, Antisocial personality, Anxiety disorder, Pressure ulcer, and Spina bifida. The active physician order sheet indicated prescriptions for Depakote ER and Valporic Acid, but there was no clinical indication for the usage of these medications. The consultant pharmacist recommended clarifying with the prescriber if the resident should continue both medications due to potential duplicate therapy. However, this recommendation was not followed up, and there was no documentation in the resident's medical records to indicate that the physician had been notified or that any action had been taken. The Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) and the Psychotropic Nurse were responsible for following up on pharmacy recommendations. The ADON stated that they typically follow up within three days, but in this case, the recommendation dated 5/30/24 was not addressed. The Psychotropic Nurse presented a copy of the pharmacy recommendation, noting that she had notified the physician and continued the orders as prescribed, but she did not document this in the physician order sheet or progress notes. The facility's policy on medication regimen review requires that the consultant pharmacist's recommendations result in a written response by either a physician or nurse, and any identified irregularities must be documented in the medical record. This policy was not adhered to in the case of R28, leading to the deficiency noted in the report.
Medication Storage and Security Deficiencies
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to keep the medication cart locked during medication administration when the cart was out of sight and did not store medications as per manufacturer recommendations. During an observation, it was noted that a nurse left the medication cart unlocked while administering medications to a resident, which was acknowledged as a mistake by the nurse. Additionally, controlled substances such as Lorazepam were found stored in the medication cart instead of the medication refrigerator, contrary to the manufacturer's storage recommendations. The Director of Nursing confirmed that the medication cart should always be locked when out of sight and that medications should be stored according to manufacturer recommendations. The facility's policies on Medication Storage, Labeling, and Disposal, as well as Medication Pass, were reviewed and indicated that medications should be stored safely under appropriate environmental controls and secured in locked storage areas. The failure to adhere to these policies affected three residents in the sample reviewed for Medication Safety Storage.
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.
