Taylorville Care Center
Inspection history, citations, penalties and survey trends for this long-term care facility in Taylorville, Illinois.
- Location
- 600 South Houston, Taylorville, Illinois 62568
- CMS Provider Number
- 145502
- Inspections on file
- 36
- Latest survey
- January 30, 2026
- Citations (last 12 mo.)
- 10 (1 serious)
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Taylorville Care Center during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
A resident with severe dementia, poor safety awareness, and a known history of wandering and exit-seeking, who wore a wander management device and was identified in the facility’s elopement book, left the building without staff knowledge after door alarms sounded multiple times and staff conducted head counts that failed to identify anyone missing; the resident was later found off premises by a community member and returned only after an assisted living facility contacted staff. In separate incidents, two residents who were dependent on mechanical lifts for transfers fell when lift slings failed during use: one paraplegic resident, cognitively intact, fell from a lift during transfer from a shower chair to bed when sling loops or stitching gave way, sustaining facial bruising, a cheek laceration, and a nondisplaced pelvic fracture; another cognitively impaired resident fell backward to the floor during a bed-to-wheelchair transfer when two sling straps on one side snapped, resulting in multiple skin tears and bruising. CNAs reported they did not inspect the sling straps before use when the sling was already under the resident, and the laundry supervisor acknowledged that required sling inspections and documentation were not consistently performed or logged, despite prior knowledge of a sling break in an earlier transfer.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment and a history of inappropriate sexual behavior was observed by an LPN touching another cognitively impaired resident's genital area while waiting to go outside. The second resident did not object, but both had confusion at times, and staff were unsure about their capacity to consent. The facility lacked a clear policy on consensual relationships and did not adequately assess or protect the residents, resulting in a deficiency.
The facility did not have a qualified food service manager or dietary manager present to supervise the Food and Nutrition Services Department. Kitchen staff worked without management supervision, and the registered dietitian was not assigned additional duties during this period. This lack of oversight affected all residents in the facility.
Surveyors observed improper food storage and handling, including a staff member returning a dropped cup to clean dishes, lack of sanitizer and temperature checks, dented cans stored with other food, uncovered and unlabeled food containers, and improper storage of uncooked meats above ready-to-eat foods. Food temperatures were not maintained at safe levels, and staff were unsure about required procedures, all in violation of facility policies.
Multiple residents reported that meals lacked flavor, were served cold, and were of poor quality, with food temperature checks confirming items were not at safe or appetizing temperatures. The facility's own policies requiring palatable and properly heated food were not followed.
Three residents reported that a CNA failed to treat them with dignity and respect during showers, including being rough, ignoring requests for repositioning, not allowing residents to perform tasks they were able to do, and not following up on complaints. The facility did not investigate or document the incidents as required.
A resident who is cognitively intact and dependent on staff for care reported that a CNA was rough during a shower, causing pain and discomfort, and that his complaints were ignored. The resident's mother reported the incident to the Social Service Director, but the concern was not documented, investigated, or reported to the State Agency as required by policy. The Administrator issued a disciplinary write-up to the CNA but did not conduct a formal investigation or notify authorities.
A resident with significant physical disabilities reported that a CNA was rough and caused pain during a shower, and that his concerns were ignored. The resident's mother reported the incident to the Social Service Director, but no investigation was conducted, no statements were collected, and the CNA was not removed from resident care, contrary to facility policy.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment and on blood thinners developed a bruise of unknown origin on her forehead, which was not reported to the State Agency as required by the facility's policy. The resident's condition worsened, leading to a hospital transfer. EMS noted dried blood in her nostrils and reported concerns of potential elder abuse to the State Agency. The facility's administrator did not report the incident, attributing the hospital transfer to a change in consciousness likely due to a urinary tract infection.
The facility failed to prevent, identify, obtain orders, and monitor pressure ulcers for two residents, resulting in significant deficiencies in care. One resident went without treatment for a stage 3 pressure ulcer for 15 days, while another had multiple pressure ulcers that were not properly treated or monitored. The facility's Wound Management Program lacked clear procedures, contributing to these deficiencies.
The facility failed to remove expired medications and glucose control solutions from the refrigerator and medication cart, and did not date multi-dose insulin pens after opening. Inspections revealed multiple instances of expired and improperly labeled medications, which were verified by staff. The facility's policy requires proper labeling and disposal of medications, but lapses in adherence were acknowledged by the DON and Administrator.
The facility failed to properly store and label foods, secure hair during meal preparation and service, and utilize hand hygiene to prevent food contamination. Open food items were found without proper sealing or labeling, and kitchen staff did not adhere to hair covering protocols or hand hygiene practices.
The facility failed to ensure wheelchair brakes were locked and gait belts were used during transfers for several residents, leading to unsafe conditions. Additionally, a resident was allowed to smoke unsupervised and keep smoking materials in her room, contrary to the care plan and facility policy.
The facility failed to follow proper infection control protocols, including hand hygiene and the use of clean barriers for medical supplies. CNAs and nursing staff were observed not performing hand hygiene before and after resident care, and soiled linens were not promptly removed, exposing residents to potential contamination.
The facility failed to notify the physician of high blood sugar results and a newly acquired pressure ulcer for two residents. One resident had blood sugar levels over 260 on 21 occasions without physician notification, and another resident's stage 3 pressure ulcer was not reported or treated until 15 days after it was first identified.
A resident reported verbal abuse by an aide who made a derogatory comment after providing a bed bath. The aide was suspended, and the incident was reported to the IDPH. The facility's investigation confirmed the verbal abuse.
The facility failed to follow its Abuse Prevention Policy for two residents. In one case, a CNA allegedly called a resident a derogatory name, which was not properly reported or investigated. In another case, a resident reported being mistreated during a bed bath and called a derogatory name by a CNA, but the incident was not immediately reported. Both incidents highlight failures in the internal reporting and investigation processes.
The facility failed to monitor blood sugars for a resident with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus as ordered. The care plan did not address the diabetes diagnosis, and blood glucose monitoring was not performed as required. Staff confirmed the resident was not receiving necessary blood sugar monitoring despite being on insulin.
The facility failed to provide timely and complete incontinent care for two residents. One resident, with Alzheimer's and Dementia, was found with saturated pants and incomplete cleansing. Another resident, with moderate cognitive impairment and multiple diagnoses, was found with a wet brief and no care provided.
A resident with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus did not receive prescribed insulin glargine for about a week after returning from hospitalization. The facility failed to administer the medication due to confusion over the physician's orders, resulting in significantly elevated blood sugar levels. The DON and ADON confirmed this as a significant medication error.
Two residents with cognitive impairments were able to leave the facility unsupervised due to inadequate supervision and malfunctioning door alarms. One resident was found by police 0.6 miles away, while another was found by a citizen a block from the facility. The facility was understaffed, and staff were not adequately trained to handle exit-seeking behavior. Door alarms were not functioning properly, and there was no system in place to ensure residents at risk of elopement were monitored.
The facility failed to use alternatives to bed rails and did not adequately assess and monitor the risks associated with their use, leading to significant harm to residents. One resident suffered a fractured arm after it became entrapped in the bed rail, resulting in a decline in physical condition and eventual hospice care. Another resident was observed with her arm through the bed rail, posing a risk of injury, without proper assessment or monitoring. A third resident had side rails installed without a proper assessment, highlighting the facility's failure to comply with regulations.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment experienced a delay in treatment and pain management due to the facility's failure to notify the physician of a change in condition and delay in diagnostics. Despite multiple staff observations of increased pain and swelling, the physician was not informed, and the X-ray was delayed. The resident was eventually sent to the hospital for further evaluation and treatment of a right distal femoral fracture.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment and mobility dependence experienced a delay in treatment for a fractured leg due to the facility's failure to promptly address swelling and pain in the knee. Despite multiple CNAs observing the resident's pain and swelling on May 2, the RN on duty decided to wait for an X-ray scheduled for the next day. The X-ray on May 3 revealed a probable distal femoral fracture, leading to the resident's transfer to the emergency department for evaluation and pain management. The facility's staff acknowledged the delay and failure to notify the physician of the increased pain.
A resident with dementia and mobility dependence developed a new pressure ulcer and experienced worsening of existing ones due to the facility's failure to assess, document, and treat the ulcers properly. Inconsistent records and delayed physician orders contributed to the issue, and improper wound care practices were observed. Staff interviews revealed a lack of awareness and communication about the resident's condition.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment and mobility dependence suffered from a leg fracture without adequate pain management for two days. Despite having orders for pain medication, the resident did not receive PRN medication when in pain. Staff observed swelling and tenderness, but the resident was not sent to the ER until the family intervened. The facility's pain management policy was not effectively implemented, leading to delayed medical evaluation.
A facility failed to provide sufficient nursing staff, resulting in inadequate care and supervision for residents. Reports indicated extended wait times for assistance with daily activities due to a lack of CNAs. Additionally, a resident with cognitive impairment left the facility unnoticed and was found by police, highlighting insufficient supervision. Staffing schedules showed inadequate coverage for 72 residents, and the administrator admitted to staffing shortages and lack of a staffing policy.
The facility failed to maintain a full-time Director of Nursing (DON) after the previous DON quit, as confirmed by staff and observations. The absence of a DON was noted over several days, and the staffing schedule did not document a DON. The facility also lacked a staffing policy.
The facility did not maintain an effective Quality Assurance program, potentially affecting all 71 residents. The last QA meeting was in September 2023, and the Maintenance Director, who started in October 2023, had not attended any QA meetings. The facility's policy requires monthly QA meetings, which were not conducted.
The facility failed to respond to call lights promptly, affecting three residents who reported extended wait times for assistance due to staffing shortages. One resident was left on a bedpan for 45 minutes, another waited up to three hours for help, and a third was found in a saturated brief. Staffing issues were acknowledged by the facility, with insufficient CNAs and nurses to cover all shifts.
A resident reported long wait times for incontinence care, and an observation revealed improper care by a CNA, including failure to rinse and dry the resident and not changing gloves after handling soiled items. The facility's Resident Council Minutes noted concerns about insufficient evening staffing.
Elopement of High-Risk Resident and Mechanical Lift Sling Failures During Transfers
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to prevent an elopement of a resident identified as high risk for wandering and elopement, and the failure to ensure mechanical lift equipment and slings were in proper working order during transfers, resulting in two separate resident falls. One resident with severe cognitive impairment, dementia, poor decision-making skills, and a history of wandering and exit-seeking behaviors eloped from the building without staff awareness. This resident had a wander management system in place and was care planned and assessed as at risk for elopement. On the day of the incident, door alarms sounded and staff performed head counts on the halls, but they did not identify that this resident was missing. Staff statements indicate that alarms sounded, staff checked their assigned halls, and all residents on those halls were believed to be present, yet the eloping resident was not accounted for. The facility later learned of the elopement only after being contacted by staff from a nearby assisted living facility, who had been alerted by a community member who found the resident wandering in a ditch and then observed her walking down the road, confused and unable to state her name. Multiple interviews and written statements describe confusion among staff and residents about how the elopement occurred and how long the resident had been outside. A CNA reported taking two residents out for a smoke break and later learning from those residents that the eloping resident had been pushing on their wheelchairs trying to get out the door and that she had gotten out. Another resident reported that the eloping resident tried to push her and another resident toward the door and that she notified a nurse, who removed the eloping resident from the area; this resident later saw the eloping resident come through the door to the outside but did not see her afterward. A different resident recalled the eloping resident trying to push her and another resident to get outside and stated she went to get the nurse because the eloping resident was not supposed to go out without staff. Nursing staff, including the former ADON and an LPN, described hearing door alarms, going to the front desk, and conducting head counts when the cause of the alarm was not witnessed, but they did not determine who had set off the alarm and believed all residents were present. The facility’s own investigation notes reference a family member of another resident who knew the patio door code and used it to take her husband outside, and who was unsure whether the eloping resident may have followed her out, while also noting that this family member had memory loss and became more confused throughout the day. The second part of the deficiency concerns two separate incidents in which mechanical lift slings failed during transfers, causing residents to fall. One resident with paraplegia due to spina bifida, scoliosis, morbid obesity, and neurogenic bladder required total assist with a mechanical lift for transfers and was cognitively intact. This resident reported that during a transfer from a shower chair to bed, while suspended in the air by the lift, the sling straps broke and she fell, striking her face on the base of the lift. Progress notes and hospital records document that staff found her on the floor with her legs partially under the bed and the sling snapped and hanging from the lift, with a large amount of blood from a facial laceration, bruising and swelling around the right eye, and subsequent diagnosis of an acute nondisplaced fracture of the anterior right iliac wing. CNAs involved in the transfer stated that the sling was already under the resident, they did not inspect or test the straps before use, and that the sling loops or stitching came undone while the resident was in the air, causing her to fall. Another resident, severely cognitively impaired and dependent on staff for transfers, experienced a similar sling failure during a transfer from bed to wheelchair. Progress notes and a CNA witness statement describe that the resident was in a sling that appeared properly fitted, with straps and hooks intact and without noted fraying or breaks, when two of the sling straps on one side snapped as the resident was being lowered into the wheelchair, causing the resident to fall backward to the floor. The nurse assisting with the transfer eased the resident to the floor, and the resident sustained three skin tears to the left arm, discoloration, and a red spot on the left cheek from contact with the nurse’s knee. Staff interviews confirm that this earlier sling break occurred and that the same type of equipment was involved. The laundry supervisor stated that laundry staff were supposed to inspect every sling, discard damaged ones, and document inspections, but acknowledged that they were not documenting in the log as required and that she had been written up for this. The administrator confirmed that after the first sling-related fall, management checked with laundry about inspecting slings and not using bleach, and that after the second fall, staff were re-educated, indicating that prior to these incidents, sling inspection and maintenance practices were not being reliably documented or verified.
Removal Plan
- Resident returned to facility safely; skin assessment and vital signs completed upon return
- Resident placed on checks
- Wander management system checked for proper functioning
- Code to patio door changed
- All door alarms checked for proper functioning
- Staff education/in-service regarding elopement policy (resident supervision, redirecting exit-seeking residents, alarm response, and no sharing of door codes with non-staff members)
- DON/ADON to audit wander management system documentation on MAR/TAR
- Review and update care plans for residents at risk for elopement as needed
- Social Service Director to review the Code Yellow book to ensure completeness
- Code Yellow drills performed on each shift
- Administrator to review audits to ensure compliance
- Report trends to the QA committee and implement further corrective action as needed
Failure to Protect Resident from Sexual Abuse Due to Inadequate Assessment and Policy
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to protect a resident from sexual abuse, as evidenced by an incident involving two residents with cognitive impairments. One resident, who was severely cognitively impaired and had a history of inappropriate sexual behavior, was observed by staff touching another resident's genital area while both were waiting to go outside to smoke. The touching occurred outside the clothing, and the second resident, who was moderately cognitively impaired and assessed as at risk for abuse and neglect, did not voice opposition at the time. Staff intervened upon witnessing the incident and separated the residents for closer observation. Documentation and interviews revealed inconsistencies in staff accounts regarding the nature of the touching, with some reports indicating the contact was outside the pants and others suggesting it may have been inside. The second resident did not recall the incident but, when questioned, expressed that she was comfortable with what had happened. Both residents had been observed interacting closely and holding hands prior to the incident. Staff noted that both residents exhibited confusion at times, raising concerns about their capacity to consent to sexual activity. The facility did not have a policy in place regarding consensual relationships between residents, and staff were uncertain about the appropriate procedures to follow in such situations. The facility's abuse prevention policy defined sexual abuse as non-consensual sexual contact and required evaluation of a resident's capacity for consent if there was reason to suspect incapacity. Despite these requirements, the facility failed to ensure adequate protections were in place to prevent abuse and to properly assess the residents' ability to consent, resulting in a deficiency.
Failure to Employ Qualified Food Service Manager
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to employ a Director of Food and Nutrition, resulting in the absence of a qualified food service manager to supervise the daily functions of the Food and Nutrition Services Department. During the survey, it was observed that there was no dietary manager present in the facility, and kitchen staff, including cooks and dietary aides, reported not having any supervision by management. The previous dietary manager had recently quit without notice, and the registered dietitian, who visits three times a month, had not been asked to take on additional duties in the interim. Facility policy requires a qualified food service manager to oversee daily planning, food procurement, storage, preparation, distribution, service, and staff supervision, but no such individual was present or fulfilling these responsibilities during the survey period. This deficiency had the potential to affect all 67 residents living in the facility.
Improper Food Storage and Handling Practices
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that food was stored and prepared in a manner that prevents foodborne illness, as evidenced by multiple observations and staff interviews. A dietary aide was seen placing a plastic cup that had fallen on the floor back with clean dishes, contrary to facility policy requiring re-washing of dropped items. The same staff member was unaware of the need to check sanitizer levels or dish machine temperatures. In the dry storage area, a dented can of beef ravioli was stored with other cans, and there was no designated area for dented cans. An uncovered, unlabeled, and undated container of white powder (identified as thickener) was found next to the three-compartment sink. In the freezer, uncooked chicken was stored above vegetables and cooked turkey, and bacon was stored above waffles and pancakes, with no specific system for separating uncooked meats from other foods. In the walk-in refrigerator, pasteurized shell eggs were stored above milk, and there were containers of food that were either unlabeled, undated, or both. Food temperatures taken after meal service revealed that ham salad and pureed items were held at temperatures (55°F, 68°F, and 71°F) not consistent with safe food handling standards. The registered dietitian confirmed uncertainty about whether staff were checking food temperatures before serving and acknowledged the improper storage of uncooked animal proteins. Facility policies require proper labeling, dating, covering, and storage of food, as well as re-washing of any dishware that falls on the floor, but these were not followed as observed.
Failure to Provide Palatable and Safe Temperature Meals
Penalty
Summary
Surveyors identified that the facility failed to provide palatable and safe temperature meals to eight residents reviewed for food and nutrition services. Multiple residents reported that the food lacked flavor, was not at the correct temperature, and was of poor quality, with specific complaints about cold food and hard toast. During a Resident Council meeting, several residents expressed that the kitchen and food quality had declined. Direct temperature measurements of food items after service revealed that ham salad and pureed items were served at temperatures ranging from 55°F to 71°F, which were acknowledged by the Registered Dietitian as not appropriate. The facility's own policy requires food to be prepared and served in a palatable, attractive manner and at safe, appetizing temperatures, but these standards were not met as observed and reported.
Failure to Promote Dignity and Respect During Resident Care
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to promote dignity and treat residents in a respectful manner during care for three residents. One resident, who is cognitively intact and dependent on staff for mobility and hygiene due to a history of stroke and other medical conditions, reported that a CNA was rough during a shower, used a hoist that caused pain to his private area, and ignored his repeated requests to be repositioned. The resident also stated that after the shower, he was put to bed while still wet and that no staff or management followed up with him about the incident. The resident's mother reported the incident to the Social Service Director, who did not document the complaint in the grievance book or speak directly to the resident, but instead relayed the information to the Administrator. The Administrator confirmed that no investigation was conducted, no interviews were held with the resident or other staff, and the only documentation was a disciplinary write-up for the CNA involved. Another resident, who is moderately cognitively impaired but was alert and oriented during the interview, stated that the same CNA showed no respect during showers, although he did not report any abuse. This resident requires partial to moderate assistance with showering, with the CNA expected to provide less than half the effort as the resident is able to complete most of his own shower. The care plan for this resident indicated a need for limited assistance and participation in restorative programs to maintain function. A third resident, who is cognitively intact and independent with activities of daily living including showers, reported that the CNA did not allow residents to do as much for themselves as they were able during showers, instead performing the tasks herself. The care plan for this resident indicated supervision was only needed as required and that the resident was independent with transfers. These findings demonstrate a pattern of staff not honoring residents' rights to dignity, respect, and independence during care.
Failure to Report and Investigate Alleged Abuse
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to report an allegation of verbal and physical abuse to the State Agency as required. A resident with a history of flaccid hemiplegia, dysphasia, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, epilepsy, and arthritis, who is cognitively intact and dependent on staff for mobility and hygiene, reported that a CNA was rough during a shower, causing pain and discomfort to his private area with the transfer sling. The resident stated that his complaints were ignored during the incident, and after being put to bed soaking wet, he informed his mother, who subsequently reported the incident to the facility's Social Service Director. Despite the report from the resident's mother, the Social Service Director did not document the concern in the grievance book or interview the resident, instead passing the information to the Administrator. The Administrator acknowledged receiving the complaint and issued a disciplinary write-up to the CNA but did not interview the resident, the CNA's coworker, or conduct a formal investigation into the allegation. The Administrator also confirmed that the incident was not reported to the State Agency as required by facility policy and federal regulations. The facility's own Abuse Prevention Program policy mandates immediate reporting of all alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, or mistreatment to the administrator and appropriate authorities, as well as a thorough investigation and a written report within five working days. In this case, the facility did not follow these procedures, as the allegation was neither reported to the State Agency nor properly investigated, and no documentation of the incident was made in the facility's grievance records.
Failure to Investigate Resident's Abuse Allegation
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to follow its abuse prevention policy by not conducting an investigation into allegations of physical and verbal abuse made by a resident against a CNA. The resident, who has diagnoses including flaccid hemiplegia, dysphasia, hypertension, and is dependent on staff for mobility and hygiene, reported that during a shower, the CNA used a hoist that caused pain to his private area, was rough, and made statements suggesting he had no rights. The resident's mother reported the incident to the Social Service Director, but no one from management spoke to the resident about the incident, and no investigation was initiated. Multiple interviews confirmed that the resident expressed discomfort and pain during the shower, and that he communicated this to the CNA, who did not reposition him or address his concerns. Other staff members and residents were aware of the resident's dissatisfaction with the CNA's care, and the resident's mother reiterated the details of the incident to facility staff. Despite these reports, the Social Service Director did not document the concern in the grievance book or speak directly to the resident, instead passing the information to the Administrator. The Administrator acknowledged that no investigation was conducted, no statements were collected from the resident or other staff, and the accused CNA was not suspended pending investigation. The facility's own policy requires immediate reporting, investigation, and protection of residents in such cases, including removal of the accused staff from resident contact. The failure to follow these procedures resulted in the deficiency cited by surveyors.
Failure to Report Injury of Unknown Origin
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to report an injury of unknown origin for a resident with severe cognitive impairment and multiple medical conditions, including dementia and atrial fibrillation. The resident was on blood thinners, which increased the risk of bleeding. On February 2, 2025, a light bluish V-shaped bruise was observed on the resident's forehead by the Assistant Director of Nurses (ADON), who documented the finding as a late entry on February 4, 2025. Despite noticing the bruise, the ADON did not report it to the State Agency, as required by the facility's Abuse Prevention Policy. The policy mandates that all alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, or mistreatment, including injuries of unknown source, must be reported immediately or within 24 hours if they do not involve serious bodily injury. The resident's condition worsened the following day, with changes in behavior such as not acting normally, needing assistance with feeding, and episodes of crying. The Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) noted the bruise and contacted the resident's physician, who decided to send the resident to the emergency room. The emergency medical services (EMS) crew observed dried blood in the resident's nostrils and noted the resident's reluctance to disclose the cause of the injury. The EMS reported their concerns of potential elder abuse to the State Agency. The facility's administrator did not report the incident to the State Agency, attributing the resident's hospital transfer to a change in consciousness likely due to a urinary tract infection, rather than the bruise.
Failure to Prevent and Monitor Pressure Ulcers
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to prevent, identify, obtain orders, and monitor pressure ulcers for two residents, resulting in significant deficiencies in care. Resident R14 went from 4/15/2024 until 4/30/2024 without treatment or monitoring of a stage 3 facility-acquired pressure ulcer. The initial identification of the ulcer was made by a CNA on 4/15/2024, but no physician was notified, and no orders were obtained until 4/30/2024. The wound was not measured or properly documented until 4/30/2024, when the Director of Nurses (DON) became aware of it. The resident's care plan and progress notes indicated that R14 was at moderate risk for pressure ulcers and required frequent monitoring and repositioning, which were not adequately performed during this period. The DON confirmed that the nurse who initially found the open area did not follow the expected protocol of notifying the doctor and obtaining an order for treatment. For Resident R71, multiple pressure ulcers were observed and documented, but there were significant lapses in care and monitoring. On 6/4/2024, the Assistant Director of Nurses (ADON) completed a dressing change for R71, but on 6/6/2024, it was observed that some pressure ulcers did not have dressings, and the resident was not properly offloaded or repositioned. The ADON failed to change gloves between dressing changes and did not cleanse one of the wounds before applying treatment. Additionally, R71 did not have heel protectors on, and the resident's positioning in bed was not conducive to preventing further pressure ulcers. The DON and ADON acknowledged these deficiencies and agreed that the resident should be turned every two hours and provided with heel protectors. The facility's Wound Management Program, dated 2/26/2021, did not document procedures for dressing changes, replacing missing dressings, cleansing wounds before treatment, and turning and positioning residents. This lack of clear procedures contributed to the inadequate care provided to R14 and R71, resulting in the development and worsening of pressure ulcers. Both residents were dependent on staff for mobility and toileting, highlighting the critical need for diligent monitoring and care to prevent pressure ulcers.
Failure to Remove Expired Medications and Date Insulin Pens
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to remove expired medication and glucose control solution from the refrigerator and medication cart, and did not date multi-dose insulin pens after opening. During an inspection, a vial of Tuberculosis (TB) solution was found open without a date, a bottle of Azithromycin oral suspension without a name or date, and an opened vial of Influenza vaccine with an expired date. Additionally, expired Bisacodyl medicated laxative suppositories were found in the refrigerator. These findings were verified by an LPN who acknowledged the errors and stated the TB solution should be disposed of 30 days after opening. Further inspection of the medication carts revealed multiple Lantus insulin pens without open dates, expired Aspirin tablets, and expired glucose control solutions. The RN on duty was unsure about the timing of quality control checks on glucometers and verified the expired dates on the solutions. The facility's policy requires medications to be dated upon opening and expired medications to be removed and destroyed. The DON and Administrator both stated their expectations for proper labeling and disposal of medications, but acknowledged lapses in adherence to these protocols.
Food Storage, Hair Covering, and Hand Hygiene Deficiencies
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to properly store and label foods, secure hair during meal preparation and service, and utilize hand hygiene to prevent food contamination and/or borne illness. During an inspection of the standup freezer, it was found that an open box of frozen pancakes and multiple boxes of maple sausage links were not sealed or labeled with open dates. Similarly, the walking refrigerator contained an open gallon of milk without an open date, a bundle of celery not stored in a bag or container, and an open box of lettuce with an unsealed inner bag. The deep freezer in the storeroom also had an open container of strawberry cheesecake ice cream without an open date. The Dietary Manager admitted to not dating the ice cream when it was opened and acknowledged the expectation for open boxes to be dated and sealed properly to prevent food from falling on the floor. Additionally, the facility's kitchen staff did not adhere to proper hair covering protocols. The cook was observed wearing a hairnet but did not have a beard guard, while two dietary aides had hairnets that did not fully cover their hair. The Dietary Manager and Administrator both stated that they expected kitchen staff to have their hairnets on and fully covering their hair, and for those with beards to have them covered as well. The facility also failed to maintain proper hand hygiene practices. The cook was observed handling food and kitchen equipment without wearing gloves and did not perform hand hygiene before donning gloves. Similarly, a dietary aide was seen retrieving a gallon of milk and setting up meal trays without performing hand hygiene before putting on gloves. Both staff members continued to handle food and kitchen equipment without changing gloves or performing hand hygiene after touching various surfaces. The facility's Cleaning and Sanitation policy emphasizes the importance of frequent hand washing to prevent contamination, but this was not followed by the kitchen staff.
Failure to Lock Wheelchair Brakes and Use Gait Belts During Transfers
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure wheelchair brakes were locked and a gait belt was utilized during transfers for several residents. Specifically, two CNAs transferred a resident with moderate cognitive impairment and high fall risk without locking the wheelchair brakes, causing the wheelchair to move backward during the transfer. Another resident with severe cognitive impairment and a history of falls was also transferred without locking the wheelchair brakes, resulting in the wheelchair moving during the transfer. Both incidents were observed by surveyors, and staff acknowledged the expectation to lock wheelchairs during transfers but failed to do so in practice. Additionally, the facility did not adhere to its smoking supervision policy for a resident who was allowed to smoke unsupervised and keep smoking materials in her room, contrary to the care plan and facility policy. The resident's care plan initially required supervision, but it was later revised without proper reassessment. The resident was observed with cigarettes and a lighter in her room, and staff confirmed the resident kept smoking materials in her room despite the policy requiring them to be secured at the nurse's station. Furthermore, a CNA failed to use a gait belt while transferring a resident with Alzheimer's Disease and Dementia, who was dependent on staff for transfers and had cognitive impairments. The CNA relied on the resident's daughter's previous assistance without a gait belt, leading to an unsafe transfer. The facility's policy mandates the use of gait belts for weight-bearing residents during transfers, but this was not followed in this instance.
Infection Control Deficiencies
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to adhere to proper infection prevention and control protocols, leading to multiple deficiencies. Certified Nurse's Aides (CNAs) were observed not performing hand hygiene before donning and doffing gloves, and not removing soiled linens, which resulted in residents being exposed to contaminated surfaces. For instance, a CNA transferred a resident with saturated pants without changing the soiled incontinent pad in the wheelchair, and another CNA operated a remote control without removing gloves after providing care. These actions were contrary to the facility's policies on hand hygiene and linen handling. Additionally, the Director of Nurses (DON) and Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) were observed placing wound care supplies directly on a resident's bed and a soiled incontinent pad, instead of using a clean barrier. This practice was not in line with the facility's infection control policy, which mandates the use of clean surfaces for medical supplies. The ADON admitted to not following proper procedures, citing her recent transition from a hospital setting as a reason for the oversight. Further observations revealed that a Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) did not perform hand hygiene before and after administering medications to residents. The LPN also failed to change gloves and perform hand hygiene between attempts to obtain a resident's blood sugar, contaminating the medication cart and other surfaces in the process. These actions were inconsistent with the facility's handwashing policy, which requires thorough hand cleansing before and after resident care to prevent the spread of infection.
Failure to Notify Physician of High Blood Sugar and Pressure Ulcer
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to notify the physician of high blood sugar results and a newly acquired pressure ulcer for two residents. One resident, who has Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, had blood sugar levels over 260 on 21 occasions between 5/8/24 and 6/4/24, but the physician was not notified as required by the resident's care plan. Interviews with nursing staff revealed that they did not consistently follow the order to notify the physician, with one nurse admitting to not calling the doctor because she did not consider a blood sugar level of 260 to be high. The physician confirmed that he was unaware of the high blood sugar levels until he reviewed the resident's records during rounds on 6/8/24 and subsequently adjusted the insulin dosage. Another resident, who was at moderate risk for pressure ulcer development, acquired a stage 3 pressure ulcer on the left buttock that was first identified by a CNA on 4/15/24. However, the physician was not notified, and no treatment order was obtained until 4/30/24 when the Director of Nurses became aware of the wound. The wound was not measured or documented properly until this date. The facility's policy requires notifying the physician of changes in a resident's condition, but this protocol was not followed in these instances.
Failure to Prevent Verbal Abuse
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to prevent verbal abuse for one resident, who reported that an aide poured water directly on him during a bed bath and later made a derogatory comment about him to another aide. The resident, who is cognitively intact and has diagnoses of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, Depression, and Anxiety, described the aide as a larger woman with curly black hair and a darker skin tone. The resident did not initially report the incident to facility staff but mentioned it to his wife. The administrator was notified of the allegations and initiated an investigation, which confirmed that the aide had made the derogatory comment, although she denied pouring a bucket of water on the resident. The aide admitted to calling the resident an offensive name under her breath, which the resident overheard. The aide was suspended pending the investigation, and the incident was reported to the Illinois Department of Public Health (IDPH). The facility's Abuse Prevention Policy mandates immediate reporting and thorough investigation of any abuse allegations, which was followed in this case. The administrator confirmed that the final report would substantiate the allegation of verbal abuse.
Failure to Follow Abuse Prevention Policy
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure their Abuse Prevention Policy was followed for two residents. In the first case, a CNA allegedly called a resident a derogatory name, which was overheard by another resident and reported by the resident's daughter. Despite multiple staff members being aware of the incident, it was not properly reported or investigated. The Director of Nursing and the Administrator both denied knowledge of the incident initially, and the matter was dismissed due to the reporting resident's confusion and hallucinations, as noted by the staff. In the second case, a resident reported that a CNA poured water directly on him during a bed bath and later called him a derogatory name. The resident's account was corroborated by the CNA's admission and another staff member's statement. However, the incident was not immediately reported to the Administrator, and the Director of Nursing was not informed until later. The CNA involved was suspended, and the incident was eventually reported to the state health department. Both incidents highlight a failure in the internal reporting and investigation processes as outlined in the facility's Abuse Prevention Policy. Staff members did not follow the required procedures for reporting and documenting allegations of abuse, leading to delays in addressing the issues and ensuring resident safety.
Failure to Monitor Blood Sugars for Diabetic Resident
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure standards of care for a resident with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus by not monitoring blood sugars as ordered. The resident's care plan did not address the diabetes diagnosis, and blood glucose monitoring (Accu checks) was not performed before meals and at bedtime as ordered. Additionally, the resident's insulin was unintentionally omitted for a period. Interviews with staff, including a Registered Nurse, the Administrator, the Director of Nursing, the Assistant Director of Nursing, and another Registered Nurse, confirmed that the resident was not receiving the necessary blood sugar monitoring despite being on insulin and having a diabetes diagnosis.
Failure to Provide Timely and Complete Incontinent Care
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide timely and complete incontinent care for two residents. One resident, who is cognitively impaired and always incontinent of bowel and bladder, was found with saturated pants and an incontinent pad. The CNA responsible for his care failed to cleanse all necessary areas, including the thighs, upper buttocks, penis, and scrotum. The CNA admitted to forgetting to provide complete care. The resident's records indicate a diagnosis of Alzheimer's Disease and Dementia, and he is dependent on staff for toileting and transfers. Another resident, who is moderately cognitively impaired and dependent on staff for toileting and mobility, was found with a wet incontinent brief. The CNAs responsible for his care failed to provide any incontinent care before covering him up. The CNA admitted to forgetting to provide care altogether. The resident's records indicate diagnoses of Hypertension, Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, and an unspecified open wound to the right foot.
Failure to Administer Insulin as Ordered
Penalty
Summary
The Facility failed to ensure physician's orders were accurately completed and implemented for a resident with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus. The resident returned from hospitalization with an order for insulin glargine 50 units twice a day, but the facility did not administer this medication from 5/29/2024 to 6/5/2024. The Director of Nursing (DON) discovered the error on 6/5/2024, noting that the resident had not received any insulin during this period. The resident's blood sugar was recorded at 278, significantly higher than the normal range of 80-120. The DON clarified the correct dosage with the resident's physician and re-ordered the previous dosage of 28 units at bedtime, which was the dosage before the hospitalization. The Event Report and interviews with staff and the resident's daughter confirmed the significant medication error. The Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) and the DON both acknowledged that missing the insulin for about a week constituted a significant medication error, with the potential for severe consequences such as Diabetic Ketoacidosis (DKA). The facility's policy on obtaining and following physician's orders was not adhered to, as the licensed personnel did not clarify or insert the correct order upon the resident's return from the hospital, leading to the resident missing critical diabetic medication for an extended period.
Inadequate Supervision and Door Alarm Failures Lead to Resident Elopement
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide adequate supervision for residents who require supervised leave and have the potential for elopement. This deficiency was observed in two residents, R5 and R8, who were able to leave the facility unsupervised. R5, who has a history of dementia and other medical conditions, was found by local police 0.6 miles from the facility after leaving without staff supervision. R5 had informed a CNA of his intention to leave, but the staff did not take appropriate action to prevent his elopement. Similarly, R8, who is moderately cognitively impaired, was found by a citizen walking on the road a block from the facility. R8 had previously attempted to exit the facility multiple times on the same day, but staff failed to monitor her closely or implement an elopement care plan. The facility's door alarms were not functioning properly, contributing to the residents' ability to leave the facility undetected. The alarm on door B did not sound when the lights were turned off, and staff were unaware of this issue. Additionally, the facility was understaffed, making it difficult for staff to monitor residents effectively. The lack of a backup battery alarm on some doors and the absence of a policy for checking door alarms further exacerbated the situation. Staff were not adequately trained on how to respond to exit-seeking behavior, and there was no system in place to ensure that residents at risk of elopement were closely monitored. The facility's failure to provide adequate supervision and maintain functioning door alarms resulted in immediate jeopardy for the residents. The deficiency was identified by surveyors, who noted that the facility's in-service training for staff was insufficient to address the issue. The facility's elopement prevention policy was outdated, and staff were not aware of the procedures for handling exit-seeking residents. The lack of communication and coordination among staff members further contributed to the deficiency, putting all residents at risk.
Removal Plan
- Maintenance Director contacted the Door Alarm company, and the technician was onsite. The corridor light switch to A and B hall that controlled door alarm power and lights down A and B hallway was removed to prevent the power to door alarm from being disengaged.
- Door backup power system identified as not being on circuit for the generator. Electric Company on site to connect door alarm power to generator panel.
- Maintenance Director and Door alarm company technician checked all doors to ensure they were working properly and that alarms sounded as designed.
- Facility elopement policy reviewed and updated to have doors check daily. Maintenance Director will check door alarms per facility policy daily. Nurses will check door alarms at the beginning of every shift.
- All residents were re-assessed for accuracy by administrator, Director of Nursing, Assistant Director of Nursing, and Social Service Director, to identify residents who are at risk for elopement including residents that require supervised leave. Assessments were completed for all residents who have been identified as at risk based on the completed assessments. Revision to all identified residents' care plans to include person-centered interventions.
- Facility elopement policy reviewed and updated by Regional Director and Administrator regarding residents at risk for elopement and what staff are to do if residents display exiting seeking behaviors or verbalize the desire to leave.
- Maintenance Director educated by Administrator on checking door alarms daily to ensure they are in good working order.
- Nursing staff educated by Director of Nursing and Assistant Director of Nursing on checking door alarms at the beginning of every shift to ensure they are in good working order.
- All staff working in the facility were in serviced on safety and supervision of residents, code yellow/missing resident, work order process, elopement and door alarm checks by Director of Nursing and Assistant Director of Nursing and Administrator.
- Education to Licensed staff in the facility on completion of elopement observations and implementation of appropriate intervention if at risk by Director of Nursing and Assistant Director of Nursing and Administrator.
- All staff will be trained during the orientation and quarterly for 1 year regarding missing resident policy and door alarm response procedure.
- The facility will implement compliance adherence during quarterly QA meetings.
Failure to Assess and Monitor Bed Rail Risks
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to use alternatives to bed rails and did not adequately assess and monitor the risks associated with their use, leading to significant harm to residents. One resident, with a history of dementia and physical impairments, suffered a fractured arm after it became entrapped in the bed rail during care. The resident's care plan indicated a preference for bed rails to reduce anxiety, but there was no documented assessment of the risks versus benefits of their use. The incident resulted in a decline in the resident's physical condition, ultimately leading to hospice care and the resident's passing. Another resident, also with dementia and behavioral disturbances, was observed multiple times with her arm through the bed rail, posing a risk of injury. Despite the resident's documented history of hallucinations and agitation, there was no physician order for the use of side rails, and the facility failed to conduct a proper assessment of the risks associated with their use. The resident's care plan included the use of side rails for safety during care, but the facility did not adequately monitor or address the potential for entrapment. A third resident, who was immobile and dependent on staff for all mobility, had side rails installed at the request of the family without a proper assessment. The facility did not document any medical symptoms justifying the use of side rails, nor did they explore alternative methods to ensure the resident's safety. The lack of proper assessments and monitoring for all three residents highlights the facility's failure to comply with regulations regarding the use of bed rails, resulting in immediate jeopardy to resident safety.
Removal Plan
- Maintenance Director completed bed gap measurement and assessment for entrapment zones per FDA guidance for all residents' beds with side rails. All bed rails were in compliance.
- Maintenance Director completed side rail audit to ensure they are compatible with bed.
- Director of Nursing and Social Service Director audit of side rails used as a restraint or enabler with completed pre restraint assessment form, side rail assessment form, side rail usage assessment and side rail consent on all residents to ensure least restrictive alternatives.
- Director of Nursing and Social Service Director audit and update care plans for residents using side rails regardless of used as enabler or restraint and for any other residents with restraints other than side rails. Care plans include medical symptoms justifying use of restraint, type of restraint used, frequency, durations, circumstances for when it is to be used, interventions to address potential or actual complications from restraints use such as increase incontinence, decline in ADLs or ROM, increased confusion agitation or depression.
- Director of Nursing and Social Service Director audit completed of physician orders for side rails and correct as needed to include medical symptom being treated, type of restraint, frequency of releasing the restraint.
- Regional Director and Regional Director reviewed and updated Bed Rail Maintenance and Installation and Entrapment Prevention, Restraint Reduction Program, Restraint Policy, and Restraint Usage Guide.
- Education to clinical staff currently in the facility conducted by Administrator, Director of Nursing and Social Services Director on Restraint Policy, Restraint Reduction Program, and Restraint Usage Guide.
- Education to Maintenance Director completed by Corporate Director of Environmental Services.
Failure to Notify Physician and Delay in Diagnostics for Resident's Fracture
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to notify the physician of a change in condition and delayed diagnostics for a resident, resulting in a delay of treatment and pain management for a right distal femoral fracture. The resident, who was severely cognitively impaired and dependent on staff for mobility and activities of daily living, was reported to have swelling and tenderness in the right knee by a CNA. The RN on duty received this report and ordered an X-ray, but the X-ray was delayed until the following day due to the service being busy. The resident's condition worsened, with increased pain and swelling noted by multiple CNAs and the RN. Despite these observations, the physician was not notified of the resident's increased pain or the delay in obtaining the X-ray. The resident's family was informed of the X-ray results, which indicated a probable distal femoral fracture, and requested that the resident be sent to the emergency department for further evaluation and pain management. The resident was eventually admitted to the hospital for pain management and treatment of the fracture. Interviews with staff revealed that there was a lack of communication and assessment regarding the resident's pain and condition. The Director of Nurses acknowledged that the physician should have been notified of the delay in diagnostics and the resident's increased pain. The facility's policy on changes in a resident's condition or status was not followed, as the physician was not informed of the significant change in the resident's physical condition.
Delay in Treatment for Resident's Fractured Leg
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to timely treat an injury of unknown origin for a resident, resulting in ongoing pain and a delay in treatment for a fractured leg. The resident, who was severely cognitively impaired and dependent on staff for all mobility and activities of daily living, was admitted with diagnoses of dementia with anxiety and weakness of the left side. On May 2, 2024, a CNA reported swelling and tenderness in the resident's right knee, which was communicated to the RN on duty. An order for a knee X-ray was placed, but the X-ray was not conducted until the following day. Throughout May 2, 2024, multiple CNAs observed the resident in significant pain, with swelling and redness in the knee. Despite these observations, the resident was not sent to the emergency department immediately. The RN on duty assessed the resident and decided to wait for the X-ray scheduled for the next morning, believing the situation was not as severe as it turned out to be. The resident's family was informed and agreed to monitor the situation until the X-ray could be performed. On May 3, 2024, the X-ray revealed a probable distal femoral fracture, and the resident was subsequently sent to the emergency department for further evaluation and pain management. The delay in obtaining the X-ray and addressing the resident's pain was acknowledged by the facility's staff, including the Director of Nursing and the Administrator, who admitted that the physician should have been notified of the increased pain and delay in the X-ray. The facility's policy on changes in a resident's condition or status was not adequately followed, contributing to the deficiency.
Failure to Properly Assess and Treat Pressure Ulcers
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to properly assess, document, and treat pressure ulcers for a resident, leading to the development of a new ulcer and the worsening of existing ones. The resident, who was admitted with dementia and left-side weakness, was severely cognitively impaired and dependent on staff for mobility and daily activities. Despite having no documented pressure ulcers upon admission, the resident developed a deep tissue injury and a Stage II pressure ulcer, which were not properly documented or treated until several days later. The facility's records show inconsistencies and delays in obtaining physician orders for pressure ulcer treatment. The resident's medication administration records indicated open areas during skin checks, but there were no corresponding wound documentation or treatment orders until days later. Interviews with staff revealed a lack of awareness and communication regarding the resident's pressure ulcers, with some staff members unaware of the ulcers' existence before the resident's hospitalization. Observations during a survey revealed improper wound care practices, such as using the same gauze pad to clean multiple ulcers. The facility's wound management policy was not followed, as there was a failure to document new skin conditions, measure wounds accurately, and obtain timely treatment orders. The facility's Director of Nurses and other staff acknowledged the deficiencies, noting that the pressure ulcers worsened due to inadequate turning and repositioning of the resident.
Failure to Provide Adequate Pain Management for Resident with Fracture
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide adequate pain management for a resident, identified as R6, who suffered from a leg fracture. R6, who was severely cognitively impaired and dependent on staff for mobility and daily activities, was admitted with diagnoses of dementia with anxiety and weakness of the left side. Despite having physician orders for pain medications such as Aleve and Motrin, R6 did not receive any PRN pain medication when she reported a pain scale of 4 on May 3, 2024. The facility's records indicate that R6 experienced pain and swelling in her right knee, which was reported by CNAs to the nursing staff, but adequate pain management was not provided. On May 2, 2024, CNAs observed swelling and tenderness in R6's right knee and reported it to the RN, who ordered an X-ray. However, the RN did not send R6 to the emergency room despite her wincing in pain with movement. The X-ray results, received on May 3, 2024, indicated osteoarthritis and a probable distal femoral fracture. The resident's family requested that R6 be sent to the emergency department for further evaluation and pain management, which was eventually done after the family expressed concerns about R6's pain and requested additional X-rays. Interviews with staff and family members revealed that R6 exhibited signs of pain, such as screaming and grimacing, during care. Despite these observations, the facility did not adequately address R6's pain, and the physician was not promptly notified of the increased pain. The facility's policy on pain prevention and treatment required regular pain assessments, but it appears that these were not effectively implemented in R6's case, leading to a delay in appropriate pain management and medical evaluation.
Inadequate Staffing Leads to Resident Care Deficiencies
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide sufficient nursing staff to meet the needs of residents, resulting in inadequate care and supervision. Residents reported extended wait times for assistance with activities of daily living, such as being taken off a bedpan or being laid down in bed, due to a lack of available Certified Nursing Assistants (CNAs). For instance, one resident was left on a bedpan for 45 minutes, while another had to wait for two CNAs to assist with being laid down, highlighting the staffing shortages during night and weekend shifts. Additionally, the report details an incident where a resident was found outside the facility by local police after leaving without staff knowledge. The resident, who was moderately cognitively impaired, managed to exit the building and was later returned by police. The staff on duty were unaware of the resident's departure, and the facility was unable to send someone to retrieve the resident due to insufficient staffing levels. This incident underscores the lack of supervision and monitoring of residents, particularly those with cognitive impairments. The facility's staffing schedules revealed that there were only three CNAs and two nurses available for 72 residents during certain shifts, which was insufficient to meet the residents' needs. The facility administrator acknowledged the staffing shortages and the inability to fill open shifts, leading to staff working short. The absence of a staffing policy further exacerbated the issue, contributing to the deficiencies observed in resident care and safety.
Absence of Full-Time Director of Nursing
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide the services of a Director of Nursing (DON) on a full-time basis, which has the potential to affect all residents residing in the facility. On April 28, 2024, a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) and a Registered Nurse (RN) confirmed that there was no DON, as the previous DON had quit on April 22, 2024. The facility administrator also confirmed the absence of a DON and stated that there was no staffing policy in place. Observations on April 28, April 30, and May 1, 2024, confirmed the absence of a DON in the facility. Additionally, the staffing schedule from April 22, 2023, to May 1, 2024, did not document a DON.
Failure to Maintain Effective Quality Assurance Program
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to implement and maintain an effective Quality Assurance program, which has the potential to affect all 71 residents residing in the facility. The last documented Quality Assurance meeting was held on September 26, 2023. During an interview on May 21, 2024, the Administrator confirmed that no Quality Assurance meetings had been conducted since September 2023. Additionally, the Maintenance Director, who started in October 2023, stated on May 22, 2024, that he had not attended any monthly or quarterly Quality Assurance meetings. The facility's policy, dated November 2017, requires the Quality Assurance team to meet monthly, which was not adhered to as per the findings.
Delayed Call Light Response Due to Staffing Shortages
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to answer call lights in a timely manner, impacting the care of three residents. Resident 1, admitted with acute respiratory failure with hypoxia, reported being left on a bedpan for 45 minutes due to insufficient staffing during the night shift. This resident noted that call light response times were acceptable when staffing levels were adequate but were significantly delayed when staffing was low, particularly during the night shift. Resident 2, with multiple diagnoses including colostomy status and mild intermittent asthma, expressed difficulty in receiving assistance to be laid down due to a lack of available CNAs. This resident reported waiting up to three hours for call light responses, especially during weekends on the second and night shifts. Resident 3, with a history of gastrointestinal hemorrhage and respiratory failure, also experienced delays in call light responses, sometimes waiting up to three hours to be changed. Observations revealed that this resident was found in a saturated incontinent brief and wet bed linens, with the CNA unaware of the last time the resident had been changed. The facility's staffing challenges were acknowledged by a staff member, who stated that there were not enough CNAs and nurses to cover all shifts, leading to staff working short. The resident council minutes further documented concerns about insufficient help during evening shifts.
Inadequate Incontinence Care and Staffing Issues
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide complete incontinence care for a resident, identified as R3, who was reviewed for bladder incontinence. R3, who is cognitively intact and dependent on staff for activities of daily living, reported that call lights take about two hours to be answered and that she has had to wait up to three hours to be changed. On one occasion, R3 was found in bed with a saturated incontinent brief, wet bed pad, and wet bottom sheet. The Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA), identified as V7, was unaware of the last time R3 had been changed and did not provide proper perineal care. V7 used a soapy washcloth without rinsing or drying R3, used the same washcloth for multiple areas, and did not change gloves after handling soiled items. The facility's Resident Council Minutes indicated that residents have expressed concerns about insufficient staffing during evenings. The facility's perineal care policy, dated July 2017, requires washing the perineal area from front to back, rinsing, and drying with a different washcloth, which was not followed in this instance. The CNA admitted to not following proper procedures, including not changing gloves and not knowing when R3 was last changed. This incident highlights a deficiency in providing adequate incontinence care and adhering to established care protocols.
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.



