Below average — CMS composite of the measures below.
Past the typical resurvey interval — a standard survey could occur at any time
Estimate from public CMS data, current as of July 2026. Survey timing is at the state agency's discretion.
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Wentworth Rehab & Hcc during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
A resident at moderate risk for pressure ulcers, with significant mobility and incontinence issues, developed a new sacral pressure ulcer that was not identified, reported, or treated by staff as required. CNAs observed the wound but failed to notify nursing staff, and there was no documentation or intervention until the issue was discovered by a surveyor. Facility policies for skin assessment and reporting were not followed, resulting in delayed care.
Failure to assess sexual consent capacity and document visitor restrictions: A resident with Alzheimer’s disease and severe cognitive impairment was observed engaging in sexual intercourse with a visitor, but the facility had no Sexual Activity Assessment and did not update the care plan or complete cognitive reassessment after the incident. The visitor was also restricted due to suspected financial abuse, but the restriction was not documented in the resident’s chart or orders, and the facility’s abuse and visitation policies did not include guidance for these situations.
Failure to report allegations of sexual and financial abuse involving a resident with severe cognitive impairment. A CNA reportedly observed the resident and a visitor engaging in sexual intercourse, and the resident’s family raised concerns that the visitor may have been taking money from him. The Administrator did not report the incidents because the resident said the sex was consensual and the visitor’s visiting privileges were restricted.
Failure to Investigate Allegations of Sexual and Financial Abuse: The facility did not document or complete an investigation into allegations that a resident with severe cognitive impairment was involved in sexual activity with a visitor and that the same visitor may have been taking money from him. Staff reported the resident said the sex was consensual, but the medical record contained no investigation or documentation of the incident, despite the resident’s dementia, BIMS scores indicating severe impairment, and a care plan noting abuse risk related to cognition.
Failure to protect a resident with severe dementia from sexual abuse by a visitor suspected of financial abuse. A CNA observed the resident and the visitor undressed and actively having sex in the resident’s room, then told them to stop and notified nursing staff. Staff later said the resident had dementia but believed he could consent, while also noting the visitor had been restricted at times because of family concerns about possible financial abuse. The facility did not have a sexual consent assessment, and no cognitive reassessment or care plan update was completed after the incident.
Three residents with cognitive impairments were not properly informed of their monthly personal fund amounts and did not consistently receive their trust fund disbursements. Facility staff were unclear about representative payee responsibilities and failed to notify residents about the management of their funds, resulting in confusion and lack of access to entitled monies.
The facility did not promptly report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft, nor did it communicate the results of its investigation to the proper authorities as required.
A deficiency was cited due to the facility's failure to keep an area free from accident hazards and to provide adequate supervision to prevent accidents. The report notes that the environment was not maintained safely and supervision was lacking, but does not provide further specifics.
A resident with multiple medical conditions, including a stage 4 pressure ulcer and severe malnutrition, did not have initial wound measurements documented by the LPN upon admission, leaving no baseline for the wound care team. Additionally, required weekly weights were missed, with only two weights recorded instead of the policy-mandated weekly monitoring, hindering proper nutritional assessment and intervention.
A resident with diabetes and multiple comorbidities did not receive appropriate blood glucose monitoring or consistent diabetes medication administration upon admission. Despite physician orders for blood sugar checks and insulin, only one blood sugar reading was documented in the first week, while diabetes medications were administered without monitoring. Nursing staff confirmed that blood glucose checks should have been performed according to orders, highlighting a lapse in following care protocols.
The facility failed to accurately assess fall risks and implement preventive interventions for two residents, resulting in multiple falls and injuries. One resident with Alzheimer's disease experienced several falls, including one causing a head injury requiring staples, without updates to their care plan. Another resident with dementia and hemiplegia had an inaccurately scored fall risk assessment and inadequate supervision, leading to a head laceration. The facility did not adhere to its fall management policy, resulting in deficiencies in fall prevention practices.
A facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan for a resident involved in an alleged abusive relationship with a CNA. Despite the resident's admission 5.5 months prior, the care plan did not include a risk for abuse. The ADON confirmed the omission and was unsure if abuse should be included in care plans, contrary to the facility's policy requiring a person-centered care plan within 7 days of the MDS completion.
The facility failed to update care plans for two residents, leading to deficiencies in care. One resident's care plan for fall risk and behavioral health pass program had expired target dates, and the ADON confirmed they were not reviewed as required. Another resident experienced a fall with a head injury, but the care plan was not updated with preventive interventions. The facility's policies require care plan revisions based on changes in condition and quarterly reviews, which were not followed.
A resident with a history of aggression became physically and verbally aggressive in the dining room. Despite staff attempts to deescalate, the resident grabbed a broom and swung it at a social worker. A housekeeper, untrained in CPI, intervened physically, resulting in the resident falling. This violated the facility's abuse policy, as the housekeeper acted outside his scope of duty.
A resident with multiple health issues experienced significant weight loss due to the facility's failure to implement and revise care plan interventions for nutritional support. Observations showed the resident struggling to eat without staff assistance, and documentation of food intake was inconsistent. The care plan lacked necessary updates, and staff interviews highlighted the need for 1:1 assistance and proper positioning during meals.
A resident with hemiplegia and dementia was observed struggling to eat independently due to the lack of a plate guard, which was documented as necessary in her care plan. Despite the resident's need for adaptive equipment and supervision during meals, staff did not provide the required assistance or ensure cleanliness, and the dietary supervisor confirmed that the necessary equipment was on order but not yet available.
A facility failed to maintain accurate and complete medical records for a resident, as required by its policy and professional standards. The resident's community survival assessment was not documented in the electronic health record before the surveyor's request, and there was a discrepancy between a handwritten assessment and the electronic record. The Director of Behavioral Health admitted the electronic assessment was inaccurate, leading to a handwritten version. The electronic assessment conflicted with the physician's orders, and the assessment was overdue, violating the facility's policy for annual or significant change assessments.
The facility did not follow fall prevention interventions for residents with dementia at risk for falls. Observations revealed several residents wearing smooth-bottomed socks instead of non-skid footwear, contrary to their care plans. The Memory Care Director and a CNA confirmed the oversight. Records showed these residents were assessed as fall risks, requiring proper footwear, as per the facility's Fall Management Program.
The facility failed to maintain the community shower room on the fourth floor East-Wing in a sanitary condition due to a drain/sewer back-up. A wet towel was found covering black liquid oozing from the drain, and the issue was not documented in the maintenance logbook until prompted by a surveyor. The Maintenance Director later attempted to clear the drain, highlighting a lapse in maintenance request procedures.
A facility failed to effectively control a bed bug infestation on the third floor, affecting multiple residents. Despite reports of bed bugs in beds and on curtains, the facility only treated rooms with sightings, allowing the problem to persist. Staff confirmed the issue, noting corporate approval was needed for treatments, limiting the number of rooms addressed. The facility's protocol was not fully implemented, as room changes were undocumented.
A resident with a suspicious breast mass refused a STAT mammogram and ultrasound due to fear, and the LTC facility failed to document or reschedule the appointment promptly. Staff interviews revealed confusion and lack of communication regarding the rescheduling, and the facility lacked a documentation policy, leading to a deficiency in meeting the resident's medical needs.
The facility failed to administer medications as ordered and did not document reasons for missed doses, affecting five residents. Interviews revealed that a resident was not given medications due to various reasons like computer issues or unavailability. The MARs showed multiple missing entries without explanations, contrary to the facility's policy requiring documentation of medication administration.
A resident with a history of falls and multiple medical conditions fell and fractured her finger due to the facility's failure to ensure her call light was within reach and her bed was in a low position. Staff admitted to not checking on the resident or ensuring necessary safety interventions were in place.
The facility failed to store food in accordance with professional standards, with expired food items found in the fridge and freezer, and opened food items without proper labeling. Additionally, a cook was observed preparing fortified pudding without using measuring utensils, deviating from the recommended recipe. These deficiencies have the potential to affect all 180 residents.
The facility failed to provide adequate staffing on the second floor, affecting all residents residing there. On multiple occasions between October 2023 and December 2023, the second floor had fewer aides than required, despite efforts by the Staffing Coordinator to cover call-offs and holidays. This led to the facility triggering with CMS for excessively low weekend staffing.
The facility failed to administer prescribed medications in a timely manner due to a nurse arriving late for her shift, affecting twelve residents. The facility's eMAR indicated the delay, and the protocol for such situations was not properly followed.
The facility failed to properly clean and disinfect multi-use blood pressure cuffs and pulse oximeters between resident use, did not follow proper hand hygiene protocols during peri-care, and did not post a required contact isolation precaution sign for a resident with specific diagnoses.
The facility failed to ensure that call light devices were within reach for two residents, placing them at risk of not being able to call for help. One resident with limited arm movement due to strokes and another with a right arm contracture were unable to reach their call lights. The facility's LPN acknowledged the importance of accessible call lights, and the facility's policy mandates that call lights be within reach at all times.
The facility failed to refer two residents with newly evident or possible serious mental disorders to the appropriate state-designated authority for review. One resident was diagnosed with bipolar disorder, and another had major depressive disorder, psychosis, and schizophrenia. Due to staff turnover and vacancies, the necessary screenings were not conducted as required.
The facility failed to provide regular showers to a resident with multiple medical conditions, including stage four and stage three pressure ulcers, dementia, and Alzheimer's disease. Documentation showed the resident did not receive a shower for two weeks, despite requiring substantial assistance with personal hygiene.
A facility failed to document catheter changes for a resident with multiple diagnoses, including stage four pressure ulcer and dementia. Despite protocols requiring weekly catheter changes, there was no documentation of any changes from admission in March 2024 until the end of May 2024. The resident's care plan also lacked information about the catheter and necessary care to prevent infections.
A resident did not receive prescribed medications due to the facility's failure to respond to pharmacy notifications about insurance issues, resulting in the unavailability of the medications. The nursing staff documented the administration of these medications despite their absence.
The facility failed to discard expired medications for two residents, as observed on medication carts managed by LPNs on the 3rd and 4th floors. Despite weekly audits and policies requiring immediate removal of expired medications, the expired medications were not discarded, posing a potential risk to resident safety.
A resident returning from the hospital was not provided a meal, resulting in hunger. The resident, with multiple medical conditions, was found struggling to get dressed and locate her call light. Staff failed to check on her or offer food after her return, despite knowing snacks were available.
A facility failed to implement effective fall prevention measures and supervision for three residents, resulting in falls and injuries. One resident, with dementia and hemiplegia, sustained a fall causing a laceration requiring sutures. Another resident, with vascular dementia, had inadequate floor mat placement, and a third resident experienced an unwitnessed fall due to insufficient supervision. Staff were not fully aware of or able to locate fall prevention interventions, highlighting a lack of proper documentation and communication.
The facility failed to revise care plans with appropriate interventions for three residents at risk for falls. One resident was sent to the hospital post-fall without preventive measures added. Another resident, with cognitive impairments, had floor mats added but lacked supervision. A third resident had a floor mat placed on one side of the bed, despite the risk of falling from either side. These actions did not adequately address fall prevention.
Failure to Prevent, Identify, and Report New Pressure Ulcer
Penalty
Summary
A resident with multiple medical conditions, including hemiplegia, heart failure, and incontinence, was assessed as being at moderate risk for developing pressure ulcers. The resident required substantial assistance for bed mobility and was unable to reposition independently. Despite being identified as at risk, the facility failed to prevent, identify, report, and treat a new pressure ulcer that developed on the resident's sacrum. During a surveyor's observation, an open skin area approximately 2 by 2 inches with a red wound base was found on the resident's sacrum, covered only with barrier cream and without a proper dressing. Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) staff observed the open wound during routine care but did not report it to the nursing staff as required by facility policy. The CNA initially claimed to have reported the wound but later admitted to assuming someone else had done so and ultimately did not notify the nurse. Licensed Practical Nurses (LPNs) and the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) were unaware of the wound prior to the surveyor's observation, and there was no documentation of the wound in the resident's electronic health record, progress notes, or skin assessments prior to the surveyor's findings. The wound care team and physician were not notified until after the surveyor brought the wound to the facility's attention. Facility records, including the resident's care plan and turning/repositioning program, indicated that staff were to check the resident's skin daily and report abnormalities. However, documentation from CNAs on shower/bath reports repeatedly indicated no new skin issues, and there was no record of the pressure ulcer in the days leading up to the survey. The facility's policy required prompt identification and reporting of skin alterations, but this process was not followed, resulting in a delay in assessment and treatment of the resident's pressure ulcer.
Failure to assess sexual consent capacity and document visitor restrictions
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to have a policy in place to assess a cognitively impaired resident’s ability to consent to sex after staff became aware that the resident was observed in his room with a visitor without clothes and engaging in sexual intercourse. The resident had diagnoses including Alzheimer’s disease and moderate dementia, and BIMS scores of 6 and 7, both indicating severe cognitive impairment. The Memory Care Director stated that after the incident she assessed the resident for distress and asked him about what happened, and he stated it was consensual sex, but she did not complete any cognitive assessments or update the care plan after the incident. She also stated the facility did not have a Sexual Activity Assessment and that she did not know who deemed the resident able to consent to sex. The resident’s care plan documented that he was at risk for abuse related to cognitive impairment and dementia, and the Memory Care assessment documented that he was only oriented to person and was not oriented to place, time, or situation, with short-term and long-term memory problems. The care plan and Memory Care assessments were last updated on 10/03/2025. The DON stated that a resident’s care plan should be updated after observed sexual intercourse in his room with a male visitor, and the PMHNP stated that a more in-depth assessment would be needed to measure decision-making capabilities in a person with dementia. The facility also failed to properly document visitation restrictions for the visitor suspected of financially abusing the resident. The Administrator stated the visitor was banned from visiting the resident at the family’s request because of concern for financial abuse, and the Memory Care Director stated the visitor was banned from 11/1/25 through 11/19/25 for safety reasons related to possible financial abuse. However, she did not document the ban in the resident’s chart and instead added the visitor to a list at the front desk. The resident’s Physician Order Sheet, care plan, face sheet, and medical record did not include orders regarding the visitor’s restrictions, and the facility’s abuse and visitation policies did not include verbiage or protocol for assessing sexual consent or documenting visitor restrictions related to abuse.
Failure to Report Allegations of Sexual and Financial Abuse
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to report allegations of sexual abuse and financial abuse involving one resident with Alzheimer’s disease, moderate dementia, essential hypertension, type 2 diabetes mellitus without complications, and benign prostatic hyperplasia with lower urinary tract symptoms. The resident’s BIMS score was 7, indicating severe cognitive impairment. A CNA reportedly told the Memory Care Director that the resident was observed in his room with a visitor without clothes and engaging in sexual intercourse. The Administrator stated that the resident said the act was consensual and that, because of that response, the incident was not reported. The Memory Care Director also stated that the resident’s family had expressed concern that the visitor might be taking advantage of the resident and receiving money from him. The Memory Care Director stated that after the alleged sexual act she assessed the resident for distress and asked him about what happened, and he said it was consensual sex. She also stated that she notified the Administrator by telephone about the sexual incident and the family’s concern about possible financial abuse, and that the visitor was restricted from visiting for safety reasons related to possible financial abuse. The Administrator stated he did not report the incident because the resident said the sex was consensual and did not report the suspected financial abuse because the visitor’s visiting privileges were banned. The facility’s initial investigation report was faxed to IDPH and documented allegations of sexual abuse and financial abuse involving the resident and the visitor.
Failure to Investigate Allegations of Sexual and Financial Abuse
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to conduct investigations for allegations of financial abuse and sexual abuse involving R14. R14 was a [AGE]-year-old resident with diagnoses including Alzheimer's disease, moderate dementia, essential hypertension, type 2 diabetes mellitus without complications, and benign prostatic hyperplasia with lower urinary tract symptoms. His BIMS scores on 9/26/25 and 10/3/25 were 6 and 7, respectively, indicating severe cognitive impairment. R14's care plan identified him as at risk for abuse related to cognitive impairment, dementia, impaired cognition, incomplete performances, and periods of confusion. According to the Administrator and Memory Care Director, a CNA reported that R14 was observed in his room with his visitor, V20, without clothes and engaging in sexual intercourse. The Memory Care Director stated she assessed R14 for distress and asked him about the event, and he said it was consensual sex. She also stated R14's family expressed concern that V20 may have been taking advantage of R14 and receiving money from him, and V20 was restricted from visiting R14. However, the facility's medical record did not include documentation or an investigation of the sexual incident, and the Memory Care Director stated she did not document the incident and forgot to do so. The facility's Initial Investigation reports were faxed to IDPH and identified allegations of sexual abuse and financial abuse involving R14 and V20, but the record review showed no investigation or documentation of the 11/1/25 sexual incident.
Failure to Protect Cognitively Impaired Resident from Sexual Abuse
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to protect a resident with severe cognitive impairment from sexual abuse by a visitor who was also suspected of financially abusing the resident. The resident had diagnoses including Alzheimer’s disease, moderate dementia, hypertension, type 2 diabetes mellitus without complications, and benign prostatic hyperplasia with lower urinary tract symptoms. BIMS scores of 6 and 7 indicated severe cognitive impairment, and the resident’s memory care assessment documented that he was oriented only to person, was not oriented to place, time, or situation, had short-term and long-term memory problems, and was at FAST stage 5. Staff interviews and record review showed that a CNA observed the resident and the visitor undressed from the bottom down and actively having sexual intercourse in the resident’s room. The CNA told them to stop and asked the visitor to leave, and later notified the nurse. The Memory Care Director stated that the incident was reported to administration, but she did not initially mention it because she did not correlate it with sexual abuse. She also stated that after the incident she assessed the resident for distress and asked him about what happened, and he said the sex was consensual. The Administrator stated that the resident had dementia but believed that did not mean he had lost his desire to have sex. The record also showed that the visitor had previously been blocked from the facility because the resident’s family member believed the visitor may have been financially abusing the resident and taking his money. Staff described confusion about whether the visitor was banned, with the visitor sometimes restricted and then later allowed back. The Memory Care Director stated that no cognitive assessments or care plan updates were completed after the sexual incident, and the DON stated the facility did not have an assessment to measure a resident’s capability to consent to sex. The facility’s abuse policy stated that residents are to be free from abuse and that the facility will immediately protect residents involved in possible abuse reports and investigate allegations promptly.
Failure to Inform and Distribute Resident Personal Funds
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to properly inform residents of their monthly personal funds amounts and did not distribute personal fund monies as required. Three residents were affected by this deficiency. One resident, who had moderately impaired cognition, was unaware of why she was not receiving her monthly trust fund disbursement and had not authorized her nephew to manage her finances. The facility did not notify her that her monthly trust fund money was being given to her nephew, and there was confusion regarding who was the authorized representative payee for her Social Security and pension funds. Another resident, with severely impaired cognition, reported not receiving her trust fund money and was unaware of the amount she should receive. The facility staff stated that this resident's family was the representative payee, but the resident was not informed about this arrangement. A third resident, also with moderately impaired cognition, stated he had not received any trust fund money and expressed a desire to receive it. There was further confusion regarding the power of attorney and who was authorized to receive and manage his personal funds. Facility staff interviews and record reviews revealed inconsistent practices in the management and distribution of residents' personal funds. Staff were unclear about the proper procedures for handling Social Security and pension disbursements, and residents were not consistently informed about their personal fund accounts or monthly disbursements. The facility's own policy required uniform guidelines for the protection of personal funds, but these were not followed, resulting in residents not receiving or being informed about their entitled funds.
Failure to Timely Report Suspected Abuse, Neglect, or Theft
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and did not report the results of the investigation to the proper authorities. This deficiency was identified based on the facility's lack of prompt action in notifying the appropriate agencies when an incident of suspected abuse, neglect, or theft occurred. The report indicates that the required notifications and investigation results were not communicated as mandated.
Failure to Maintain Safe Environment and Adequate Supervision
Penalty
Summary
A deficiency was identified in the facility's failure to ensure that an area was free from accident hazards and that adequate supervision was provided to prevent accidents. The report notes that the environment did not meet safety standards, and supervision was insufficient to prevent potential or actual accidents. Specific details regarding the nature of the hazards, the supervision provided, or the individuals affected are not included in the report.
Failure to Document Wound Measurements and Monitor Weekly Weights
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to follow its own policies regarding the documentation of wound measurements and the monitoring of weights for a resident admitted with multiple complex medical conditions, including a stage 4 sacral pressure ulcer and severe protein-calorie malnutrition. Upon admission, the wound nurse measured the resident's wound but did not document the measurements, resulting in the absence of baseline data for the wound care team and physician to assess wound progression. The wound nurse practitioner confirmed that no initial wound measurements were available prior to his assessment several days after admission, which hindered the ability to monitor wound improvement or deterioration. Additionally, the facility did not adhere to its policy of obtaining a baseline weight upon admission and conducting weekly weights for the first four weeks. The resident's weights were only recorded on two occasions, missing several required weekly weigh-ins. Both the dietitian and assistant director of nursing acknowledged that these missed weights prevented accurate monitoring of the resident's nutritional status and timely intervention. The physician order sheet and facility policy both specified the need for weekly weights, which was not followed in this case.
Failure to Monitor Blood Glucose and Ensure Continuity of Diabetes Care
Penalty
Summary
A deficiency occurred when a resident with multiple complex diagnoses, including type 2 diabetes mellitus, was not provided with appropriate blood glucose monitoring and continuity of diabetes medication administration upon admission. The resident was admitted with orders for blood glucose monitoring and several diabetes medications, including insulin and oral agents. Despite these orders, there was only one documented blood sugar reading on the day of admission, with no further monitoring recorded until a week later. During this period, the resident received diabetes medications, including insulin and oral agents, without concurrent blood glucose monitoring as ordered. Interviews with nursing staff and facility leadership confirmed that blood glucose monitoring should have been performed according to physician orders, especially for residents receiving insulin. Staff acknowledged that monitoring is necessary to safely administer insulin and oral diabetes medications and to detect abnormal blood sugar levels that require intervention. The Director of Nursing and Assistant Director of Nursing both stated that the expectation is to follow physician orders for blood glucose checks and that such monitoring is critical for diabetic residents, particularly those on insulin therapy. Record review showed that the resident was administered diabetes medications, including Lantus Insulin Glargine and Empagliflozin, before blood glucose monitoring was initiated. Additionally, an ordered insulin (Semglee) was not administered due to a delay in pharmacy supply. The lack of blood glucose monitoring and incomplete medication administration represented a failure to provide appropriate care and management for the resident's diabetes as ordered and as required by facility policy.
Inadequate Fall Prevention and Supervision
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure accurate fall risk assessments and implement preventive interventions for two residents, leading to multiple falls and injuries. Resident 5, diagnosed with Alzheimer's disease and severe cognitive impairment, experienced several falls, including one resulting in an intracranial hemorrhage and traumatic head injury requiring staples. Despite being identified as at risk for falls, the resident's care plan was not updated following a significant fall incident, and interventions were not revised to prevent further falls. Resident 2, with a history of dementia and hemiplegia, also experienced multiple falls, including one that resulted in a head laceration requiring sutures. The resident's fall risk assessment was inaccurately scored, failing to account for hypotension and impaired memory, which would have indicated a higher risk. The care plan included interventions such as call light placement and regular rounding, but these were not effectively implemented, as evidenced by the call light being out of reach during an observation. The facility's management of falls policy requires comprehensive assessments and timely updates to care plans to address fall risks. However, the facility did not adhere to these protocols, resulting in inadequate supervision and failure to prevent accidents. The lack of appropriate interventions and supervision contributed to the residents' injuries and highlighted deficiencies in the facility's fall prevention practices.
Failure to Develop Comprehensive Care Plan for Abuse Risk
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan for a resident (R4) who was involved in an alleged abusive relationship with a Certified Nursing Assistant (V7). The State Agency received allegations of this intimate relationship, which was considered abuse. Despite R4 being admitted to the facility approximately 5.5 months prior, the comprehensive care plan received on 2/26/25 did not include a risk for abuse. During a surveyor's inquiry, the Assistant Director of Nursing (V3) confirmed that R4's care plan did not address the risk of abuse, and V3 was unsure if abuse should be included in care plans. The facility's policy from 11/2017 requires the interdisciplinary team to develop a person-centered comprehensive care plan within 7 days of the completion of the required comprehensive MDS, which should describe services to maintain the resident's well-being and identify responsible professional services.
Failure to Update Care Plans for Fall Risk and Behavioral Health
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to follow its policy procedures and did not review or revise comprehensive care plans for two residents, leading to deficiencies in care. For one resident, the care plan for fall risk and behavioral health pass program had expired target dates, and the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) acknowledged that the care plans were not reviewed or revised as required. The ADON confirmed that the fall care plan should have been reviewed every three months, but it was not updated within the specified timeframe. Another resident experienced a fall resulting in a head injury, but the care plan was not updated to include preventive interventions or revisions following the incident. The ADON confirmed that the care plan was not updated to reflect the fall incident. The facility's policies require that care plans be revised based on changes in the resident's condition and at least quarterly, but these procedures were not followed, resulting in the deficiencies noted by the surveyor.
Untrained Staff Involvement in Resident Altercation
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to adhere to its abuse policy for a resident who exhibited aggressive behavior. The resident, who has a history of difficulty managing anger and frustration, was involved in an incident where she became verbally and physically aggressive, throwing food and other items. During this episode, a housekeeper, who was not trained in Crisis Prevention Interventions (CPI), attempted to intervene physically, resulting in the resident falling to the floor. The incident began when the resident entered the dining room, cursing and throwing her food on the floor. Despite attempts by staff to deescalate the situation, the resident continued to act out, eventually grabbing a broom and swinging it at a social worker, breaking his glasses. The housekeeper, who was called to clean the floor, attempted to take the broom from the resident, leading to both the resident and the housekeeper ending up on the floor. The housekeeper's actions were outside his scope of duty, as he was not trained to handle aggressive residents and should not have physically engaged with the resident. The facility's abuse policy clearly states that residents should be protected from physical abuse, which includes controlling behavior through corporal punishment. The housekeeper's involvement in the physical altercation with the resident was a violation of this policy, even though the resident did not sustain any injuries.
Failure to Provide Adequate Nutritional Support
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to implement and revise the care plan interventions necessary for a resident's nutritional support, leading to significant unplanned weight loss. The resident, a [AGE] year-old individual with multiple diagnoses including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, dementia, and muscle weakness, was observed struggling to eat without adequate assistance from staff. Despite the resident's evident difficulty in maintaining a comfortable eating position and using utensils, no staff intervened to assist during meal times. The resident's weight log indicated a significant weight loss from 138 pounds in August to 119 pounds in October, with no hospitalizations to account for this change. The Clinical Nutrition Manager noted that the resident required setup assistance and encouragement during meals, yet documentation of the resident's food intake and assistance needs was inconsistent and incomplete. The resident's care plan did not include an assessment for the use of finger foods, which could have facilitated easier eating. Interviews with staff, including a Nurse Practitioner and a CNA, highlighted the need for 1:1 assistance and proper positioning during meals, which were not consistently provided. The facility's policy on comprehensive care plans emphasized the need for person-centered care, yet the resident's care plan lacked necessary updates and interventions to address the resident's nutritional needs effectively.
Failure to Provide Adaptive Eating Equipment and Assistance
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide special eating equipment and appropriate assistance for a resident, identified as R3, who has a history of hemiplegia and hemiparesis following a cerebral infarction, dementia, and generalized muscle weakness. Observations on November 6, 2024, revealed that R3 was having difficulty using a spoon to eat independently in the dining room, often dropping food and resorting to using her left hand to grab food directly. Despite the resident's documented need for a plate guard to assist with eating, no such adaptive equipment was provided during the observed meal times. Additionally, staff did not offer assistance or ensure the resident's hands were clean before eating. Further investigation on November 7, 2024, showed that R3 was being fed by an LPN while lying in bed, again without the use of a plate guard as indicated on her dietary slip. The dietary supervisor confirmed that plate guards were on order but had not yet been received. R3's care plan and assessments documented the need for adaptive equipment and supervision during meals, yet these were not consistently provided. The facility's policy emphasizes the importance of providing appropriate treatment and services to maintain or improve residents' abilities, which was not adhered to in this case.
Failure to Maintain Accurate Medical Records
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain accurate and complete medical records for a resident, as required by its policy and accepted professional standards. During a review of the resident's electronic health record, it was found that the most recent community survival assessment was not documented in the electronic health record prior to the surveyor's request. The assessment, which was completed on a previous date, was not signed until the day of the surveyor's inquiry. Additionally, there was a discrepancy between a handwritten assessment provided by the facility and the electronic assessment in the resident's record, with conflicting information regarding the resident's pass privileges. The Director of Behavioral Health acknowledged that the electronic assessment was completed inaccurately and instructed the Behavioral Health Counselor to complete a new form, resulting in a handwritten assessment. The electronic assessment indicated that the resident could not have unsupervised pass privileges, which conflicted with the physician's orders allowing unrestricted independent passes. Furthermore, the community survival skills assessment was past due, as it was completed more than a year after the previous assessment. The facility's policy requires comprehensive assessments to be conducted annually or upon significant change, but this was not adhered to in this case.
Failure to Implement Fall Prevention Interventions
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to implement fall prevention interventions as outlined in the care plans for residents with dementia who are at risk for falls. During an observation on the fourth floor, several residents were seen wearing smooth-bottomed socks instead of the required non-skid socks or shoes. Specifically, one resident was observed walking in the hallway and near the nursing station with red smooth-bottomed socks, while three other residents were seen in the day room with similar footwear. The Memory Care Director confirmed that these residents were supposed to wear non-skid socks, and a CNA acknowledged the need to change their socks. The records for the affected residents indicated that they were all assessed to be at risk for falls due to various factors such as poor safety awareness, impaired cognition, unsteady gait, and use of assistive devices. Their care plans specifically stated the need for proper, well-maintained, and non-skid footwear as a preventive measure against falls. The facility's Fall Management Program also emphasized the importance of using standard fall safety precautions for all residents. Despite these documented interventions, the facility did not ensure that the residents were wearing the appropriate footwear, thereby failing to adhere to the established fall prevention strategies.
Sanitation Deficiency in Community Shower Room
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain the large community shower room on the fourth floor East-Wing in a sanitary condition, as evidenced by a drain/sewer back-up. This issue was observed when a wet towel was found covering black liquid oozing from the drain. The Assistant Director of Nursing acknowledged the problem and mentioned that maintenance would be notified. However, the Maintenance logbook did not initially document the clogged drain issue. The Maintenance Director later confirmed being informed about the problem and attempted to clear the drain using a wire. The maintenance logbook was updated only after the surveyor's inquiry, indicating a lapse in the facility's maintenance request procedures.
Inadequate Pest Control Measures Lead to Persistent Bed Bug Infestation
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide effective pest control for residents on the third floor, as evidenced by multiple reports of bed bug infestations affecting seven residents in a sample of ten. Residents reported bed bugs crawling on them, their beds, and privacy curtains, leading to multiple room changes. The facility's pest control measures were inadequate, as they only treated rooms where bed bugs were sighted, rather than conducting a comprehensive treatment of the affected area. This approach allowed the bed bug problem to persist since at least January 2024, with residents experiencing repeated infestations and embarrassment due to the need for room changes. Interviews with staff, including the administrator and a licensed practical nurse, confirmed the ongoing bed bug issue on the third floor. The administrator noted that corporate approval was required for extermination treatments, which limited the number of rooms treated at any given time. The pest control invoices reviewed indicated sporadic treatments of individual rooms, rather than a coordinated effort to address the infestation comprehensively. Additionally, the facility's bed bug protocol was not effectively implemented, as room changes were not documented in residents' clinical records, and the pest control contractor's inspections were limited to rooms with reported sightings.
Failure to Address Resident's Refusal for Critical Medical Appointment
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to address a resident's refusal to attend a scheduled mammogram and ultrasound appointment, which was ordered on a STAT basis due to a highly suspicious mass found in a previous ultrasound. The resident, who has intact cognitive function, refused to attend the appointment out of fear that her breast would be removed. Despite this refusal, there was no documentation of any further attempts to reschedule the appointment until a later date, and the facility's records lacked evidence of timely communication with the physician regarding the resident's refusal. Interviews with facility staff revealed a lack of clarity and communication regarding the rescheduling of the appointment. The Clinical Director of Behavioral Health Services and the Licensed Practical Nurse were unsure if the appointment had been rescheduled, and the nurse practitioner was informed of the refusal but did not document it. The Director of Nursing was unaware of the STAT order and acknowledged that the documentation was late, indicating a failure in the facility's process for handling such critical appointments. The facility's documentation practices were found to be lacking, as there was no policy for documentation, and the nurse responsible for rescheduling the appointment did not document her actions. The resident's rights document indicated that the facility must make reasonable arrangements to meet the resident's needs and choices, which was not adhered to in this case. The deficiency highlights a failure in ensuring timely and appropriate care for the resident, as well as a breakdown in communication and documentation processes within the facility.
Failure to Administer and Document Medications
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to administer medications as ordered by the physician and did not document the reasons for not administering these medications. This deficiency affected five residents who were reviewed for medication administration. During interviews, one resident reported that the nurse did not provide medications on several occasions, citing reasons such as computer issues, unavailability of medication, or inability to find keys. The Medication Administration Records (MAR) for these residents showed multiple missing entries without any chart codes or explanations for the missed doses. The Director of Nursing and Licensed Practical Nurses confirmed that MAR should not be left blank and that chart codes should be used to indicate reasons for missed medications, such as resident refusal or absence from the facility. However, the MARs for the residents in question had several blank entries, indicating that the medications were not given. The facility's policy requires medications to be administered according to the physician's written orders, but this was not adhered to, leading to the deficiency.
Failure to Ensure Safe Environment for Resident
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure a safe environment free from accidents and hazards for a resident, resulting in the resident falling and sustaining a fracture of the second left finger. The resident, who has a history of falls and multiple medical conditions including end-stage renal disease, hemiplegia, and type 2 diabetes, was observed sitting at the edge of her bed in incontinence underwear, struggling to get dressed and find her call light. The resident reported that she had not been checked on by staff since returning from the hospital that morning and was very hungry. The call light was found to be out of reach, and the resident's bed was not in a low position, which is a necessary intervention for fall risk residents. The Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) who assisted the resident back to bed after her return from the hospital admitted to not checking on the resident again or ensuring the call light was within reach. The CNA also confirmed that the resident's bed could not be lowered, which is contrary to the facility's policy for fall risk residents. The Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) acknowledged that the resident had multiple falls in the past year and should have had interventions such as a low bed, floor mats, and a call light within reach. The Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) also admitted to not checking on the resident after her initial assessment and not ensuring the bed was in a low position or the call light was accessible. The Maintenance Director confirmed that the bed model used for the resident could not be adjusted for height and did not have half rails to assist the resident in getting in and out of bed. The Assistant Administrator swapped the resident's bed with her roommate's bed, which could be lowered, after the surveyor's observation. The Nurse Practitioner emphasized the importance of having floor mats, a call light within reach, and a bed in a low position for the resident due to her high risk of falls and fractures. The facility's policy on fall management was not followed, leading to the resident's fall and subsequent injury.
Deficiencies in Food Storage and Preparation
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to store food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety and sanitation. During a kitchen observation, a cook was seen without a hair net while preparing food, and expired food items were found in the main fridge and freezer. Specifically, the surveyor observed expired potato salad, chicken base, magic cup, Worcestershire sauce, mayonnaise cole-slaw dressing, and grits. Additionally, there were opened food items without proper labeling, such as vanilla ice-cream in a damaged container and an opened red-hot bottle without an open or expiration date. The facility's policy requires that all food products with pre-printed manufacturer date labels be discarded by the noted date, and any opened food should be labeled with the date and time it was placed in the refrigerator. The failure to adhere to these policies was evident during the surveyor's inspection. Furthermore, the facility did not follow the recommended portion size for the menu and failed to utilize measuring utensils when mixing ingredients. A cook was observed preparing fortified pudding by mixing ingredients without using any measuring utensils, relying instead on visual estimation. This practice deviated from the US Foods Management System production recipe for fortified pudding, which specifies precise measurements for ingredients. The dietary manager confirmed that all staff should follow protocol when preparing meals and mixing ingredients, and that expired foods should be discarded immediately. The failure to follow these protocols has the potential to affect all 180 residents in the facility.
Inadequate Staffing on Second Floor
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide adequate staffing for one out of four floors, specifically the second floor, which affects all residents residing there. On multiple occasions, the second floor was understaffed, with fewer aides than required. For instance, on several Sundays and Saturdays between October 2023 and December 2023, the second floor had only three or four aides instead of the required six for various shifts. This pattern of understaffing was confirmed through interviews and record reviews, including statements from the Staffing Coordinator, who acknowledged the staffing issues and the efforts made to cover call-offs and holidays. The deficiency was highlighted by the facility triggering with CMS for excessively low weekend staffing. The Staffing Coordinator detailed the usual staffing levels, which include five nurses per shift and a varying number of aides based on floor acuity and census. Despite these efforts, the second floor, which has the highest acuity, consistently fell short of the required staffing levels, leading to the identified deficiency. The report does not mention any specific residents' medical history or conditions at the time of the deficiency but emphasizes the overall impact on the second floor residents due to inadequate staffing.
Failure to Administer Medications Timely
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to administer residents' prescribed medications in a timely manner according to physician orders. On 05/28/2024, a registered nurse (V3) arrived late for her shift, starting at approximately 8:20 AM instead of the scheduled 7:00 AM. Consequently, V3 began administering medications at around 9:00 AM, which was beyond the acceptable time frame for timely medication administration. The facility's electronic medication administration record (eMAR) indicated that medications for twelve residents were administered late, as the eMAR turned red to signify the delay. The facility's policy mandates that medications should be administered within one hour of the prescribed time, which was not adhered to in this instance. The Assistant Director of Nursing (V23) confirmed that the protocol for such situations involves the unit supervisor or another nurse from the previous shift administering medications until the scheduled nurse arrives. However, it was unclear who was responsible for administering medications on the first floor until V3 arrived. The medication administration audit report and time clock punches corroborated that V3 and another nurse (V22) were late in administering medications to the affected residents. This lapse in protocol and timely medication administration affected twelve residents in the facility.
Infection Control Deficiencies
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that multi-use blood pressure cuff devices and pulse oximeters were properly cleaned and disinfected between resident use. Observations revealed that staff members did not clean or disinfect these devices after using them on multiple residents, including R12, R20, R27, R29, R83, R98, R124, R126, R159, and R161. This failure was noted during medication administration observations on different floors of the facility. Staff members placed the used devices back on the medication cart without cleaning them, which was confirmed by the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) and Infection Preventionist, who acknowledged the potential for the spread of germs and infections due to this oversight. The facility also failed to ensure that staff followed proper hand hygiene protocols while performing peri-care. During an observation, a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) did not change gloves or perform hand hygiene after cleaning a resident's peri-area and before applying a new brief. The CNA admitted that she was not informed about the necessity of changing gloves after such procedures. The facility's policy on perineal care and hand hygiene clearly states the importance of removing gloves and washing hands to prevent infection and odor. Additionally, the facility did not post a contact isolation precaution sign for a resident identified as having a physician order for contact isolation precautions. The resident, who had diagnoses including chronic osteomyelitis, pressure ulcers, urinary tract infection, sepsis, and pericarditis, was observed without the required contact isolation sign outside his room. Staff members provided conflicting information about the resident's isolation status, and it was noted that sometimes staff did not wear gowns when entering the resident's room. The facility's infection prevention and control manual mandates the use of appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) and the posting of a CDC contact precaution sign for residents on contact isolation.
Failure to Ensure Call Lights Within Reach for Residents
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that the call light devices were within reach for two residents, R14 and R17, which placed them at risk of not being able to call for help if needed. On 05/28/24, the surveyor observed R17 in bed with limited movement in her right arm due to a history of strokes. The call light was placed under her right arm, making it difficult for her to reach it with her left hand. R17 confirmed that she often could not reach her call light due to a lack of strength. Similarly, on the same day, the surveyor observed R14's call light hanging from the right side of his bed's side rail, which he could not reach due to a right arm contracture. R14 confirmed his inability to reach the call light when questioned by the surveyor. The facility's Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) acknowledged the importance of having call lights within residents' reach to ensure they can call for assistance in emergencies. R17's medical records indicate she is a cognitively intact female with a history of hemiplegia, hemiparesis following cerebral infarction, generalized anxiety disorder, and muscle weakness. R14's records show he is a male with moderately impaired cognition, muscle contracture, and generalized muscle weakness. The facility's policy, dated 9/20, mandates that call lights be placed within residents' reach at all times, which was not adhered to in these cases.
Failure to Refer Residents with Serious Mental Disorders for Review
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to refer two residents with newly evident or possible serious mental disorders to the appropriate state-designated authority for review. This deficiency affected two residents, one of whom was diagnosed with bipolar disorder and the other with major depressive disorder, psychosis, and schizophrenia. The first resident, a man diagnosed with bipolar disorder, was admitted to the facility with an initial OBRA screen indicating no reasonable basis for suspecting mental illness. However, he was later diagnosed with bipolar disorder, and the facility did not initiate a new screening as required. The psychosocial coordinator acknowledged that due to staff turnover and vacancies, the necessary screenings might not have been conducted, despite quarterly assessments prompting for changes in resident diagnoses. The second resident had diagnoses including major depressive disorder, psychosis, and schizophrenia, which are considered serious mental illnesses. Despite these diagnoses, the initial PASRR Level I screen indicated no need for a Level II screening. The resident was readmitted to the facility after a hospital stay, and it appears that the necessary diagnoses were not updated in the Maximus system. The psychosocial coordinator confirmed that the facility did not notice the discrepancy between the screening and the resident's records until much later, prompting a new Level I screening. The facility's policy mandates that residents be screened for severe mental illness or developmental disabilities prior to admission and upon any changes in status, which was not adhered to in these cases.
Failure to Provide Regular Showers to Resident
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide showers to a resident who is unable to maintain good personal hygiene. This deficiency affected a [AGE] year-old female resident with multiple medical diagnoses, including stage four pressure ulcer of the sacral region, stage three pressure ulcers of the right heel and other sites, dementia, Alzheimer's disease, high blood pressure, visual disturbance, and wasting syndrome. The resident's Minimum Data Set (MDS) indicated that she was not alert and required substantial/maximal assistance with showers and bathing. The resident's care plan noted a functional performance deficit in activities of daily living (ADL) and required staff assistance with personal hygiene. However, documentation revealed that the resident did not receive a shower for two weeks in May 2024, with the last recorded shower on May 1, 2024, and the next on May 15, 2024. The Assistant Director of Nursing confirmed that residents are supposed to be showered once a week and as needed, and if a shower is not documented, it was not done.
Failure to Document Catheter Changes
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to document catheter changes for a resident requiring an indwelling catheter. The resident, a [AGE] year-old female with multiple diagnoses including stage four pressure ulcer, dementia, and Alzheimer's disease, was observed with a very dark urine and old, discolored catheter tubing containing dark sediment. Despite the facility's protocol to change catheters weekly and as needed, there was no documentation of any catheter change from the resident's admission in March 2024 until the end of May 2024. Interviews with nursing staff revealed that catheter changes should be documented in progress notes, but a review of the resident's progress notes showed no such documentation. The Assistant Director of Nursing confirmed that nurses are expected to follow physician orders, change visibly dirty catheters, notify the physician, and document the change and the resident's condition. However, the resident's care plan did not include any information about the catheter, its necessity, or the required care to prevent urinary tract infections.
Failure to Administer Medications as Ordered
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that medications were administered as ordered by the resident's physician for one resident. On the morning of 05/28/2024, a surveyor observed a registered nurse (V3) unable to locate the resident's medications in the medication carts. The nurse then contacted the facility's contracted pharmacy, which revealed that the resident's medications had not been shipped due to a loss of insurance. The pharmacy had previously notified the facility about the insurance issue via fax on multiple occasions, but the facility had not responded until the surveyor's visit on 05/28/2024. The resident, identified as R83, was admitted with diagnoses including acute chronic systolic heart failure, atrial fibrillation, pulmonary hypertension, and type 2 diabetes mellitus. The resident's physician had prescribed several medications, including Amiodarone, Apixaban, Empagliflozin, and Spironolactone, which were not available in the facility's emergency medication convenience box. The resident's medication administration record indicated that the nursing staff had been documenting the administration of these medications, despite their unavailability. The facility's policy on medication administration requires that medications be administered safely as prescribed and that the physician be notified if an order cannot be followed. However, the facility failed to adhere to this policy, resulting in the resident not receiving the prescribed medications for an extended period. The progress notes documented by the nurse on 05/28/2024 indicated that the issue was being addressed, but the deficiency had already occurred due to the facility's inaction in responding to the pharmacy's notifications and ensuring the resident's medications were available and administered as ordered.
Failure to Discard Expired Medications
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to follow its policy to ensure that medications that are outdated are immediately removed or disposed of. This deficiency was observed for two residents out of three reviewed for medication storage and labeling. On the 3rd floor, a surveyor observed an expired budesonide formoterol fumarate dihydrate inhaler for a resident on cart #1, which had an expiration date of 5/13/2024. The LPN managing the cart confirmed that the medication was expired and should have been discarded. Similarly, on the 4th floor, the surveyor found an expired insulin Lispro pen injector and an expired Fluticasone Advair inhaler for another resident on cart #2. The LPN managing this cart also confirmed that these medications were expired and should have been discarded. The Associate Director of Nursing stated that weekly cart audits are conducted to ensure that medications are within their proper expiration dates and to reorder any necessary medications. The facility's policy requires that medications be labeled with the date they are first given and their expiration date, and that expired medications be immediately removed for the safety of the residents. Despite these procedures, the expired medications were not discarded as required, posing a potential risk to the residents' safety.
Failure to Provide Meal to Resident Returning from Hospital
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide a meal to one resident (R85) who had returned from the hospital, resulting in the resident experiencing hunger. R85, a [AGE] year-old individual with multiple medical conditions including end-stage renal disease, hemiplegia, and type 2 diabetes mellitus, was observed in her room at 11:35 am, stating she was very hungry and had not been offered food since her return from the hospital earlier that morning. R85 was found struggling to get dressed and locate her call light, which was out of her reach. The Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) who assisted the paramedics in transferring R85 to bed did not check on her or offer her food after the initial transfer. The Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) also failed to check on R85 after the initial assessment and did not ensure the call light was within reach or offer food, despite knowing that breakfast time had ended and snacks were available in the kitchen. The Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) confirmed that the nursing staff should have asked R85 if she was hungry and provided a meal, even if breakfast was over. The facility's policy on food substitutes and the always available menu, which includes items like grilled cheese and hamburgers, was not followed. This oversight led to R85 experiencing hunger and being unable to communicate her needs due to the call light being out of reach and the lack of staff follow-up after her return from the hospital.
Inadequate Fall Prevention and Supervision in LTC Facility
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure adequate fall prevention measures and supervision for three residents, leading to a significant incident involving one resident. This resident, diagnosed with dementia and hemiplegia, was at high risk for falls as indicated by their fall risk assessment. Despite this, the facility did not implement effective interventions after previous falls, resulting in the resident sustaining a fall that caused a laceration requiring sutures. The care plan was not adequately updated to prevent further incidents, and staff were not fully aware of the necessary interventions. Another resident, with vascular dementia and a history of falls, was also inadequately protected. The resident's care plan included interventions such as keeping the bed in the lowest position and using floor mats. However, during the survey, it was observed that only one floor mat was in place, despite the bed not being against a wall, which could have prevented falls from either side. The staff's understanding of the resident's fall prevention measures was incomplete, as they failed to mention the use of floor mats. A third resident, with cognitive impairments and a history of falls, was found on the floor after an unwitnessed fall. The care plan included the use of floor mats, but supervision was not mentioned as an intervention. Staff were unable to locate the resident's fall prevention interventions in the communication book, indicating a lack of proper documentation and communication regarding fall prevention strategies. This lack of awareness and implementation of fall prevention measures contributed to the residents' falls and injuries.
Failure to Revise Care Plans for Fall Prevention
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to revise care plans with appropriate interventions for three residents who were reviewed for falls. For the first resident, the care plan noted a risk for falls and included an intervention to send the resident to the hospital for evaluation and treatment after a fall. However, this intervention did not address the prevention of future falls. The resident had fallen while receiving ADL care and sustained a head injury. The restorative nurse confirmed that sending the resident to the hospital would not prevent additional falls. The second resident's care plan identified risks related to muscle weakness, poor balance, poor safety awareness, and visual impairment. After an unwitnessed fall, the intervention added was the use of floor mats while in bed, but supervision was not included despite the resident's cognitive impairments. The third resident, diagnosed with vascular dementia and unsteadiness, had a care plan intervention to keep the bed in the lowest position and use a floor mat on one side of the bed. However, the resident could fall from either side as neither side of the bed was against the wall, and the intervention did not adequately address the risk of falls.
What surveyors are citing around you — mapped
All 10 risk areas, ranked with evidence
Repeat citations, what's rising near you, and quality measures — ranked so department heads know exactly where to look first.
Illustrative
What surveyors actually found near you
We read the 1,772 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — including the 26 immediate-jeopardy cases — and tell you exactly what happened, in plain English, matched to your record.
Resident with a documented fall history left unattended on the patio; found on the ground with a hip fracture.
Walk-in cooler logs missing for 12 days; expired supplements in the medication room fridge.
Illustrative
A prioritized, do-first checklist
Every risk area becomes concrete audit steps drawn from real citations at facilities like yours — run them this week, before your window opens.
Illustrative
Risk indicators are statistical estimates from public CMS data — not predictions, findings, or compliance advice.
Nursing homes near Chicago
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Princeton Rehab & Hcc | 0.1 mi | ★★★★★ | 3 | 0 |
| Landmark Of Hyde Park Rehabilitation And Nursing C | 2.2 mi | ★★★★★ | 14 | 0 |
| Bria Of Forest Edge | 3.1 mi | ★★★★★ | 4 | 0 |
| Montgomery Place | 3.1 mi | ★★★★★ | 20 | 0 |
| Pavilion Of South Shore | 3.1 mi | ★★★★★ | 1 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Wentworth Rehab & Hcc.
100% money-back within 48 hours.
Trusted data, never guesswork. Every citation, penalty, rating and Plan of Correction on this page is sourced from public CMS records (latest release July 2026) and official state health department websites.