Below average — CMS composite of the measures below.
A standard survey is most likely before around December 2026
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 Columbia Healthcare Center during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
Surveyors identified multiple failures in food storage and labeling practices in the kitchen, including expired mayonnaise, grape jelly, Worcestershire sauce, baking soda, mini marshmallows, yellow cornmeal, and orange juice, as well as several items such as syrups, ketchup, and pudding mix that lacked required open and use-by dates. The Dietary Manager acknowledged that opened food should be labeled with open and use-by or expiration dates, and the facility’s Kitchen Operations policy requires all refrigerated, ready-to-eat, non-potentially hazardous, and shelf-stable foods to be properly labeled, dated, and used or discarded within defined time frames.
A resident with a pressure ulcer and multiple comorbidities did not receive antibiotics and wound care as ordered by the physician, with missing documentation for several medication doses and treatments. Staff interviews revealed confusion about care plan requirements, and the resident was not consistently included on the assignment form for turning and repositioning, despite physician orders.
Several residents who required staff assistance for ADLs did not consistently receive scheduled showers or complete bed baths, with some going weeks without bathing and their preferences for timing and frequency not being honored. Observations included residents with unkempt hair and direct complaints about missed showers, while documentation and staff interviews confirmed lapses in both care delivery and record-keeping.
Failure to Implement Wheelchair Dycem Intervention: A resident with cancer and COPD was care planned and ordered to have Dycem in the wheelchair every shift, but surveyors observed the wheelchair at bedside without Dycem on multiple occasions. The resident stated the Dycem had not been in the wheelchair for a while, and an LPN confirmed the resident was care planned for a Dycem pad but did not know why it was missing.
A resident with quadriplegia had citalopram reduced from 20 mg to 10 mg HS, with orders to closely observe and document side effects and notify the MD as needed. After the dose change, nursing and IDT notes repeatedly documented tearfulness, emotional distress, and reports from family and staff that the resident was more tearful and angry, but there was no documented notification to the psych NP or follow-up for the ongoing side effects.
The facility was found to have significant cleanliness issues, including dust and dirt build-up in multiple halls, unclean linen closets, and improperly stored urinals in a shared bathroom. Shower rooms were not maintained, with discolored grout and broken tiles observed. A strong urine odor was present in various areas, and residents expressed concerns about inadequate housekeeping. The facility's housekeeping policy was not effectively implemented, leading to these unsanitary conditions.
The facility failed to ensure complete and accurate documentation for four residents' medication administration records. Insulin and nebulizer treatments were not properly documented, and the facility lacked a nebulizer treatment documentation policy. Staffing issues during the evening shift contributed to incomplete documentation.
A facility failed to follow its nebulizer treatment protocol for a resident, resulting in the resident being found unresponsive during the treatment. The RN left the resident unattended to contact a nurse practitioner, and required assessments were not documented. CPR was initiated, and the resident was transported to the hospital. The facility lacked a formal nebulizer treatment policy, although nurses received skills check-offs during orientation.
A resident with diabetes experienced dangerously high blood glucose levels, leading to diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) and emergency hospitalization. The facility failed to document physician notifications and follow-up actions, despite critical readings and symptoms. Communication and documentation inconsistencies were noted, including the use of undocumented text messages.
The facility failed to ensure medications were properly dated, labeled, and not expired across multiple medication and treatment carts. Observations revealed insulin vials, nasal saline, sterile water, Betadine, and other medications were missing open dates, labels, or were expired. Non-medical items were found in medication carts, and interviews confirmed the need for proper labeling and dating.
A facility failed to notify a physician of a resident's critical blood glucose levels, which were outside the specified parameters. Despite a lab report indicating a critical level, there was no documented follow-up with the physician as required by the facility's policy. This deficiency highlights a lapse in communication and adherence to established protocols for managing changes in a resident's condition.
A facility failed to implement a care plan for a resident with frequent UTIs and multidrug-resistant organisms. The resident reported that improper cleaning by staff led to the infections. The DON acknowledged the absence of a care plan, which was required by the facility's policy to address the resident's needs, including ESBL colonization and recurrent UTIs.
A resident developed avoidable pressure ulcers due to the facility's failure to monitor skin under a knee immobilizer. Despite a care plan requiring weekly skin assessments, the facility did not conduct these assessments, resulting in two unstageable pressure wounds. The facility's policy to prevent pressure ulcers was not followed, as confirmed by the DON.
A resident with cancer diagnoses did not receive appropriate pain management before wound care. Despite requesting pain medication, the RN proceeded with the treatment, causing the resident to express pain. The facility's pain management policy was not adhered to, as the medication was not given time to take effect before continuing the procedure.
A facility failed to administer medications according to standards, resulting in a 7.69% error rate. An LPN did not prime insulin pens before administering Glargine and Lispro Insulin to a resident with diabetes and systemic lupus erythematosus. The LPN was unaware of the priming requirement, as indicated in the Humalog Kwik Pen instructions provided by the administrator.
A resident with diabetes mellitus experienced critically high blood glucose levels, but the LTC facility failed to document insulin administration and physician notifications as required. The DON admitted to lapses in documentation, and interviews revealed inconsistencies in communication and record-keeping practices, leading to incomplete records for the resident's insulin management.
The facility failed to follow infection control practices during care for three residents. A CNA did not sanitize hands or change gloves after handling soiled items for a resident with dementia. Another resident, who was cognitively intact and had frequent UTIs, received care from staff who did not sanitize hands between tasks. A resident with a stage 4 pressure ulcer did not receive proper enhanced barrier precautions during wound care, as the LPN did not wear a gown despite facility policy requiring it.
A resident with multiple health issues was discharged home without the arrangement of home health services and without completing necessary documentation. The resident left the facility with her husband before being evaluated by the hospice company, which later did not accept her. The facility did not follow its policy on discharge against medical advice and failed to notify outside agencies about the resident's safety concerns.
The facility failed to ensure dignity and timely care for three residents, leading to significant delays in assistance and disrespectful treatment. Residents reported waiting hours for care, being talked down to, and experiencing neglect despite their medical conditions requiring substantial assistance.
Improper Food Storage, Labeling, and Use of Expired Food in Kitchen
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to store and label food in accordance with its own Kitchen Operations policy and professional standards during a kitchen tour. In the reach-in refrigerator, surveyors observed a bottle of mayonnaise past its manufacturer expiration date, a bottle of grape jelly with no open or use-by date and an expired manufacturer date, and bottles of caramel syrup, chocolate syrup, and ketchup without appropriate open or use-by dates consistent with policy. A container of Worcestershire sauce was labeled with an open date and a use-by date that had already passed. In the food preparation area, a box of baking soda was labeled with an open date and a use-by date that had already passed, a bag of mini marshmallows was beyond its use-by date, and two bags of pudding mix wrapped in plastic had no open or use-by dates. A bag of yellow cornmeal was also observed with a use-by date that had passed. In the dry storage area, three bottles of orange juice were found with use-by dates that had already expired. During an interview, the Dietary Manager stated that once food is opened it should be labeled with an open date and a use-by or expiration date. The Administrator provided the facility’s Kitchen Operations policy, which requires refrigerated, ready-to-eat food to be clearly marked with the date opened and the date by which it will be consumed or discarded, and specifies that opened food can be held at 41°F or less for no more than seven days, not exceeding the manufacturer’s use-by date. The policy also requires non-potentially hazardous condiments and shelf-stable items to be labeled, dated, and used or disposed of within specified time frames, and that all foods be covered or wrapped tightly, labeled, and dated. The observations showed multiple instances where these requirements were not followed.
Failure to Follow Physician Orders for Pressure Ulcer Care and Antibiotic Administration
Penalty
Summary
A resident with diagnoses including type 2 diabetes mellitus and gout, and with a history of a right heel pressure ulcer and osteomyelitis, did not receive care and treatment as ordered by the physician. The resident's care plan required turning and repositioning every 2 hours and administration of antibiotics for a right heel infection. However, documentation was missing for several doses of prescribed antibiotics (Clindamycin and Cephalexin) and wound treatments on specific dates. The medication administration record (MAR) and treatment administration record (TAR) lacked evidence that these orders were carried out as scheduled. Additionally, the resident was not consistently included on the CNA assignment form for turning and repositioning, despite the care plan directive. Interviews with staff revealed inconsistencies in understanding and implementing the resident's care plan. A CNA stated the resident was not listed as needing to be turned and repositioned every 2 hours, while the DON confirmed that such interventions were required and should have been documented. The DON also indicated that staff should have attempted to wake the resident for treatments, and that MAR and TAR entries should not have been left blank. The facility did not have a specific policy related to following physician's orders, though the Assistant Administrator stated it was their practice to do so.
Failure to Provide Scheduled Showers and ADL Assistance
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that residents who were dependent on staff for activities of daily living (ADLs), specifically bathing, received showers or complete bed baths as scheduled. Multiple residents reported or were observed to have gone extended periods without showers, despite care plans and preferences indicating the need for assistance with bathing at least twice per week, with partial baths in between. Documentation and interviews revealed that showers were missed on several scheduled days for seven out of eight residents reviewed, and in some cases, residents' preferences for shower timing and frequency were not honored. Residents affected included those with cognitive impairments such as Alzheimer's disease and dementia, as well as those with physical limitations like quadriplegia and major depressive disorder. Observations included residents with unbrushed, greasy, or oily hair, and direct complaints from residents about not receiving showers for up to two or three weeks. Clinical records and care plans consistently documented the need for staff assistance with bathing, and residents' preferences for shower frequency and timing were noted but not consistently followed. Review of the facility's documentation systems, including Point of Care (POC) charting and shower sheets, showed gaps where showers or bed baths were neither provided nor documented as refused. Staff interviews confirmed that information was sometimes not transferred correctly between documentation systems, and that reattempts or alternative shower times were not always offered when a resident initially refused care. The facility's policy on resident rights emphasized dignity, respect, and honoring resident schedules, but these standards were not met in practice for the residents reviewed.
Failure to Implement Wheelchair Dycem Intervention
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that Resident G's comprehensive care plan interventions were implemented for a fall-related concern. Resident G was observed in bed with the wheelchair next to the bed on 9/3/25 and again on 9/4/25, and on both observations there was no Dycem seen in the wheelchair even though the current physician order dated 8/29/25 directed Dycem to the wheelchair every shift. The current fall care plan, reviewed on 8/28/25, included interventions for Dycem to the wheelchair and keeping the wheelchair at bedside. Resident G's record showed diagnoses including malignant neoplasm of the upper lobe, right bronchus, secondary malignant neoplasm of the liver, and COPD. The most current admission MDS indicated the resident was cognitively intact and dependent on toileting and dressing, with partial assistance needed for hygiene. During interview, Resident G stated the Dycem was supposed to be in the wheelchair but had not been there for a while. An LPN stated the resident was care planned for a Dycem pad and that there should be one on top and one on the bottom, but she did not know why it was not in the wheelchair.
Failure to Address Behavioral Health Side Effects After Antidepressant Dose Reduction
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure necessary behavioral health care and services were provided for a resident with diagnoses including quadriplegia. The resident’s most recent Significant Change MDS, dated 8/6/25, showed dependence on staff for bathing and toileting. Current and discontinued physician orders showed citalopram was reduced from 20 mg at bedtime to 10 mg at bedtime on 8/20/25, with instructions to observe closely for significant side effects and to document observed side effects in progress notes and notify the MD as needed. After the medication reduction, nursing documentation repeatedly described the resident as tearful and emotional. A late-entry nursing note on 8/22/25 recorded that the resident was tearful, and interdisciplinary notes that same day acknowledged increased side effects of tearfulness following the medication reduction. Additional nursing notes on 8/28/25, 8/29/25, 8/30/25, 9/1/25, and 9/3/25 documented ongoing tearfulness, emotional distress, and reports from family and staff that the resident had been more tearful and angry over the prior week and a half. Despite these observations, notification to the psychiatric nurse practitioner, or follow-up from the nurse practitioner, for side effects after the medication reduction was not documented from 8/20/25 through 9/3/25. The ADON stated that side effects after a medication reduction would be addressed immediately and that staff were aware of the increased tearfulness but had not yet notified the psychiatric nurse practitioner.
Facility Fails to Maintain Sanitary Environment
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain a safe and sanitary environment over the course of a two-day survey. Observations revealed a significant build-up of dust and dirt along the base of room doors and fire doors in multiple halls, including the 1200, 1400, 1500, 2100, 2200, and 2400 halls. Additionally, the fire doors leading to the second-floor dining room were also found to have dust and dirt accumulation. The facility's linen closets were not properly cleaned, with one closet on the 1100 hall containing a safety razor on the floor, and another on the 2500 hall having debris, trash, and gloves on the floor. The facility's policy indicated that floors should be swept and mopped daily, but this was not adhered to, as evidenced by the observations. The survey also identified issues with the cleanliness and maintenance of shower rooms. The 2500 hall shower room had discolored grout, a cracked tile, and a build-up of dust and dirt, while the 2100 hall shower room had broken window blind strings and a cracked tile. Furthermore, there were concerns about the improper storage of urinals in a shared bathroom, where two uncovered urinals were found on the floor near the commode. A resident expressed concerns about the lack of housekeeping on weekends and the poor quality of cleaning in their room and bathroom. Throughout the survey, a strong urine odor was detected in various areas of the facility, including the 1100 hall, the first and second floors, and the lobby by the front entrance. The facility's housekeeping policy outlined specific cleaning procedures, including sweeping and mopping under beds, corners, and edges, as well as wiping down walls and cove bases on designated days. However, these procedures were not effectively implemented, contributing to the unsanitary conditions observed during the survey.
Incomplete Documentation of Medication Administration
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure complete and accurate documentation for four out of eight resident records reviewed. For Resident C, the Medication Administration Record (MAR) lacked documentation indicating whether insulin doses were administered on specific dates. The Director of Nursing (DON) was unable to confirm if the insulin was given as ordered due to the absence of documentation. Resident U's electronic medication administration record (eMAR) also lacked documentation for blood sugar results and insulin administration on a particular date. Resident M's eMAR was missing documentation for insulin administration and blood sugar results on two consecutive days. Similarly, Resident O's eMAR lacked documentation for the administration of ipratropium bromide and pre and post-nebulizer assessments on multiple occasions. The facility did not have a nebulizer treatment documentation policy, although nurses received skills check-off during orientation. An anonymous interview revealed that the facility was often understaffed during the evening shift, leading to incomplete documentation. The facility's current Medication Administration policy, revised in July 2023, requires that medication administration be recorded on the MAR/eMAR or TAR after being given. This deficiency relates to a complaint identified as IN00449174, highlighting the facility's failure to maintain accurate and complete medical records in accordance with accepted professional standards.
Failure to Follow Nebulizer Treatment Protocol
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to adhere to its nebulizer treatment policy for a resident who had recently been discharged from the hospital. The resident, identified as Resident D, was not assessed prior to receiving a nebulizer treatment, and facility staff did not remain at the bedside during the treatment. This lapse in protocol resulted in Resident D being found unresponsive, without respirations or a pulse, during the treatment. Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) was initiated, and emergency medical technicians (EMTs) were called, leading to the resident's transport to the hospital. The incident occurred when a Registered Nurse (RN) left the room to contact a nurse practitioner, leaving the resident unattended during the nebulizer treatment. The facility's documentation was incomplete, lacking records of the required pre-treatment assessments, including pulse, respirations, and breath sounds. The Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed that assessments should have been completed and documented by a nurse before, during, and after each treatment. Additionally, the facility did not have a formal nebulizer treatment policy, although nurses received skills check-offs during orientation. The deficiency was related to a complaint investigation.
Failure to Manage Elevated Blood Glucose Levels
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide effective services for treating elevated blood glucose levels for a resident with diabetes mellitus, leading to a life-threatening condition known as diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA). The resident's blood glucose levels were significantly elevated on multiple occasions, with readings as high as 490 mg/dL and later exceeding 600 mg/dL. Despite these critical levels, there was a lack of documentation indicating that the physician was notified or that appropriate follow-up actions were taken by the facility staff. On several occasions, the facility's records lacked documentation of physician responses or follow-up actions between the initial high blood glucose reading and subsequent critical levels. The resident's condition deteriorated, showing symptoms such as increased heart rate, refusal to eat or drink, and excessive urination. Despite these signs, there was no documented evidence of timely communication with the physician or adjustments to the resident's insulin regimen. The facility's policies required such notifications and documentation, but these were not adhered to. The resident eventually became unresponsive, with a blood glucose level of 742 mg/dL, and was admitted to the hospital's intensive care unit for DKA treatment. Interviews with the Director of Nursing and the Nurse Practitioner revealed inconsistencies in communication and documentation practices, including the use of text messages that were not part of the clinical record. The facility's failure to document and act on critical blood glucose levels resulted in the resident's emergency hospitalization.
Medication Labeling and Expiration Deficiencies
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that medications and biologicals were properly dated, labeled, and not expired across multiple medication and treatment carts. Observations revealed that insulin vials and pens, nasal saline, liquid protein, sterile water, Betadine, and various other medications were either missing open dates, labels, or were expired. For instance, insulin vials and pens in the 1500 Hall Medication Cart lacked open dates and labels, while a bottle of nasal saline was expired. Similarly, the 1400 Hall Medication Cart contained a bottle of sterile water past its expiration date, and the First Floor Treatment Cart had an opened bottle of Betadine without an open date. Further observations in the Memory Care Unit's medication cart revealed non-medical items such as jewelry, alongside medications like Clonidine and MiraLAX that were not properly labeled. The ,d+[DATE] Hall Medication Cart contained an opened bottle of Nitroglycerin without a date, and the 2500 Medication Cart had multiple opened bottles of MiraLAX with no open dates. The Second Floor Treatment Cart was found with various medications, including Nystatin powder and antifungal cream, lacking labels or open dates, and some items were expired. Interviews with nursing staff confirmed that medications should be labeled and dated, and the Director of Nursing indicated that stock medications require labeling once opened.
Failure to Notify Physician of Critical Blood Glucose Levels
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to notify the physician of blood glucose levels outside of the specified parameters for a resident with diabetes mellitus. The resident's clinical record indicated that the resident was not assessed for cognitive impairment and received insulin regularly. Physician orders required notification if blood glucose levels were below 60 mg/dL or above 400 mg/dL. On a specific date, the resident's blood glucose level was recorded as greater than 600 mg/dL, but the physician was not notified as required by the facility's policy. Further documentation revealed that a critical blood glucose level of 526 mg/dL was reported by the lab, but there was a lack of follow-up with the physician between the time the lab called and the following morning. The facility's policy required that changes in a resident's condition be communicated to the physician and family, with appropriate and timely intervention. However, the clinical record lacked documentation of such communication and follow-up, indicating a deficiency in adhering to the facility's policies.
Failure to Implement Care Plan for Resident with Recurrent UTIs
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to implement a care plan for a resident, identified as Resident 85, who experienced frequent urinary tract infections (UTIs) with multidrug-resistant organisms. On October 25, 2024, Resident 85 reported that the frequent UTIs were due to improper cleaning by the staff. A review of the clinical record on October 28, 2024, revealed that Resident 85 had several diagnoses, including a urinary tract infection, and required substantial assistance with personal hygiene. The resident was also noted to be incontinent of bowel and bladder, had a primary diagnosis of COPD, and had been on antibiotics and isolation precautions due to an intravenous catheter and colonization with ESBL. The Director of Nursing (DON) acknowledged on November 1, 2024, that there should have been an ongoing care plan addressing the recurrent UTIs and ESBL colonization in Resident 85's urine. The facility's policy, as provided by the Administrator, mandates that each resident should have a comprehensive, person-centered care plan developed and implemented based on the Resident Assessment Instrument process. This care plan should include measurable goals and resident-specific interventions to promote the resident's highest level of functioning. However, the facility did not adhere to this policy for Resident 85, resulting in a deficiency.
Failure to Monitor Skin Under Immobilizer Leads to Pressure Ulcers
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to prevent the development of an avoidable pressure ulcer in a resident, identified as Resident 89, by not adequately monitoring the skin condition under a knee immobilizer. Resident 89, who was cognitively intact and fully dependent on staff for transfers, returned from a hospital stay with a knee immobilizer due to a fracture. Despite having a care plan that required weekly skin assessments, the facility did not conduct these assessments during several weeks when the immobilizer was in place. This lack of monitoring led to the development of two unstageable pressure wounds on the resident's right lateral calf, which were attributed to the knee immobilizer. The clinical record review revealed that there were no documented skin assessments during critical periods when the immobilizer was used, specifically from mid-June to late July. The facility's policy on skin management aimed to prevent pressure ulcers by evaluating residents' clinical conditions and implementing necessary interventions. However, the facility did not adhere to this policy, as evidenced by the absence of skin assessments and the subsequent development of pressure injuries. The Director of Nursing confirmed the lack of skin assessments during the missing weeks, highlighting a failure in the facility's monitoring and evaluation processes.
Failure to Administer Pain Management Before Wound Care
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide appropriate pain management for Resident 104, who was observed during wound care. Resident 104, diagnosed with malignant neoplasm of lymph nodes and squamous cell carcinoma, was cognitively intact and dependent on staff for transfers and personal care. The resident's care plan included offering non-pharmacological interventions and administering medications as ordered. However, during an observation, RN 12 began wound care without administering pain medication, despite Resident 104's request for it. The resident expressed pain and requested medication multiple times during the procedure. RN 12 continued the wound care without repositioning the resident or postponing the treatment to allow the pain medication to take effect. Another nurse, RN 10, was called to provide the medication, which was administered during the procedure, but not given time to work before continuing the wound care. The facility's policy on pain management, which emphasizes individualized care and alternative pain relief techniques, was not followed. Resident 104 reported not receiving routine pain medications and that staff did not allow time for pain medication to take effect before wound treatments.
Medication Administration Errors Due to Lack of Priming Insulin Pens
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure medications were administered according to manufacturer and professional standards for one of five residents observed during a medication pass. Specifically, two medication errors were observed during 26 opportunities for error, resulting in a 7.69% error rate. The errors involved a resident with diagnoses including diabetes mellitus and systemic lupus erythematosus. During a medication administration, an LPN prepared Glargine Insulin and Lispro Insulin but did not prime the two insulin injection pens with two units prior to administering. The LPN indicated she was unaware of the need to prime the insulin prior to administration. The facility's administrator provided a patient information insert for the Humalog Kwik Pen, which stated that priming ensures the pen is ready and removes air that may collect in the cartridge during normal use.
Incomplete Documentation of Insulin Administration
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure complete and accurate documentation for a resident with diabetes mellitus who was receiving insulin. The resident's clinical record indicated that they were not assessed for cognitive impairment and received insulin over a seven-day period. However, there was a lack of documentation regarding the physician's response or follow-up actions taken by the facility staff when the resident's blood glucose levels were critically high on multiple occasions. On several instances, the resident's blood glucose levels exceeded 500 mg/dL, yet there was no documentation of insulin administration or physician notification as required by the facility's policies. The Director of Nursing (DON) acknowledged that the nurse did not document the notification to the Nurse Practitioner (NP), the new order, or the insulin administration amount in the progress notes. Additionally, there was confusion regarding whether the 8 A.M. dose of insulin was administered on a specific date, as the Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) could not recall the details. Interviews with the facility's staff, including the Administrator and NP, revealed inconsistencies in communication and documentation practices. The NP indicated that she was not contacted regarding the resident's elevated blood glucose levels on certain dates and was unable to find records of rechecked blood glucose levels. The facility's policies required documentation of medication administration and communication of orders, but these were not adhered to, leading to incomplete records for the resident's insulin management.
Infection Control Deficiencies in Resident Care
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure proper infection control practices during incontinence and wound care for three residents. In the case of Resident 64, a CNA did not sanitize hands or change gloves after touching soiled items and then proceeded to touch the resident's remote and bedside table. Resident 64 was not cognitively intact and required substantial assistance with personal hygiene. For Resident 85, who was cognitively intact and had a history of urinary tract infections, a QMA did not wash or sanitize hands after changing gloves during peri care, and a CNA did not change gloves or sanitize hands after handling a soiled bedpan. Resident 86, who had a stage 4 pressure ulcer and required enhanced barrier precautions, did not receive proper care as the LPN performing wound care did not wear a gown, despite the presence of a sign indicating the need for enhanced barrier precautions. The facility's infection preventionist confirmed that residents with wounds should automatically be placed on enhanced barrier precautions, which include wearing a gown and gloves during high-contact care activities. The facility's policy on enhanced barrier precautions was not followed, contributing to the deficiency.
Failure to Implement Proper Discharge Process
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure the proper implementation of the discharge process for a resident who was unable to care for herself. Resident B, who had multiple diagnoses including COPD, major depressive disorder, anxiety, chronic pain, history of falls, weakness, and unsteadiness on feet, was discharged home without the arrangement of home health services and without completing the necessary documentation according to the facility's discharge policy. The resident's hospital notes prior to admission to the facility indicated significant concerns about her safety and stability, both socially and mentally, and recommended an in-depth Adult Protective Services (APS) investigation into her well-being. The resident's care plan required assistance with activities of daily living and noted a risk for falls. Despite this, the resident was discharged home with an order for hospice services without confirmation of acceptance from the hospice company. The discharge summary for Resident B was completed but lacked a signature from the resident or a representative, rendering it invalid. The facility's social service staff indicated that the resident was alert and oriented but chose to leave the facility without a transition of care being completed. The record lacked documentation of the exact time or date the resident left the facility and did not include any education provided about leaving against medical advice (AMA). Interviews with facility staff revealed that the resident left the facility with her husband before being evaluated by the hospice company, which later did not accept her. The facility did not contact APS regarding the resident's return home, despite the significant concerns noted in her hospital records. The facility's policy on discharge against medical advice was not followed, as there was no documentation of the options offered, risks explained, or information given to the resident. Additionally, no AMA observation was completed in the resident's record, and the facility failed to notify outside agencies about the resident's safety and well-being concerns.
Failure to Ensure Dignity and Timely Care for Residents
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure dignity for three residents, leading to significant delays in care and disrespectful treatment. Resident B reported waiting two hours for care after turning on their call light, only for staff to turn off the light and leave without providing assistance. Resident B's medical history includes hemiplegia and muscle weakness, necessitating extensive assistance with toileting. The care plan indicated the need for assistance due to these conditions, but the facility did not adhere to it. Resident D also experienced neglect, having waited over two hours to be changed despite multiple requests. The resident's medical history includes hemiplegia and contractures, requiring substantial assistance with toileting. Despite a grievance being filed, the issue persisted, and Resident D reported being talked down to and labeled as the worst patient for frequently using the call light. This indicates a pattern of disrespect and neglect from the staff. Resident C faced similar issues, including delays in receiving medications, water, and assistance with toileting. The resident's medical history includes heart failure and COPD, requiring moderate assistance with daily activities. Despite filing multiple grievances, the resident continued to experience long wait times for care. An anonymous interview also revealed that a nurse had derogatorily referred to residents as druggies when administering pain medication. These incidents collectively highlight a failure to provide timely and respectful care to the residents.
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 305 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — including the 2 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 Evansville
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Brickyard Healthcare - Woodbridge Care Center | 0.1 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| Envive Of River City | 0.1 mi | ★★★★★ | 25 | 0 |
| Brickyard Healthcare - Brentwood Care Center | 1.4 mi | ★★★★★ | 2 | 0 |
| North Park Nursing Center | 1.7 mi | ★★★★★ | 1 | 0 |
| Aperion Care Lincoln | 2 mi | ★★★★★ | 13 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Columbia Healthcare Center.
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.