North Woods Village
Inspection history, citations, penalties and survey trends for this long-term care facility in Kokomo, Indiana.
- Location
- 2233 W Jefferson St, Kokomo, Indiana 46901
- CMS Provider Number
- 155139
- Inspections on file
- 25
- Latest survey
- March 20, 2026
- Citations (last 12 mo.)
- 7
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at North Woods Village during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
Two residents with orders for narcotic pain medications experienced misappropriation of their medications when an LPN removed narcotics from the medication cart, concealed them, and left her shift without conducting the required medication count or reporting to incoming staff. The theft was discovered when another nurse attempted to administer medication and found both the narcotics and count sheets missing, in violation of facility policy.
A facility failed to follow a physician's order to hold midodrine, a blood pressure medication, for a resident when their systolic blood pressure exceeded 120. Despite the order, the medication was administered multiple times over several months when the resident's blood pressure was above the specified threshold. An LPN confirmed that vital signs should be reviewed before medication administration, and the facility's policy supported this practice.
A facility failed to ensure a resident's portable oxygen tank was turned on to the correct flow rate, as required by a physician's order. The resident, diagnosed with chronic respiratory conditions, was observed with a nasal cannula and an oxygen tank set at zero liters per minute. Despite interactions with staff, the oxygen flow was not verified, contrary to facility policy.
A QMA failed to follow infection control protocols by handling a resident's medication with bare hands instead of using gloves. The resident had diagnoses including diabetes mellitus and atrial fibrillation. Facility policy requires medications to only contact the medication cup and mandates hand hygiene before and after resident contact.
The facility failed to notify a resident's representative of a psychotic disturbance and the initiation of an antipsychotic medication. Despite multiple physician's orders to administer Risperdal for dementia with psychotic disturbance, there was no documentation indicating that the resident's representative was informed about the medication or its risks and benefits. The Director of Nursing Services confirmed the lack of notification, which was against the facility's policy.
The facility failed to correctly code an annual MDS assessment for a resident with multiple diagnoses, including dementia and bipolar disorder. The assessment incorrectly indicated that the resident was not considered by the state level 2 PASARR process to have a serious mental illness. The SSD acknowledged the error, and the DNS confirmed the use of the RAI manual for assessments.
The facility failed to ensure a resident's oxygen was set to the correct liter flow as per the physician's orders. The resident's oxygen was observed at 1 liter instead of the prescribed 2 liters, despite a history of inconsistent oxygen usage and no evidence that the resident adjusted the concentrator.
The facility failed to document and implement nonpharmacological interventions for a resident with dementia, who exhibited continuous fidgety behavior and was on Risperdal. The staff did not consistently document the resident's behaviors or the interventions used, and the AIMS assessment for monitoring adverse side effects was not properly conducted.
The facility failed to store clean clothing and personal care items in a clean environment for four residents. Observations revealed that clean clothes were hanging in bathrooms, touching the toilet armrest, and within the contamination splash zone. Additionally, a bathroom had a strong odor of urine and bowel movement, with dirty sink handles and a bathtub used for storing clean supplies. The facility's policy emphasized preventing contamination, but these guidelines were not followed, posing a risk to residents' health.
Narcotic Medication Theft by Staff Member
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that narcotic medications were protected from theft by an employee, resulting in the misappropriation of controlled substances prescribed to two residents. One resident, with diagnoses including a pathological fracture, malignant neoplasms, osteoarthritis, and anxiety disorder, had an active order for oxycodone for pain management. Another resident, with acute pain due to trauma and multiple fractures, also had an order for oxycodone-acetaminophen for pain relief. Both residents were found to have missing narcotic medications and associated count sheets. The events leading to the deficiency involved an LPN who, during her shift, was observed on facility video surveillance removing narcotics from the medication cart, concealing them in a jacket, and subsequently placing the jacket in a bag at the nurse's station. The LPN also took the narcotic count sheet book from the cart, brought it to the locked medication room, and then returned it to the cart. The LPN left her shift early without waiting for a replacement nurse, failed to conduct a medication count with the incoming staff, and did not provide a report on the residents prior to leaving the facility. Interviews and record reviews confirmed that the missing medications were discovered when another nurse attempted to administer a pain pill and found both the narcotics and the count sheet missing. The pharmacy verified that the medications should have been available, and the incident was reported to the DON. Facility policies required shift change verification and dual staff counts of controlled substances, but these procedures were not followed, allowing the theft to occur.
Failure to Hold Medication as Ordered for Blood Pressure
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to adhere to a physician's order regarding the administration of midodrine, a medication used to increase blood pressure, for a resident with multiple diagnoses including paraplegia, neuromuscular dysfunction of the bladder, familial dysautonomia, and chronic systolic congestive heart failure. The physician's order specified that the medication should be withheld if the resident's systolic blood pressure exceeded 120. However, the Medication Administration Record (MAR) indicated that the medication was administered on multiple occasions despite the resident's systolic blood pressure being above the specified threshold. The deficiency was identified through a review of the resident's clinical records and interviews with facility staff. The records showed numerous instances in January, February, and March where the medication was not held despite the resident's systolic blood pressure readings exceeding 120. An LPN confirmed during an interview that vital signs and medication orders should be reviewed before administering medication, and if the blood pressure was above the hold parameter, the medication should not be given. The facility's policy on medication administration also emphasized the need to obtain vital signs prior to administering medication.
Failure to Administer Correct Oxygen Flow Rate
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a portable oxygen tank was turned on to administer the correct flow rate for a resident requiring respiratory care. During an observation, the resident was seen in the hallway with a nasal cannula in her nose and a portable oxygen tank on her wheelchair, which was set at zero liters per minute. Despite receiving medications from a QMA, the oxygen flow rate was not checked. Later, the resident was observed entering the dining room with the oxygen tank still set at zero liters per minute. The resident's clinical record indicated diagnoses of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia, and asthma, with a physician's order for continuous oxygen at 4 liters per minute. Interviews with facility staff revealed that the responsibility to ensure the correct oxygen flow rate was not consistently followed. The facility's policy required nurses to coordinate oxygen therapy as ordered by the physician, but this was not adhered to in the case of the resident.
Infection Control Breach During Medication Administration
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure proper infection prevention and control practices during medication administration for one resident. During an observation, a Qualified Medication Aide (QMA) was seen removing a multivitamin pill from its packaging and placing it into a medication cup using her bare hands, without wearing gloves. The QMA acknowledged that she should have used gloves and not touched the pill with her bare hands. The resident involved had a clinical record indicating diagnoses of diabetes mellitus, atrial fibrillation, and anxiety disorder. The facility's policy on medication administration, which was revised recently, specifies that medications should not come into contact with any surface except for the medication cup, and appropriate hand hygiene should be performed before and after direct resident contact.
Failure to Notify Resident's Representative of Antipsychotic Medication
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to notify the resident's representative of a psychotic disturbance and the initiation of an antipsychotic medication for Resident 89. The resident had multiple diagnoses, including a nondisplaced fracture of the right femur, major depressive disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, cognitive communication deficit, and dementia with psychotic disturbance. A physician's order was given on three separate occasions to administer Risperdal at increasing dosages to manage the resident's dementia with psychotic disturbance. However, there was no documentation indicating that the resident's representative was informed about the start of the antipsychotic medication or the associated risks and benefits. A Pharmacy Consultation Report recommended discontinuing Risperdal due to the increased risk of mortality in older adults with dementia-related psychosis, but this recommendation was declined by the prescriber. The Psychiatric Nurse Practitioner noted that the resident exhibited delusional thinking and symptoms of depression, which led to the decision to start Risperdal. Despite these observations, the facility's progress notes did not include any notification to the resident's representative. The Director of Nursing Services confirmed the lack of documentation regarding the notification. The facility's policy on resident change of condition mandates that all changes be communicated to the physician and family/responsible party, but this protocol was not followed in this instance.
Incorrect Coding of MDS Assessment for Resident with PASARR Level 2
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to correctly code an annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for a resident reviewed for Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR). The resident had multiple diagnoses, including unspecified dementia with mood disturbance, insomnia, bipolar disorder, major depressive disorder, and psychotic disorder with delusions. A PASARR level 2 outcome notice indicated the resident had a long-term approval without specialized services based on these diagnoses. However, the annual MDS assessment incorrectly indicated that the resident was not considered by the state level 2 PASARR process to have a serious mental illness and/or intellectual disability or related condition. During interviews, the Social Services Director (SSD) acknowledged that the MDS assessment was marked in error and should have been marked as a yes. The Director of Nursing Services (DNS) confirmed that the facility used the Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) manual for MDS assessments. The CMS Long-Term Care Facility Resident Assessment Instrument 3.0 User's Manual emphasizes the importance of accurate information and validation by the interdisciplinary team (IDT) completing the assessment. The facility failed to ensure that all participants in the assessment process had the requisite knowledge to complete an accurate assessment.
Failure to Ensure Correct Oxygen Flow Rate
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure a resident's oxygen was set to the correct liter flow as per the physician's orders. During an observation, it was noted that the resident's oxygen was set at 1 liter flow, while the physician's order required 2 liters per nasal cannula continuously. The resident's clinical record indicated diagnoses including COPD, chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia, and influenza due to novel influenza A virus. The physician's order was changed to 2 liters at bedtime, but the resident's oxygen was still observed at 1 liter. Historical oxygen saturation results showed inconsistencies in oxygen usage, with instances where oxygen was either not used or set at different flow rates. The resident indicated she did not adjust her oxygen concentrator, and there was no documentation suggesting she had done so before. The facility's policy on oxygen concentrators emphasized verifying and understanding the physician's orders and knowing the flow rate and duration of use.
Failure to Document and Implement Nonpharmacological Interventions for Resident with Dementia
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure proper documentation and implementation of nonpharmacological interventions for a resident with dementia. The resident exhibited continuous fidgety behavior and was observed rocking back and forth in her wheelchair, pulling at a blanket, and making constant movements with her hands. Despite these behaviors, the staff did not document them in the electronic health record (EHR) as required. Additionally, the staff did not document the nonpharmacological interventions used to address the resident's behaviors, such as offering a snack or providing personal space. The resident's clinical record indicated a history of severe cognitive impairment, anxiety disorder, delusional disorder, and other mental health conditions. The resident was on Risperdal, an antipsychotic medication, and had experienced a failed gradual dose reduction (GDR) of the medication. The staff reported increased aggression, agitation, delusions, and hallucinations following the GDR, but these behaviors were not consistently documented in the EHR. The lack of documentation made it difficult to assess the resident's response to the medication changes and the effectiveness of nonpharmacological interventions. The facility's policies on behavior management and psychotropic medication management were not followed. The staff did not document new or worsening behaviors in the EHR, and the AIMS assessment for monitoring adverse side effects of antipsychotic medication was not properly conducted. The Dementia Unit Manager was unaware of the correct procedures for completing the AIMS assessment, leading to incomplete evaluations. The Director of Nursing Services acknowledged the lack of documentation and training on AIMS assessments, contributing to the deficiency in care for the resident with dementia.
Improper Storage of Clean Items in Contaminated Areas
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to store clean clothing and personal care items in a clean environment for four residents. Observations revealed that clean clothes were hanging from the shower curtain rod over the bathtub in the bathroom of two residents, with some items touching the armrest of the toilet and within the contamination splash zone of the flushing toilet. The Assistant Director of Nursing Services was unaware of why the clothes were stored in the bathroom, and the Executive Director confirmed that clean clothing should not be stored in bathrooms or bathtubs. The Infection Preventionist stated that clean laundry and linens should be covered during transport and stored in closets. The clinical records of the residents involved indicated various medical conditions, including cellulitis, chronic ulcers, and pressure ulcers, which could be exacerbated by improper storage of clean items in contaminated areas. Additionally, the bathroom for two other residents had a strong odor of urine and bowel movement, with dirty and rusty sink handles. The bathtub in this bathroom was covered with plywood and used for storing clean personal care supplies. The Executive Director was unsure why the plywood was there and confirmed that clean items should not be stored in the bathtub. The facility's policy on laundry and linen handling emphasized the importance of preventing contamination by storing clean linen appropriately. The report also referenced a Splash Zone Information Sheet, which highlighted the risk of contamination from splashes occurring up to three feet from sinks, toilets, or drains. This information underscored the importance of avoiding the storage of supplies within the splash zone to prevent the spread of multidrug-resistant organisms. The facility's failure to adhere to these guidelines resulted in the improper storage of clean items in contaminated areas, posing a risk to the residents' health and safety.
Latest citations in Indiana
Surveyors observed that dietary staff repeatedly worked in kitchen and meal service areas with uncovered facial hair, despite facility policy and state sanitation requirements mandating effective hair restraints. Two dietary aides with short beards or mustaches were seen walking through food preparation areas, taking food temperatures, handling food, and plating meals at steamtables in dining rooms without any facial hair coverings, while the current policy required all hair, including facial hair, to be restrained to prevent contamination.
The facility failed to consistently provide and document required bed-hold policy notices when several residents were transferred to the hospital. In multiple cases, residents with dementia, psychotic disorders, COPD, chronic respiratory failure, altered mental status, and cerebral infarction were sent out for acute changes in condition, and while transfer notes reflected physician and family notifications, they lacked documentation that the bed-hold policy was discussed with the resident or responsible party. Notices of Transfer or Discharge often indicated a copy of the bed-hold policy was sent with the resident, but the records did not show signed and dated acknowledgment by the resident or appropriate representative, including in situations where a resident had moderate cognitive impairment, short-term memory issues, or a documented need for a proxy and a financial POA authorizing an agent for health care decisions.
Surveyors found that the facility failed to provide trauma‑informed and culturally competent care by not incorporating two residents’ extensive trauma histories and specific behavioral triggers into their care plans. One resident with documented homelessness, polysubstance abuse, severe accidents with multiple fractures, viral encephalitis with coma, physical and sexual abuse, loss of family contact, and a past suicide attempt had multiple behavior‑focused care plans that referenced identifying triggers but listed none and did not mention their physical, sexual, medical, or psychosocial trauma. Another resident with TBI from being struck by a truck, an 11‑month coma, long‑term state hospital residence, alleged shooting of a parent, and diagnoses including intermittent explosive disorder and borderline personality disorder had a PASRR identifying a specific trigger and notes of inappropriate sexual behavior, yet their care plans omitted these traumatic events, the identified trigger, and the sexual behavior. Staff interviews confirmed that residents were screened for trauma, but the trauma histories and triggers were not reflected in the individualized plans of care.
A resident with schizophrenia, post‑stroke hemiparesis, and mild cognitive impairment expressed feeling down and wanting to kill himself, but staff did not document asking about a specific plan, did not notify the physician or psychiatric NP as expected, and did not develop or update a care plan addressing depression or suicidal ideation. The SSD documented offering support and initiating 15‑minute checks once, but there was no further follow‑up or documentation of interventions after subsequent suicidal statements made in a care plan meeting with the resident’s father. The DON and Administrator reported that facility policy requires immediate notification of key staff, assessment for a plan and means of self‑harm, and thorough documentation, which were not carried out or reflected in the medical record for this resident.
A resident with schizophrenia, post-stroke hemiparesis, and mild cognitive impairment verbalized suicidal ideation, but the care plan did not address depression or suicidal thoughts, and required assessments and services were not accurately or timely documented. An SSD note recorded the resident saying he wanted to kill himself and referenced 15‑minute checks and a care plan update, yet the active care plan lacked depression/suicidal ideation interventions. Multiple late-entry Social Services notes were later added, describing follow-up visits and the resident denying suicidal ideation, but the SSD later reported she did not typically ask about a suicide plan and did not personally provide individual follow-up visits as described. These practices conflicted with the facility’s policy requiring factual, first-hand, and timely documentation of assessments and services.
A resident was observed with an Albuterol inhaler on an overbed table and later reported keeping the inhaler in a nightstand drawer, with no staff present during these observations. Record review showed the resident had no cognitive impairment on the admission MDS but lacked any documented self-medication administration assessment. The DON acknowledged that the required assessment had not been completed, despite facility policy requiring staff and the practitioner to evaluate each resident’s mental and physical abilities before allowing self-administration of medications.
Surveyors found that the facility submitted inaccurate direct care staffing data to CMS through the PBJ system over multiple days in a quarter. CASPER reports showed apparent gaps in 24-hour licensed nurse coverage, low weekend staffing, and a 1-star staffing rating, while internal staffing sheets documented that licensed nurses were present and the facility was fully staffed on those days. The Administrator reported that the discrepancies were due to PBJ data entry errors, despite a facility policy requiring all PBJ entries to be accurate, auditable, and verifiable against payroll, invoices, or contracts.
Surveyors found that the facility did not provide or document required written transfer/discharge notices and bed-hold policy information for four residents who were sent to the hospital, including individuals with conditions such as dementia, CHF, chronic respiratory failure, and CKD. In each case, progress notes showed that the resident was transferred for acute issues, but the clinical records lacked evidence that written notices were given to the residents or their representatives, and in one case lacked documentation that required information was sent to the receiving provider. Facility leadership, including the ADON, DON, and Administrator, acknowledged that the records did not contain the required documentation, despite a written policy requiring such notices and information exchange.
A resident with Alzheimer’s disease and depression, previously on an antidepressant, exhibited intermittent refusals of medications and care, occasional yelling at staff, and reports of unusual perceptions, such as believing men were in or near her room. Nursing notes over several months documented these refusals and complaints but did not show that the behaviors were evaluated or recorded as dangerous, non-redirectable, or causing significant distress, nor did they document specific non-pharmacological interventions attempted or their outcomes. Despite this, a psychiatric NP later added new diagnoses of schizoaffective disorder, borderline personality disorder, and delusional disorder and ordered an antipsychotic (Seroquel) without a comprehensive evaluation in the record to support these diagnoses. The facility’s psychotropic medication policy, which requires identification and documentation of target behaviors, use of nonpharmacological interventions, and ongoing behavior monitoring, was not followed for this resident.
The facility failed to keep PASARR Level I screenings accurate and current for three residents when new mental health diagnoses and psychoactive medications were initiated. One resident’s PASARR omitted a PTSD diagnosis and an added antidepressant, despite documentation of PTSD on the MDS and care plan and a physician order for Pristiq. Another resident’s PASARR listed only depression and dementia, even after additional diagnoses such as borderline personality disorder, delusional disorder, and schizoaffective disorder were added and an antipsychotic (quetiapine) was ordered, with the MDS later reflecting psychotic disorder, schizophrenia, and depression with antipsychotic and antidepressant use. A third resident’s PASARR did not include a depression diagnosis or newly ordered escitalopram and lorazepam, although the admission MDS documented depression with antianxiety and antidepressant use. These omissions occurred despite facility policy requiring a new Level I review after significant mental status changes, including new mental health diagnoses or new psychotropic medications.
Uncovered Facial Hair During Food Preparation and Meal Service
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to ensure that food was served in a sanitary and safe manner in accordance with professional standards and facility policy during multiple kitchen and meal service observations. During an initial kitchen observation, two dietary aides were seen walking through the kitchen food preparation area with uncovered facial hair. One aide had facial hair above and below the lip and along the jaw line, approximately one-fourth inch in length, and the other had a mustache of similar length; neither used any facial hair covering. These observations occurred while staff were present in the kitchen area where food was stored and prepared. During subsequent observations on the same day, the same two dietary aides were again observed with uncovered facial hair while directly involved in meal preparation and service. One aide walked through the kitchen while the noon meal was being prepared and placed into a transport cart for service in the south dining room, and later was observed plating the noon meal at the steamtable in that dining room, still without a facial hair covering. The other aide walked through the kitchen while the noon meal was being prepared and placed into the steamtable for the north dining room, took food temperatures, assisted with plating meals at the steamtable, and retrieved food items and supplies from the kitchen, all while having an uncovered mustache approximately one-fourth inch in length. The Dietary Manager stated that staff hair was to be covered when in the kitchen and during meal service, and the facility’s written policy and the cited Indiana Food Establishment Sanitation Requirements both required effective hair restraints, including for facial hair, to prevent contamination of food, equipment, and utensils.
Failure to Provide and Document Bed-Hold Policy at Time of Hospital Transfer
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to ensure that required bed-hold policy information was provided and documented for four residents transferred to the hospital. For a resident with dementia, psychotic disorder, and autistic disorder who had a BIMS score of 0 indicating severe cognitive impairment, progress notes documented physician notification and guardian notification when the resident was sent to the hospital, but there was no documentation that the bed-hold policy was provided to the responsible party. A Notice of Transfer or Discharge later indicated a copy of the bed-hold policy was sent with the resident. Another resident with COPD and chronic respiratory failure, cognitively intact with a BIMS score of 13, experienced a decline in condition and was transferred to the hospital by ambulance; progress notes documented family notification but did not document any discussion of the bed-hold policy, although a Notice of Transfer or Discharge indicated a copy of the bed-hold policy was sent with the resident. A third resident with altered mental status and cerebral infarction, with a BIMS score of 10 indicating moderate cognitive impairment and documented short-term memory impairment, experienced changes in condition and was transferred to the hospital. Progress notes stated the resident was their own responsible party and that no other notification was completed, and transfer documentation did not include the bed-hold policy, although an untimed Notice of Transfer or Discharge indicated a copy of the bed-hold policy was signed by the resident. A financial power of attorney document in the record showed the resident had designated an agent to act in consent or refusal of health care. For a fourth resident with dementia and osteomyelitis, transfer documentation and a Notice of Transfer or Discharge indicated a copy of the bed-hold policy was sent with the resident, and the transfer form noted the resident required a proxy for decision making. The facility’s policy required that at the time of transfer to a hospital, written notice specifying the duration of the bed-hold policy and information on return to the next available bed be provided, and that a signed and dated copy of the bed-hold notice given to the resident or representative be kept in the resident file, which was not consistently documented for these residents.
Failure to Integrate Trauma Histories and Behavioral Triggers Into Care Plans
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to identify and incorporate residents’ trauma histories and specific behavioral triggers into their care plans, despite documented histories of significant trauma and behavioral health issues. For one resident, extensive social service and progress notes documented homelessness, polysubstance abuse, major depressive and anxiety disorders, chronic pain, a history of severe car accidents with multiple fractures, viral encephalitis resulting in a three‑month coma, loss of child custody, multiple divorces, physical abuse by a spouse, the death of a fiancé who was struck by a car while in a wheelchair, lack of family contact, and a past suicide attempt by Valium overdose. Additional documentation noted a history of rape by a brother at age eight and prior placement under direct supervision and 15‑minute checks related to suicidal ideation. Despite these documented traumatic events and behavioral health concerns, the resident’s care plans did not identify a history of physical trauma, sexual trauma, homelessness, substance abuse, medical trauma, or attempted suicide. For this same resident, the MDS showed no cognitive deficit and identified behaviors such as verbal aggression and rejection of care, along with diagnoses including seizure disorder, depression, chronic pain syndrome, homelessness, and anxiety disorder. Multiple care plans addressed behaviors such as drug‑seeking, pretending to have seizures for attention or medication, making false allegations, verbal aggression when unable to smoke, and a desire for intimate relationships with consenting male residents. These care plans referenced goals such as effective coping skills, seeking staff support, and compliance with the smoking policy, and they called for identification and reduction of behavioral triggers. However, none of these care plans actually listed any specific triggers. The care plan addressing the resident’s right to consensual intimate relationships focused on assessment and education regarding consent but did not integrate the resident’s extensive trauma history. Staff interviews indicated the resident had displayed sexual behaviors since admission, including an incident where the resident expressed anger at another resident for not buying a soda after engaging in sexual acts. A second resident with a documented history of traumatic brain injury (TBI), dementia, seizure disorder, borderline personality disorder, anxiety, intermittent explosive disorder, tobacco use, and other behavioral/emotional disorders was also affected by the same deficiency. Social history and progress notes documented that this resident sustained a TBI after being hit by a semi‑truck while riding a bicycle at age 18, resulting in an 11‑month coma, followed by 13 years in a state hospital and subsequent residence in a group home. Additional documentation indicated the resident allegedly shot their father at age 26 after being sworn at and had a PASRR identifying TBI, intermittent explosive disorder, and borderline personality disorder, with a specific trigger of hearing the name of the current U.S. President. Progress notes also described inappropriate sexual behavior toward staff, including touching themselves intimately during personal care and refusing to stop when redirected. Despite this, the resident’s care plans, which addressed explosive disorder and history of altercations, risk for decreased psychosocial well‑being, and refusal to bathe or shower, did not list any specific behavioral triggers, did not reference the traumatic events such as being hit by a truck or shooting their father, and did not document the inappropriate sexual behavior. The Administrator and Social Service Director acknowledged that residents were to be screened for trauma and that trauma responses and PTSD should be added to care plans, but the specific trauma histories and triggers for these two residents were not incorporated into their plans of care.
Failure to Assess and Care Plan for Resident Suicidal Ideation
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to adequately assess, investigate, and care plan for a resident’s suicidal ideation in accordance with its own policy and staff expectations. The resident had diagnoses including schizophrenia, cerebral edema, and hemiparesis/hemiplegia following a cerebral infarction, and a current MDS showed mild cognitive impairment (BIMS score 12). A progress note documented that the resident told the Social Services Director (SSD) he was feeling down and wanted to kill himself; the SSD offered assistance, activities, and initiated 15‑minute checks, and the note stated the care plan was updated. However, the note did not indicate that the SSD asked whether the resident had a plan to kill himself, and there were no additional notes regarding suicidal ideation or follow‑up. Review of the current care plan showed no problem, goal, or interventions addressing depression or suicidal ideation, and progress notes over the following month contained no documentation of physician notification related to the suicidal statement. Further record and interview evidence showed that the care plan conference summary did not document interventions for suicidal ideation, and the SSD acknowledged she did not normally ask residents expressing suicidal ideation if they had a plan. The SSD reported that the resident had admission paperwork mentioning suicidal ideation related to depression after a stroke and that the resident again vocalized suicidal ideation during a care plan meeting with his father, after which emotional support was offered and the father took the resident out on a leave of absence; no further visits or follow‑up were done. The DON stated that, upon notification of suicidal verbalization, staff should assess the resident, ask if there is a plan, remove potential means of self‑harm, immediately notify the psychiatric NP, and document the occurrence, and that a detailed progress note and updated care plan were expected but not present for this resident. The Administrator similarly stated that staff should ask about a plan, document interventions, notify the physician and family, and update the care plan, and indicated the resident should have had a care plan addressing depression with suicidal ideation. The facility’s written policy required immediate notification of the DON, SSD, and physician, an interview including asking about a plan and assessing mood and means for self‑harm, and thorough documentation of mood, behavior, and all actions taken, which were not reflected in the resident’s record.
Incomplete and Inaccurate Documentation of Suicidal Ideation and Follow-Up
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure accurate, complete, and timely documentation of assessments and services for a resident who verbalized suicidal ideation. Resident 6, who had schizophrenia, cerebral edema, and right-sided hemiparesis/hemiplegia following a cerebral infarction, had a BIMS score of 12 indicating mild cognitive impairment. The resident’s admission paperwork mentioned suicidal ideation related to depression after a stroke, and a Social Services note on 3/11/2026 documented that the resident was feeling down and said he wanted to kill himself. The Social Services Director (SSD) documented that she talked with the resident, coordinated with Activities, advised the resident to contact SSD or nursing if he wanted to talk, and that the resident was scheduled for 15-minute checks and the care plan was updated. However, the current care plan initiated on 2/26/2026 did not address depression or suicidal ideation. Multiple Social Services progress notes were later entered as late entries in April, with effective dates in March, stating that the resident had no plan and no longer had suicidal ideation, that he felt much better after 1:1 time, and that he continued his daily routine and therapy. These late entries described follow-up visits and reassessments of suicidal ideation on several consecutive days, but in interviews the SSD stated she did not normally ask residents about having a plan when they verbalized suicidal ideation and did not recall any other occurrences beyond the initial event. She further indicated she did not personally provide individual follow-up visits with this resident regarding suicidal ideation, despite the late-entry notes describing such visits. The DON acknowledged that late entries had been added to address concern about suicidal verbalization, and the Administrator stated that upon suicidal statements staff should ask about a plan, notify the physician and family, and update the care plan, and that this resident should have had a care plan addressing depression with suicidal ideation. The facility’s documentation policy required factual, first-hand, timely documentation, which was not followed in this case.
Failure to Complete Required Self-Administration Assessment for Inhaler Kept at Bedside
Penalty
Summary
Surveyors identified that a resident was allowed to keep and access an Albuterol inhaler without the facility completing the required self-administration medication assessment. During an initial tour, the resident was observed sitting in a wheelchair with a handheld Albuterol inhaler on the overbed table and no staff present in the room or hallway. On a subsequent observation, the resident again was in a wheelchair and reported that the Albuterol inhaler was stored in the top drawer of the nightstand, where it was found. Review of the clinical record showed an admission MDS indicating no cognitive impairment, but there was no documentation of a self-medication administration assessment. In an interview, the DON confirmed that the resident did not have the required self-medication assessment, despite the facility’s policy stating that staff and the practitioner must assess each resident’s mental and physical abilities to determine whether self-administering medications is clinically appropriate. This failure to complete and document a self-administration medication assessment for a resident who had an Albuterol inhaler kept at bedside constituted noncompliance with the facility’s own policy and with 410 IAC 16.2-3.1-11(a).
Inaccurate PBJ Staffing Data Submission to CMS
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to electronically submit complete and accurate direct care staffing information to CMS through the Payroll-Based Journal (PBJ) system for 22 days in a fiscal quarter. A CASPER report review on 4/6/26 showed that, according to PBJ data, the facility did not have licensed nursing coverage 24 hours per day on multiple specific dates across three months, had low weekend staffing, and held a 1-star staffing rating. However, review of the facility’s internal staffing sheets for that quarter indicated the facility was fully staffed and had licensed nurse coverage on all of the dates in question. During an interview, the Administrator stated that the PBJ information must have contained data entry errors, as she had verified licensed staff coverage on the timesheets. The facility’s PBJ policy in effect stated that all staffing data entered into the PBJ system would be auditable and verifiable through payroll, invoices, or contracts, but the submitted PBJ data did not accurately reflect the facility’s actual licensed nurse staffing as documented on internal records. No specific residents or clinical conditions were mentioned in the report, and the deficiency centers solely on inaccurate staffing data submission rather than direct resident care events.
Failure to Provide and Document Required Transfer/Discharge and Bed-Hold Notices
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to provide and document required written notices of transfer/discharge and bed-hold policies, as well as required information to receiving providers, for four residents who were transferred or discharged to the hospital. For a resident with generalized anxiety disorder, major depressive disorder, and dementia, progress notes showed that the resident was sent to the hospital via 911 for chest pain, lower back pain, and shortness of breath and later returned to the facility, but the clinical record lacked documentation that a written Notice of Transfer/Discharge and the bed-hold policy were provided to the resident or representative, and lacked documentation that required information was conveyed to the receiving facility. The ADON and the Administrator both confirmed there was no documentation that these written notices were provided. For a resident with congestive heart failure and muscle weakness who was sent to the emergency room for painful urination and bloody urine, the clinical record lacked documentation that a Notice of Transfer/Discharge or bed-hold policy was given to the resident or representative, which the DON confirmed. Another resident with chronic respiratory failure and diabetes was discharged to the hospital for respiratory failure, and a resident with chronic kidney disease and dementia was discharged to the hospital, but in both cases there was no documentation that a written notice of transfer/discharge or bed-hold policy was provided to the residents or their representatives. Review of the facility’s Transfer and Discharge policy, dated 1/15/26, showed that the policy required the facility to provide written transfer/discharge notices and bed-hold information to residents and representatives and to provide specified information to receiving providers, but the records for these four residents did not contain the required documentation.
Failure to Document Target Behaviors and Non-Pharmacological Interventions Before Initiating Antipsychotic
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to document how a resident’s behaviors presented danger or distress to self or others, and failure to document non-pharmacological interventions attempted prior to initiating an antipsychotic medication. Resident 6 had documented diagnoses of Alzheimer’s disease, depression, and severe cognitive impairment, and was receiving sertraline for depression. A PASSAR identified only depression and dementia, and the admission MDS listed Alzheimer’s disease and depression as active diagnoses. Over several months, nursing progress notes documented that the resident intermittently reported unusual perceptions, such as believing there were men causing trouble, a man in her room, or a man wanting to marry her and yelling through the walls, but there was no documentation that these episodes caused danger to the resident or others or that they resulted in unmanageable distress. From late April through mid-July, nursing notes primarily described the resident’s frequent refusals of evening and morning medications, blood sugar checks, blood pressure checks, insulin administration, hygiene care, and showers. Staff documented that the resident sometimes yelled at staff, said “Get out!”, was visibly upset by a room move, was leery of staff and asked to see name badges, and became upset about a pillow under her head until it was removed, after which she calmed down. The notes also recorded instances where the resident believed housekeeping had not cleaned her room or that she had not received medications when she had. However, there were no progress notes or assessments indicating that these behaviors were evaluated as dangerous, non-redirectable, or causing significant distress or functional impairment, and no detailed behavior monitoring logs were present as required by facility policy. On a psychiatric NP visit for initial psychotropic medication management, new mental health diagnoses of schizoaffective disorder, borderline personality disorder, and delusional disorder were added, and Seroquel 25 mg, an antipsychotic, was ordered. The clinical record did not contain a comprehensive evaluation to support these new diagnoses, and there was no documentation of target behaviors meeting the facility’s policy criteria for psychotropic use, such as behaviors representing danger to self or others, causing distress and impairment in functional abilities, or clearly attributable to psychosis or mania. The resident’s representative reported that the resident had no prior history of mental health disorders or psychiatric hospitalization and was unaware of the new diagnoses. The facility’s own psychotropic medication policy required identification and documentation of specific target behaviors, use and documentation of nonpharmacological interventions, and ongoing monitoring of behaviors and interventions, which were not reflected in the record for this resident.
Failure to Update PASARR Screens for New Mental Health Diagnoses and Psychotropic Medications
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to ensure that Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) Level I screenings were accurate and updated when new mental health diagnoses and psychoactive medications were initiated for multiple residents. For one resident with dementia, anxiety, depression, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), the PASARR completed on admission listed anxiety, depression, and dementia with sertraline and quetiapine, but did not include the PTSD diagnosis or the antidepressant Pristiq, despite the admission MDS and care plan documenting PTSD and a subsequent physician’s order for Pristiq. For another resident with Alzheimer’s disease, borderline personality disorder, delusional disorder, schizoaffective disorder, and depression, the PASARR only reflected depression and dementia with sertraline, even though additional mental health diagnoses were added later and an antipsychotic (quetiapine) was ordered for borderline personality disorder, and the quarterly MDS documented psychotic disorder, schizophrenia, and depression with antipsychotic and antidepressant use. A third resident had diagnoses including Alzheimer’s disease, depression, anxiety disorder, irritability and anger, and nonrheumatic aortic valve stenosis. The PASARR for this resident listed dementia and anxiety with Risperdal but omitted the diagnosis of depression and the medications escitalopram and lorazepam, although physician’s orders were in place for escitalopram for depression and lorazepam for anxiety, and the admission MDS documented depression with antianxiety and antidepressant use. Interviews with the Assistant Director of Nursing confirmed that new Level I PASARR screens should have been completed when new mental health diagnoses and psychoactive medications were added, and that the PASARR for one resident, completed prior to arrival, should have included all mental health diagnoses and medications. The facility’s own policy required notification of the state mental health authority within 14 days after a significant change in mental condition and specified that a new Level I screen is required for new mental health diagnoses or newly prescribed psychotropic medications, which was not followed in these cases.
Trusted data from CMS and state health departments
Every citation, penalty and Plan of Correction is sourced from public CMS records (latest release May 27, 2026) and official state health department websites — never guesswork.
Trusted by long-term care providers and associations.
