Average — CMS composite of the measures below.
The next survey window likely opens around January 2027
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 Highlandspring Of Ft Thomas during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
Food storage and sanitizer practices were not maintained in accordance with facility policy. Surveyors found undated cans, unlabeled and undated packaged foods, a clear container of food that was not labeled or dated, and cereal containers in a serve kitchen without labels or dates. Surveyors also found the kitchen sanitizer bucket lacked documentation of when the solution was checked or changed, and the Chef stated this was not documented.
Incomplete PTSD Care Planning: The facility failed to develop and implement person-centered CCPs with measurable interventions for two residents with PTSD histories and known triggers. One resident with a history of stroke, depression, anxiety, insomnia, and PTSD had no PTSD interventions in the admission care plan and later required hospital psychiatric care after an acute behavioral episode; staff were unaware of specific triggers. Another resident with PTSD, anxiety, and diabetes had no PTSD care plan for over a year, despite reports of sexual assault trauma, loud-voice sensitivity, and a preference for female caregivers. Interviews showed staff knew the diagnoses but lacked complete trigger information in the care plans.
Survey Results Not Readily Accessible to Residents: The facility failed to make the State Inspection book’s location readily known to residents without asking. Resident Council members stated they did not know the survey results were available for review or where to find them. The survey book was observed in the living room bookcase on each floor, while the DON and Administrator stated residents were told about it on admission or informed if they asked.
The facility failed to provide adequate nursing staff, resulting in long wait times for resident assistance, particularly during evenings, nights, and weekends. Residents reported delays in receiving help with basic needs, leading to physical discomfort. Staff confirmed frequent short staffing, worsened by call-ins, and the facility's assessment tools did not adequately address staffing needs based on resident acuity and census.
A survey found that a facility failed to label drugs and biologicals according to professional principles, with undated and expired medications present in six medication carts. Staff interviews revealed inconsistent adherence to the facility's policy of dating medications when opened, leading to potential safety risks. Despite monthly pharmacy audits and staff awareness, the deficiency highlighted systemic issues in medication management.
The facility failed to provide adequate ADL care for two residents, resulting in deficiencies in their person-centered care plans. One resident, with intact cognition, received fewer showers than scheduled, while another, moderately cognitively impaired, also received fewer baths than planned. Staff interviews revealed inconsistencies in following up on refused showers and time constraints affecting care delivery.
The facility failed to provide necessary hygiene services to two residents, resulting in missed showers and baths. Despite policies in place, staff inconsistencies in handling refusals and documentation led to this deficiency. Interviews revealed a lack of awareness among the DON and Administrator about the issue.
The facility failed to maintain proper infection control measures for three residents. A resident under Enhanced Barrier Precautions had their brief and bed linen changed without staff wearing gowns, and a gait belt was used on two residents without cleaning. Another resident's wound vac tubing was repeatedly found on the floor, posing an infection risk. Staff interviews revealed inadequate training and understanding of infection control protocols, leading to these deficiencies.
Food Storage and Sanitizer Documentation Deficiencies
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to store food under sanitary conditions in the kitchen and second floor serve kitchen. During observations, surveyors found undated cans on the dry storage rack, four packages of vanilla wafers out of the box and not dated, a large clear plastic container with the appearance of white rice that was not labeled or dated, and one undated bag of chocolate chips out of the box. In the second floor serve kitchen, three of five clear plastic covered cereal containers had no label or date. The facility's policy required opened, potentially hazardous food items to be labeled, dated, covered, and discarded within seven days. Surveyors also observed that the sanitizer bucket in the kitchen had no documentation of the date or time the sanitizer was checked or changed. The Chef stated the sanitizing solution was not documented when changed, though she expected it to be changed every two hours or if soiled. The DON stated she completed weekly kitchen walk-throughs and looked for cleanliness and dated cans, and the Administrator stated she expected food to be labeled and dated and the sanitizer regularly changed. The report states the deficient practice had the potential to affect all 136 current residents.
Incomplete PTSD Care Planning
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to develop and implement comprehensive, person-centered care plans with measurable objectives and timeframes for two residents with PTSD histories and known triggers. For Resident 52, the facility admitted him with multiple co-morbidities including hemiplegia and hemiparesis after a stroke, major depressive disorder, anxiety, insomnia, and PTSD. His admission assessments identified PTSD, and the social services admission assessment noted a trauma-informed care assessment, but the only trigger documented was "loud." The comprehensive care plan dated at admission contained no documented interventions for PTSD or for preventing potential adverse behaviors. Resident 52 later had an emergent hospital admission for an acute behavioral episode and was admitted to intensive care for psychiatric care. Hospital records indicated there were no acute infections causing the behaviors, and psychiatric consult records noted his baseline anger issues had worsened since returning from the Vietnam War, with the stroke in 2022 likely contributing to worsened emotional management. Interviews with the resident's family member described a long history of anger outbursts and loud noises as a historical trigger. Facility staff, including the NP, PT director, social services director, and DON, stated they were aware of the PTSD diagnosis but were unaware of specific triggers or of the resident's history of adverse behaviors, and the DON stated she was not present during the outburst. For Resident 79, the facility admitted her with PTSD, anxiety, and type 2 diabetes mellitus, and her MDS triggered for PTSD with intact cognition. Her admission comprehensive care plan contained no documented PTSD interventions for over a year. A later care plan entry added a stress focus related to PTSD from sexual assault by her stepfather and noted loud voices could be triggering, with a goal that she would receive as much social support as wanted and interventions including coordination of resources, breathing techniques, and mindfulness education. Interviews showed the resident had requested female caregivers upon admission and did not like loud noises, while staff acknowledged awareness of her PTSD and that care plan interventions were communicated through the Kardex. The DON stated that without complete information and interventions in the care plan, staff would not know how to best care for residents, and the Administrator stated Social Services was responsible for identifying triggers and communicating them through the care plan.
Survey Results Not Readily Accessible to Residents
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to make the location of the State Inspection book readily available to residents without requiring them to ask. During an interview with Resident Council members on 02/09/2026, residents stated they did not know the state survey results were available for their review and did not know where the survey results were located without asking. The deficient practice was identified as having the potential to affect all 136 current residents. Review of the facility’s Federal Resident Rights document showed that reports of survey certifications, complaint investigations, and plans of correction from the preceding three years were to be available for review upon request. The State Resident Rights document stated residents had the right to examine the results of the most recent survey and any plan of correction, and that the results were to be posted in a place readily accessible to residents. Observation on 02/09/2026 showed the state survey results were kept on each floor in the living room bookcase on the shelf labeled Family Resident Handbook. In interviews, the DON stated residents were told about the survey book upon admission and informed of its location if they asked, while the Administrator stated the information was posted by the front door and residents were informed of the location in each unit’s living room.
Inadequate Staffing Leads to Delayed Resident Care
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide sufficient qualified nursing staff to meet the needs of residents, as evidenced by interviews, observations, and record reviews. Residents reported long wait times for assistance, particularly during evening, night, and weekend shifts. The facility's policy and assessment tools did not adequately address staffing needs based on resident acuity and census, leading to inadequate staffing levels. The Payroll-Based Journal Staffing Data Report indicated excessively low weekend staffing during the third fiscal quarter of 2024. Multiple residents, including those who were cognitively intact, expressed concerns about the lack of timely assistance, with some waiting up to an hour for help with basic needs such as using the bathroom. This delay in care led to physical discomfort and health issues for residents, such as constipation and hemorrhoids. Resident representatives also reported difficulties in reaching the facility by phone, further highlighting the staffing issues. Interviews with staff, including STNAs and a Kentucky Medication Aide, confirmed the frequent occurrence of short staffing, exacerbated by call-ins and particularly severe on weekends. The facility's staffing coordinator and DON acknowledged the staffing challenges and the reliance on previous day's acuity and census data to determine staffing needs. The administrator, who was not present during the period of reported deficiencies, was aware of the issues and working on improving weekend staffing coverage.
Medication Labeling and Expiration Deficiency
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to label drugs and biologicals in accordance with currently accepted professional principles, as observed in six medication carts. The survey revealed multiple instances of opened medication containers, such as eyedrops, nasal sprays, and inhalers, that were not dated, as well as expired medications like potassium chloride tablets and nasal sprays. The facility's policy required medications to be dated when opened, but this was not consistently followed, leading to undated and expired medications being present in the medication carts. Interviews with staff, including State Tested Nurse Aides (STNAs), a Pharmacy Technician, a Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN), the Director of Nursing (DON), and the Administrator, highlighted a lack of adherence to the facility's medication storage policy. Staff members acknowledged the importance of dating medications to ensure their effectiveness and safety but admitted to not always dating both the packaging and the medication containers. The DON and Administrator stated that pharmacy audits were conducted monthly, and nurses were responsible for checking carts for expired medications, but the practice of dating only the packaging was deemed sufficient by some staff. The deficiency was further compounded by the fact that some staff members had not encountered situations where medications were separated from their original packaging, which could lead to undated medications being used. The Administrator expressed concerns that improperly labeled medications could be administered to the wrong resident and that undated medications could lose effectiveness and become potentially harmful. Despite the facility's policy and staff awareness of the importance of proper labeling, the survey findings indicated a systemic issue with medication management and labeling practices.
Deficiency in ADL Care for Two Residents
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for two residents, R23 and R82, to meet their medical, nursing, and psychosocial needs as identified in their comprehensive assessments. R82, who was admitted with diagnoses including malignant neoplasm of the lung, polyneuropathy, and heart failure, was assessed with intact cognition and required extensive assistance with bathing. Despite being scheduled for showers twice a week, R82 only received three showers per month over a three-month period. During an interview, R82 expressed that she did not always receive showers when needed, and staff interviews revealed a lack of consistent follow-up when residents refused showers. R23, admitted with diagnoses including type 2 diabetes and osteoarthritis, was moderately cognitively impaired and dependent on staff for bathing. Her care plan indicated she should receive showers twice a week, but records showed she only received one bath per week. R23 reported not remembering when she last had her hair washed and expressed a preference for bed baths. Staff interviews indicated that while encouragement was provided, time constraints often prevented make-up showers from being offered the following day. Interviews with facility staff, including the DON and WOCN, highlighted that residents were expected to receive showers twice a week, and care plans were crucial for determining resident needs. However, there were complaints from residents about not receiving scheduled showers, and staff acknowledged the importance of updating and following care plans to ensure resident needs were met. The facility's failure to adhere to the care plans resulted in deficiencies in providing adequate ADL care for R23 and R82.
Deficiency in Providing Scheduled Showers and Baths
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that residents who were unable to carry out activities of daily living received the necessary services to maintain good nutrition, grooming, and personal hygiene. This deficiency was observed in two residents, R23 and R82, who did not receive showers or baths as scheduled. R82, who was cognitively intact, reported not receiving showers when needed, and her electronic medical record (EMR) showed inconsistencies with the scheduled shower days. Similarly, R23, who was moderately cognitively impaired, did not receive regular bed baths as preferred, and her EMR indicated missed showers and baths. The facility's policy on bathing and general hygiene emphasized providing residents with choices regarding their hygiene, and refusals were to be documented and reported to the Charge Nurse. However, interviews with staff revealed that showers were often missed due to time constraints, and refusals were not always properly documented. Staff members had varying approaches to handling refusals, with some reapproaching residents later in the day, while others did not have time for make-up showers. Interviews with the Director of Nursing (DON) and the Administrator revealed a lack of awareness of the missed showers and baths. The DON acknowledged that refusals were common and not always documented correctly, while the Administrator expected residents to receive showers as scheduled and for refusals to be documented. The inconsistency in staff practices and documentation contributed to the deficiency in providing adequate hygiene care to the residents.
Infection Control Deficiencies in Resident Care
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain proper infection prevention and control measures for three residents, leading to potential risks of infection transmission. Resident R10 was under Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP), yet State Trained Nurse Aides (STNA) 11 and 12 changed R10's brief and bed linen without wearing the required gowns. Additionally, they used a gait belt to transfer R10 and attempted to use the same belt on her roommate, R231, without cleaning it between uses. Interviews revealed that staff were not adequately trained on cleaning gait belts, and there was a lack of understanding regarding the necessity of cleaning them between residents. Resident R26's wound vacuum (vac) tubing was observed on the floor on multiple occasions, which poses a risk for infection. Staff members, including STNA14 and STNA3, were unsure of the proper positioning of the wound vac tubing during transport, leading to the tubing being on the floor. Interviews with staff, including the Wound Care Certified Nurse (WOCN) and the Infection Preventionist (IP), confirmed that tubing should be kept off the floor to prevent infection, and any tubing found on the floor should be replaced immediately. The Director of Nursing (DON) and the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) acknowledged the lapses in infection control practices, including the improper use of gait belts and the handling of wound vac tubing. The Administrator was unaware of the issues with the gait belts and expected staff to maintain infection control precautions. The facility's policies on infection control and standard precautions were not adequately followed, leading to these deficiencies in maintaining a safe and sanitary environment for 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 914 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — including the 7 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 Fort Thomas
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| St Elizabeth Ft Thomas Snf | 0.4 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| Carmel Manor | 1.5 mi | ★★★★★ | 15 | 0 |
| The Pavilion At Kenton | 1.9 mi | ★★★★★ | 23 | 0 |
| Rosedale Green | 2.7 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| Carecore At Margaret Hall | 4 mi | ★★★★★ | 12 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Highlandspring Of Ft Thomas.
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.