Above average — CMS composite of the measures below.
A standard survey is most likely before around October 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 Seneca Place during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
A resident with multiple medical conditions, including diabetes and upper extremity impairments, did not receive regular fingernail care as required by facility policy and their care plan. Observations showed the resident's nails were long and dirty, and staff interviews revealed confusion about who was responsible for providing nail care, especially for diabetic residents. The resident was dependent on staff for personal hygiene and did not refuse care, but nail care was not performed as needed.
A resident with intact cognition and a history of major depressive disorder had a cell phone go missing, and a grievance was filed by a family member. Facility records indicated the grievance was resolved, but there was no documentation of the complainant's acknowledgment or agreement. Interviews revealed conflicting accounts between the family and staff, and required documentation of grievance resolution was not completed.
A facility failed to implement enhanced barrier precautions for a resident with a Stage 4 pressure ulcer. Despite policy and signage requiring PPE during high-contact care, an SRNA did not wear a gown while providing care. The resident had cognitive impairments and was admitted with conditions including Parkinson's disease. Interviews confirmed staff expectations to follow PPE protocols.
A resident's care plan was not updated after undergoing surgery to change a gastrostomy tube to a jejunostomy tube. Despite new physician orders for continuous feeding, the care plan still included interventions for the previous tube, leading to a lack of appropriate guidance for staff.
The facility failed to accommodate the needs and preferences of two residents by not providing the appropriate call light for one resident with hemiplegia and not keeping another resident's call light within reach, as per their care plans.
The facility failed to implement a comprehensive care plan for a resident with hemiplegia, who required a touch call light due to limited movement. Despite the care plan specifying a touchpad call light, the resident had a regular push-button call light, which he was unable to activate. Staff interviews confirmed that no work order had been placed for the touchpad call light, and the maintenance department was not informed of the resident's need.
A resident did not receive wound care as ordered, with the dressing dated incorrectly and not changed as required. The resident's medical history included severe cognitive impairment and diabetes with a foot ulcer. The facility's policy and physician orders were not followed, posing a risk to the resident's health.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment and multiple medical conditions experienced significant weight loss despite being on a specialized diet and receiving nutritional supplements. The facility's documentation showed inconsistent meal intake, and the interdisciplinary team did not make new recommendations despite the ongoing weight loss. Staff interviews indicated concerns about the effectiveness of the interventions, and discussions were ongoing to consider palliative care for the resident.
The facility failed to ensure all drugs and biologicals were labeled and stored in accordance with professional standards. Two out of four medication carts observed were left unlocked and unattended, and several opened medications were not labeled with the date they were opened. Interviews with staff confirmed awareness of the policy requiring medication carts to be locked when unattended and medications to be labeled with the date opened.
The facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program, as evidenced by staff not properly donning PPE while providing care to two residents on Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP). One RN did not wear a gown while performing wound care, and an SRNA's improperly donned gown led to contact between her uniform and a resident's bed linens. Interviews with the DON and Administrator highlighted the importance of adhering to EBP guidelines for resident and staff safety.
Failure to Provide Regular Nail Care for Dependent Resident
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide regular nail care for one resident who was dependent on staff for activities of daily living due to multiple medical conditions, including cerebrovascular disease, cerebral palsy, diabetes mellitus, vascular dementia, muscle weakness, and contractures in both hands. The resident was assessed as having intact cognition and did not refuse care. Facility policy required that residents unable to perform ADLs receive necessary services to maintain personal hygiene, including routine cleaning and inspection of nails during ADL care. The resident's care plan specifically directed staff to check, trim, and clean nails on bath days and as needed. Despite these requirements, observations revealed that the resident's fingernails were long, dirty, and had debris underneath, with some nails having jagged edges. Interviews with staff indicated confusion regarding responsibility for nail care, particularly for diabetic residents. Some staff believed only nurses or a podiatrist could trim the nails, while others stated nurse aides were responsible for ADL care, including nail care, except for diabetic residents. The podiatrist only visited monthly and was reported to provide toenail, not fingernail, care. Nursing staff acknowledged the resident's nails needed trimming and confirmed the resident did not refuse care, but could not recall when nail care was last provided.
Failure to Properly Resolve Grievance Regarding Missing Personal Property
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to resolve a grievance regarding a missing personal item in a timely and appropriate manner for one resident. The resident, who had a diagnosis of moderate, recurrent, major depressive disorder and was assessed as having intact cognition, was admitted with a cell phone, which was documented in the facility's inventory. A family member reported the cell phone missing and filed a grievance. Facility documentation indicated that a search was conducted and that the family refused a replacement, marking the grievance as resolved and satisfied. However, there was no signature from the complainant or resident to validate notification or agreement with the resolution. Interviews revealed conflicting accounts between the family member and facility staff. The family member stated that after reporting the missing phone, no action was taken by the Social Services Director (SSD) and denied refusing a replacement. The SSD recalled offering a replacement, which she claimed was refused, but could not provide documentation of this refusal. The Director of Nursing (DON) and Executive Director (ED) both confirmed that facility policy requires documentation of grievance resolution, including acknowledgment by the complainant, which was not present in this case.
Failure to Implement Enhanced Barrier Precautions
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain an effective infection prevention and control program, specifically in implementing enhanced barrier precautions for a resident with a Stage 4 pressure ulcer. The facility's policy required staff to wear personal protective equipment (PPE), including gowns and gloves, during high-contact care activities for residents with chronic wounds. However, during an observation, a State Registered Nurse Aide (SRNA) did not don a gown while repositioning the resident and continued to provide high-contact care, such as changing clothes and linens, without the appropriate PPE. The resident in question was admitted with diagnoses including Parkinson's disease, protein calorie malnutrition, and adult failure to thrive, and was assessed as having moderately impaired cognitive skills. The resident's care plan included enhanced barrier precautions due to a Stage 4 pressure ulcer. Despite signage outside the resident's room indicating the need for PPE, the SRNA admitted to forgetting to check the sign. Interviews with the Assistant Director of Nursing, Director of Nursing, and the Administrator confirmed that staff were expected to follow the facility's policy and signage instructions to prevent the spread of infections.
Failure to Update Care Plan After Medical Procedure
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure the comprehensive care plan for a resident was reviewed and revised by the interdisciplinary team after a significant change in the resident's medical condition. Specifically, the resident underwent outpatient surgery to change a gastrostomy tube to a jejunostomy tube, but the care plan was not updated to reflect this change. The care plan still included interventions related to the previous gastrostomy tube, such as checking for tube placement and gastric contents, which were no longer applicable after the surgery. The resident, who had severe cognitive impairment and multiple hospitalizations for aspiration pneumonia and a fall, returned to the facility after the surgery with new physician orders for continuous jejunostomy tube feeding. Despite these new orders, the care plan was not revised to include the necessary interventions for the jejunostomy tube, such as continuous feeding at a specified rate. The failure to update the care plan meant that staff did not have the correct guidance to provide appropriate care for the resident's new medical condition. Interviews with facility staff, including the RAI Coordinator, Executive Director, and Director of Nursing, revealed that the care plan should have been updated immediately following the resident's change in status. The staff acknowledged that the care plan is essential for guiding the care provided to residents and that the failure to update it could lead to inappropriate treatment. The facility's policy also required care plans to be revised upon any status change, but this was not followed in this case.
Failure to Accommodate Resident Needs and Preferences
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure residents received services with reasonable accommodation of their needs and preferences. For Resident #69, who had hemiplegia and hemiparesis following a cerebral infarction, the facility care planned for a touch call light to be within reach. However, observation revealed that Resident #69 had a push-button call light instead. The resident was unable to activate the call light due to his/her condition, and the maintenance department was not informed about the need for a touch-pad call light. The Director of Nursing (DON) and the Administrator acknowledged the discrepancy and the potential risk it posed to the resident's ability to call for help. For Resident #78, who had generalized muscle weakness and was assessed to be cognitively intact, the facility care planned for the call light to be within reach to prevent falls. Observation revealed that the resident's call light was lying on the bedside table, making it difficult for the resident to reach. The resident expressed difficulty in reaching the call light, and it was found that housekeeping staff had not moved the call light as initially thought. The DON and other staff members confirmed that the call light should be within reach and acknowledged the potential risk of falls if it was not. Interviews with various staff members, including the Maintenance Manager, Housekeeping Manager, and Regional Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) Coordinator, highlighted the importance of following care plans and ensuring call lights are accessible to residents. The failure to provide the appropriate call light for Resident #69 and to keep Resident #78's call light within reach were identified as deficiencies in accommodating the residents' needs and preferences as per their care plans.
Failure to Implement Comprehensive Care Plan for Resident
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for Resident #69, who had significant medical conditions including hemiplegia and hemiparesis following a cerebral infarction. The care plan specified that the resident should have a touch call light due to limited movement, but observations revealed that the resident had a regular push-button call light, which he was unable to activate. This discrepancy was noted during an observation when the resident attempted to use the push-button call light but failed to activate it, indicating that the care plan was not being followed. Interviews with staff, including an LPN, the Maintenance Manager, the Regional RAI Coordinator, the DON, and the Administrator, confirmed that the resident's care plan required a touchpad call light. However, no work order had been placed for the touchpad call light, and the maintenance department was not informed of the resident's need. The LPN acknowledged the need for a touchpad call light and stated that he would inform maintenance, but this had not been done prior to the surveyor's observation. The DON and the Administrator both stated that the care plan should have been followed, and the resident should have had a touchpad call light as specified. The Maintenance Manager confirmed that no request had been made for the touchpad call light, and the DON was unaware that the resident had a push-button call light instead of the required touchpad. This failure to implement the care plan as written resulted in the resident not having the appropriate means to call for assistance, as required by their medical condition and care plan.
Failure to Provide Proper Wound Care
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that Resident #22 received wound care treatment in accordance with professional standards of practice and physician orders. The resident had a physician's order for daily wound care on the right foot, which was to be performed at bedtime. However, an observation on 02/08/2024 revealed that the dressing on the resident's foot was dated 02/03/2024, and was soiled with what appeared to be blood, indicating that the wound care had not been performed as ordered. RN #2 admitted to marking the wrong date on the dressing and repeatedly using the same date for several days, despite performing the wound care daily as claimed. This discrepancy was confirmed by the Treatment Administration Record (TAR) and the observations made by the State Survey Agency (SSA) Surveyor. The resident's medical history included severe cognitive impairment, diabetes with foot ulcer, and other conditions that necessitated diligent wound care management. The failure to provide proper wound care as ordered posed a risk to the resident's health and safety. Interviews with the nursing staff, Nurse Practitioner (NP), Director of Nursing (DON), and the Administrator revealed that the facility's policy required wound care to be documented accurately, and any deviations from this practice were concerning. The DON and Administrator emphasized the importance of following physician orders and maintaining accurate records to prevent potential harm to residents. The deficiency was identified as a failure to adhere to the facility's wound treatment management policy and physician orders, leading to inadequate care for Resident #22.
Failure to Maintain Nutritional Status
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain acceptable parameters of nutritional status for one of the sampled residents, who experienced a significant weight loss of over twelve percent within sixty-seven days. The resident, who was severely cognitively impaired and had multiple medical conditions including diabetes, osteomyelitis, and a foot ulcer, was on a specialized diet and had orders for double portions and nutritional supplements. Despite these interventions, the resident's weight continued to decline, and the facility's documentation showed inconsistent meal intake and occasional meal refusals by the resident. Observations revealed that the resident required feeding assistance and often appeared drowsy during meals, which affected their ability to eat. The staff documented the resident's food intake and reported it to the nurse, but there were instances where the resident's weight fluctuated significantly within short periods. The facility's interdisciplinary team (IDT) reviewed the resident's nutritional status and interventions, but no new recommendations were made despite the ongoing weight loss. Interviews with staff, including the nurse practitioner and director of nursing, indicated that the resident was part of the facility's Nutrition at Risk (NAR) program, and the staff were expected to follow the physician's orders for nutritional supplements. However, there were concerns about the effectiveness of the interventions and the resident's continued weight loss. The facility was in discussions with the resident's state guardian and healthcare team to consider palliative care due to the resident's declining condition and severe weight loss.
Medication Storage and Labeling Deficiencies
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure all drugs and biologicals were labeled and stored in accordance with professional standards. Specifically, two out of four medication carts observed were found to be non-compliant. One medication cart on E Hall was left unlocked and unattended multiple times while the RN was passing medications to residents in their rooms. Additionally, several opened medications in the carts were not labeled with the date they were opened, including insulin vials and pens, Nitroglycerin, and various liquid medications. This was observed on multiple occasions, and interviews with the RNs confirmed that they were aware of the policy requiring medication carts to be locked when unattended and medications to be labeled with the date opened. Further observations revealed that the facility had a total of eight medication carts, and similar issues were found with the C-Hall and E-Hall carts. The C-Hall cart contained insulin vials and pens, as well as other liquid medications, without opened dates. The E-Hall cart had inhalers and liquid medications also missing opened dates. Interviews with the Executive Director and the Director of Nursing confirmed that the facility's policy required medication carts to be locked when not attended and medications to be labeled with the date opened. Both acknowledged the deficiencies and stated that oversight was provided through daily walking rounds by administrative and nursing managers.
Infection Control Deficiencies
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program, as evidenced by two specific incidents involving residents on Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP). In the first incident, a Registered Nurse (RN) entered the room of a resident with severe cognitive impairment and multiple diagnoses, including osteomyelitis and cellulitis, without donning the required gown while performing wound care. Additionally, there was no personal protective equipment (PPE) available outside the resident's door as per the facility's policy. The RN admitted to forgetting to wear the gown and acknowledged the potential harm this could cause, including the spread of germs and infections. In the second incident, a State Registered Nurse Aide (SRNA) was observed providing personal hygiene care to a resident with an indwelling medical device without fully donning her PPE. The SRNA's gown was not tied in the back, causing her uniform to come into contact with the resident's bed linens. The SRNA admitted difficulty in tying the gown, which led to improper use of PPE. Additionally, the SRNA had to walk past multiple residents' rooms to retrieve PPE, which she described as a cumbersome process. Interviews with the Director of Nursing (DON) and the Administrator revealed that the facility's expectations were for staff to follow EBP guidelines to protect both residents and staff. The DON acknowledged that failure to adhere to these guidelines could result in the spread of germs and bacteria, potentially causing harm to residents. The Administrator reiterated the importance of following EBP guidelines for the safety of all residents and staff.
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 347 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — including the 9 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 Louisville
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Klondike Nursing And Rehabilitation Center | 1.4 mi | ★★★★★ | 2 | 0 |
| Cherokee Park Rehabilitation | 1.6 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| Louisville East Post Acute | 1.7 mi | ★★★★★ | 12 | 2 |
| Sam Swope Care Center | 2.1 mi | ★★★★★ | 5 | 0 |
| Westport Place Health Campus | 2.8 mi | ★★★★★ | 5 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Seneca Place.
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.