Average — CMS composite of the measures below.
A standard survey is most likely before around August 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 Portageville Health Care Center during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
The facility failed to provide a safe, clean, and comfortable environment, as evidenced by observations of spiderwebs, dirt, and debris under awnings, scuff marks, peeled paint, and exposed sheetrock in various areas, and cracked and stained floor tiles. Staff were verbally reporting issues rather than documenting them, leading to delays in addressing environmental concerns.
The facility failed to ensure staff treated residents with dignity and respect by leaving a resident exposed during care. A resident with multiple diagnoses, including moderate cognitive impairment, was left exposed to the view of the parking lot while CNAs performed incontinent care without closing the window curtains. Interviews confirmed that the facility's protocol for ensuring privacy was not followed.
The facility failed to provide baseline care plans to two residents within 48 hours of admission, as required by policy. One resident with schizophrenia and depression and another with schizoaffective disorder, PTSD, major depressive disorder, and bipolar disorder did not receive written summaries of their care plans. The oversight was attributed to the absence of an MDS Coordinator and a high volume of new admissions.
The facility failed to implement individualized care plans for four residents, leading to deficiencies in addressing their specific needs. Residents with various diagnoses, including schizoaffective disorder, PTSD, major depressive disorder, bipolar disorder, rheumatoid arthritis, lack of coordination, hypoglycemia, and schizophrenia, lacked specific interventions for smoking and the use of bilateral pull bars, despite being observed engaging in these activities. Interviews with the DON and Administrator confirmed that smoking should have been included in the care plans.
The facility failed to attempt a gradual dose reduction (GDR) for a resident with Alzheimer's Disease, unspecified psychosis, and major depressive disorder. Despite the pharmacist's requests for GDRs for Olanzapine, Quetiapine, and Carbamazepine, there was no documented response from the physician, and the facility did not follow its policy for addressing these recommendations.
The facility failed to maintain a medication error rate of less than five percent, resulting in an error rate of 9.09%. Two residents were affected due to improper administration of Colesevelam and Novolog insulin, with deviations from the facility's medication administration policies observed.
The facility failed to maintain proper infection control practices during incontinent care and wound care treatments for multiple residents. CNAs and an LPN did not follow hand hygiene protocols, did not change gloves between dirty and clean tasks, and did not clean instruments between uses, contrary to the facility's policies.
Failure to Maintain a Safe, Clean, and Comfortable Environment
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide a safe, clean, and comfortable homelike environment, as evidenced by multiple observations of environmental deficiencies. Observations on various dates revealed a buildup of spiderwebs, dirt, and debris on the vinyl ceiling and sides under the driveway and entrance awnings. The main dining room had several areas of dark scuff markings on the bottom portions of both dining room doors. Additionally, the 100 hall had several areas of peeled paint and exposed sheetrock on the walls behind a recliner near the door in a resident's room, a missing vent protector on the air conditioner/heating unit, and a buildup of dirt and debris inside the unit. The 300 hall dining room also showed several straight-line areas of dark scuff marks, peeled paint, and exposed sheetrock on the walls by the window, under the wall-mounted television, and on both sides of the entrance/exit door. Further observations on the 300 hall revealed cracked and stained floor tiles around the base of the bathroom toilet in a resident's room, as well as multiple areas of dark scuff marks, peeled paint, and exposed sheetrock on the walls in various locations within the room. Interviews with staff indicated that environmental concerns were verbally reported to the Maintenance Supervisor (MS) rather than being documented in the maintenance repair log. The MS and the Administrator both stated that they expected staff to fill out a maintenance form for timely addressing of environmental concerns, which was not being consistently done. The facility's failure to maintain a safe, clean, and comfortable environment had the potential to affect all residents in the facility, which had a census of 59.
Resident Exposed During Care Due to Staff Negligence
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure staff treated residents with dignity and respect by leaving a resident exposed during care. Specifically, Resident #41, who has diagnoses including seizures, chronic embolism and thrombosis of deep veins, unspecified psychosis, and unspecified intellectual disabilities, was observed lying in bed while CNAs performed incontinent care without closing the window curtains. This left the resident's genitalia area exposed to the view of the parking lot and driveway. The resident's quarterly Minimal Data Set indicated moderate cognitive impairment and moderate dependence for toileting hygiene. During the incident, CNA D left the room to obtain additional supplies, further prolonging the resident's exposure. Interviews with LPN B, CNA C, and the Director of Nursing confirmed that the facility's protocol requires closing the curtains and door to ensure privacy before starting peri-care. The failure to follow these protocols resulted in the resident being exposed, violating their right to dignity and respect.
Failure to Provide Baseline Care Plans to Residents
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that baseline care plans were developed and provided to residents within 48 hours of admission, as required by their policy. Specifically, two residents, Resident #105 and Resident #155, did not receive a written summary of their baseline care plans. Resident #105, who has diagnoses of schizophrenia and depression, reported not receiving a copy or a written summary of the baseline care plan and stated that staff did not discuss her care or orient her to the facility. Similarly, Resident #155, who has diagnoses of schizoaffective disorder, PTSD, major depressive disorder, and bipolar disorder, reported that loud yelling and confrontational people triggered his PTSD and did not recall staff asking specific questions about personal care or current health status. He also did not receive a copy or a written summary of the baseline care plan. During interviews, the Director of Nursing (DON) and the Administrator acknowledged the oversight, attributing it to the absence of an MDS Coordinator and the high volume of new admissions. The DON mentioned that she and other staff had been working on MDSs and care plans due to the lack of an MDS Coordinator. The Administrator admitted that while they believed the baseline care plans had been completed, they were unaware that the summaries had not been provided to the residents or their representatives. This failure to provide the necessary documentation and communication within the required timeframe constitutes a deficiency in the facility's adherence to its own policies and regulatory standards.
Failure to Implement Individualized Care Plans for Residents
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to implement individualized care plans for four residents, leading to deficiencies in addressing their specific needs. Resident #16, diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder, PTSD, major depressive disorder, and bipolar disorder, had no individualized interventions for smoking in their care plan, despite being observed smoking in a designated area with staff supervision. Similarly, Resident #50, diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis, lack of coordination, and hypoglycemia, had no individualized interventions for bilateral pull bars, even though they were observed using them while sitting upright in bed. Resident #53, with similar diagnoses to Resident #16, also lacked individualized smoking interventions in their care plan, despite being observed smoking under staff supervision. Resident #105, diagnosed with schizophrenia and depression, had no individualized smoking interventions in their care plan, despite being observed smoking in a designated area with staff supervision. Interviews with the Director of Nursing (DON) and the Administrator confirmed that they expected smoking to be included in the care plans of residents who smoke. The facility's policy on comprehensive care plans, revised in January 2022, mandates the development of care plans with measurable objectives and timetables to meet residents' needs, using the Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) User Manual 3.0 as a reference. The policy emphasizes managing risk factors, using current standards of practice, involving residents and their families, and assessing and planning for new admissions. However, the facility failed to adhere to this policy for the four residents mentioned, resulting in the identified deficiencies.
Failure to Attempt Gradual Dose Reduction for Psychotropic Medications
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to attempt a gradual dose reduction (GDR) for a resident diagnosed with Alzheimer's Disease, unspecified psychosis, and major depressive disorder. The resident had orders for Olanzapine, Quetiapine, and Carbamazepine, but there was no attempt by the physician to reduce the dosages of these medications. The pharmacist had requested GDRs for these medications, but there was no documentation from the physician regarding these requests in the resident's medical record. The facility's policy requires the consultant pharmacist to review each resident's drug regimen monthly and report any irregularities. These recommendations are to be forwarded to the attending physician within 48 hours, and if the physician does not respond within 7 days, follow-up is required. However, in this case, the facility did not adhere to its policy, as there was no documented response from the physician regarding the GDR requests. The administrator acknowledged that GDRs should be completed and documented, but this was not done for the resident in question.
Medication Administration Errors
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain a medication error rate of less than five percent, resulting in an error rate of 9.09%. This deficiency was identified during a review of 28 medication administration opportunities, where three errors were made, affecting two residents. The facility's policy mandates that medications be given per doctors' orders and recorded immediately in the Electronic Medication Administration Record (EMR). However, deviations from this policy were observed, leading to the identified errors. One resident was affected when a Certified Medication Technician (CMT) administered Colesevelam at 8:45 A.M., despite the medication being ordered to be given with meals. The resident confirmed that the medication was supposed to be given before meals. The CMT admitted to charting the medication as given, even though it was not administered by the night shift. The Director of Nursing (DON) and the Administrator both stated that they would expect medications to be charted only when administered. Another resident was affected when an LPN administered 8 units of Novolog insulin without priming the insulin pen or holding it in place for the required 6-10 seconds, as per the manufacturer's instructions and facility policy. The DON confirmed that nurses and CMTs are expected to prime the insulin pen and hold the needle in place to ensure proper absorption. These actions led to the facility failing to comply with its medication administration policies, resulting in a higher medication error rate.
Infection Control Deficiencies During Resident Care
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain proper infection control practices during incontinent care and wound care treatments for multiple residents. During incontinent care for one resident, a CNA did not change gloves or perform hand hygiene after removing a soiled brief and before applying a clean one. This was observed despite the facility's policy requiring hand hygiene before and after gloving and between dirty and clean tasks. Another instance involved two CNAs performing incontinent care for a different resident, where one CNA did not perform hand hygiene before donning gloves, and both CNAs failed to change gloves and perform hand hygiene between dirty and clean tasks, including after handling soiled linens and before touching clean items in the resident's room. In a separate incident, an LPN did not follow proper infection control practices during wound care for a resident. The LPN did not perform hand hygiene before donning gloves, did not clean the scissors used to remove the soiled bandage, and failed to clean each wound individually, using the same gauze to clean multiple wounds. Additionally, the LPN did not perform hand hygiene between glove changes and used the same scissors to cut dressings without cleaning them between uses. These actions were contrary to the facility's policy, which requires hand hygiene before and after gloving, cleaning each wound individually, and cleaning instruments between uses. Interviews with staff, including the DON, confirmed that the observed practices were not in compliance with the facility's infection control policies. The DON emphasized that staff should always wash their hands before applying gloves, between dirty and clean tasks, and before exiting resident rooms. The DON also stated that wounds should be cleaned individually to prevent cross-contamination, and instruments like scissors should be cleaned before and after use during wound care treatments.
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 31 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — 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 Portageville
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gideon Care Center | 12.7 mi | ★★★★★ | 7 | 0 |
| Reelfoot Manor Health And Rehab | 13.3 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| New Madrid Living Center | 14.1 mi | ★★★★★ | 8 | 0 |
| Pemiscot County Memorial Hospital | 14.2 mi | — | 0 | 0 |
| Signature Healthcare Of Ridgely Rehab&wellness Ctr | 16.8 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Portageville Health Care 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.