The Eleanor Nursing Care Center
Inspection history, citations, penalties and survey trends for this long-term care facility in Hyde Park, New York.
- Location
- 419 North Quaker Lane, Hyde Park, New York 12538
- CMS Provider Number
- 335323
- Inspections on file
- 24
- Latest survey
- December 5, 2025
- Citations (last 12 mo.)
- 3
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at The Eleanor Nursing Care Center during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
The facility did not consistently staff each unit with both a Charge LPN and a medication nurse on the day shift as required by its own assessment, resulting in single nurses being responsible for approximately 30 residents per unit and causing delays in medication administration. Interviews and staffing records confirmed that this staffing shortfall occurred on multiple occasions and did not align with the facility's documented plan.
Multiple environmental deficiencies, including stained ceiling tiles, torn curtains, missing bathroom tiles, and noisy fixtures, were observed throughout the facility. Maintenance issues were not consistently documented or tracked, and a significant plumbing incident went unreported. The lack of a formal system for maintenance requests and follow-up contributed to an unsafe and uncomfortable environment for residents.
The facility's assessment indicated that each unit should have a Charge LPN and a medication nurse on the day shift, but staffing records showed that units were often staffed with only one nurse. This discrepancy led to late medication administration, as confirmed by staff interviews and review of assignment sheets. The issue persisted across multiple units and dates, despite the facility's documented staffing plan.
The facility did not maintain adequate nursing staff on multiple occasions, resulting in units being staffed below the minimum required number of CNAs. Staff and residents reported that this led to delayed care, incomplete tasks, and increased workload, especially for residents needing extensive assistance. Resident Council meetings documented ongoing concerns about slow call bell responses and lack of assistance, with no evidence that these issues were addressed by facility leadership.
Surveyors found that the facility failed to provide a safe, clean, and homelike environment for residents, as evidenced by unresolved maintenance issues such as a missing closet bar for a resident, lack of a lock box leading to a resident's loss of funds, dirty and damaged radiator units, missing closet doors, inadequate lighting in a dayroom, and persistent noise from a defective call bell system. The facility did not have an effective system to track or address these deficiencies.
Two residents were transferred to the hospital without timely notification to their emergency contacts or representatives, despite facility policy requiring such communication. In both cases, family members were not informed by staff and only learned of the transfers after the fact, either upon the resident's return or from the hospital directly.
Surveyors found that the facility did not provide required written notifications of transfer or discharge, including bed-hold policies and ombudsman notification, for two residents who were hospitalized. In both cases, there was no documentation of discharge notices or bed-hold notifications in the medical records, and one resident's family was not informed by the facility about the hospitalization.
Three residents experienced falls, but their care plans were not updated to reflect the incidents or to include new interventions, despite facility policy requiring such updates. Documentation and interviews confirmed that the care plans did not reflect the falls or any changes in care following these events.
The facility failed to maintain a functioning call system on Unit 3, affecting 37 residents, including one at moderate risk for falls. The centrally located call bell system was non-operational, and interim tap bells were ineffective. Staff were unaware of the issue, and there was no documented evidence of increased monitoring or care plan updates. The deficiency posed an immediate jeopardy to resident safety.
The facility failed to maintain a safe, clean, and homelike environment in two units, with issues such as broken floor molding, rusted heaters, damaged walls, and dirty floors. A strong urine odor was noted, and residents' wheelchairs were unclean. One elevator was out of service, affecting accessibility. Maintenance issues were to be logged in a book, but prioritization and renovation plans delayed repairs.
A resident with schizophrenia and bipolar disorder exhibited escalating aggressive behaviors, including physical attacks on staff and other residents. Despite documented incidents, the facility failed to implement effective interventions, resulting in multiple attacks and injuries. Interviews revealed inadequate supervision and documentation, with staff acknowledging the need for increased oversight.
The facility failed to report alleged abuse and injuries involving three residents to the State Agency within the required timeframe. A resident's injury of unknown origin was not reported, another resident's allegation of staff abuse was delayed by three days, and a resident-to-resident incident was reported over five hours late. The facility's policy requires immediate reporting, but these incidents were not communicated as mandated.
The facility failed to ensure a dignified experience for three residents. A nurse stood over two residents while feeding them, contrary to policy. Another resident lacked appropriate clothing, wearing a hospital gown and sweatshirt without pants. A CNA used the term 'feeders' for residents needing assistance, which was inappropriate. These actions violated residents' rights to dignity and respect.
The facility did not ensure regular Resident Council meetings, as residents were unaware of who should assist them, and there were no documented minutes for several months. The Administrator and DON acknowledged the issue upon starting at the facility, noting the absence of a staff liaison and a Resident Council President.
A recertification survey found that a facility lacked proper communication and documentation processes between its administration and governing body, leading to unaddressed issues such as a non-functional call bell system since April and only one working elevator for over a year. Interviews revealed that staff were unaware of the duration of these problems, and there was no formal documentation of discussions with the facility owner about these issues.
The facility failed to address a malfunctioning call bell system since April 2024, leaving residents unable to call for assistance. The QAPI committee did not develop or implement a plan to ensure resident safety, and there was no documentation of meetings or interim measures. The facility was cited for Immediate Jeopardy due to the lack of an effective plan and for not notifying the Department of Health about having only one working elevator.
The facility failed to update care plans for two residents, one at risk for falls and another requiring care plan meetings. A resident's care plan was not updated after a fall, and the call bell system was malfunctioning, leaving residents unable to call for help. Another resident did not have documented care plan meetings since early in the year, causing anxiety due to lack of support for housing needs.
The facility was found to have insufficient nursing staff, leading to delayed resident care. Residents and family members reported staff shortages, particularly on weekends, resulting in delayed responses to call bells and inadequate care. Staff interviews confirmed excessive working hours and burnout due to insufficient staffing. The facility's staffing plan was not consistently met, impacting the quality of care provided.
A resident with dementia and fragile skin experienced multiple instances of bruising, which were reported by family members. Despite this, the LTC facility did not conduct thorough investigations or update care plans as required. Interviews revealed a lack of documentation and communication regarding the injuries, and no Accident and Incident reports were found.
A resident with a history of exit-seeking behaviors eloped from the facility due to inadequate supervision and safety measures. Despite being assessed as high risk for elopement, the resident frequently removed their wander guard, and there was no physician order for the device. The resident's care plan interventions, including 15-minute checks and 1:1 supervision, were inconsistently implemented. On the night of the incident, the CNA on duty did not check the stairwell after hearing an alarm, leading to the resident's elopement. Interviews revealed systemic issues, including faulty alarms and inadequate staffing.
A resident with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and impaired vision was inaccurately assessed in their Quarterly Minimum Data Set, which failed to reflect their need for continuous oxygen and vision impairment. Despite being cognitively intact, the resident struggled to locate food due to vision issues and required oxygen, which was inconsistently documented. The Minimum Data Set Coordinator acknowledged the oversight in the assessment process.
The facility failed to develop comprehensive care plans for two residents, one with a pressure ulcer and another on psychotropic medications. A resident with Parkinson's and Peripheral Vascular Disease developed a pressure ulcer that was not addressed in their care plan, while another resident on psychotropic drugs lacked a care plan with interventions. Observations and interviews revealed inadequate repositioning and incomplete care planning, respectively.
A resident with a pressure ulcer did not receive consistent treatment and services as per professional standards. The facility failed to document treatments and follow up on wound care recommendations for heel booties and an air mattress. Observations showed the resident was not using heel booties or an air mattress, and staff interviews revealed a lack of communication and documentation regarding the wound care team's recommendations.
A resident experienced significant weight loss due to inadequate monitoring and assistance with meals, despite having a care plan in place. The resident, with impaired vision, was not reassessed for the necessary level of assistance, leading to multiple instances of unconsumed meals. Staff interviews revealed a lack of communication and documentation regarding the resident's needs, contributing to the deficiency.
A resident with Coronary Artery Disease, Congestive Heart Failure, and Asthma was administered oxygen at 3 liters/min instead of the prescribed 2 liters/min. Observations confirmed the incorrect dosage, and a nurse admitted to not checking the oxygen settings during rounds, leading to the deficiency.
The facility failed to ensure proper documentation and follow-up on drug regimen reviews for three residents, leading to a deficiency. Despite irregularities noted in reports from March to August 2024, there was no evidence of follow-up actions by the attending physician or medical provider. Interviews revealed that the facility had not been receiving Drug Regimen Reviews until July 2024, and there was no documented evidence of actions taken in response to the reviews.
A facility failed to properly label and store medications, as observed during a survey. One resident's medications were left unattended on a bedside table, while another resident had wound care treatments unsecured in their room. An LPN admitted to leaving medications due to a busy schedule, acknowledging they should have been secured.
A resident with Dementia and no natural teeth did not receive timely dental services after transitioning to long-term care. Despite facility protocols requiring dental evaluations upon admission, the resident had not been seen by a dentist. Interviews with staff revealed a lapse in communication and procedure adherence, as the Social Worker did not inform the team of the resident's need for a dental evaluation.
The facility failed to store food according to professional standards, with observations of open and undated food items, expired milk and juice, and improperly stored frozen chicken thighs and pasta. The Food Services Director acknowledged lapses in oversight and communication regarding food storage practices.
The facility failed to implement an effective infection control program for two residents with pressure ulcers. A resident with quadriplegia received care without staff using PPE, and there were no signs or PPE bins outside the room. Another resident with a stage 4 sacral ulcer had a dressing change performed by LPNs without PPE, despite recent training. Staff were unaware of the need for enhanced barrier precautions, and the infection control practitioner could not explain the non-compliance.
The facility failed to notify the Ombudsman and a resident's Health Care Proxy of transfers. One resident was discharged without notifying the Ombudsman, and another was transferred to a hospital without notifying their Health Care Proxy, contrary to facility policy.
Two residents did not receive scheduled showers, with one missing 41 showers over several months and another missing 12 showers. Staff shortages and lack of documentation were contributing factors. Additionally, required skin checks were not consistently performed for one resident. Interviews with staff and the DON revealed systemic issues in monitoring and recording care.
A facility failed to ensure physician oversight in the care of two residents. One resident, at high risk for elopement, lacked a physician order for a wander guard, despite its documented use. Another resident, with severe cognitive impairment and cancer, did not receive recommended oncologist follow-up or a CT scan as per hospital discharge instructions. Staff interviews confirmed the need for physician orders and oversight, highlighting lapses in following discharge instructions and care plan requirements.
The facility failed to provide the required twelve hours of in-service education and annual performance reviews for CNAs, as revealed during a survey. Interviews indicated that CNAs could not recall receiving the necessary training or evaluations, and there was no documentation to support compliance with these requirements.
Two residents experienced significant medication errors due to omissions in medication administration and documentation. One resident missed doses of critical medications for conditions like hypertension and depression, while another missed multiple insulin doses. Staffing issues contributed to these errors, with only one nurse often available, leading to incomplete MAR documentation.
Failure to Provide Sufficient Nursing Staff per Facility Assessment
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide sufficient nursing staff to meet the needs of residents as outlined in its own facility assessment. The assessment, reviewed by Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement, specified that each unit should have a Charge LPN and a medication nurse on the day shift. However, staffing assignment sheets and direct observations revealed that on multiple dates, including the observed date, only one nurse was assigned per unit, each responsible for approximately 30 residents. This staffing pattern was consistent across several dates within a one-month period for all units, including the rehabilitation, long-term, and dementia units. As a result, there were instances where medications were administered late due to the insufficient number of nurses available to provide timely care. Interviews with nursing staff, the staffing coordinator, the interim DON, and the administrator confirmed the discrepancy between the facility's staffing plan and actual staffing practices. Staff reported frequently working alone on units, and the staffing coordinator acknowledged that units were sometimes staffed with only one nurse if additional staff were unavailable. The interim DON and administrator both agreed that the facility assessment required two nurses per unit on the day shift, but staffing records showed this was not consistently achieved. There was no indication that staff were aware of habitual lateness among nurses, but the lack of adequate staffing directly contributed to delays in medication administration and did not align with the facility's documented plan.
Failure to Maintain Safe and Homelike Environment Due to Poor Maintenance Tracking
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide a safe, clean, and comfortable environment for residents, as evidenced by multiple observations of environmental deficiencies across several units. Surveyors noted visible dark water stains on ceiling tiles in numerous resident rooms, community areas, and bathrooms. Additional issues included torn window curtains, missing ceramic tiles under bathroom sinks, and makeshift repairs with sheet rock that did not adequately cover gaps. Noisy exhaust fans and sinks producing banging and rattling noises were also observed. These deficiencies were not systematically tracked or documented, and the maintenance binders intended for reporting such issues were inconsistently used, with entries often lacking specifics, dates, or resolution information. Interviews with the Director of Maintenance revealed the absence of a formal system to track or prioritize maintenance needs, relying instead on informal verbal reports and personal recollection. During a walkthrough, the Director of Maintenance was unable to specify the extent of needed repairs or provide timelines for completion. Furthermore, a significant plumbing incident involving a burst pipe in the Physical Therapy room was not formally documented, and the Director of Maintenance was unaware of the event, its cause, or its resolution. These lapses in maintenance reporting and follow-through contributed to the ongoing unsafe and uncomfortable environment for residents.
Facility Assessment Failed to Reflect Actual Staffing, Leading to Delayed Medication Administration
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that its facility-wide assessment accurately reflected the resources and staffing needed to care for residents, as required. The assessment, reviewed by Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement, documented that each unit should have a Charge LPN and a medication nurse on the day shift. However, staffing assignment sheets for multiple dates over approximately one month showed that several units, including the rehabilitation, long-term, and dementia units, were often staffed with only one nurse per unit during the day shift, despite each unit housing about 30 residents. This staffing pattern was observed repeatedly, and on several occasions, a single nurse was responsible for medication administration and resident care, which led to medications being administered late. Interviews with nursing staff, the staffing coordinator, the interim DON, and the administrator confirmed that the actual staffing did not match the facility assessment. Staff reported frequently working alone on units, and the staffing coordinator acknowledged that units were sometimes staffed with only one nurse if additional staff were unavailable. The interim DON and administrator both agreed that the facility assessment called for two nurses per unit on the day shift, but staffing records showed this was not consistently achieved. There was no indication that staff were aware of any habitual lateness among nurses, but the discrepancy between the assessment and actual staffing contributed to delays in medication administration.
Insufficient Nursing Staff to Meet Resident Needs
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide sufficient nursing staff to meet the needs of all residents, as required by their own Facility Assessment and staffing policy. Review of staffing schedules over a two-month period revealed multiple instances across all three shifts and units where the number of certified nurse aides (CNAs) fell below the facility's minimum requirements. Staff interviews confirmed that callouts were frequent, and the facility did not utilize agency staff, relying instead on internal pools and offering bonuses to cover gaps. Despite these efforts, there were repeated occasions when units operated with fewer CNAs than needed, particularly on weekends and during evening shifts. Staff reported having to work double shifts, skip breaks, and work into the next shift to complete resident care tasks, with some units experiencing only one CNA on duty at times. Resident acuity data indicated a high number of residents requiring extensive assistance, including mechanical lifts, help with eating, and total or extensive assistance with toileting. Staff consistently reported that the workload was heavy and that the reduction in CNA staffing from four to three per unit made it difficult to complete all required cares. Staff also noted that tasks were rushed, and resident care was sometimes incomplete, especially when callouts reduced staffing below even the minimum guideline. Supervisory staff acknowledged that low staffing levels could negatively affect resident care and that complaints about staffing had been raised by both staff and residents. Resident Council meeting minutes documented ongoing concerns from residents about delayed call bell responses, insufficient assistance with activities of daily living, and staff inattentiveness, particularly on weekends. These concerns were raised repeatedly over several months, with no documented evidence that the facility addressed or responded to them. During interviews, residents confirmed that they had to wait a long time for care and that their concerns about staffing had been expressed in previous meetings. The Administrator acknowledged awareness of these concerns and stated that incentives were offered to attract and retain staff.
Failure to Maintain Safe, Clean, and Homelike Environment for Residents
Penalty
Summary
Surveyors identified multiple deficiencies related to the facility's failure to provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment for residents across all three residential units. One resident was unable to hang clothing in their closet for over six months due to a missing closet bar, despite repeated requests by the resident's family representative to both the Director of Social Work and the Director of Maintenance. The Director of Social Work recalled discussing the issue at a care plan meeting and with maintenance, but could not confirm if a formal work order was submitted, while the Director of Maintenance did not recall the request. Another resident reported the loss of approximately $45 from their wallet, which was kept on their bedside table. This resident was not provided with a lock box and was unaware of what a lock box was, although the Director of Social Work stated that lock boxes were offered and discussed at resident council meetings, but could not confirm if this resident had been offered one. Environmental observations revealed that heating and air conditioning radiator units throughout the facility were heavily soiled with dust, debris, and black stains, and had bent, crushed, and rusty conductor fins. Several rooms and dayrooms on all floors were affected. Additionally, one room was missing closet doors, leaving clothing exposed. The 3rd Floor dayroom was found to have inadequate lighting, with only a portion of ceiling fixtures illuminated during resident activities and meals, resulting in a dim environment. The 3rd Floor was also noted to be noisy due to a defective call bell system that emitted a continuous beeping noise, which was audible throughout the unit and originated from a wall-mounted intercom near the medication room. The Director of Plant Operations confirmed the beeping was constant and had not been resolved by the call bell vendor. The facility lacked a formal system to track maintenance and repair requests, relying instead on logbooks and verbal communication between staff and the Director of Plant Operations. Maintenance staff were responsible for addressing issues, but there was no documentation to indicate when repairs were completed or if outside vendors were needed. Housekeeping was responsible for cleaning radiator units quarterly, but observations indicated this was not sufficient to maintain cleanliness. The ongoing environmental and safety issues were not addressed in a timely or effective manner, resulting in a failure to uphold residents' rights to a safe and homelike environment.
Failure to Notify Resident Representatives of Hospital Transfers
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure timely notification of resident representatives or emergency contacts when two residents were transferred to the hospital. In the first case, a resident with end stage renal disease, respiratory failure, and atrial fibrillation was sent to the hospital for perma-catheter placement and later admitted for hypotension and end stage renal disease. Although the resident's family member was listed as the emergency contact, there was no documented evidence that the representative was notified at the time of transfer. The resident reported that their family was not contacted until days later, and documentation showed that the family member was only called after the resident returned to the facility. In the second case, another resident with diagnoses including sepsis, viral encephalitis, and chronic lymphocytic leukemia was admitted to the hospital for medical issues. The family member, listed as the emergency contact, stated they were not notified by the facility and only learned of the hospitalization from the hospital itself. There was no documentation of representative notification in the medical record. Facility policy required timely notification of residents and their representatives regarding transfers or discharges, but this was not followed in these instances.
Failure to Provide Required Transfer/Discharge and Bed-Hold Notifications
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide required written notifications of transfer or discharge, including bed-hold policies and appeal rights, to residents, their representatives, or the ombudsman for two residents who were hospitalized. For one resident with end stage renal disease, respiratory failure, and atrial fibrillation, there was no documented evidence of discharge notices or bed-hold notifications for three separate hospitalizations, nor was there evidence that the ombudsman was notified of one of these hospitalizations. The facility's policy requires that such notifications be provided in writing and in a language and manner understood by the resident and their representative, and that the ombudsman be notified at the same time as the resident and representative. For another resident with diagnoses including sepsis, viral encephalitis, and chronic lymphocytic leukemia, there was no documented evidence of a discharge notice or bed-hold notification when the resident was sent to the hospital. Additionally, the resident's family member, listed as the emergency contact, reported not being contacted by the facility regarding the hospitalization and only learned of it from the hospital. These findings were confirmed through interviews and record reviews, which revealed the absence of required documentation in the medical records for both residents.
Failure to Update Care Plans After Resident Falls
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that the Comprehensive Care Plans for three residents were updated to reflect their current condition following falls, as required by facility policy and state regulations. Specifically, after each resident experienced a fall, there was no documented evidence that the care plans were revised to include the details of the incident or to add new interventions to address the increased risk or to evaluate the effectiveness of existing interventions. The facility's own policies require care plans to be updated after significant changes in a resident's condition, including falls, and to document any new or modified interventions. One resident with end stage renal disease, atrial fibrillation, and peripheral vascular disease experienced a fall while being transported to hemodialysis. Although the incident was documented in progress notes and an accident report, the resident's care plan was not updated to reflect the fall or any new interventions. Another resident with peripheral vascular disease, anxiety disorder, and a history of cerebrovascular accident had an unwitnessed fall from bed, but the care plan last reviewed several months prior did not include this event or any new interventions. A third resident with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, iron deficiency anemia, and an aneurysm also experienced an unwitnessed fall out of bed, and while the fall risk score was updated, there was no evidence of new interventions or a revised care plan following the incident. Interviews with facility leadership, including the acting DON, Regional Director of Operations, and Regional Nursing Coordinator, confirmed that care plans were not updated after the falls for these residents. The staff were unable to provide any documentation showing that the care plans reflected the falls or any subsequent changes in interventions, despite facility policy requiring such updates.
Failure to Maintain Functioning Call System on Unit 3
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide a functioning call system for residents on Unit 3, which includes the Dementia/Long Term Care Unit. On 9/10/2024, it was observed that the centrally located audible call bell system was not operational, and the interim system using tap bells was ineffective. The tap bells were not audible at the central nursing station or throughout the hall, affecting 37 residents. Specifically, Resident #31, who was at moderate risk for falls, was found sitting on the toilet without access to a functioning call bell, as the bathroom call bell was neither audible nor visual, and the tap bell was out of reach. The facility's policy required that each resident have a call bell within reach, but this was not adhered to. The issue with the call bell system began in April 2024, and despite a contract proposal being signed, the contractor did not receive the necessary down payment until late August 2024, delaying repairs. Interviews with staff revealed a lack of awareness about the non-functioning call bell system, and there was no documented evidence of increased monitoring or updated care plans to address the residents' ability to contact staff during this period. The deficiency was further highlighted by the lack of documented evidence of tap bell function and placement logs, as well as care plan updates from April to September 2024. Interviews with various staff members, including CNAs, LPNs, and the Director of Maintenance, confirmed the ongoing issues with the call bell system and the absence of effective interim measures. The facility's failure to ensure a working call system posed an immediate jeopardy to the health and safety of residents on Unit 3.
Removal Plan
- The facility assigned two to four staff members as monitors to make continuous rounds on Unit 3.
- Monitoring logs for room rounds were presented to the survey team by the facility with no negative findings.
- Staff education regarding room rounds on Unit 3 was conducted with 90.2% completion.
- Unit 3 residents were assessed for the ability to use the call bell system. Three residents were assessed by therapy as not being able to use a call bell.
- The Policy and Procedure titled Alternate Call Bell System for use during a Partial or Full Call Bell System Downtime was initiated.
- The Temporary Alternative Call Bell System was installed in Unit 3 rooms with a receiver located at the desk.
Environmental Deficiencies in Facility Units
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment for residents in two of its three units during a recertification survey. Observations revealed several environmental deficiencies, including missing or broken floor molding, rusted and scratched heaters, damaged sheetrock with large gouges, and dirty, dusty floor tiles. Additionally, there was a strong odor of urine in the Unit 3 hallway, and residents' wheelchairs were found to be dusty, with ripped armrests and caked-on food. One of the two passenger elevators was out of service, limiting accessibility for residents and staff. Interviews with facility staff revealed that maintenance issues were supposed to be recorded in a maintenance book checked three times daily. However, the Maintenance Director indicated that they had to prioritize repairs and were working with contractors on a renovation plan. The wheelchairs were supposed to be cleaned by nursing staff at night, but no cleaning schedule was provided despite requests. The Administrator confirmed that the facility was undergoing renovations, with the first floor completed and the second floor pending. Staff were expected to update the maintenance book with needed repairs.
Failure to Protect Residents from Abuse Due to Inadequate Interventions
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to protect residents from abuse, specifically resident-to-resident abuse, involving Resident #84, who exhibited escalating aggressive behaviors. Despite documented incidents of aggression starting on 9/16/23, including physical attacks on staff and other residents, the facility did not implement effective interventions to manage these behaviors. Resident #84, who was admitted with schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and other conditions, was noted to have moderate cognitive impairment and a history of physical aggression. The care plans in place included maintaining a daily routine and providing emotional support, but these measures were insufficient to prevent further incidents. On 9/22/23, Resident #84 punched a staff member and another resident, leading to their hospitalization. Upon return, no new interventions were implemented, and the resident continued to exhibit aggressive behaviors, including hitting and scratching other residents. On 10/7/23, Resident #84 attacked multiple residents, causing injuries and necessitating hospitalization for both Resident #84 and one of the victims. The facility's records lacked evidence of interventions to address these aggressive behaviors effectively. Interviews with staff revealed a lack of adequate supervision and documentation of interventions. The Corporate LPN mentioned possible undocumented interventions, while the Director of Nursing acknowledged the need for increased supervision. The Medical Director was unaware of Resident #84's psychiatric history and noted staffing limitations that prevented 1:1 supervision. These deficiencies highlight the facility's failure to protect residents from abuse and implement necessary interventions to manage aggressive behaviors.
Failure to Timely Report Alleged Abuse and Injuries
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to report alleged violations of abuse, neglect, or mistreatment involving three residents to the State Agency within the required two-hour timeframe. For Resident #104, there was no documented evidence that an injury of unknown origin, reported by the family as bruises on the resident's hands, was communicated to the state agency. The facility's policy mandates immediate reporting of such incidents, but the necessary Accident and Incident report was not found, and the injury was not reported as required. Resident #45 reported an allegation of staff-to-resident abuse, which was not communicated to the State Agency until three days after the incident. The resident described being pulled by a nurse aide, resulting in bruises, and informed their son, who contacted the police. Despite the initiation of an investigation by the facility, there was no evidence of timely reporting to the state agency, as confirmed by interviews with the current Director of Nursing and the Administrator. For Resident #73, an incident of resident-to-resident abuse was reported late to the State Agency. The resident reported being hit by their roommate, resulting in visible injuries, but the report was not sent to the Department of Health until over five hours after the incident occurred. The Director of Nursing, who was not employed at the time of the incident, acknowledged that the report should have been made within the two-hour timeframe.
Dignity and Respect Deficiencies in Resident Care
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure a dignified experience for three residents during a recertification survey. A Registered Nurse was observed standing over two residents, who required assistance with eating, while feeding them their meals. This action was contrary to the facility's policy and staff interviews, which indicated that staff should be seated and facing residents during mealtime to provide a personal experience. Another resident was observed in the dining room wearing a hospital gown and a sweatshirt without pants, indicating a lack of appropriate clothing. The resident expressed a desire to wear their own clothes but did not have any available. The facility's policy was to provide clothing from a donation box within 24 hours of admission, but there was no record of this being offered to the resident. Staff interviews revealed that the resident had been without proper clothing since admission, and the issue was not addressed promptly. Additionally, a Certified Nurse Aide referred to residents needing assistance with eating as 'feeders,' which was deemed inappropriate by the Director of Nursing. The aide was unaware that such terminology was not allowed, highlighting a lack of awareness and training regarding respectful communication with residents.
Failure to Facilitate Resident Council Meetings
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that residents had the right to organize and participate in resident groups, specifically the Resident Council meetings. During a Resident Council meeting, several residents reported that it had been months since they last attended a meeting because they were unaware of who should be assisting them. The facility lacked documented Resident Council minutes for several months, from April to July 2024, indicating that meetings were not held regularly during this period. The Administrator and Director of Nursing acknowledged that they were aware of the irregularity in holding Resident Council meetings when they started working at the facility. They confirmed that there was no staff liaison assigned to assist with the meetings, and there was no President of the Resident Council prior to the survey. A meeting was scheduled in August 2024 to introduce the new administration to the Resident Council members, but the absence of regular meetings and proper documentation led to the deficiency.
Deficiencies in Communication and Maintenance at LTC Facility
Penalty
Summary
The facility was found to have significant deficiencies during a recertification survey, primarily due to a lack of communication and documentation between the facility's administration and its governing body. The survey revealed that there was no established process or frequency for the administrator to report to the governing body, and the method of communication was not recorded. This lack of communication led to the governing body being unaware of critical issues, such as the non-functional call bell system on the third floor, which had been out of service since April 2024, and the absence of a plan to address this issue. Additionally, the facility failed to document any Quality Assurance Performance Improvement (QAPI) meetings or actions taken to resolve the call bell system problem. The survey also uncovered that the facility had only one working elevator for over a year, and this issue was not reported to the Department of Health. The QAPI meeting agendas from March and July 2024 did not mention the non-working elevator or call bells. Interviews with the facility's staff, including the Administrator, Director of Maintenance, and Corporate Director of Nursing, revealed a lack of awareness and documentation regarding these issues. The Administrator, who had been in the position for about a month, was unaware of the duration of the elevator problem and whether it had been reported to the Department of Health. Further interviews with the Corporate Administrator and Regional Director of Maintenance indicated that there were informal weekly calls with the facility owner to discuss issues, but no formal documentation of these discussions existed. The Regional Director of Maintenance did not consider the elevator issue as a loss of service since one elevator was operational. Attempts to contact the facility owner were unsuccessful, and the Assistant Chief Operating Officer, who worked closely with the facility operator, was also unaware of the exact timeline of the call bell system failure.
Failure to Address Call Bell System Malfunction
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure the Quality Assurance Performance Improvement (QAPI) committee developed and implemented an appropriate plan of action to address issues impacting resident safety, specifically regarding the malfunctioning centralized call bell system. Since April 2024, the call bell system had been out of service, leaving residents on the 3rd Floor Unit unable to call for assistance from their rooms or bathrooms. This deficiency also affected family members visiting residents and staff working in shower rooms, as they were unable to summon help when needed. Despite the ongoing issue, there was no documentation of meetings or plans to address the problem until September 2024. The facility was cited for Immediate Jeopardy at F919 due to the lack of an effective plan to ensure resident safety in the absence of a functioning call bell system. Additionally, the facility was cited for having only one working elevator and failing to notify the Department of Health about this ongoing issue. The QAPI meeting agendas from March and July 2024 did not mention the non-working elevator or the call bell system, and there was no evidence of monitoring the interim plan using tap bells for effectiveness and safety. The facility also did not document any input from residents, representatives, or direct care staff, nor did they inform the Governing Body or facility operator about the call bell system issues. Interviews with facility staff revealed that the Corporate Director of Nursing and the Corporate LPN were aware of the call bell issue in April 2024 and had implemented temporary measures such as tap bells and increased rounding. However, they were unsure if these measures were documented or if ongoing education and assessments were conducted. The call bell contractor confirmed that the facility first contacted them in April 2024, but work did not begin until September 2024 due to delays in receiving a deposit. The Corporate Administrator and Assistant Chief Operating Officer were also interviewed, revealing a lack of formal documentation and communication regarding the call bell issue with the facility owner.
Deficiencies in Care Plan Updates and Documentation
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that the comprehensive care plans for two residents were reviewed and revised as required. Resident #31, who was at moderate risk for falls, did not have their care plan updated to reflect current interventions to prevent falls. Despite the resident's fall on 8/27/24, there was no documented evidence that the care plan was updated to address the resident's ability to contact staff while the call light system was not functioning. The facility's call bell system had been malfunctioning since mid-April, and temporary tap bells were provided, but these were not placed in bathrooms, leaving residents without a means to call for help when needed. Resident #88, who was admitted with diagnoses including type II Diabetes Mellitus and absence of leg below the knee, did not have documented evidence of quarterly care plan meetings or updates since 2/27/24. The resident expressed anxiety due to the lack of a Social Worker to assist with housing needs and had not attended a care plan meeting in a long time. The Corporate Social Worker confirmed that the resident should have had two additional care plan meetings, but there was no documentation of these meetings or invitations to the resident or their representative. The facility's failure to update care plans and ensure proper communication and documentation of care plan meetings led to deficiencies in the care provided to these residents. The lack of updated interventions for Resident #31's fall risk and the absence of care plan meetings for Resident #88 highlight the facility's non-compliance with regulatory requirements for comprehensive care planning.
Insufficient Staffing Leads to Delayed Resident Care
Penalty
Summary
The facility was found to have insufficient nursing staff to meet the needs of residents on all shifts, as revealed during the Recertification and Abbreviated Survey. Residents reported during a Resident Council meeting that the facility was short-staffed, particularly on weekends and various shifts, leading to delayed responses to call bells. Family members also noted the absence of staff during visits, and an analysis of staffing schedules from June to September 2024 showed the facility frequently fell below its minimum staffing levels. The Facility Assessment documentation confirmed that the staffing levels were inadequate for the facility's capacity of 120 residents. Interviews with staff further corroborated the deficiency in staffing. Several Certified Nurse Aides (CNAs) and Licensed Practical Nurses (LPNs) reported working excessive hours, often covering double shifts due to the lack of sufficient staff. The Director of Nursing and the Staffing Coordinator acknowledged the staffing challenges, noting that the facility did not have contracts with outside agencies and faced difficulties retaining staff due to its location. Despite offering bonuses, the facility struggled to maintain adequate staffing levels, leading to burnout among current staff. The deficiency in staffing resulted in residents experiencing delays in receiving care, such as infrequent bed linen changes, limited access to ice, and extended wait times for pain medication. The facility's staffing plan, which aimed for 3-4 CNAs on the day shift, 2-3 on the evening shift, and 1-2 on the night shift, was not consistently met. This inadequacy was highlighted by multiple instances where the actual staffing fell short of these targets, impacting the quality of care provided to residents.
Failure to Investigate Injuries of Unknown Origin
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to thoroughly investigate alleged violations involving abuse, mistreatment, or neglect for a resident with severely impaired cognition and multiple diagnoses, including anxiety disorder and dementia. The resident's family reported observing bruises on the resident's hands on multiple occasions, which led to x-rays being performed. However, there was no documented evidence that the facility initiated an investigation into the injuries of unknown origin, as required by their policy. Additionally, the resident's Skin Integrity Care Plan was not updated to address the bruising, and there was no Abuse/Victim Care Plan in place. Interviews with facility staff, including the Administrator and Director of Nursing, revealed that no Accident and Incident reports were located for the resident, despite the requirement to report and investigate injuries of unknown origin immediately. The Medical Director noted that the resident was combative and had fragile skin, which could lead to bruising during care. However, there was no documented evidence that regular skin assessments were conducted as per physician orders, and the facility failed to communicate with the family about the resident's bruising.
Resident Elopement Due to Inadequate Supervision and Safety Measures
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure adequate supervision and a safe environment for Resident #102, who had a history of exit-seeking behaviors and was at risk for elopement. Despite being assessed as high risk for elopement and having a wander guard placed on their wrist, Resident #102 frequently removed the device. There was no documented physician order for the wander guard, and the resident's behaviors and safety measures were inconsistently documented by the nursing staff. The resident's care plan included interventions such as 15-minute checks and 1:1 supervision, but these were not consistently implemented or documented. On the night of the incident, Resident #102 eloped from the facility and was found by the police at an address away from the facility. The nursing supervisor had observed the resident in bed during rounds, but later, the Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) on duty heard an alarm and assumed it was the supervisor. The CNA did not check the stairwell due to being the only staff on the unit and did not realize the resident was missing until informed by the supervisor. The facility's alarm system was reportedly faulty, and the resident was not adequately monitored despite their known risk for elopement. Interviews with staff revealed systemic issues, including the lack of a physician's order for the wander guard, inadequate staffing, and failure to follow protocols for monitoring high-risk residents. The Medical Director and Corporate Director of Nursing acknowledged that residents assessed as high risk for elopement should not be placed near exit doors and should have proper safety measures in place. The facility's failure to implement and document appropriate interventions and supervision contributed to the resident's elopement.
Inaccurate Resident Assessment for Vision and Oxygen Use
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that each resident received an accurate assessment reflective of their status, as evidenced by the case of a resident with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and neuromuscular dysfunction of the bladder. The resident's 8/8/24 Quarterly Minimum Data Set Assessment inaccurately documented their vision and oxygen use. Despite being cognitively intact, the resident was noted to have highly impaired vision and required continuous oxygen, as per the 5/27/24 Physician Order and the 8/24 Administration Record. However, the assessment incorrectly indicated that the resident could see fine details and did not use oxygen. During an observation on 9/06/24, the resident was found in bed with oxygen administered at 3 liters via nasal cannula, struggling to locate food on their tray and calling for help due to their impaired vision. The Minimum Data Set Coordinator admitted to overlooking the resident's vision impairment and oxygen use in the assessment, despite the administration record showing inconsistent documentation of oxygen use. This oversight led to the inaccurate coding of the resident's assessment, highlighting a deficiency in the facility's assessment process.
Deficiencies in Care Planning for Pressure Ulcer and Psychotropic Drug Use
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for two residents, leading to deficiencies in addressing their medical needs. Resident #40, who was admitted with conditions including Parkinson's Disease and Peripheral Vascular Disease, developed a pressure ulcer that was not adequately documented or addressed in their care plan. Despite being readmitted with an unstageable pressure ulcer, there was no evidence in the medical record of a care plan to manage this condition. Observations and interviews revealed that the resident was not being repositioned frequently enough, and the care plan should have been initiated by the Registered Nurse upon the resident's return from the hospital. Resident #19, diagnosed with Type II Diabetes Mellitus, Major Depressive Disorder, and Atrial Fibrillation, was prescribed psychotropic medications but lacked a care plan with interventions to address the use of these medications. The nursing care plan for psychiatric drug use had a goal for maintaining the resident's psychosocial well-being but did not include specific interventions. The Minimum Data Set Coordinator acknowledged the absence of interventions, attributing it to being called away and not completing the plan. These deficiencies highlight a lack of comprehensive care planning for residents with specific medical needs.
Failure to Implement Pressure Ulcer Care Recommendations
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide necessary treatment and services for a resident with pressure ulcers, as required by professional standards of practice. Resident #401, who was admitted with a diagnosis of pressure ulcer on the left heel, did not receive consistent documentation of treatments and weekly skin checks as per the physician's order and care plan. The physician's order for Santyl application to the left foot wound was not documented on several occasions, and there was no evidence of follow-up on the wound care team's recommendations for heel booties and an air mattress. Observations revealed that Resident #401 was not consistently using heel booties or an air mattress, as recommended by the wound care team. The resident was seen with an air heel lift boot, which was not ordered by a physician, and the boot was often not secured properly, leading to inadequate offloading of pressure from the heel. Interviews with staff, including a physical therapist and a licensed practical nurse, confirmed that the recommendations for offloading and the use of an air mattress were not implemented, and there was a lack of awareness and follow-up on the wound care team's notes. The deficiency was further highlighted by the lack of communication and documentation within the facility. The wound care team's recommendations were not entered into the electronic medical record in a timely manner, leading to a delay in implementing necessary interventions. Staff interviews indicated a lack of clarity on who was responsible for updating care plans and ensuring that physician orders were followed, contributing to the failure to provide adequate care for Resident #401's pressure ulcer.
Failure to Provide Adequate Nutrition and Hydration Care
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure proper nutrition and hydration care for a resident with a significant weight loss of 9.79% over six months. The resident, who was admitted with conditions such as Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and Adult Failure to Thrive, had a care plan that required meal intake monitoring and assistance due to impaired vision. However, the facility did not consistently monitor the resident's meal intake as per the care plan, and the resident was not reassessed to determine the necessary level of assistance during meals. Observations revealed that the resident often did not consume food on multiple days, and there were instances where the resident was left unattended during meals, leading to inadequate nutrition intake. Interviews with staff, including a Registered Dietician, Occupational Therapist, and Certified Nurse Assistants, highlighted a lack of communication and documentation regarding the resident's needs and meal consumption. The staff were unaware of the resident's visual impairment, which affected their ability to feed themselves. The Occupational Therapist acknowledged the resident's vision problems and suggested methods like the clock method or divided plate, but these recommendations were not documented or communicated effectively to the nursing staff. The lack of consistent assistance and monitoring contributed to the resident's continued weight loss and inadequate nutrition management.
Inappropriate Oxygen Administration for Resident
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide appropriate respiratory care to a resident, as evidenced by the administration of oxygen at a rate inconsistent with the physician's order. The resident, who was admitted with diagnoses including Coronary Artery Disease, Congestive Heart Failure, and Asthma, had a physician's order for continuous oxygen at 2 liters per minute. However, observations on multiple occasions revealed that the resident was receiving oxygen at 3 liters per minute via nasal cannula, contrary to the prescribed amount. The deficiency was further highlighted during an interview with a registered nurse who acknowledged that the oxygen concentrator was set between 2.5 to 3 liters per minute, rather than the ordered 2 liters per minute. The nurse admitted that during rounds, they only checked on the residents' well-being and did not verify the oxygen concentrator settings unless administering medications. This oversight led to the resident receiving an incorrect oxygen dosage, which was not documented in the Medication Administration Record for the specified date.
Failure to Document and Act on Drug Regimen Reviews
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a licensed pharmacist performed a monthly drug regimen review and reported irregularities to the attending physician, the facility's Medical Director, and the Director of Nursing. This deficiency was identified during a recertification survey conducted from September 5 to September 17, 2024. The survey revealed that for three residents, there was no documented follow-up for drug regimen reviews from March to August 2024. Specifically, Resident #89, who had diagnoses including Metabolic Encephalopathy and Type 2 Diabetes, had no documented follow-up for drug regimen reviews despite irregularities being noted in reports from March to August 2024. Similarly, Resident #83, diagnosed with Dysphagia and Dementia, also lacked documented follow-up for the same period, and Resident #19, with diagnoses including Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and Type II Diabetes Mellitus, had no documented evidence of follow-up for irregularities noted in March and April 2024. Interviews with the Director of Nursing revealed that the facility had not been receiving the Drug Regimen Reviews until they started working at the facility in July 2024. The Director of Nursing stated that the pharmacist should send the Drug Regimen Reviews via email, and these should be handed to the medical providers for a response, with any ordered interventions put in place. However, there was no documented evidence in the electronic medical records or the Drug Regimen Review binder that the facility's medical provider received, reviewed, or acted upon the pharmacy drug regimen reviews for the residents in question.
Medication Storage and Labeling Deficiencies
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that all drugs and biologicals were labeled and stored according to professional standards, as observed during a recertification survey. In one instance, a resident with diagnoses of hepatic encephalopathy, hypothyroid, and neoplasm of the breast had a cup containing approximately ten pills left unattended on their bedside table while they were in the bathroom. The resident was unable to recall the purpose of all the medications, which included Aldactone, Vitamin E, Ursodiol, Tramadol, Propranolol, Amlodipine, Gabapentin, and Acidophilus. A Licensed Practical Nurse admitted to leaving the medications at the bedside due to a busy schedule, acknowledging that it would have been better to secure the medications in the medication cart until the resident returned. In another instance, a resident with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, hypertension, and pressure ulcers had a bottle of Dakins' solution and a tube of Silver Sulfadiazine left on their bedside table. These items were intended for wound care, as per the physician's order, but were not stored securely. The same Licensed Practical Nurse stated that such treatments should be locked in the treatment cart and could not explain why they were left in the resident's room. These observations indicate a failure to adhere to proper medication storage protocols, as required by professional standards.
Failure to Provide Timely Dental Services
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide timely dental services for Resident #70, who was admitted with conditions including Dementia, Major Depressive Disorder, and Cerebrovascular Accident. The resident, who had no natural teeth and performed oral care independently, reported not having seen a dentist since admission. Interviews revealed that the facility's protocol was for residents to be seen by a dentist upon admission and as needed. However, despite transitioning to long-term care, the resident had not been evaluated by a dentist. The Licensed Practical Nurse and Director of Nursing acknowledged the oversight, indicating a lapse in communication and procedure adherence, as the Social Worker did not inform the team of the resident's need for a dental evaluation.
Improper Food Storage and Labeling in Facility
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure proper food storage in accordance with professional standards for food service safety during a recertification survey. Observations revealed open and undated food items in the walk-in refrigerator, including chicken and tuna salads that exceeded their storage duration, and expired low-fat milk and orange juice boxes. In the walk-in freezer, there were boxes of frozen chicken thighs without expiration dates, one of which was open to air. Additionally, the dry food storage contained loose Mac orzo and egg noodle pastas in plastic bags without expiration dates. These findings indicate a lack of adherence to the facility's policy on food receiving and storage, which mandates labeling, dating, and discarding of opened items within specified timeframes. Interviews with the Food Services Director highlighted a lack of oversight and communication regarding food storage practices. The director acknowledged the expired items and the failure to discard them, attributing it to staff oversight. They also mentioned that the frozen chicken thighs were received without expiration dates and that a notification had been sent to the vendor without response. Furthermore, the director admitted to forgetting about a code system for identifying expiration dates, which was left by the previous director. This oversight contributed to the improper storage and handling of food items, as staff were not adequately informed or reminded of the necessary procedures.
Inadequate Infection Control for Residents with Pressure Ulcers
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to establish and maintain an effective infection prevention and control program, as evidenced by the lack of enhanced barrier precautions for two residents with pressure ulcers. Resident #3, who has quadriplegia and a community-acquired pressure ulcer, was observed receiving care without staff wearing personal protective equipment (PPE). Additionally, there were no signs indicating the need for enhanced barrier precautions or PPE bins outside the resident's room. Interviews with staff revealed a lack of awareness and training on enhanced barrier precautions prior to the survey, despite the facility's policy requiring such measures. Resident #63, diagnosed with a stage 4 sacral pressure ulcer, was also subject to inadequate infection control practices. During a wound care observation, two LPNs were seen performing a dressing change without wearing the required PPE, despite recent in-service training on enhanced barrier precautions. The LPNs were unaware of the signage indicating the need for enhanced barrier precautions and the absence of a PPE cart outside the resident's room. The facility's infection control practitioner was unable to explain the lack of compliance with the established policy.
Failure to Notify Ombudsman and Health Care Proxy of Resident Transfers
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure proper notification procedures were followed for two residents regarding their transfer or discharge. For one resident, who was discharged to another facility in July 2024, there was no documented evidence that the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman was notified of the discharge. The facility's policy required such notifications to be sent, but interviews with the Director of Nursing and the Regional Manager of Operations revealed that they could not verify if the notification was sent. This oversight indicates a lapse in adhering to the facility's policy and state regulations. Another resident, who was transferred to a hospital in June 2024 due to seizures, did not have their Health Care Proxy notified of the transfer. The facility's policy required immediate notification of the resident's representative in such cases, but there was no documentation in the electronic medical record to confirm this occurred. Interviews with the Health Care Proxy and facility staff, including a Nurse Practitioner and a Registered Nurse, confirmed that the notification was not made, highlighting a failure in communication and documentation processes within the facility.
Failure to Provide Scheduled Showers and Document Care
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that residents received the necessary assistance for bathing, resulting in deficiencies in personal hygiene for two residents. Resident #104, who was admitted with diagnoses including Anxiety Disorder, Dementia, and Hypokalemia, did not receive 41 scheduled showers between May 2023 and September 2023. Despite having a care plan that required extensive assistance with bathing, there was no documented evidence of showers being provided as scheduled. Interviews revealed that staff shortages and lack of documentation contributed to the failure to provide showers, with a complainant noting the resident's unkempt appearance and the need to provide personal hygiene products themselves. Resident #105, admitted with diagnoses including Epileptic Seizures, Overactive Bladder, and Spondylolisthesis, did not receive 12 scheduled showers between December 2023 and January 2024. Additionally, there was no documented evidence of skin checks being performed as per physician orders. Interviews with staff indicated that insufficient staffing and chaotic conditions on the unit hindered the ability to provide showers and document care. The Director of Nursing acknowledged the responsibility of Nurse Managers to ensure showers were given and documented, highlighting a systemic issue in monitoring and recording resident care.
Deficiencies in Physician Orders for Resident Care
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a physician reviewed the total program of care for two residents, leading to deficiencies in their care plans. Resident #102, who was assessed at high risk for elopement, did not have a physician order for the placement and function check of a wander guard, despite having one placed on their wrist. The resident's care plan and medical progress notes indicated the presence of a wander guard, but there was no documented physician order for it. Interviews with staff, including a Licensed Practical Nurse and the Medical Director, confirmed that a physician order was required for residents with wander guards, and this oversight occurred during the admission process via telehealth. Resident #104, admitted with severe cognitive impairment and a diagnosis of malignant neoplasm of the supraglottis, did not receive follow-up care as per hospital discharge instructions. The discharge summary recommended an oncologist follow-up within 1-2 weeks and a repeat CT scan within 3-6 months, but there was no evidence of these actions being taken in the resident's physician orders and progress notes. The Medical Director acknowledged the oversight, stating that the focus was on the resident's current condition rather than following the discharge instructions, and emphasized the need for reviewing orders to ensure compliance with hospital discharge summaries.
Deficiency in CNA In-Service Education and Performance Reviews
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that each Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) received the required twelve hours of in-service education per year based on their individual performance review. This deficiency was identified during a Recertification Survey conducted from September 5 to September 17, 2024. The survey revealed that eight CNAs did not have documented evidence of performance reviews completed at least once every 12 months. The facility's assessment indicated that education was primarily provided by the Director of Nursing/Staff Educator, with several sessions scheduled to accommodate all shifts. However, there was no documentation to support that the CNAs received the mandatory education as required by regulation. Interviews conducted during the survey further highlighted the deficiency. The Director of Nursing acknowledged that CNA education was previously managed by the corporate team but stated that they would take over the responsibility moving forward. CNAs interviewed could not recall receiving the required 12 hours of in-service training or having performance evaluations. One CNA mentioned receiving in-service education on specific topics but could not remember the duration, while another CNA recalled signing off on in-services without recalling the content or duration. This lack of documentation and recall indicates a failure in the facility's process to ensure compliance with the regulatory requirements for CNA education and performance evaluations.
Medication Administration Deficiencies
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that residents were free from significant medication errors, as observed during the Recertification Survey and Abbreviated Surveys. Specifically, two residents experienced multiple medication omissions. Resident #105, who had intact cognition and was taking nine or more medications for various conditions including hypertension, anxiety, and depression, had numerous instances where medications were not administered as documented in the Medication Administration Record (MAR). These omissions included critical medications such as antihypertensives, antibiotics, antidepressants, and thyroid hormones, with no documented reasons for the omissions. Additionally, Resident #19, diagnosed with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, type II diabetes mellitus, and major depressive disorder, experienced multiple missed doses of insulin, a crucial medication for managing blood sugar levels. The MAR for September 2024 showed several instances where insulin was not administered, and no reasons were documented for these omissions. Interviews with nursing staff revealed that medication administration was often delayed or omitted due to staffing issues, with only one nurse available on the unit at times, leading to incomplete documentation in the MAR. Interviews with facility staff, including the Corporate Director of Nursing and the Medical Director, highlighted systemic issues in medication administration and documentation. The Director of Nursing acknowledged the problem of medication omissions and the need for improvement. The Medical Director emphasized the importance of insulin administration for Resident #19 and noted that they were not informed of the missed doses. The facility's policy requires that all medication administrations be documented immediately, and any omissions be reported to the appropriate supervisory staff, which was not consistently followed in these cases.
Latest citations in New York
A resident with spastic quadriplegic cerebral palsy, severe hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy, chronic respiratory failure, and a tracheostomy was on continuous pulse oximetry with ordered SpO2 parameters and linked Vocera alerts. When the resident’s oxygen saturation dropped significantly, the Vocera system sent sequential alarms to the primary RN, buddy RN, charge RN, and RT. The primary RN repeatedly pressed “Accept” on the alert device without assessing the resident, while the buddy RN, charge RN, and RT did not respond to the alarms, each assuming others would intervene or not recalling the alert. For approximately 25 minutes, no assigned clinician assessed the resident despite ongoing alarms, until another RN, not assigned to the resident, heard an alarm while passing the room and found the resident unresponsive and gray. A Code Blue was initiated, CPR was performed, and the resident was transferred to the hospital, where they were found to have no brain activity and later died. The facility’s investigation determined that staff failed to respond to and appropriately manage the pulse oximetry/Vocera alerts and failed to maintain and use required communication devices as expected.
A resident with Parkinson’s disease, dementia with behavioral disturbances, and known exit-seeking behaviors, care planned with a wander alarm, eloped through a 3rd floor stairwell door whose alarm had been disabled days earlier by maintenance and security while addressing a wandering system issue. A plastic barrier was placed in front of the door, but the door remained accessible and unrepaired. Video showed the resident repeatedly attempting to exit, bypassing the barrier, trying to remove the wander device, and ultimately opening the door, falling into the stairwell, and leaving the unit. Staff observed the resident at the door but did not consistently redirect them, and the resident was later found outside the building by a visitor after staff realized the resident was missing and discovered the wheelchair in the stairwell.
Two residents with psychiatric and behavioral histories were waiting by an elevator in a lobby when one, known to have prior aggressive behavior and a care plan noting risk for physical aggression, removed a wheelchair armrest and struck the other in the forehead, causing a bump and laceration that required ED evaluation. Video, staff, and security accounts confirmed that the aggressor resident was able to access and weaponize the removable armrest in a common area despite prior documented altercations and behavioral concerns, and was only on 30‑minute checks at the time, resulting in a failure to protect another resident from physical abuse.
Staff failed to respond promptly to an oxygen alert alarm for a resident with spastic quadriplegic CP, severe hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy, chronic respiratory failure, severe cognitive impairment, and total dependence for ADLs, resulting in the resident being found unresponsive with gray skin and requiring a Code Blue, CPR, and hospital transfer where no brain activity was found and life support was later withdrawn. Despite facility policy requiring alleged or suspected neglect and serious bodily injury to be reported to the State Agency within 2 hours (or within 24 hours if no serious bodily injury), the Administrator was not notified until days after the event and the NYS DOH was notified four days after the incident; the DON reported they were initially unaware of the failure to respond to alarms or of the need to report the incident, and the Administrator stated they had not been informed of the Code Blue on the day it occurred.
Surveyors found that the facility failed to implement an effective infection surveillance and reporting process during a norovirus gastroenteritis outbreak and in its routine infection tracking. During the outbreak, only a single-day tracking sheet was completed for several residents with gastrointestinal illness on two units, and daily surveillance with updated symptoms and management was not maintained as required by facility policy. Despite receiving a directive from the state health department to submit a Nosocomial Outbreak Reporting Application for the identified cluster, the DON acknowledged that the report was never submitted. Additionally, monthly infection control line lists for residents on antibiotics for various infections lacked documentation of signs and symptoms, diagnostic and lab results, precautions used, and outbreak potential, even though the IP relied on these lists for surveillance.
A resident with multiple chronic conditions and numerous scheduled medications had repeated discrepancies between scheduled morning medication times and documented administration times. On multiple days, all medications ordered for a 9:00 a.m. pass were documented as given around midday by an RN, contrary to policy requiring timely administration and immediate electronic documentation. The RN cited computer timeouts, possible late documentation, and workload pressures, while leadership acknowledged that a single nurse was responsible for passing medications to roughly 40 residents within a limited time window and that MAR review was primarily done by the passing nurse and through monthly reports, with no routine MAR review by the pharmacy consultant.
The facility did not ensure residents understood how to file grievances and failed to document and track grievances and their resolutions. Residents reported that they only voiced concerns during resident council and were unclear about the grievance process otherwise, and the designated Grievance Officer could not produce a grievance log or forms. The DON acknowledged the grievance process was informal and lacked clear documentation. In addition, a resident with significant cardiac and neurologic conditions and moderately impaired cognition had a representative who raised multiple concerns about care coordination, communication, discharge planning, call bell response, personal property, preferences, and nutrition, but these grievances were largely handled verbally, with no consistent documentation of how each concern was addressed or resolved.
Surveyors found that the facility failed to provide timely toileting assistance and call bell response for multiple residents who were dependent on staff for ADLs. A resident with Parkinson’s disease and dementia, care planned for two-hour toileting checks, was found by family with urine-saturated clothing and wheelchair cushion after a CNA admitted not changing or checking on the resident for most of a shift, and documentation showed numerous missing toileting and check entries over several months. Another resident with a history of stroke and MI, requiring maximal assist for toileting, reported long waits for morning care while the call bell rang, with staff not responding for extended periods, and the resident’s representative described multiple episodes of call bell waits exceeding an hour. Resident Council minutes, call bell audits, and observations showed repeated long call bell wait times, including bells ringing for 15–45 minutes while various staff passed the rooms without responding, and a spouse reported frequent overnight calls from a resident seeking help because call bells were unanswered.
A resident with bowel incontinence and new-onset loose, watery stools and nausea had a physician and NP order for a stool bacterial detection panel with C. difficile and a GI PCR, along with PRN Zofran. Over subsequent shifts, documentation showed the resident remained incontinent of bowel and that the ordered stool collection was repeatedly marked on the TAR as "not administered, unable to obtain" by LPNs, despite multiple incontinence episodes. There was no documentation that the NP or physician were notified that the ordered stool specimen had not been collected, even though facility policy required practitioner notification when orders were not carried out and the physician and NP later stated they expected to be informed if a lab test they ordered was not completed.
A resident with vascular dementia, behavioral disturbances, and dependence for transfers and toileting was sent to the hospital for suspected GI bleeding, with documentation indicating an unplanned hospital transfer and anticipated return. An IDT meeting held earlier did not document any discharge planning, and the resident’s care plan lacked a planned discharge. While the resident remained hospitalized, the facility issued a same-day discharge notice citing inability to meet needs and endangerment to others, based on interference from the resident’s guardians rather than documented resident behavior, and later did not accept the resident back after medical clearance. The medical record contained no IDT discharge plan and no subsequent nursing or social work notes, demonstrating a lack of documented discharge planning and coordination.
Failure to Respond to Pulse Oximetry Alarms for Tracheostomy-Dependent Resident
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to ensure that a resident requiring respiratory care and continuous pulse oximetry monitoring received services consistent with professional standards of practice and the resident’s care plan. The resident had spastic quadriplegic cerebral palsy, severe hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy, and chronic respiratory failure, was severely cognitively impaired, and was totally dependent on staff for all ADLs. The care plan and physician’s orders required mechanical ventilation with CPAP to tracheostomy collar overnight, humidified trach collar oxygen during the day, and maintenance of oxygen saturation above 92%, with pulse oximeter alarm parameters set to alert below 92%. The resident was equipped with a pulse oximeter linked to the Vocera alert system, which generated alarms at the bedside and on staff mobile devices when oxygen saturation fell outside ordered parameters. On the day of the incident, the resident’s oxygen saturation dropped to 84% at 8:58 AM, triggering an alert to the primary RN via the Patient Safe Solutions/Vocera system, followed by sequential escalation to the buddy RN, the charge RN, and the RT when not acknowledged. The Call Point Detailed Activity Report showed that an alert was sent to the primary RN at 8:58 AM, to the buddy RN at 8:59 AM, and to the charge RN and RT at 9:01 AM. The primary RN pressed “Accepted” on the device at 9:04 AM, and again when the system alerted at 9:17 AM and 9:18 AM, but did not go to the resident’s room to assess the resident and did not document any assessment or intervention. The buddy RN reported not recalling hearing the alert and stated they were administering medications and unaware of the resident’s distress until the rapid response was called. The charge RN acknowledged receiving the alert but did not respond timely, stating they expected the primary or buddy nurse to respond. The RT stated they received the alert but were busy with other residents and expected other staff to respond. From 8:58 AM to 9:23 AM, no assigned nurse or RT responded to the alarms or performed a clinical assessment of the resident, and the alarm cycle continued without intervention. At 9:23 AM, a second alert was triggered when the resident’s oxygen saturation dropped to 52%. An RN who was not assigned to the resident heard an alarm while passing the room, entered, and found the resident in a wheelchair, unresponsive with gray skin. This RN activated a rapid response/Code Blue, assisted in returning the resident to bed, and another RN began chest compressions. EMS was called and arrived at 9:44 AM; a pulse was briefly restored, and the resident was placed on a ventilator and transferred to the hospital, where they were determined to have no brain activity. Life support was later terminated and the resident expired. The facility’s own investigation concluded that nursing and respiratory staff failed to respond to alarms, failed to appropriately acknowledge and review alerts, failed to maintain accessibility to required communication devices, and failed to escalate when they were occupied or unable to respond, resulting in actual harm and Immediate Jeopardy to the resident and placing other monitored residents at risk.
Removal Plan
- Review camera footage, Patient Safe Solution phone verification notifications, and the pulse oximetry policy.
- Re-educate involved staff on pulse oximetry alarm response, notification handling, and escalation expectations.
- Send voice alarm presentation via email to all assistant nurse managers and assistant directors of nursing for review during evening and morning huddles.
- Ensure Vocera device functionality is reviewed and staff are instructed to keep devices accessible and operational.
- Have IT/MIS check and confirm monitoring equipment is functioning properly.
- Implement disciplinary action for staff involved.
- Discuss and initiate a root cause analysis.
- Review and revise the pulse oximetry policy.
- Provide leadership oversight.
- Implement an audit of alert response times.
Elopement of High-Risk Resident Through Disabled Stairwell Door Alarm
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to provide adequate supervision and maintain a safe environment for a resident with known exit-seeking behaviors and elopement risk. The resident had diagnoses of Parkinson’s disease, dementia with behavioral disturbances, and anxiety, and was assessed as having moderately impaired cognition. The resident’s MDS documented exit-seeking behaviors and daily use of a wander/elopement alarm, and the comprehensive care plan identified the resident as an elopement risk/wanderer related to disorientation to place, with an intervention for a wandering device on the ankle. A physician’s order also specified a wandering device to the right ankle with checks every shift. The 3rd floor North stairwell door alarm had been disabled by maintenance following a work order dated 07/02/2024. Maintenance and security staff attempted to address a wandering system alarm issue, and the alarm on the 3rd floor North stairwell door was turned off by removing a screw from the alarm box. A yellow plastic accordion-style barrier was placed in front of the door, and nursing staff were notified that the door was broken. However, the door itself remained accessible, and the alarm remained disabled for days prior to the elopement. Staff on the unit, including CNAs, were not all aware that the stairwell door was broken, and the door was not repaired until 07/17/2024. On the day of the incident, video footage showed the resident repeatedly exit-seeking at the 3rd floor North stairwell door over several hours. The resident moved the yellow barrier, wheeled around it, and closed it behind them. At one point, two unidentified staff observed the resident at the door, opened the barrier, and walked away without redirecting the resident. The footage documented multiple attempts by the resident to exit, including attempts to remove the wander alert bracelet and repeated efforts to push on the delayed egress bar with their leg and hands. Eventually, the resident stood from the wheelchair, pushed the crash bar, opened the door, and fell backwards into the stairwell while pulling the wheelchair through. The resident then maneuvered the wheelchair into the stairwell and exited the unit. Staff later discovered the resident missing, found the wheelchair in the stairwell, and the resident was ultimately located outside the building by a visitor and brought back inside by nursing and security. The DON’s investigation summary identified the root cause of the elopement as the 3rd floor North stairwell door alarm being disabled while the door remained broken and unsecured.
Removal Plan
- Resident #1 was placed on 15-minute safety checks and kept under line-of-sight supervision when outside of their room; continued with use of a wander alert device; and resided in a room adjacent to the nursing station for frequent observations.
- All staff were educated on the Elopement policy and what measures to take if a resident went missing, including a power point presentation and post-tests.
- All exit and stairwell doors in the facility on the 2nd and 3rd floors were repaired by an outside vendor.
Failure to Prevent Resident-to-Resident Physical Abuse in Lobby Elevator Area
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to protect a resident from physical abuse by another resident, despite a known history of aggressive behavior. One resident with paraplegia, mood disorder, major depressive disorder, and anxiety disorder had an established care plan noting potential for physical aggression and risk of being abused. Prior documentation showed that this resident had been involved in a physical altercation with another resident in June of the previous year, during which they reported being punched and stated they hit the other resident back. The care plan was updated at that time to reflect that the resident was abused by peers, with interventions including relocation as needed and a psychiatry referral, but later updates reflecting another resident-to-resident altercation did not include new interventions. On the day of the incident, video surveillance and witness statements documented that the aggressive resident and another resident were waiting at the elevator in the lobby, along with other residents. The second resident, who had diagnoses including schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, approached and stood next to the first resident’s wheelchair. The first resident was seen making hand gestures, then removed the left wheelchair armrest and used both hands to swing it toward the second resident. When the second resident reached toward the armrest, the first resident struck them on the forehead with the armrest, causing bleeding and resulting in a bump and small laceration. Staff arrived immediately after the assault and separated the residents, and the injured resident was later assessed and transferred to the hospital for evaluation. Interviews conducted after the event revealed differing accounts of the interaction leading up to the assault. The first resident reported that the second resident had previously used a racial epithet toward them and, on the day of the incident, again stood close, touched their shoulder, and repeated the racial epithet, prompting them to remove the armrest and strike the other resident. The second resident stated they were standing at the elevator, heard the first resident saying something, ignored it, and were then struck without warning. A security guard reported hearing the first resident tell the second resident not to stand close and to stop touching them, then observed the first resident swinging the armrest and hitting the second resident. Facility staff, including the RN Supervisor and DON, acknowledged that the incident occurred off the unit, that the aggressive resident had a history of verbal and physical abusive behavior toward staff, and that this was the first documented physical altercation between these two specific residents. Despite prior behavioral incidents and care plan documentation of aggression risk, the resident was on 30‑minute checks and was able to access and weaponize a removable wheelchair armrest in a common area, resulting in physical abuse of another resident.
Failure to Timely Respond to Oxygen Alarm and Report Suspected Neglect
Penalty
Summary
Facility staff failed to immediately report an alleged incident of neglect involving a resident who was dependent on respiratory support and continuous monitoring. The resident had spastic quadriplegic cerebral palsy, severe hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy, chronic respiratory failure, was severely cognitively impaired, and totally dependent on staff for all ADLs. On the date of the incident at 8:58 AM, the resident’s alert alarm indicated decreasing oxygen levels, but nursing and respiratory staff did not respond to the alarm or assess the resident in a timely manner, in deviation from the facility’s pulse oximetry escalation pathway and alarm response procedures. The resident was later found unresponsive with gray skin, and a Code Blue was initiated. CPR was started, and the resident was transferred to the hospital, where they were determined to have no brain activity; life support was later terminated and the resident expired. Although the facility’s policy required that alleged or suspected violations involving mistreatment, neglect, or other reportable events be reported to the State Survey Agency and other appropriate authorities no later than 2 hours after forming the suspicion if serious bodily injury occurred, or within 24 hours otherwise, the incident was not reported in accordance with these time frames. The incident occurred on one date, the Administrator was not notified until a later date, and the New York State Department of Health was not notified until four days after the event. The DON stated they were unaware that staff had failed to respond to the alerts until reviewing the alert system report and interviewing staff, and also stated they were unaware the incident should have been reported to the Department of Health, while the Administrator confirmed they had not been notified of the Code Blue on the day it occurred.
Failure to Implement Effective Infection Surveillance and Outbreak Reporting
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to maintain and implement an effective infection prevention and control program during a norovirus outbreak and in its ongoing surveillance activities. During a norovirus gastroenteritis outbreak, the facility identified multiple residents with gastrointestinal illness on two units, as documented on an infection control tracking sheet for a single date. The facility’s policy on routine infection control surveillance required ongoing assessment of all residents for changes in symptoms or conditions indicative of infection, but surveillance tracking was only completed for one day and was not continued or updated with symptoms or management throughout the outbreak. The DON and the Infection Preventionist (IP) both acknowledged that surveillance tracking sheets should have been completed daily during the outbreak and that they did not know why this was not done. The facility also did not comply with state reporting requirements related to the outbreak. After the cluster of gastrointestinal illness cases was identified, the NYSDOH sent an email to the DON stating that submission of a Nosocomial Outbreak Reporting Application report was required for a single case of a reportable pathogen in a nursing home resident or a cluster of cases above baseline. The DON stated they were aware of this email but confirmed that the requested outbreak report was never submitted to NYSDOH. The DON further stated that NYSDOH should have been contacted immediately when the outbreak was discovered, and that they were not the DON at the time and did not know why the previous DON failed to submit the report. In addition to the outbreak-related issues, the facility’s ongoing infection surveillance line lists for several months were incomplete. The Infection Control Line List for January, February, and March documented residents on antibiotic therapy for various infections, including wound infections, respiratory infections, urinary tract infections, bacteremia, and Clostridium difficile. However, these line lists lacked documentation of infection signs and symptoms, diagnostic tests and laboratory results, the type of precautions used, and any indication of outbreak potential. During interview, the IP confirmed that they used the line list for surveillance and monitoring of residents with infections and on antibiotics, but acknowledged that the lists did not include the required clinical details and precautions. The DON also stated that the IP was responsible for ensuring surveillance included signs and symptoms, diagnostic tests with results, and precautions to prevent outbreaks.
Incomplete and Inaccurate Medication Administration Documentation for a Resident
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to maintain complete and accurately documented medical records in accordance with accepted professional standards for one resident. For this cognitively intact resident with essential hypertension, adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety and depressed mood, major depressive disorder, and dementia, standing medication orders included multiple daily and twice-daily medications such as antihypertensives, antidepressants, an anticoagulant, a diuretic, an antianginal patch, an inhaler, and other agents. The facility’s medication administration policy required that medications be administered in accordance with physician orders, that documentation of administration be completed on the computer immediately after administration with the nurse’s initials at the corresponding date and time, and that at the end of each shift the medication nurse review the MAR, 24‑hour report, and nurses’ notes to ensure documentation is accurate and complete. Record review of the medication administration audit report for multiple dates in December 2024 showed discrepancies between the scheduled 9:00 a.m. administration times and the times documented as administered for this resident’s medications. On thirteen separate dates, all medications scheduled for 9:00 a.m. were documented as being administered after 12:00 p.m. but before 1:00 p.m. when a particular RN was passing medications to this resident. These documented times did not align with the scheduled administration time and were inconsistent with the policy requirement that medications be given at the right time and documented immediately after administration. The pattern of late documentation occurred on each of the identified dates when that RN was responsible for the medication pass for this resident. In interviews, the RN who administered the medications stated that the resident received most medications at 9:00 a.m. and some at 5:00 p.m., and described issues such as the computer timing out after about 10 minutes, logging the nurse out, and situations where medications might have been given earlier but not clicked off in the system. The RN reported that the documented times (for example, showing around 12:00 p.m.) might not be accurate, could reflect late documentation, and could be affected by computer glitches, but could not recall specific details from the December dates. The Assistant DON reported that one nurse on the unit was responsible for administering medications to approximately 38–40 residents, that the incoming nurse’s start of shift included a narcotic count and report that delayed the start of the medication pass to about 8:30 a.m., and that this left about two minutes per resident to complete the pass by 10:00 a.m. The Administrator stated that their expectation was that nurses review the MAR at the end of the shift and that unit managers run a monthly report, while the Pharmacy Consultant stated they did not review MARs and assumed nursing conducted internal auditing. These practices and conditions contributed to incomplete and inaccurate medication administration documentation for the resident on the identified dates.
Failure to Inform Residents of Grievance Process and Document Grievances and Resolutions
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure residents were informed about the grievance process and that grievances were documented and tracked in accordance with its grievance policy. The Social Services/Admissions Coordinator, identified as the Grievance Officer, reported that while they interviewed residents and emailed Administration about complaints they could not resolve, they were unable to provide a grievance log or grievance forms. During resident council, multiple residents stated they voiced concerns in the meeting but did not know how to file grievances outside of that setting, and there was no documented evidence listing grievances or the facility’s responses. The DON stated that grievances should be monitored by Social Services with documentation of the nature of the complaint and the resolution, but acknowledged that the process was informal, dependent on circumstances, and not completely clear, with no forms or documentation used to track grievance progress and resolution. For one resident reviewed for care planning, the facility did not consistently address and document multiple grievances raised by the resident’s representative. This resident had diagnoses including cerebral infarction, occlusion and stenosis of the left carotid artery, and myocardial infarction, with the admission MDS indicating moderately impaired cognition and involvement of the resident and family in assessment and goal setting. The representative reported numerous concerns regarding miscommunication between nursing and rehabilitation, discharge planning, appointment scheduling, call bell response time, personal property, resident preferences, nutrition, and proper diet, all of which were communicated to Administration via email and paper copies. Although a family meeting was held to discuss these concerns, the Social Services/Admissions Coordinator and the DON confirmed there was no documented evidence of how each grievance was addressed or resolved, and that most concerns were handled verbally without formal documentation or investigation of every complaint.
Failure to Provide Timely Toileting Assistance and Call Bell Response
Penalty
Summary
Surveyors identified a deficiency in the facility’s failure to provide necessary assistance with toileting and timely response to call bells for residents who were unable to perform activities of daily living independently. Facility policy on Activities of Daily Living required that residents receive appropriate treatment and services to maintain or improve their ability to carry out ADLs, including elimination and toileting, and the facility’s No Pass policy required all staff to respond to call lights and obtain help if they could not provide it themselves. Despite these policies, multiple observations, interviews, and record reviews showed that residents did not consistently receive timely toileting care or call bell responses. One resident with Parkinson’s disease, dementia, heart disease, severely impaired cognition, and total dependence on staff for toileting and hygiene was care planned to be checked for incontinence and changed as needed, and to have toileting needs anticipated every two hours with assistance to the toilet. Kardex instructions for several months reiterated two-hour toileting checks and assistance, and CNA documentation reports for January through March showed numerous missing entries for toileting and two-hour checks across multiple shifts. A nursing home investigative report documented that a family member found this resident with urine-saturated clothing and wheelchair cushion in the afternoon, and the Administrator confirmed the saturation. The CNA identified as responsible for ADLs and accountability tasks for that shift stated they did not change the resident at all during the eight-hour shift, did not perform end-of-day care, and did not inform anyone that they were unable to care for the resident, and also stated they did not check on the resident until late morning. There was conflicting documentation on the assignment sheet, and another CNA reported that the resident was checked every two hours and could indicate when cleaning was needed, while a second family member reported having observed a strong urine smell on three Sunday visits in recent months, which staff addressed when notified. Another resident with a history of stroke and myocardial infarction, and moderately impaired cognition, required maximal assistance with toileting and moderate assistance with bathing and dressing. During one observation, this resident’s call bell was ringing, and the resident reported having waited a long time for care and stated they had been waiting since early morning; staff did not respond until several minutes after the surveyor’s observation began, at which time morning care was provided. On another day, the shared room call bell was ringing while two residents in the room reported they were still in bed, unwashed, undressed, and waiting to get out of bed, stating they had been waiting about half an hour; staff arrived to assist approximately 18 minutes after the surveyor’s initial observation. The resident’s representative reported multiple episodes when call bell response times exceeded one hour and had communicated these concerns to staff. The DON stated that call bells should be responded to when heard and that 30–60 minutes was not acceptable, but also indicated that response time depended on staffing. Additional evidence of delayed call bell response and unmet toileting needs came from Resident Council minutes, call bell audits, and direct observations. Resident Council minutes over several months documented ongoing resident reports that call bell wait times were “on the longer side” and “too long,” and that more nursing staff were needed, particularly on weekends when residents reported only three CNAs were often scheduled. Facility call bell audits conducted in response to complaints documented 23 observations, including one call bell active for 45 minutes and another for 15 minutes in the same room. During one observation, a room call bell rang for at least 14 minutes while multiple staff, including a CNA, a medication nurse, a social work/admissions coordinator, and a unit clerk, passed the room without entering; when the CNA finally entered, the resident requested a bedpan and the CNA left and did not return with the bedpan for another 10 minutes. In another observation, a room call bell rang for at least 27 minutes while a medication nurse, social work/administration staff, and a unit clerk were present in the hallway or nearby but did not respond to the bell. A spouse reported receiving at least 10 overnight phone calls from a resident asking them to call the nurses’ station because no one was responding to the call bell, and also reported that it took a long time for the nurses’ station to answer the phone.
Failure to Collect Ordered Stool Specimen and Notify Practitioner of Uncompleted Lab Test
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to ensure that a resident received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards and practitioner orders when a stool specimen was not collected as ordered, and the ordering practitioners were not notified. The facility’s policy dated 05/2025 required that when a physician or other authorized practitioner’s order is not carried out as ordered, delayed, modified, or discontinued, the practitioner must be notified. Resident #124 had diagnoses including moderate persistent asthma, essential hypertension, and spinal stenosis, and was documented as always incontinent of bowel and dependent on staff for toileting and hygiene per the care guide, care plan, and admission MDS. On 12/11/2024, the resident developed loose, watery stools and nausea, and the physician and NP were notified, resulting in orders for a stool bacterial detection panel with C. difficile and Zofran as needed. On 12/11/2024, nursing documentation showed that the resident had an episode of loose watery stool in the morning, with the physician notified and an order given to collect stool for testing. Later that day, an RN documented that the resident had nausea and loose stool, that the NP was made aware, and that stool collection and Zofran were ordered. The NP progress note that evening documented watery stool, ordered a GI PCR to rule out gastroenteritis, and planned to monitor the resident, noting stable vitals and a mildly elevated white blood count. The functional abilities record showed the resident was incontinent of bowel on multiple shifts on 12/11/2024, 12/12/2024, and 12/13/2024. The Treatment Administration Record for December 2024 documented the stool test order on 12/11/2024 and 12/12/2024, with entries by LPN #2 and LPN #3 indicating the stool collection was “not administered, unable to obtain.” Despite repeated incontinence episodes that could have provided opportunities to obtain a specimen, there was no documented evidence that the NP or physician were notified that the ordered stool sample had not been collected. A nursing progress note on 12/12/2024 at 2:24 A.M. documented that the resident was alert, able to make needs known, had poor appetite, good fluid intake, an episode of emesis after drinking water too fast, and was feeling better afterward, but did not address the outstanding stool order. During interviews, LPN #3 acknowledged awareness of the stool collection order and documented “not administered” on two shifts but did not write a note indicating that the NP or physician had been informed that the specimen was not obtained. The LPN Unit Manager stated that whether to notify the NP or physician when a stool sample was not collected was handled on a case-by-case basis. In contrast, the Medical Director/Primary Physician and NP #1 both stated they expected to be informed if a lab test they ordered, such as a stool specimen, was not completed, and NP #1 indicated they might have added additional orders and reminded staff to collect the stool if they had known it was not obtained.
Failure to Provide Appropriate Discharge Planning and Readmission for Hospitalized Resident
Penalty
Summary
Surveyors identified that the facility failed to ensure an appropriate discharge plan for one resident who was hospitalized for a suspected gastrointestinal bleed. The resident had vascular dementia with behavioral disturbances, sequelae of cerebral infarction, constipation, and atrial fibrillation, and was dependent for toileting and transfers with documented verbal and physical behaviors toward others. After the resident vomited coffee-ground emesis, the physician ordered a transfer to the hospital emergency department to rule out a GI bleed, and the discharge MDS reflected an unplanned discharge to a short-term general hospital with return anticipated. An interdisciplinary care plan meeting held prior to the hospitalization included multiple disciplines, the resident’s companion, and two guardians, but there was no documentation that discharge planning was discussed, and the resident’s care plan contained no evidence of a planned discharge. While the resident was in the hospital, the facility issued a same-day Transfer/Discharge Notice stating that the IDT had determined the resident would be discharged that day, citing that the resident’s needs could not be met after reasonable accommodation and that the safety and health of individuals in the facility would be endangered. The notice identified interference from the resident’s two guardians as the evidence supporting these reasons, but there was no documentation that the resident personally endangered the health or safety of others. The notice included information about the right to appeal the discharge, and the discharge was appealed. When the resident was medically cleared to return, the facility did not accept the resident back. Review of the electronic medical record showed no documented IDT discharge plan and no nursing progress notes after the date of hospital transfer, and no social work progress notes after that time, indicating a lack of documented planning and coordination related to the discharge decision.
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.



