Altercare Newark North Inc.
Inspection history, citations, penalties and survey trends for this long-term care facility in Newark, Ohio.
- Location
- 151 Price Road, Newark, Ohio 43055
- CMS Provider Number
- 365481
- Inspections on file
- 25
- Latest survey
- July 30, 2025
- Citations (last 12 mo.)
- 1
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Altercare Newark North Inc. during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
A resident with multiple respiratory and cardiac diagnoses was admitted with a physician's order for scheduled Ipratropium-Albuterol nebulizer treatments every 6 hours. The order was incorrectly transcribed into the EMAR as a PRN (as needed) medication instead of scheduled. The error was identified two days after admission during a review of the new admission checklist and was confirmed by the DON.
The facility's kitchen was not maintained in a clean and sanitary manner, affecting all 68 residents who consumed food from it. Observations revealed issues such as an open, unlabeled package of bacon, food splatter on meal trays, and dirty, broken kitchen tiles. The dishwasher failed to reach the required temperature for proper sanitation, and attempts to fix it were unsuccessful. The facility's policy required daily cleaning to ensure sanitation, which was not followed.
The facility did not conduct the required two-step tuberculin skin test (TST) for two newly hired employees, a Staff Coordinator and an Activities Coordinator. This oversight was confirmed during an interview and had the potential to affect all 68 residents.
The facility failed to monitor and document the nutritional status of several residents, leading to significant weight changes that were not addressed. A resident experienced a significant weight loss, which was not addressed in her medical records, and there was inconsistent documentation of her meal intake. Another resident experienced significant weight changes that were not addressed, and a reweigh was not completed as required. A third resident experienced drastic weight fluctuations, with only one nutritional note addressing a weight gain, and no interventions were discussed for other significant changes. Additionally, a resident was not administered the prescribed nutritional supplement, leading to weight loss.
The facility failed to notify physicians of significant weight changes for three residents, as identified through medical record reviews and interviews. A resident experienced significant weight fluctuations, including an 18.6% loss and a 12.3% gain, without physician notification. Another resident lost 11.1% of their weight over six months, and a third resident had multiple significant weight changes, all without physician notification. The dietitian informed nursing staff of these changes, but they did not notify the physicians.
A facility failed to ensure a resident, who required substantial assistance for bathing, received baths or showers per her preferences. Despite consistent refusals over several months, there was no documented plan to address these refusals or offer alternatives. Staff confirmed that refusals were documented but not reported to the physician, and the resident expressed dissatisfaction with her bathing schedule.
A resident with a complex medical history experienced four unwitnessed falls over two months, yet the facility failed to conduct additional fall risk assessments. Despite the resident's cognitive intactness and conditions like end-stage renal disease and difficulty walking, the initial assessment indicated no fall risk. Interviews with staff confirmed the lack of reassessment, which contradicted the facility's Fall Prevention policy requiring assessments with significant changes.
A facility failed to justify the use of psychotropic medications for a resident with multiple diagnoses, including dementia. The resident's care plan included monitoring and non-pharmacological interventions, but physician orders for medications like Seroquel and Celexa lacked specific diagnoses. The DON confirmed the absence of appropriate diagnoses, noting dementia was not suitable for these medications.
A resident with intact cognition and multiple diagnoses was found with unsecured medications on his bedside table without a nurse present. The LPN initially believed the resident had taken his morning medications, but upon returning, found them still there. Facility policy required observation to ensure ingestion, which was not followed, leading to the deficiency.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment and multiple diagnoses was not provided the prescribed mechanical soft diet, as observed during a breakfast meal. Despite a physician's order to downgrade the diet due to food pocketing, the resident received a sausage patty cut into pieces larger than quarters. The kitchen was not updated with the correct diet order, and the diet change was not communicated to the kitchen.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment and multiple diagnoses did not receive timely laboratory tests as ordered by the physician. Despite a stat order for a CBC and CMP due to bilateral edema, the tests were delayed by four days, and a subsequent CBC order was not completed. The facility's contract with the lab specified 24/7 stat services, which were not adhered to, leading to a deficiency finding.
A resident was recorded without consent by an agency STNA in the common area, violating the facility's privacy policy. The STNA admitted to recording the resident and herself dancing, claiming it was a playful moment. The incident was reported by another STNA who saw the video on social media. The facility's investigation confirmed the recording but found no willful intent to harm.
A facility failed to transcribe physician orders and obtain blood sugars for a resident with diabetes and other medical conditions. The resident's hospital transfer orders required finger stick blood sugars before meals and at bedtime, but there was no documented evidence that these orders were followed. The DON confirmed the oversight.
A resident with a postoperative wound infection did not receive the ordered wound vacuum treatment due to procedural errors and miscommunication. The wound vacuum was delayed and not applied, as the agency nurse was unfamiliar with its use, and the treatment administration record was incorrectly scheduled. This led to the resident being transferred back to the hospital for evaluation.
Incorrect Transcription of Scheduled Respiratory Medication Order
Penalty
Summary
A deficiency occurred when a resident's physician-ordered medication for Ipratropium-Albuterol, intended to be administered by nebulization every 6 hours on a scheduled basis, was incorrectly transcribed into the facility's Electronic Medication Administration Record (EMAR) as an as-needed (PRN) medication rather than as a scheduled dose. This error was identified during a review of the resident's medical and hospital discharge records, which showed that all other medications were transcribed correctly except for this respiratory treatment. The resident had diagnoses including influenza, chronic pain, acute and chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia, and heart failure, making accurate respiratory medication administration critical. The Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed in an interview that the breathing treatment order was not entered into the EMAR as prescribed by the physician. The facility's new admission check-off list was completed two days after the resident's admission, at which point the transcription error was discovered. The resident also brought the issue to the DON's attention, and the error was subsequently corrected. However, the resident left the facility against medical advice shortly after. Facility policy requires that medications be administered as prescribed and in accordance with good nursing practices, which was not followed in this instance.
Kitchen Sanitation and Dishwasher Deficiencies
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain the kitchen in a clean and sanitary manner, which had the potential to affect all 68 residents who consumed food from the kitchen. Observations revealed several issues, including an open, unlabeled, and undated package of bacon in the refrigerator, and a silver cart with meal trays covered in food splatter and debris. The kitchen had missing, broken, and chipped tiles under the dishwasher, with a buildup of dirt and dust. The oven hood and the wall above it were covered in grease stains, and the wall next to the oven had dark drip stains. Additionally, the window blinds near the dishwasher were dirty, covered in food splatter, and broken, while the kitchen flooring was chipped and broken in multiple places. The ceiling had food splatters and stains, and areas around ceiling vents were covered in dust. The dishwasher was observed to have been run multiple times without reaching the expected temperature of 180 degrees Fahrenheit, and the sanitation level was insufficient to sanitize the dishes. Dietary Coordinator #181 confirmed these observations and reported that chemicals were added to counteract the low temperature, but the sanitation level remained inappropriate. Despite attempts to fix the dishwasher, it continued to fail in meeting temperature and sanitation requirements. The facility's policy, dated January 2020, stated that all kitchen areas should be cleaned daily to ensure proper sanitation, which was not adhered to in this instance.
Failure to Conduct Tuberculosis Testing for New Employees
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that two new employees, a Staff Coordinator and an Activities Coordinator, were tested for tuberculosis as required by the facility's tuberculosis risk assessment. The risk assessment specified that healthcare workers should undergo a baseline two-step tuberculin skin test (TST) upon hire and with exposure, with the results maintained in the employees' files. However, upon review of the employee files, it was found that these two employees, hired on August 5, 2024, did not have the two-step TST performed. This oversight was confirmed during an interview with the Staff Coordinator, who acknowledged that the tests were not completed. This failure had the potential to affect all 68 residents in the facility, as the facility census was 68.
Failure to Monitor and Address Nutritional Needs
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to adequately monitor and document the nutritional status of several residents, leading to significant weight changes that were not addressed. Resident #53 experienced a significant weight loss of 18.6% over one month and 19.6% over three months, which was not addressed in her medical records. Despite being admitted to hospice care, there was no nutrition assessment completed to address her significant change in condition. Additionally, there was inconsistent documentation of her meal intake, and her significant weight changes were not addressed according to the facility's policy. Resident #14 also experienced significant weight changes, with a weight loss of 11.1% over six months and 12.4% over three months, followed by a significant weight gain of 8.5% over one month. These changes were not addressed in her medical records, and a reweigh was not completed as required. The dietitian's annual nutrition progress note did not address these significant weight changes, indicating a lack of monitoring of the resident's nutritional status. Resident #21 experienced drastic weight fluctuations, including a 39% weight gain in one week and a 31% weight gain over 50 days. Despite these significant changes, there was only one nutritional note addressing a weight gain, and no interventions were discussed or implemented for the other significant weight changes. Resident #37, who was at risk for altered nutrition, was not administered the prescribed nutritional supplement when consuming less than 50% of meals, leading to a 7% weight loss in one month. The lack of adherence to physician orders and inadequate documentation contributed to the deficiencies in the residents' nutritional care.
Failure to Notify Physicians of Significant Weight Changes
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to notify physicians of significant weight changes for three residents, which was identified during a review of medical records and interviews. Resident #53 experienced a significant weight loss of 18.6% over one month and 19.6% over three months, followed by a significant weight gain of 12.3% over three months. Despite these changes, there was no evidence that the physician was notified. Interviews with the Regional Nurse Consultant and Registered Dietitian confirmed that the dietitian generated reports of significant weight changes and informed nursing staff, who were responsible for notifying the physician, but this did not occur. Resident #14 experienced a significant weight loss of 11.1% over six months and 12.4% over three months, with no evidence of physician notification. Similarly, Resident #21 had multiple significant weight changes, including a 39% weight gain in one week and an 11% weight loss in six days, without documentation of physician notification. The facility's process involved the dietitian notifying nursing staff of significant weight changes, but the nursing staff failed to notify the physicians, as confirmed by interviews with the Regional Nurse Consultant and Registered Dietitian.
Failure to Address Bathing Preferences and Refusals
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a dependent resident, who was cognitively intact and required substantial assistance for bathing, was able to take baths or showers according to her preferences. The resident, who had a complex medical history including syncope, cardiac arrest, and cognitive communication deficit, among other conditions, consistently refused baths and showers over a period of several months. Despite these refusals, there was no documented plan or mechanism in place to address the resident's preferences or refusals, nor was there evidence that alternatives were offered as per the care plan. The facility's staff, including an LPN and the DON, confirmed that refusals were documented but not reported to the physician or addressed with alternative solutions. The resident expressed dissatisfaction with not receiving baths or showers as desired, and there was no documentation indicating that the physician was notified to discuss the refusals or explore potential changes in the resident's medical condition that might explain her behavior. This lack of communication and planning contributed to the deficiency in providing adequate care for the resident's activities of daily living.
Failure to Reassess Fall Risk After Multiple Falls
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to adequately assess a resident after multiple falls to ensure they remained in the safest environment possible. The resident, who was cognitively intact, had a complex medical history including end-stage renal disease, repeated falls, and difficulty walking, among other conditions. Despite these factors, the resident's fall risk assessment, conducted shortly after admission, indicated they were not at risk for falls. No subsequent fall risk assessments were completed after the resident experienced four unwitnessed falls over a two-month period. Interviews with facility staff, including the Regional Nurse Consultant and the Director of Nursing (DON), confirmed the absence of additional fall risk assessments following the falls. The DON acknowledged that the falls were related to changes in the resident's condition, such as adjusting to a new environment and refusals to attend dialysis. The facility's Fall Prevention policy mandates fall risk assessments upon admission, quarterly, with significant changes, and annually, but these were not adhered to in this case, leading to a deficiency in maintaining resident safety.
Lack of Justification for Psychotropic Medication Use
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure proper justification for the use of psychotropic medications for a resident, affecting one out of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The resident had a range of diagnoses, including rhabdomyolysis, fracture of nasal bones, paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, dysphagia, chronic diastolic heart failure, hemiplegia and hemiparesis affecting the left non-dominant side, cerebral infarction, and unspecified dementia. The resident's comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment indicated severely impaired cognition. Despite these conditions, the facility did not provide appropriate diagnoses for the psychotropic medications prescribed, including Seroquel, Celexa, and Haloperidol. The resident's plan of care included interventions such as monitoring for side effects, offering non-pharmacological approaches, and consulting psychological or psychiatric services. However, the physician orders for psychotropic medications lacked specific diagnoses, with some orders indicating target behaviors like refusal of care instead of a medical diagnosis. An interview with the Director of Nursing confirmed that the necessary diagnoses were not included in the orders for the antipsychotics and antidepressants, and dementia was not an appropriate diagnosis for these medications.
Medication Security Lapse for Resident
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that medications were secured appropriately for Resident #223, who was observed with a medication cup containing nine pills on his bedside table without a nurse present. The resident, who had intact cognition, was admitted with diagnoses including hallucinations, rhabdomyolysis, spinal stenosis, epilepsy, alcohol abuse, and atherosclerotic heart disease. The resident's physician orders included several medications to be administered in the morning, but there was no indication in the medical record that the resident was authorized to self-administer medications. During an interview, an LPN reported that she believed the resident had taken his pills when she initially gave them to him. However, upon returning to the room, she found the pills still present and verified they were the resident's morning medications. The facility's policy on medication administration required that residents be observed to ensure the complete ingestion of medications, which was not adhered to in this instance. This oversight led to the deficiency as the resident's medications were not secured and were left unattended.
Failure to Provide Correct Diet Texture
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide a resident with the diet texture as ordered, affecting one of five residents reviewed for nutrition. The resident, who had severe cognitive impairment and multiple diagnoses including metabolic encephalopathy and chronic kidney disease, was observed eating a breakfast meal that did not comply with the prescribed mechanical soft diet. Despite a physician's order to downgrade the resident's diet due to food pocketing, the resident was served a sausage patty cut into pieces larger than quarters. An interview with a Transitional Nurse Specialist revealed that the kitchen had not been updated with the correct diet order, and a Regional Nurse Consultant confirmed that the diet change was never communicated to the kitchen.
Failure to Obtain Timely Laboratory Tests
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to obtain laboratory tests as ordered by the physician for Resident #24, who was admitted with multiple diagnoses including dementia, anxiety disorder, and hypertension. On 12/09/24, the resident exhibited bilateral edema, prompting the nurse to contact the physician, who ordered stat laboratory blood tests, specifically a complete blood count (CBC) and a complete metabolic panel (CMP). However, the laboratory did not draw the resident's blood until 12/13/24, four days after the initial order, without any documentation explaining the delay. Further, on 12/16/24, another order for a CBC was placed, but the laboratory results from 12/16/24 to 01/07/25 did not include the CBC. The Director of Nursing confirmed that the facility did not ensure the completion of the laboratory tests as ordered. The contract with the laboratory indicated that stat services were available 24/7, with results to be reported within five hours, yet this protocol was not followed. This deficiency was investigated under Complaint Number OH00161041.
Unauthorized Recording of Resident by Agency STNA
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that residents were not recorded without their consent or knowledge, affecting one resident who was recorded by an agency State Tested Nursing Assistant (STNA) in the common area. The resident, who had an intact cognition for daily decision-making abilities, did not recall the event and reported no issues or concerns with caregivers. The agency STNA admitted to recording the resident and herself dancing, claiming it was a playful moment without malicious intent. The incident was reported by another STNA who saw the video on social media and recognized the resident and the facility. The facility's investigation revealed that the agency STNA recorded the resident without consent, which violated the facility's policy on videotaping and photographing residents. The policy mandates that residents be protected from invasion of privacy through unauthorized recordings. Despite the agency STNA's claim of no ill intent, the facility determined that the recording occurred, although it could not substantiate willful intent to harm. The agency STNA was placed on a Do Not Return list, and the staffing agency was notified of the incident.
Failure to Transcribe Physician Orders and Obtain Blood Sugars
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that physician's orders were transcribed and blood sugars were obtained as ordered for a resident. The resident, who was admitted with multiple diagnoses including a fracture of the right lower leg, anemia, anxiety, liver laceration, right talus fracture, and diabetes, had hospital transfer orders for finger stick blood sugars to be taken before meals and at bedtime. However, a review of the facility's physician orders, treatment, and medication administration record showed no documented evidence that these orders were transcribed or that the blood sugars were obtained. An interview with the Director of Nursing confirmed that the order for finger stick blood sugars was not carried over or completed. This deficiency was investigated under a specific complaint number.
Failure to Provide Ordered Wound Care Treatment
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide the ordered wound care treatment for a resident who was admitted with a postoperative wound infection. The resident was discharged from the hospital with specific orders for a wound vacuum system to be applied to the left upper anterior thigh/groin area, with changes scheduled for Mondays and Thursdays. However, the wound vacuum was not applied as ordered, and the resident's wound was left open to air, leading to the resident being transferred back to the hospital for evaluation. The deficiency occurred due to a series of miscommunications and procedural errors. The Director of Nursing (DON) revealed that a new process for ordering the wound vacuum was in place, but the order was not received by the supplier on time, resulting in a delay. Although the wound vacuum eventually arrived, it was not applied because the agency nurse on duty was unfamiliar with its application. Additionally, the treatment administration record (TAR) was incorrectly scheduled, and there was no documentation of alternative treatment while the wound vacuum was unavailable. This oversight affected the resident's care and was investigated under a specific complaint number.
Latest citations in Ohio
A resident with intact cognition receiving Medicare Part A skilled services for metabolic encephalopathy had services discontinued while benefit days remained, but the facility did not issue the required Skilled Nursing Facility Advance Beneficiary Notice (SNF ABN). The Social Services Director later confirmed that no SNF ABN was provided and reported she believed only a Notice of Medicare Non-Coverage (NOMNC) was needed when all skilled services were stopped. This practice conflicted with the facility’s written policy, which required SNF ABNs to be issued when extended care items or services were initiated, reduced, or terminated due to expected non-coverage by Medicare.
Surveyors identified that the facility exceeded the acceptable medication error rate when two residents with type 2 DM received insulin doses that were not administered according to orders or manufacturer instructions. In two separate observations, an LPN administered Novolog and another LPN administered insulin glargine and insulin lispro without priming the insulin pens, and the insulin lispro and Novolog were given after the residents had already consumed a significant portion of their breakfast meals, despite orders for administration before meals. Manufacturer information for both insulin products required priming before each injection to ensure accurate dosing, and facility policy required medications, including insulin, to be administered safely, timely, and in accordance with prescriber orders and specified time frames.
Surveyors found that the facility failed to document tray line food temperatures for multiple meals served from two dining room kitchenettes, despite having a “Trayline Taste & Temperature Log” and a policy requiring food to be stored, prepared, distributed, and served according to professional food safety standards. Review of logs showed repeated missing entries for breakfast, lunch, and dinner services in both the Harrison and McClellan dining areas, and the Senior Director of Culinary Services confirmed that temperatures had not been recorded for those meals, potentially affecting all residents receiving meals from those kitchenettes.
The facility failed to conduct and document required periodic care conferences for two residents, despite multiple comprehensive, quarterly, and significant change MDS assessments and a policy requiring periodic care conferences with resident and/or family participation. One resident with Parkinson’s disease, post-stroke hemiplegia, TIA, DMII, and depression had only two documented care conferences over a year, while another resident with aphasia, cerebrovascular disease, DMII, gait difficulty, coagulation defect, depression, and muscle weakness had no documented care conferences in the past year, aside from a declined invitation to the representative. The UCC confirmed that care conferences were expected to occur quarterly and that no additional documentation existed for either resident.
A resident with Alzheimer's disease and type II DM, who required extensive assistance with ADLs and was receiving scheduled Lantus and sliding-scale Humalog, experienced a severely elevated blood glucose level. The on-call provider was notified and ordered an additional dose of lispro insulin with a directive to recheck the blood glucose after administration. Nursing staff administered the extra insulin but did not document any follow-up blood glucose check, and the DON confirmed that this reevaluation was required by the facility's abnormal blood glucose policy and was not completed or documented.
A resident with Parkinson’s disease, dementia, and hypothyroidism was prescribed levothyroxine once daily along with other medications. A consultant pharmacist’s monthly drug regimen review recommended that levothyroxine be given in the morning on an empty stomach, 30–60 minutes before food, per manufacturer instructions. The medical record contained no documented physician response to this recommendation, and the MAR showed the drug scheduled for morning administration while the resident was observed eating breakfast and receiving the medication at the same time. An LPN confirmed administering levothyroxine during the meal, and the DON verified there was no documentation explaining whether or why the pharmacist’s recommendation was or was not followed, resulting in a failure to act on and document the identified irregularity.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment, multiple comorbidities, documented gait and balance abnormalities, and a high fall risk was care planned and assessed by therapy to require contact guard assistance and use of a gait belt for transfers and ambulation. While being assisted by a CNA from a recliner to the bathroom with a walker, the CNA did not apply a gait belt, even though the resident had a known tendency to lean backward when standing. As the CNA reached to open the bathroom door, the resident lost balance and fell backward, striking the back of the head, and was later found by an LPN without a gait belt in place, contrary to the facility’s gait belt policy and the resident’s assessed needs.
A resident with CKD stage five requiring peritoneal dialysis (PD) was admitted with pre-admission physician orders for three daily PD exchanges and monitoring for peritonitis (fever, abdominal pain, cloudy effluent), but these monitoring orders were not entered into the facility’s physician orders. The care plan referenced PD and general monitoring but did not specifically address peritonitis monitoring. Paper PD flowsheets showed incomplete and inconsistent documentation of exchanges and resident condition, including missing condition/comments for individual treatments and no record of one ordered PD exchange. The PD cycler flowsheet lacked effluent descriptions on multiple days. The PD nurse reported facility staff were expected to monitor effluent and symptoms, and the DON confirmed the absence of specific peritonitis monitoring orders, lack of an order for the PD cycler, and documentation gaps, despite a facility policy requiring ongoing assessment and monitoring for complications before, during, and after dialysis treatments.
A nurse was observed preparing multiple oral medications for a resident with depression, traumatic brain injury, anxiety, and impaired cognition by pushing tablets and capsules from unit-dose cards directly into her ungloved hand and then using her fingers to place them into a medication cup. In a follow-up interview, the RN confirmed this practice and acknowledged that the correct procedure is to dispense medications directly from the card into the cup, contrary to the facility’s medication administration policy requiring adherence to good nursing principles and practices.
A resident with Alzheimer’s disease, diabetes, anxiety, significant ADL dependence, and behavioral symptoms was observed seated in a chair positioned against the nursing station with a locked wheelchair placed directly in front, also against the nursing station, effectively restricting movement. An LPN confirmed both wheelchair wheels were locked and that it should not have been placed there, while a CNA stated she had positioned the wheelchair to prepare for lunch, was unable to complete the transfer, and left it in place, acknowledging this was wrong. This arrangement conflicted with the facility’s restraint policy, which prohibits physical restraints except when alternatives are ineffective for treating a medical symptom and defines restraints as devices adjacent to the body that cannot be easily removed and that restrict freedom of movement or access to the body.
Failure to Issue Required SNF ABN When Discontinuing Medicare Part A Services
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to issue a Skilled Nursing Facility Advance Beneficiary Notice (SNF ABN) when Medicare Part A services were discontinued for a resident who still had available benefit days. The resident was admitted with a diagnosis of metabolic encephalopathy and had intact cognition per the Minimum Data Set assessment. The facility’s own SNF Beneficiary Notification Review documented that Medicare Part A skilled services began on 02/11/26 and the last covered day was 03/11/26, and that the facility initiated discharge from Medicare Part A services before the resident’s benefit days were exhausted. Despite this, no SNF ABN was provided to the resident or the resident’s representative. During interviews, the Social Services Director stated that the SNF ABN was issued hours prior to the last covered day but, upon reviewing her files, confirmed that no SNF ABN had actually been issued for this resident. She further explained that she believed an SNF ABN was only required if one skilled service remained and that if all skilled services were being discontinued, only the Notice of Medicare Non-Coverage (NOMNC) needed to be issued. The Administrator, however, stated that a resident should always receive both a SNF ABN and a NOMNC when Medicare Part A services are discontinued and benefit days remain. Review of the facility’s written policy dated 03/28/23 showed that the facility was required to issue SNF ABNs for initiation, reduction, or termination of extended care items or services when Medicare payment was not expected, which did not occur in this case.
Plan Of Correction
This Plan of Correction is submitted as required under State and Federal law. This Plan of Correction does not constitute an admission on the part of the Facility that the findings cited are accurate, that the findings constitute a deficiency or that the scope and severity regarding the deficiency cited are correctly applied. Any changes to the Facility's policies and procedures should be inadmissible in any proceeding on that basis. Without admitting or denying the validity or the existence of the alleged noncompliance, the Facility submits this Plan of Correction with the intention that it be inadmissible by any third party in any civil or other action against the facility or any employee, agent, officer, director or shareholder of the Facility. The Facility is utilizing this Plan of Correction as its allegation of substantial compliance as of 05/29/2026 F-0582 Corrective action for resident/s: On 5/14/26 Resident #34 was informed of rights and responsibilities related to Advanced Beneficiary Notice and voiced understanding of information for future reference by administrator. Identification of other residents who may be affected: Any resident receiving skilled services from nursing or therapy services. The Administrator audited all residents who were discharged from skilled services in the past 30 days to ensure they were issued a Notice of Non-Coverage and Advanced Beneficiary Notice on 5/29/26. No non-compliance was noted. Measures for systemic change: On 5/14/2026 Business Office Manager, Director of Rehab, Minimum Data Set nurse, Director of Nursing and Social Services Director were educated on proper procedure of issuing of Notice Of Medicare Non Coverage and Advanced Beneficiary Notice by administrator. All upcoming discharges from skilled services will be reviewed weekly at Utilization Review meeting to ensure notices will be delivered timely. How Corrective Action will be monitored: Administrator or designee to complete audits of all residents being discharged from skilled services to ensure they were issued a Notice of Non-Coverage and Advanced Beneficiary. This audit will be completed weekly x 4 weeks, then monthly x 2 months. Corrective action will be initiated for any noted non-compliance. Audit findings will be reviewed as part of the monthly quality assurance process to determine the need for further monitoring. Date of Compliance 5/29/26
Insulin Administration Errors and Failure to Prime Insulin Pens
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to maintain a medication error rate below 5%, with surveyors identifying 3 errors out of 28 medication administration opportunities, resulting in a 10.71% error rate. For one resident with type 2 diabetes mellitus and moderate cognitive impairment, the physician’s order directed Novolog insulin 10 units via subcutaneous pen-injector to be given before meals. During an observed medication pass, the LPN administered 10 units of Novolog insulin without priming the pen and did so after the resident had already consumed approximately 50% of the breakfast meal. The LPN later confirmed she did not prime the pen and acknowledged that the insulin was ordered to be administered prior to meals. Manufacturer instructions for the Novolog FlexPen specified that an air shot (priming) must be performed before each injection to ensure proper dosing. Another resident, also diagnosed with type 2 diabetes mellitus and with intact cognition, had orders for insulin glargine 35 units subcutaneously twice daily and insulin lispro 20 units subcutaneously before meals, plus 12 units subcutaneously if blood glucose was between 251 mg/dL and 300 mg/dL. During an observed medication administration, an LPN administered 35 units of insulin glargine and 32 units of insulin lispro without priming the insulin pens and after the resident had consumed approximately 90% of the breakfast meal, despite orders for insulin lispro to be given before meals. The LPN later stated she could not remember if she had primed the pen and acknowledged that the insulin was ordered to be administered prior to meals. Manufacturer information for insulin lispro stated that the pen must be primed before each injection to confirm insulin delivery and remove air, and that failure to prime could result in too much or too little insulin. The DON confirmed the expectation that insulin be administered as ordered, including priming each pen with two units before dialing the prescribed dose, and facility policy required medications, including insulin, to be administered safely, timely, and in accordance with prescriber orders and required time frames.
Plan Of Correction
This Plan of Correction is submitted as required under State and Federal law. This Plan of Correction does not constitute an admission on the part of the Facility that the findings cited are accurate, that the findings constitute a deficiency or that the scope and severity regarding the deficiency cited are correctly applied. Any changes to the Facility's policies and procedures should be inadmissible in any proceeding on that basis. Without admitting or denying the validity or the existence of the alleged noncompliance, the Facility submits this Plan of Correction with the intention that it be inadmissible by any third party in any civil or other action against the facility or any employee, agent, officer, director or shareholder of the Facility. The Facility is utilizing this Plan of Correction as an allegation of substantial compliance as of 5/29/2026. F-0759 Corrective action for resident/s: Residents #21 and #22 were assessed and evaluated by nurse and Director of Nursing 5/14/26. Resident #21 and #22 both denied any adverse effects and none were noted upon assessment by the Director of Nursing on 5/14/2026. Notification made to physician on 5/14/2026. LPN # 2 competency Eval on insulin administration with the Director of Nursing completed 5/14/2026. Identification of other residents who may be affected: Diabetic residents on assignment of LPN #2/station 2 have the potential to be affected and were assessed by the DON/Designee on 5/14/26 and found to be within normal limits. Measures for systemic change: All Nurses were educated by the Director of Nursing on the steps for Insulin administration per competency, diabetes clinical protocol policy, Medication and treatment orders policy, administering medications policy, and Obtaining fingerstick Glucose Level policy On 5/14/2026. How Corrective Action will be monitored: Director of Nursing and Assistant Director of Nursing will complete insulin administration audits on 5 nurses. This audit will be completed weekly x 4 weeks, then monthly x 2 months. Corrective action will be initiated for any noted non-compliance. Audit findings will be reviewed as part of the monthly quality assurance process to determine the need for further monitoring. Date of Compliance: 5/29/2026
Failure to Document Tray Line Food Temperatures in Dining Room Kitchenettes
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to document tray line food temperatures for meals served from the Harrison and McClellan Dining Room kitchenettes, as required by professional standards for food service safety and the facility’s own policy. Review of the “Trayline Taste & Temperature Log” (revised September 2018) showed missing temperature documentation for multiple meals from the Harrison Dining Room kitchenette, including dinner on 03/30/26 and 03/31/26, lunch and dinner on 04/01/26 and 04/02/26, dinner on 04/07/26, and lunch and dinner on 04/08/26 and 04/10/26. The Senior Director of Culinary Services confirmed during interview that tray line food temperatures were not documented on the log for these meals. Similarly, review of the same log for the McClellan Dining Room kitchenette revealed that tray line food temperatures were not documented for dinner on 04/01/26, breakfast and lunch on 04/02/26, and lunch and dinner on 04/07/26. The Senior Director of Culinary Services also verified these omissions during interview. The facility census at the time was 27 residents, and the governing “Food and Nutrition” policy, approved on 09/07/21, stated that the facility must store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety.
Plan Of Correction
F812 The facility will continue to ensure food temperatures are completed before meals are served for all residents. To ensure compliance with this standard the following measures have been taken: 1. Immediately 4/15/26 culinary supervisor #224 was re-educated by Dietary Manager to this standard and policy "Food and Nutrition" which includes documentation of food temperatures. 2. All dietary staff have been re-educated to the standard and policy "Food and Nutrition" during the month of April 2026. 3. Audits of food temperature documentation to be completed by Dietary Manager 4 x per week for 4 weeks then weekly for 4 weeks. 4. Administrator to validate audits/compliance and provide additional training as needed. Administrator will present to QAPI committee for ongoing monitoring and further direction.
Failure to Conduct and Document Required Care Conferences
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to complete and document comprehensive care conferences at required intervals in accordance with care plan regulations and facility policy. For one resident with Parkinson’s disease with dyskinesia, cognitive communication deficit, hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction, transient cerebral ischemic attack, type II diabetes mellitus, and major depressive disorder, the record showed multiple MDS assessments over a one-year period, including annual, quarterly, and significant change assessments. However, only two care conferences were documented during the last 12 months, despite the expectation that care conferences be conducted quarterly with the resident and family when possible. The Unit Care Coordinator confirmed that no additional care conference documentation existed for this resident beyond the notes dated 04/21/25 and 01/02/26. A second resident, with diagnoses including aphasia following cerebrovascular disease, cerebral infarction, type II diabetes mellitus, unsteadiness on feet, difficulty in walking, coagulation defect, depression, and muscle weakness, also had multiple MDS assessments completed over the review period, including quarterly and annual assessments. The record contained a note that a care conference was offered to the resident’s representative, who declined to attend, but there was no documentation of any care conferences for the most recent 12 months. The Unit Care Coordinator confirmed that no other care conference documentation was available for this resident. Facility policy stated that periodic care conferences involving the resident, family, and the interdisciplinary team are part of the care planning process, but the required periodic care conferences and corresponding documentation were not completed for these two residents.
Plan Of Correction
THIS PLAN OF CORRECTION SERVES AS BERKELEY SQUARE'S CREDIBLE ALLEGATION OF SUBSTANTIAL COMPLIANCE AS OF June 1, 2026. Without admitting or denying the validity or existence of the alleged deficiencies, Berkeley Square provides the following Plan of Correction: F657 The facility will continue to document completion of care conferences at the required intervals for all residents, including residents #04 & #15. To ensure compliance with this standard the following measures have be taken: 1. The social service designee and the inter- disciplinary team were re-educated by the administrator to the facility policy "Care Conference" on 4/29/26 and verbalized understanding. 2. Care conferences for resident #04 and resident #15 were conducted on or before 4/29/2026 by the interdisciplinary team. 3. Review of all other residents was conducted by the social service designee to validate and ensure that care conference schedule is up to date with timely care conferences scheduled for them on 4/15/2026. Audits of care conferences to be completed weekly for four weeks and then monthly after that by the social service designee. Documentation of the care conference including any identified concerns in the medical record. Administrator to validate audits/compliance and provide additional training as needed. Administrator will present results of these audits to QAPI committee for ongoing monitoring and further direction.
Failure to Reevaluate Blood Glucose After Treatment for Hyperglycemia
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a resident with diabetes received treatment in accordance with professional standards of practice when nursing staff did not reevaluate the resident's blood glucose after treatment for severe hyperglycemia. The resident, admitted with diagnoses including Alzheimer's disease, type II diabetes mellitus, and depression, had physician orders for Humalog insulin on a sliding scale before meals, Lantus insulin 25 units daily, and lisinopril 5 mg daily. The resident required extensive assistance with activities of daily living, including transfers, toileting hygiene, eating, and bathing. On the evening in question, the resident's blood glucose was documented as 532 mg/dL, and the on-call provider was notified. The provider gave a new order to administer an additional 8 units of lispro (Humalog) and to recheck the blood glucose in 30 minutes. The electronic medication administration record showed that the blood glucose of 532 mg/dL was obtained at 9:00 p.m. and that the additional 8 units of lispro were administered at 9:21 p.m. However, there was no documentation in the resident's chart that the blood glucose was rechecked after the additional insulin was given. In an interview, the DON confirmed there was no evidence of reevaluation and verified that, according to the facility's "Abnormal Blood Glucose Procedure" policy, the resident should have been reevaluated and that the evaluation step should have been included in the progress note documentation.
Plan Of Correction
F684 The facility will continue to ensure all residents, including #03, receive treatment in accordance with professional standards of practice and reevaluated for hyperglycemia. To ensure compliance with this standard the following measures have been taken: 1. The director of nursing assessed resident #03, reviewed documentation and orders and found no ill effects immediately 4/16/26. 2. All licensed nurses were re-educated to facility policy "Blood Glucose Monitoring" by the Director of Nursing/designee in April 2026. 3. Audits of like-residents that require blood sugar checks to be completed by the director of nursing/designee two times a week for 4 weeks and then monthly after that to validate correct follow through when there is abnormally high blood glucose result. The Administrator will bring results of these audits to the QAPI committee for ongoing monitoring and further direction.
Failure to Act on Pharmacist Drug Regimen Recommendation for Thyroid Medication
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to ensure that pharmacy recommendations from the monthly drug regimen review were acted upon and documented for a resident. The resident was admitted with diagnoses including Parkinson’s disease, dementia, and hypothyroidism, and had current physician orders for levothyroxine 150 mcg once daily, buspirone 50 mg twice daily, and losartan 100 mg once daily. A medication regimen review dated 11/25/2025 included a consultant pharmacist recommendation that levothyroxine be administered consistently in the morning on an empty stomach, at least 30–60 minutes before food, per manufacturer instructions. There was no specific physician response in the medical record to this recommendation, and the facility’s policy stated that consulting pharmacist reviews are sent to nursing and addressed with the primary care provider or consulting specialist for review and follow-up. Review of the resident’s medication administration record for April 2026 showed levothyroxine scheduled for 9:00 a.m. On observation, the resident was seen eating breakfast in the dining area at 8:03 a.m., and an LPN reported administering the levothyroxine 150 mcg to the resident while the resident was in the dining area eating breakfast. The DON confirmed there was no evidence in the resident’s medical record explaining why the consultant pharmacist’s recommendation from 11/25/2025 was or was not acted upon. This lack of documented physician review and action on the pharmacist’s identified irregularity constituted noncompliance with the drug regimen review requirements.
Plan Of Correction
F756 The facility will continue to ensure the pharmacy recommendations from the monthly drug regimen review by a licensed pharmacist are acted upon for all residents, including #08. To ensure compliance with this standard the following measures have been taken: 1. Resident #08 was assessed by the registered nurse and med review completed by 4/28/26. After review of resident's drug regime's, it was discovered that resident #8 had 2 separate medication recommendations on the same form, to be reviewed by two separate practitioners, pharmacy has been instructed and agreed to separate meds on individual forms. 2. Licensed nurses re-educated to facility policy "Drug Regimen Review" by Director of nursing/designee in April 2026 and no later than 5/8/26. Licensed nurses are responsible for ensuring the reviews and recommendations are given to the physician for timely review. 3. Review of all other current residents Drug Regimen orders completed by Director of nursing/designee on 4/16/26 to ensure recommendations were followed up on/reviewed by the physician and address concerns if needed. 4. Audit of drug regime recommendations, pharmacy recommendations, and physician follow up to be completed weekly for four weeks by the Director of nursing/designee. Administrator will present results of these audits to the QAPI committee for ongoing monitoring and further direction.
Failure to Use Required Gait Belt During Ambulation Resulting in Resident Fall
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to ensure that a required gait belt was used while assisting a high fall‑risk resident with ambulation, resulting in a fall with head injury. The resident had multiple diagnoses including metabolic encephalopathy, hypertension, osteoarthritis, muscle weakness, gait and mobility abnormalities, major depressive disorder, anxiety, and visual hallucinations. Admission and subsequent MDS and fall risk assessments documented that the resident was severely cognitively impaired, required moderate to maximal assistance with transfers and ambulation, could not independently come to a standing position, exhibited loss of balance while standing, used an assistive device, and had decreased muscle coordination. The resident had a history of falls prior to admission and was assessed as being at high, later moderate, risk for falls. The resident’s fall care plan identified her as at risk for falls and included interventions such as providing maximum to moderate assistance with transfers and walking short distances, use of a walker and wheelchair, and following the facility’s fall protocol. Therapy notes and care conference documentation indicated that the resident leaned backwards when standing, required contact guard to minimal assistance for bed mobility and transfers, and needed constant verbal cueing for safe sequencing during toilet transfers. The physical therapist confirmed that the resident was to use a gait belt with staff when ambulating, and the DON verified that therapy had assessed the resident as requiring contact guard assistance and a gait belt for ambulation and transfers. On the day of the incident, a CNA was assisting the resident from her recliner to the bathroom using a walker. The CNA walked beside the resident, providing guidance and support, and reported having a hand on the resident while assisting her. As they approached the bathroom door, the CNA reached for the doorknob to open it, and at that moment the resident began to lose her balance and fell backwards to the floor, striking the back of her head. The nurse who responded found the resident on her back at the foot of the bed with her feet near the bathroom, noted a red raised area on the back of the head, and documented that the resident was not wearing a gait belt and that the gait belt was on the dresser. In the facility’s investigative summary and in interviews, the CNA acknowledged that she did not have a gait belt on the resident while ambulating her, despite the resident’s assessed need for hands‑on assistance and gait belt use per facility policy and the resident’s care and therapy plans.
Failure to Implement PD Orders and Monitor Resident Receiving Peritoneal Dialysis
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to implement pre-admission physician orders for peritoneal dialysis (PD) and to provide ongoing monitoring for a resident with chronic kidney disease (CKD) stage five who required PD. Pre-admission orders dated 11/14/25 specified three daily PD exchanges at 6:00 A.M., 2:00 P.M., and 10:00 P.M., and directed staff to monitor for signs and symptoms of peritonitis, including fever, abdominal pain, and cloudy effluent. These monitoring orders were not entered into the facility’s physician orders. The resident’s care plan noted the need for PD and included general monitoring interventions (labs, signs of bleeding, bacteremia, septic shock, and significant vital sign changes), but did not specifically address the ordered monitoring for peritonitis. Review of PD documentation showed incomplete and inconsistent charting of treatments and resident condition. The paper peritoneal flowsheet had columns for time of PD and condition/comments, including instructions to call the nurse immediately for cloudy fluid, abdominal pain, or fever. However, the first entry on 11/15/26 at 2:00 P.M. only noted that the PD nurse completed the exchange, and the 10:00 P.M. entry that day had no condition/comment documentation. Subsequent days (11/16/25, 11/17/25, and 11/18/25) contained only one condition/comment entry per day rather than for each exchange, and there was no documentation that the 6:00 A.M. PD on 11/18/25 was completed. The PD cycler flowsheet starting 11/19/25 lacked any description of the effluent on multiple days. The PD nurse from the dialysis company stated facility staff were expected to monitor effluent for cloudiness and assess for abdominal pain and fever, and the DON confirmed there was no electronic physician order for peritonitis monitoring or for use of the PD cycler, that the paper charting did not allow for effluent description or symptom documentation for each treatment, and that PD was not documented at one ordered time. The facility’s dialysis policy required ongoing assessment and monitoring for complications before, during, and after treatments, which was not reflected in the documentation for this resident.
Improper Infection Control During Medication Administration
Penalty
Summary
Surveyors identified a deficiency in infection prevention and control related to medication administration for Resident #29. The resident was admitted on 02/28/14 with diagnoses including depression, traumatic brain injury, and anxiety, and had impaired cognition per a quarterly MDS assessment. During an observation on 03/25/26 at 6:58 A.M., RN #281 prepared the resident’s medications by removing an Amoxicillin-Pot Clavulanate tablet from the medication card and pushing it directly into her ungloved hand, then using her fingers to place the pill into a medication cup. The same process was observed for multiple other medications, including Escitalopram Oxalate, Furosemide, Sennosides, Lyrica, and Vitamin D, each being pushed from the card into the RN’s ungloved hand and then transferred by her fingers into the medication cup before administration to Resident #29. In a subsequent interview at 7:27 A.M. the same day, RN #281 confirmed she had placed each medication into her ungloved hands prior to administration and acknowledged that the proper procedure was to push the pills directly from the card into the medication cup. Review of the facility’s “Medication Administration – General guidelines” policy, revised 10/08/25, stated that medications are to be administered in accordance with good nursing principles and practices. This practice failure was cited as a deficiency under Complaint Number 2681777.
Improper Use of Wheelchair as a Physical Restraint
Penalty
Summary
Surveyors identified a deficiency related to the facility’s failure to ensure a resident was free from physical restraints. Resident #7, admitted with diagnoses including Alzheimer’s disease, diabetes mellitus, and anxiety disorder, was documented on a recent MDS as rarely understood and dependent for ADLs except eating. The resident ambulated independently on the unit without an assistive device and had documented verbal and other behaviors occurring one to three days during the look-back period. The care plan noted the resident had potential to be physically aggressive, chase staff, throw objects, and be combative with care, with interventions such as offering choices, administering medications as ordered, and intervening early when agitation occurred. During an observation and interview, Resident #7 was found sitting in a chair with the right arm of the chair positioned against the nursing station and a wheelchair placed directly in front of him. The left arm of the wheelchair was also against the nursing station, and both wheelchair wheels were locked, creating a barrier that appeared to restrain the resident, who was sleeping with his knees touching the locked wheelchair. An LPN confirmed both wheelchair wheels were locked and that the wheelchair should not have been placed in front of the resident. A CNA reported she had placed the wheelchair there in preparation to get the resident up for lunch, was unable to transfer him, and left the wheelchair in that position, acknowledging it was wrong to keep it there. The facility’s physical restraint policy stated that physical restraints are not used except when alternatives are not appropriate or effective for treating a medical symptom and defined physical restraints as any device attached or adjacent to the body that the individual cannot easily remove and that restricts freedom of movement or access to the body.
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.



