Arbors At Streetsboro
Inspection history, citations, penalties and survey trends for this long-term care facility in Streetsboro, Ohio.
- Location
- 1645 Maplewood Dr, Streetsboro, Ohio 44241
- CMS Provider Number
- 365718
- Inspections on file
- 35
- Latest survey
- March 3, 2026
- Citations (last 12 mo.)
- 20
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Arbors At Streetsboro during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
A deficiency was cited for not ensuring a resident's right to dignity, self-determination, communication, and the exercise of their rights. The report does not specify the exact circumstances or individuals involved.
Two residents were found in unsanitary conditions, including soiled linens, strong urine odors, and the presence of gnats, with staff confirming that soiled items and spills were not promptly addressed. One resident, with hemiplegia and incontinence, was left in a room with wet pads and soiled clothes, while another, with a urinary catheter and dementia, frequently spilled urine and refused housekeeping, resulting in unclean and odorous living spaces.
The facility failed to protect residents from various forms of abuse and neglect, including physical, mental, and sexual abuse, as well as physical punishment, by any individual.
A resident with multiple medical conditions was repeatedly served carrots, a documented food dislike, despite clear dietary records and tray tickets specifying alternative vegetables. Photographic evidence and staff interviews confirmed that the resident received meals inconsistent with her stated preferences, in violation of facility policy.
The facility's assessment, intended to determine necessary resources for resident care, was incomplete and lacked essential information, such as the names of key personnel and staffing requirements. This deficiency was confirmed by the Administrator.
The facility failed to properly secure and dispose of sharp objects, affecting six ambulatory residents on the 600 unit. An observation revealed a treatment cart with an open compartment containing used syringes, lancets, and a needle, without a second receptacle for securing these items. An LPN verified the exposed sharp objects, which violated the facility's policy for a safe environment.
A resident with intact cognition was found with three skin tears of unknown origin after a shower and smoke break. The injuries were documented by a nurse but not reported to the DON or state agency as required. The facility's policy mandates immediate investigation and reporting of such injuries, which was not followed, leading to a deficiency.
A resident with intact cognition was found with three skin tears of unknown origin, but the facility failed to investigate or report the injuries within the required time frame. The registered nurse documented the injuries but did not notify the DON or on-call nurse, and the LPN present did not conduct an investigation. The facility's policy requires immediate investigation and reporting, which was not followed, leading to a delay in reporting to the state agency.
The facility failed to provide therapeutic activities for its residents, affecting three individuals. A resident with severe cognitive impairment was observed lying in bed with minimal engagement, despite a care plan for daily socialization. Another resident, mostly bed-bound, reported a lack of activity staff visits and exclusion from outings, leading to boredom. A third resident, who is cognitively intact, stated that the activity calendar was not followed, and he had to buy his own puzzle books for entertainment. The facility did not adhere to its policy of providing activities based on residents' preferences and needs.
A facility failed to maintain a clean and monitored refrigerator for a resident. A mini refrigerator was found with an outdated temperature log and a dirty interior with a pink dried substance. An RN confirmed these findings. The facility's policy requires daily temperature checks and cleaning by housekeeping, which was not followed.
A facility failed to use proper PPE during incontinence care for a resident on enhanced barrier precautions. Despite a care plan requiring gowns and gloves for high-contact activities, CNAs provided care without gowns. An RN confirmed the oversight, noting available PPE and signage indicating precautions. The facility's policy to prevent multidrug-resistant organism transmission was not followed.
Two residents at high risk for elopement managed to leave a secured memory care unit without staff knowledge. One resident followed a dietary staff member through a secured door and exited the facility, while the other was found by a staff member on their way to work. The facility failed to respond to wander guard alarms and did not conduct timely headcounts, resulting in these incidents.
The facility failed to report two resident elopements to the State Agency. One resident with dementia was found by police 0.7 miles away, and another resident was located in a church parking lot 1.1 miles from the facility. Both incidents were not reported as required by the facility's policy.
The facility failed to ensure that a resident consistently received a divided plate with all meals as requested, despite the preference being documented on her diet ticket. Observations and interviews confirmed the deficiency, and the resident's care plans did not include this preference.
The facility failed to apply prescribed barrier cream after incontinence care for two residents, both of whom reported discomfort and had no barrier cream applied despite physician orders and care plan instructions.
The facility failed to provide timely dental services for a resident with Alzheimer's dementia, dysphagia, and failure to thrive, who experienced weight loss and had an order for a dental consultation due to improper fitting dentures. Despite the order, the resident was not seen by the dentist during their visit to the facility.
Failure to Honor Resident Rights
Penalty
Summary
A deficiency was identified regarding the failure to honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and the exercise of their rights. The report notes that the facility did not ensure these resident rights were upheld, but does not provide specific details about the actions or inactions that led to this deficiency, nor does it mention any particular events or residents involved.
Failure to Maintain Clean and Sanitary Resident Environment
Penalty
Summary
Surveyors observed that the facility failed to maintain a clean and sanitary environment for its residents. In one instance, a resident was found in a room with a strong odor of urine, a wet and soiled incontinence pad on the bed with dried yellowish-brown stains, and multiple gnats present on the soiled area. Additionally, wet soiled clothes were found on the floor outside the bathroom, and soiled linens were left across the room. The resident reported being left in the wheelchair for an extended period without the area being cleaned, and a CNA confirmed that the night shift had left the room in that condition for several hours. The resident's care plan indicated a need for one to two staff assistance with all ADLs and noted incontinence of bowel and bladder. In another case, a different resident's room and the surrounding hallway had a strong urine odor, and the floor was sticky. The bed had an exposed incontinence pad with dried urine and feces, and the bedside table was sticky with dried spills and debris. Staff interviews confirmed that the resident, who had a urinary catheter and moderate cognitive impairment, would empty the catheter bag without assistance, often spilling urine on the floor and bed sheets. The resident also exhibited behaviors such as refusing housekeeping or personal care, requiring staff to clean the room after the resident left. Facility policies required prompt removal of soiled linens and maintenance of a clean, odor-free environment, which was not followed in these instances.
Failure to Protect Residents from Abuse and Neglect
Penalty
Summary
A deficiency was identified regarding the facility's failure to protect each resident from all types of abuse, including physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by any individual. The report notes that residents were not adequately safeguarded from these forms of mistreatment, indicating lapses in the facility's responsibility to ensure resident safety and well-being. No specific details about the residents involved, their medical history, or their condition at the time of the deficiency are provided in the report.
Failure to Honor Resident Food Preferences
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide meals in accordance with a resident's documented food preferences. The resident, who had diagnoses including diabetes, end stage renal disease, and major depressive disorder, was cognitively intact and required set up assistance with meals. Documentation in the Nutrition Data Collection/Evaluation and Meal Tracker printout indicated that carrots were listed as a dislike for this resident, and the resident's diet was updated accordingly. Despite this, photographic evidence provided by the resident's family showed that carrots were repeatedly served to the resident, even when tray tickets specified other vegetables such as brussel sprouts, whole kernel corn, or broccoli florets. Interviews with the resident's family and facility staff, including the District Director of Dietary and the DON, confirmed that the resident received food items listed on her dislike list for at least three meals. The facility's policy required that individual tray assembly tickets reflect all food items appropriate for the resident based on diet order, allergies, intolerances, and preferences. Both the Regional Director of Dietary and the DON reviewed and verified the photographs, confirming the discrepancy between the resident's documented preferences and the meals served.
Incomplete Facility Assessment Lacks Critical Information
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to complete an accurate and thorough Facility Assessment, which is essential for determining the necessary resources to care for residents competently during both routine operations and emergencies. The assessment, dated from January 2024 through December 2024, lacked critical information, including the names of the Administrator, Director of Nursing, and Medical Director, as well as a review mark. Additionally, it did not specify the type and number of staff required to provide care and services. This deficiency was confirmed during an interview with the Administrator, who acknowledged the assessment's inadequacies.
Failure to Securely Dispose of Sharp Objects
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to properly secure and dispose of sharp objects, which had the potential to affect six ambulatory residents residing on the 600 unit. During an observation, a treatment cart was found with an open compartment containing nine used syringes, three lancets, and one used needle for an insulin injector pen. This compartment lacked a second receptacle for securing these sharp objects, posing a safety risk. A Licensed Practical Nurse verified the presence of these exposed sharp objects at the time of the observation. The facility's policy, titled 'Safe and Homelike Environment,' dated 01/01/2022, mandates providing a safe environment, which includes ensuring that the physical layout does not pose a safety risk to residents.
Failure to Report Injuries of Unknown Origin
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to report injuries of unknown origin to the state agency within the required time frame, affecting one resident. The resident, who had intact cognition and required varying levels of assistance for daily activities, was found with three new skin tears of unknown origin. These injuries were documented by a registered nurse but were not reported to the Director of Nursing (DON) or the state agency as required by facility policy. The incident occurred when the resident, who had been incontinent and more agitated than usual, was taken for a shower by two nurses. After the shower, the resident went out to smoke and returned with blood on her arm and three skin tears. The nurses involved did not notify the DON or the on-call nurse about the injuries, and no Self-Reported Incident (SRI) was initiated on the day of the injury. The facility's policy requires immediate investigation and reporting of injuries of unknown origin, but this was not followed. The DON confirmed that neither she nor the on-call nurse was notified, and an SRI was only opened two days later. The failure to report and investigate the injuries promptly was a clear violation of the facility's policy and state regulations.
Failure to Investigate and Report Injuries of Unknown Origin
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to investigate and report injuries of unknown origin for a resident within the required time frame. The resident, who had intact cognition and required varying levels of assistance for daily activities, was found with three new skin tears of unknown origin. These injuries were documented by a registered nurse, but no immediate investigation or self-reported incident (SRI) was initiated on the day the injuries were discovered. Interviews with the Director of Nursing (DON) and nursing staff revealed that the registered nurse who documented the injuries did not notify the DON or the on-call nurse. Additionally, the licensed practical nurse (LPN) who was present did not conduct any investigation into the cause of the injuries, as they were on orientation and unsure of the procedures. The DON confirmed that neither they nor the on-call nurse were informed of the injuries until two days later, at which point an SRI was opened and an investigation began. The facility's policy on abuse, neglect, and exploitation requires immediate investigation and reporting of injuries of unknown origin. However, the staff failed to adhere to these procedures, resulting in a delay in reporting the incident to the state agency. The policy mandates that such incidents be reported within two hours if they involve abuse or serious bodily injury, or within 24 hours if they do not. This deficiency highlights a lapse in communication and procedural adherence among the facility's staff.
Failure to Provide Therapeutic Activities for Residents
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide therapeutic activities to meet the needs and preferences of its residents, affecting three residents. Resident #47, who has severe cognitive impairment and is dependent on staff for mobility, was observed lying in bed with a flat affect and watching television during multiple observations. The care plan for Resident #47 included daily visits for encouragement and socialization, but the Activity Director admitted that one-on-one activities occurred only once a week and were not documented on the activity calendar. The resident's participation in group activities was minimal, and the facility did not adhere to the care plan's interventions. Resident #2, who has intact cognition but is mostly bed-bound, reported that activity staff did not visit her room for activities and that she was not included in outings. The resident expressed boredom and a desire for more engagement, stating that the activities documented were due to a CNA sneaking her treats from activities. The activity documentation showed limited participation, and the resident felt neglected in terms of being offered activities or outings. Resident #10, who is cognitively intact and dependent on staff for mobility, also reported a lack of engagement from the activity department. The resident stated that the monthly activity calendar was not followed, and he had to purchase his own puzzle books for entertainment. The Activity Director confirmed that one-on-one activities were brief and infrequent, and the resident's care plan for daily visits was not implemented. The facility's policy to provide activities based on residents' preferences and needs was not followed, as evidenced by the limited participation and lack of individualized attention for these residents.
Failure to Maintain Clean and Monitored Resident Refrigerator
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain a safe and clean refrigerator for a resident's personal use. During an observation, a mini refrigerator in the room of a resident was found to have a temperature log dated September 2024, indicating a lack of recent monitoring. The interior of the refrigerator was dirty, with a pink dried substance present. A Registered Nurse confirmed both the outdated temperature log and the unclean condition of the refrigerator. The facility's policy, dated January 1, 2022, requires daily temperature recording and cleaning of resident-owned refrigerators by housekeeping staff, which was not adhered to in this instance.
Failure to Use PPE During Incontinence Care
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to adhere to its infection prevention and control program by not utilizing proper personal protective equipment during incontinence care for a resident on enhanced barrier precautions. Resident #118, who was admitted with diagnoses including chronic peptic ulcer, hypertension, chronic kidney disease stage four, and diabetes mellitus type two, required enhanced barrier precautions as per their care plan. The resident's care plan specified the use of gowns and gloves during high-contact care activities, such as personal hygiene and changing briefs. During an observation, Certified Nurse Assistants (CNAs) #305 and #360 were seen providing incontinence care to Resident #118 without wearing gowns, despite the presence of a sign indicating enhanced barrier precautions and available personal protective equipment outside the room. This was confirmed by Registered Nurse (RN) #347, who acknowledged that the CNAs should have been wearing gowns. The facility's policy on enhanced barrier precautions, which aims to reduce the transmission of multidrug-resistant organisms, was not followed, leading to this deficiency.
Inadequate Supervision Leads to Resident Elopement
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide adequate supervision for a resident who was assessed to be at high risk for elopement. This resident, who resided in a secured memory care unit and had a history of exit-seeking behavior, managed to follow a dietary staff member through a secured door and subsequently eloped from the facility. The resident's wander guard alarmed as designed when he exited through the front door, but staff failed to respond in a timely manner and did not adequately investigate the source of the alarm. The resident was found approximately 0.7 miles away by local police after a neighborhood resident reported seeing him fall. Another incident involved a second resident who also eloped from the facility without staff knowledge. This resident was found by a staff member who was on their way to work. Both residents were identified as being at high risk for elopement, and the facility's failure to supervise them adequately resulted in their unsupervised departure from the premises. The facility's policies and procedures for preventing elopement were not followed, as evidenced by the lack of timely response to alarms and failure to conduct resident headcounts. Staff interviews confirmed that the facility did not adequately monitor residents at risk for elopement, leading to these incidents.
Removal Plan
- Upon discovery Resident #18 had eloped from the facility, a head count was initiated by Licensed Practical Nurses (LPNs) #136 and #137 and all additional residents were accounted for.
- LPN #249 completed a head-to-toe assessment on Resident #18.
- Resident #18 was placed on one-on-one staff supervision, which would continue pending the outcome of a guardianship hearing.
- LPN #144 was notified by the LPD Resident #03 had been located off facility grounds.
- LPN #144 initiated a resident head count to ensure all other residents were accounted for.
- The LPD and Emergency Medical Services (EMS) arrived at the facility with Resident #03. EMS and LPN #144 assessed the resident, and the resident was returned to the secured memory care unit.
- Resident #03 was placed on one-on-one supervision. This would continue while the facility worked with the resident's guardian to determine any additional interventions or alternative placement.
- The DON and LPN/UM #248 reviewed the facility cameras and completed a root cause analysis. It was determined Resident #03 was able to elope when staff exited the secured memory care unit without ensuring no residents were following, lack of timely staff response when the wander guard set off the front door alarm and lack of adequate staff response upon investigating the front door alarm.
- The DON completed a wander guard audit for all residents (#03, #53 and #54) with wander guards to ensure the intervention was appropriate, orders were in place and care plans were updated with no discrepancies identified.
- The DON and LPN/UM #248 reviewed and updated the resident elopement binder to ensure accuracy of information.
- The DON completed a second audit of the facility elopement binder with no discrepancies identified.
- The DON and LPN/UM #248 completed a reassessment of all facility residents for elopement risk. Care plans for residents at risk for elopement (#03, #18, #53 and #54) were reviewed and updated as appropriate.
- An elopement drill was completed by the DON and LPN/UM #248.
- The DON educated all facility staff in-person and by phone on ensuring residents do not follow them through the locked door of the secured memory care unit, the facility policy for elopement, responding to door alarms and missing resident with 100% of staff receiving the education.
- The DON educated all Certified Nursing Assistants (CNA) in-person and by phone on resident supervision, to include checking on residents every two hours, and if unable to locate a resident, to immediately notify the nurse so a headcount of facility residents can be initiated and search conducted per facility policy with 100% of the CNAs receiving the education.
- LPN #249 and LPN #139 completed a whole facility audit of windows and doors to validate all security measures were in place with no concerns identified.
- Dietary Manager (DM) #156 completed one-on-one education with Dietary Aide (DA) #157 to ensure no residents were following when exiting the secured memory care unit.
- The DON/designee would review all risk for elopement assessments and nursing quarterly assessments for four weeks to ensure accuracy and appropriate interventions are in place.
- The DON/designee would observe food carts going off the secured memory care unit five times per week for eight weeks to ensure staff are following procedures to prevent residents from following behind them when exiting the unit.
- The DON/designee would randomly observe staff entering and exiting the secured memory care unit for eight weeks to ensure procedures are followed to prevent residents from exiting the unit.
- The Administrator/designee would complete daily elopement drills on random shifts for two weeks then monthly elopement drills (one on each shift per quarter).
- The DON would review progress notes for all residents daily, Monday through Friday, for any documentation of exit seeking behaviors for four weeks to ensure appropriate interventions are implemented and care plans revised.
- The Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) would continue to identify residents at risk for elopement upon admission/re-admission and change in condition to ensure appropriate interventions are implemented and care planned to address elopement risk.
- DOM #246 would continue to monitor and validate door alarms and function per facility policy and procedures.
- An ad hoc Quality Assurance Performance Improvement (QAPI) committee meeting was held, which included the Administrator, DON, Medical Director (MD) #247, Activities Director (AD) #255 and LPN/UM #248 to review the root cause analysis, policies and procedures and corrective action plan.
- The QAPI Committee met to review the first week audit findings with no concerns identified.
Failure to Report Resident Elopements
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to report incidents of elopement involving two residents to the State Agency, which was identified during a complaint investigation. Resident #03, who had diagnoses including dementia and Alzheimer's disease, eloped from the secured memory care unit. The resident was found by the police approximately 0.7 miles away from the facility, disoriented and on his hands and knees. The facility staff were unaware of the resident's absence until contacted by the police. The incident was not reported to the state agency as required. Resident #18, diagnosed with unspecified dementia and other conditions, was found in a church parking lot 1.1 miles from the facility. The resident had left the facility without informing the staff, which was treated as an elopement. Despite the resident being her own responsible person, the facility did not report this incident to the state agency. The facility's policy required reporting all alleged violations and substantiated incidents to the State Agency, which was not followed in these cases. Interviews with facility staff, including the DON and Regional Directors, confirmed the lack of reporting for both incidents. The facility's failure to report these elopements was an incidental finding during the investigation, highlighting a deficiency in adhering to reporting protocols as outlined in their policy.
Failure to Provide Divided Plate as Requested
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that Resident #42 consistently received a divided plate with all meals as requested. Resident #42, who has diagnoses including Alzheimer's dementia, dysphagia, and failure to thrive, had a documented preference for a divided plate on her diet ticket. However, observations on two separate days revealed that her lunch meals were not served on a divided plate. Resident #42 confirmed that she was not provided with a divided plate as requested on these occasions. Additionally, her current care plans, including the nutritional care plan, did not include information related to her preference for a divided plate. Interviews with the District Manager confirmed that Resident #42's meal ticket indicated a preference for a divided plate due to her desire to keep different food types from touching. Despite this, the facility's policy on Resident Food Preferences, which states that the resident's clinical record should document likes, dislikes, and special dietary instructions, was not followed. This deficiency was investigated under Complaint Number OH00152644.
Failure to Apply Prescribed Barrier Cream After Incontinence Care
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that care planned and physician-ordered protective barrier cream was applied after incontinence care for two residents. Resident #43, who had a stage two pressure ulcer on the right buttock, reported that staff had not been applying the prescribed zinc oxide cream. During an observation, it was confirmed that Resident #43 was not wearing an incontinence brief and had no zinc oxide cream applied, despite the resident stating she had never refused the treatment. This was corroborated by the State tested Nursing Assistants (STNAs) who were present during the observation. Similarly, Resident #53, who had a raw and painful peri area, was also not receiving the prescribed barrier cream. Despite physician orders and care plan instructions to apply zinc oxide cream after each incontinence episode, an observation revealed that no barrier cream had been applied. The Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) confirmed that the cream should have been applied, and the STNA admitted to not applying it. Both residents had intact cognition and were able to communicate their discomfort and the lack of care they received.
Failure to Provide Timely Dental Services
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide dental services as requested for Resident #42, who had diagnoses including Alzheimer's dementia, dysphagia, and failure to thrive. The resident experienced weight loss and had an order for a dental consultation due to improper fitting dentures. Despite the order being placed on 04/02/24, the resident was not seen by the dentist when they visited the facility on 04/16/24. Interviews with the Registered Dietitian, Social Worker, and Director of Nursing revealed a lack of awareness and follow-through regarding the dental concerns and consultation order. The facility's policy on dental services, revised on 10/30/23, stated that residents with lost or damaged dental appliances would be promptly referred for dental services, which was not adhered to in this case.
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.



