Canfield Healthcare Center
Inspection history, citations, penalties and survey trends for this long-term care facility in Youngstown, Ohio.
- Location
- 2958 Canfield Rd, Youngstown, Ohio 44511
- CMS Provider Number
- 365972
- Inspections on file
- 31
- Latest survey
- September 24, 2025
- Citations (last 12 mo.)
- 29 (3 serious)
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Canfield Healthcare Center during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
A housekeeper physically abused a resident by pushing him from his wheelchair, causing a fall and head injury, then choking and punching him. Multiple staff witnessed the incident, and the resident, who had a history of falls and psychiatric conditions, was later sent to the ER for evaluation. The event was reported to authorities and documented as Immediate Jeopardy and Actual Harm.
Two residents with cognitive impairment and behavioral health histories were allowed to leave the facility unsupervised, one without guardian consent and another after a CNA assisted with the exit code. Both residents were later found by police, with one requiring hospital evaluation. The facility did not have effective systems to assess elopement risk, ensure proper LOA authorization, or promptly identify missing residents, and also failed to individualize fall prevention and supervise residents regarding smoking safety.
The facility did not maintain comprehensive, accurate, and timely medical records for several residents, including missing documentation after hospital transfers, incomplete progress notes regarding incidents and care, and multiple late entries. Staff confirmed failures to document key events, notifications, and clinical rationales, contrary to facility policy and professional standards.
The facility did not complete or document required quarterly care conferences for four residents with complex medical and cognitive needs, despite ongoing care plan updates. Record reviews and staff interviews confirmed that care conferences were either not held or not properly documented within the required timeframe, in violation of facility policy.
A resident with co-guardians appointed for personal decisions was allowed to sign consent and declination forms for influenza and COVID-19 immunizations, rather than having the co-guardians provide consent as required. The DON was unsure of the proper consent process and had the resident sign the forms, with no documentation of guardian involvement.
The facility did not notify the legal guardians of two residents about significant events, including a hospitalization and a leave of absence with police involvement. In both cases, staff either failed to consult with the guardian before allowing a resident to leave or did not ensure timely notification after a change in condition, despite facility policy requiring such communication.
A resident with impaired cognition and mental health conditions was subjected to verbal abuse by a CNA, who yelled at the resident to stop crying and threatened to shut the door. The incident was not documented in progress notes, and the resident later reported feeling scared. Facility policy aimed to prevent abuse, but the resident was not protected from staff mistreatment.
A resident who was fully dependent on staff for ADLs, including bathing, did not consistently receive scheduled showers or bed baths as required by facility policy. Documentation and staff interviews confirmed missed care, with some staff citing staffing issues and others unable to explain the lapses, despite the resident's care plan and preferences.
The facility did not ensure that residents who required or preferred one-on-one activities received them as scheduled, and failed to document these activities as required. Several residents with complex medical and psychosocial needs were affected, with staff and activity records showing missed or undocumented visits, and residents reporting that their interests and preferences were not accommodated.
A resident with multiple complex diagnoses experienced a significant change in condition, but the facility failed to notify the appropriate emergency contact due to outdated records and lack of documentation. Staff did not update the emergency contact information after the primary contact's death, nor did they document family notification or the rationale for new medical orders, contrary to facility policy.
A resident with chronic pain was discharged with an inaccurate written discharge summary stating a 30-day supply of Oxycodone, while only a seven-and-a-half-day supply was provided. Interviews with the Regional Nurse and DON confirmed the discrepancy as a clerical error, contrary to the facility's policy on medication reconciliation.
The facility failed to thoroughly investigate an allegation of physical abuse involving a resident with intact cognition and another resident with severe cognitive impairment. Despite the resident's complaints of severe pain and a disheveled bandage, the facility's investigation was incomplete and did not address the physical abuse allegation in detail. The incident was classified as verbal abuse, and the facility did not file a self-reported incident for physical abuse with the Ohio Department of Health.
Failure to Protect Resident from Physical Abuse by Housekeeper
Penalty
Summary
A deficiency occurred when a housekeeper physically abused a resident by pushing the resident in his wheelchair, causing him to fall and hit his head on a medication cart. The housekeeper then placed his hands around the resident's neck and punched him with a closed fist. Multiple staff members witnessed the incident, and the resident was subsequently found sitting on the floor, refusing immediate assessment and assistance. The incident was also captured on video, which showed the housekeeper approaching the resident, placing both hands on the resident's neck/shoulder area, and pushing him out of the frame. Staff members responded to the altercation, and the resident was later transferred to the emergency room for evaluation at his brother's request. The resident involved had a history of multiple medical and psychiatric conditions, including a recent femur fracture, diabetes, repeated falls, substance dependencies, bipolar disorder, depression, insomnia, and anxiety. At the time of the incident, the resident was cognitively intact, required supervision for all activities of daily living, and used a wheelchair for mobility. The care plan identified risks for mood disruptions and falls, with interventions in place for behavioral support and safety education. Despite these interventions, the resident became involved in a verbal altercation with housekeeping staff, which escalated to physical abuse by the housekeeper. Witness statements from staff, including CNAs and LPNs, corroborated the resident's account of being choked, punched, and pushed, resulting in a fall from the wheelchair. The police were called, and a report was filed. The resident reported pain and had a small abrasion on his lower back but declined immediate pain medication and assessment, preferring to wait for his brother before going to the hospital. The incident was reported to the state agency, and the facility's abuse policy defined the actions as physical abuse. The deficiency was cited as Immediate Jeopardy and Actual Harm due to the failure to protect the resident from abuse.
Removal Plan
- Social Service Designee (SSD) #524 separated Housekeeper #582 and Resident #66 and provided for resident safety.
- Housekeeper #582 was suspended pending investigation by the Administrator.
- The Director of Nursing (DON) notified Medical Director #585 and Resident #66's emergency contact/brother of the incident.
- The Administrator notified the local police department.
- The Administrator collected witness statements from facility staff that observed the incident.
- The Administrator changed all of the door codes in the facility (to prevent unauthorized access to the building).
- The Administrator reviewed the facility abuse policy with no changes to the policy deemed necessary.
- The Administrator initiated training on the facility Abuse Policy, Aggressive and Combative Behavior Management Policy, and Resident Rights with all staff, including initiation of a posttest with a theme of Just Walk Away! The training was completed.
- Resident #66 was transferred to the local ER for evaluation per his brother's request.
- SSD #524 interviewed all interviewable residents in facility related to abuse.
- Registered Nurse (RN) #538 completed skin checks on residents unable to be interviewed related to abuse.
- RDCO #578 completed training on Abuse Policy with all staff via OnShift.
- RDCO #578 completed training on policy on Management of Combative and Aggressive Behavior with all staff via OnShift.
- RDCO #578 completed training related to Identifying, Preventing and Managing Aggressive Behaviors with all staff via OnShift.
- RDCO #578 completed training on resident rights policy with all staff via OnShift.
- SSD #524 assessed Resident #66's psychosocial status at baseline psychosocial status.
- The Administrator in collaboration with Healthcare Services Group terminated Housekeeper #582's employment.
- The Administrator reiterated to Human Resources #587 to continue to ensure newly hired employees were educated on the abuse policy upon hire during orientation.
- The facility implemented a plan for SSD #524 to conduct interviews with five employees weekly related to abuse and five residents weekly related to abuse for four weeks, then monthly for two months. Compliance with the interviews would be overseen by the Administrator. Results of the interviews would be reviewed with the Quality Assurance and Performance improvement (QAPI) committee for additional recommendations as warranted.
Failure to Prevent Resident Elopement and Inadequate Supervision
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide adequate supervision and intervention to prevent resident elopement, resulting in two separate incidents where residents left the facility unsupervised and without proper authorization. In the first incident, a resident with a history of psychiatric hospitalization, cognitive disorder, and a court-appointed guardian was admitted to the facility and immediately expressed a desire to leave. Despite being assessed as an elopement risk and having a guardian who instructed staff not to allow unsupervised departures, the resident was permitted to sign out for a leave of absence (LOA) without a physician order or guardian consent. The resident's whereabouts were unknown until police returned him to the facility later that day. Documentation revealed that staff relied primarily on cognitive assessment scores and did not consistently consult with guardians or follow clear protocols for LOA, especially for new admissions or residents with guardianship in place. In the second incident, another resident with severe dementia, mood disorder, and a history of confusion was allowed to exit the facility unsupervised after a CNA entered the door code for him to go outside and smoke. The resident was last seen at the facility in the evening and was later found by police the next morning, disoriented and sleeping behind a gas station half a mile away. The facility's records showed that the resident was not previously identified as an elopement risk, and staff did not recognize the need for increased supervision or the use of a wanderguard. The delay in identifying the resident as missing and the lack of immediate notification to police further contributed to the deficiency. Additionally, the facility lacked adequate systems to identify and manage risks associated with residents leaving the facility unsupervised. There was inconsistency in how staff determined which residents could safely leave, with reliance on cognitive scores and incomplete communication with guardians and families. The facility also failed to individualize fall interventions for another resident and did not adequately supervise several residents regarding smoking and possession of smoking materials, further indicating lapses in accident prevention and supervision.
Removal Plan
- Administrator provided all staff education related to the facility elopement policy and procedures.
- Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) #805 completed wandering assessments for all residents.
- Administrator conducted a facility elopement drill.
- ADON #805 spoke with Resident #13's guardian, related to the resident's ability to leave the facility with supervision.
- DON, Unit Manager #844 and ADON #805 re-assessed all residents for elopement risk.
- The door codes were changed by the door company.
- All residents were reviewed to determine if they were able to go on LOA supervised or unsupervised and orders were written to reflect the findings.
- DON, ADON #805 and Unit Manager #844 consulted with resident families/guardians and physicians to determine resident LOA status.
- DON/designee placed a list of residents (#4, #8, #9, #10, #11, #13, #22, #25, #31, #33, #34, #36, #43, #51, #53, #55, #61, and #66) who were not permitted to go on leave of absence (LOA) unsupervised at both nurses' stations and at the front receptionist area.
- Regional RN #869 reviewed and updated the elopement binders on all units.
- All staff were educated by Regional RN #869, LPN #865, Mobile Business Office Manager #890, Administrator, DON, ADON #805, Regional Director of Environmental Services #891, Dietary Manager #876, and Regional Dietary Manager #892 regarding all residents being required to have a physician order for LOA and if the LOA was required to be supervised or could be unsupervised.
- All staff were educated that nobody was to assist any resident out of the facility for any reason without consulting with the charge nurse who was assigned to that resident.
- Once a staff member confirmed with the nurse that a resident was permitted to go LOA, the staff member must enter the code without the resident seeing the code.
- At no time was it appropriate to give the code to a resident or family.
- Education included the facility door codes would be changed weekly.
- Education included not permitting residents to smoke in front of the facility and only permitting smoking in the designated courtyard.
- DON/designee were assigned to review the LOA list daily in clinical meetings Monday through Friday and updates were to be completed if needed. A new list would be placed at both nursing stations and front desk on an ongoing basis.
- A process was initiated for the DON/designee to review new admissions in clinical meeting for LOA status on an ongoing basis.
- Human Resources (HR) #851/designee was assigned the duty to ensure all new hires were educated on the LOA process on an ongoing basis.
- The facility implemented a plan to conduct elopement drills by the DON/designee on a weekly basis each shift for four weeks then on an as needed basis.
- The DON/designee was scheduled to interview five staff members on the LOA process weekly for four weeks then on an as needed basis.
- The results of all audits were to be reported, reviewed and trended for compliance through the facility Quality Assurance Committee for a minimum of six months then randomly thereafter for further recommendation.
- The Administrator/designee was to observe five smokers weekly for four weeks then on an as needed basis to ensure they were smoking in the appropriate areas.
- The results of all audits were to be reported, reviewed and trended for compliance through the facility Quality Assurance Committee for a minimum of six months then randomly thereafter for further recommendation.
Failure to Maintain Comprehensive and Timely Medical Records
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that progress notes and medical records for multiple residents were comprehensive, accurate, and maintained in chronological order, as required by accepted professional standards. For one resident with complex medical needs, including pressure ulcers and opioid dependence, there were no status updates or discharge documentation after a hospital transfer, and attempts to contact the resident's spouse were not recorded. The admissions director confirmed that tracking and documentation protocols were not followed, especially when the resident was transferred to an out-of-network hospital. Another resident with psychiatric and mobility diagnoses had progress notes that were incomplete and inaccurate. Nursing staff documented a leave of absence but failed to clearly identify which parties were notified, and subsequent notes referenced the wrong date of the event. In a separate case, a resident with impaired cognition and multiple mental health diagnoses experienced a witnessed staff-to-resident verbal abuse incident, but there was no documentation in the progress notes regarding the incident, the investigation, or notifications to the physician, family, or police. Additional deficiencies included multiple late entry notes for a resident with severe malnutrition and cognitive deficits, with staff acknowledging that documentation was not completed timely due to workload. Another resident's record showed a lack of documentation regarding the rationale for a urinalysis order, family notification, and late entries for antibiotic use, with staff confirming that behaviors and notifications were not recorded. The facility's own policy requires timely, accurate, and complete documentation, but these standards were not met in the reviewed cases.
Failure to Complete and Document Quarterly Care Conferences
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that care conferences were completed quarterly for four residents, as required by policy and regulatory standards. Record reviews, interviews, and policy review revealed that care conferences for these residents were either not held or not documented within the required quarterly timeframe. For example, one resident with hemiplegia, aphasia, and dependency for all ADLs had their last documented care conference several months prior to the review, with no evidence provided for more recent conferences. Another resident with ataxic cerebral palsy and schizophrenia had a significant gap between care conferences, despite routine care plan updates. Similar deficiencies were found for two other residents with complex medical and cognitive needs, where care conferences were either not conducted or not documented as required. The facility's policy stated that care plans should be reviewed quarterly and/or with significant changes in care, with attendees signing and dating meeting documents. However, documentation for care conferences was missing or incomplete for the affected residents, despite ongoing care plan revisions. Interviews with the Social Service Designee confirmed the lack of evidence for timely care conferences. This deficiency was identified during a complaint investigation and affected half of the residents reviewed for care conferences.
Failure to Obtain Guardian Consent for Immunizations
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a resident's co-guardians were permitted to exercise their authority to consent or decline influenza and COVID-19 immunizations. The resident, who had diagnoses including ataxic cerebral palsy, epilepsy, nutritional anemia, schizophrenia, and obsessive-compulsive disorder, was admitted with co-guardians appointed for personal decisions. The medical record listed the co-guardians as primary contacts, and official court documents confirmed their status as co-guardians of the person. Despite this, the care plan did not specifically reference the guardians, instead using the term 'resident representative.' Consent forms for both COVID-19 and influenza vaccinations were signed by the resident, who was assessed as cognitively intact, rather than by the co-guardians. The Director of Nursing (DON) acknowledged uncertainty regarding the consent process and had the resident sign the forms, although she stated she contacted the guardian by phone, which was not documented in the record. This resulted in the co-guardians not being given the opportunity to exercise their legal authority to consent or decline immunizations for the resident.
Failure to Notify Guardians of Significant Resident Events
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to notify the legal guardians of two residents regarding significant changes in their conditions and events affecting their care. In the first case, a resident with a history of psychiatric disorders, cognitive impairment, and a legal guardian was admitted and immediately expressed a desire to leave the facility. Although the guardian was initially contacted and advised staff to calm the resident and use an involuntary psychiatric hold if necessary, the resident was later allowed to sign out on a leave of absence (LOA) without further consultation with the guardian. The resident left the facility, returned later with police escort, and the guardian was not notified of either the departure or the return in a timely manner. Documentation showed that the guardian would have imposed restrictions on LOA if consulted, and staff did not notify the guardian as required by policy. In the second case, another resident with ataxic cerebral palsy, epilepsy, schizophrenia, and a legal guardian was sent to the hospital after being found unresponsive. The facility's records had not been updated to reflect the current legal guardian, as the previous guardian had passed away. Nursing staff attempted to contact the deceased guardian and only later tried to reach the correct guardian, but no voice message was left. The nurse practitioner also attempted to contact the guardian but could not recall if a message was left and stated a preference not to leave messages that might cause panic. There was no documentation of successful notification to the legal guardian regarding the resident's hospitalization. Facility policy required prompt notification of guardians or responsible parties in the event of significant changes, such as hospitalization or LOA. In both cases, the facility did not follow its own policies for notification, resulting in guardians not being informed of critical events affecting the residents. The deficiencies were identified through medical record review, staff and guardian interviews, and policy review, affecting two of the 22 residents reviewed for notification.
Verbal Abuse of Cognitively Impaired Resident by CNA
Penalty
Summary
A deficiency occurred when a certified nursing assistant (CNA) was verbally abusive to a resident with impaired cognition and multiple mental health diagnoses, including schizoaffective disorder, major depressive disorder, and anxiety. The resident required significant assistance with daily activities and was dependent on staff for personal care. During an observation, the CNA yelled loudly and aggressively at the resident, telling her to stop crying or the door would be shut. The resident was observed crying quietly at the time, and there were no progress notes documenting the incident. The CNA later justified her behavior by stating the resident was upsetting others and needed to stop. The resident was later interviewed and reported feeling scared when the CNA yelled at her. Additional observations showed the resident crying with staff attempting to console her, and at another time, she was quietly in her room without distress. The facility's policy on abuse, neglect, and misappropriation was reviewed and indicated an intent to prevent such incidents and ensure proper staff screening. However, the actions of the CNA constituted verbal abuse, and the facility failed to protect the resident from this mistreatment.
Failure to Provide Scheduled Showers and Bed Baths
Penalty
Summary
Resident #6, who was admitted with immobility syndrome, severe protein-calorie malnutrition, and ESBL resistance, was found to be dependent on staff for all activities of daily living, including bathing. The resident was cognitively intact and had a care plan indicating a self-care performance deficit, requiring full staff assistance. Despite being scheduled for showers on Wednesdays and Fridays during the night shift, documentation and interviews revealed that the resident did not consistently receive showers or bed baths as scheduled. Progress notes and shower records showed significant gaps between bathing events, with some refusals documented but also instances where the resident requested a bed bath and there was no evidence it was provided. Interviews with staff, including CNAs and the DON, confirmed that showers were not always given as scheduled, with some staff citing staffing shortages or unwillingness to provide showers, while others denied staffing issues but could not explain the missed care. The facility's policies required routine daily care, including bathing, to be provided by CNAs under nurse supervision, and perineal care to be planned according to individual needs and preferences. However, the records and staff interviews indicated that these policies were not consistently followed for Resident #6, resulting in missed scheduled showers and bed baths.
Failure to Provide and Document One-on-One Activities for Residents
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide one-on-one activities tailored to meet the interests and needs of residents who were unable or unwilling to participate in group activities. This deficiency was identified through record review, observation, interviews, and facility policy review, and affected three residents. Documentation for scheduled one-on-one activities was either missing or incomplete, and staff interviews confirmed that these activities were not consistently offered or recorded as required by the residents' care plans. One resident with schizoaffective disorder, major depressive disorder, and impaired cognition was care planned to receive one-on-one activities twice weekly, but documentation showed only a single entry for the month, with the resident denying the activity. The resident reported not being offered opportunities to attend activities outside her room and described staff as unkind and unengaged during visits. Staff interviews confirmed that one-on-one activities were not consistently documented or provided, and the activity director acknowledged the lack of documentation for these visits. Another resident with chronic respiratory failure, obstructive sleep apnea, and major depressive disorder was also scheduled for twice-weekly one-on-one activities. Documentation showed only a few instances of staff visiting to chat or provide reading material, with no evidence that the scheduled frequency was met. The resident expressed a preference for in-room activities related to his interests, such as video games and movies, but reported that the activity department did not accommodate these preferences. A third resident with ataxic cerebral palsy, epilepsy, and schizophrenia was care planned for personalized activities and one-on-one visits due to declining health, but there was no documentation to support that these activities were provided. Staff interviews confirmed that most one-on-one activities consisted of sitting and chatting, with no documented evidence of these interactions.
Failure to Notify Emergency Contact of Change in Condition
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a resident's emergency contact was notified of a change in condition. Medical record review showed that the resident's father, who was listed as the primary emergency contact, had passed away in 2022, but the chart was not updated to reflect this. As a result, no family member was notified when the resident experienced a significant change in condition. The resident, who had multiple diagnoses including ataxic cerebral palsy, epilepsy, anemia, thoracic aortic aneurysm, schizophrenia, obsessive compulsive disorder, and major depressive disorder, required assistance with activities of daily living and personal care. Progress notes indicated that a urinalysis with culture and sensitivity was ordered without documentation of the reason, the ordering provider, or family notification. Additionally, late entry notes were made regarding antibiotic use, but these were completed a month after the events occurred, and there was no evidence of timely documentation or family notification. On one occasion, a registered nurse found the resident unresponsive and, after consulting with a physician and nurse practitioner, the resident was sent to the hospital. The nurse practitioner attempted to contact the family but received no response. Interviews with facility staff confirmed that the emergency contact information was outdated and that there was no documentation of family notification regarding the resident's change in condition or new medical orders. The facility's policy required notification of resident representatives or authorized family members for changes in condition, but this was not followed in this case.
Inaccurate Discharge Summary for Resident's Medication
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that the written discharge summary for Resident #65 accurately reflected the amount of Oxycodone provided at the time of discharge. Resident #65, who had diagnoses including paraplegia, chronic pain syndrome, and major depression, was discharged with a care plan that included medication management for chronic pain. A physician order indicated that the resident was to receive Oxycodone 20 mg four times a day. However, the discharge summary inaccurately stated that the resident would receive a 30-day supply of medication, while only 30 tablets of Oxycodone, equating to a seven-and-a-half-day supply, were actually provided. Interviews with the Regional Nurse and the Director of Nursing confirmed the discrepancy between the discharge summary and the actual amount of medication given. The Regional Nurse acknowledged the error as clerical, and the Director of Nursing confirmed that the discharge instructions inaccurately documented a 30-day supply of medications. The facility's policy on transfer and discharge required reconciliation of all pre-discharge medications, which was not accurately followed in this case. This deficiency was investigated under Master Complaint Number OH000163758.
Failure to Investigate Physical Abuse Allegation
Penalty
Summary
The facility did not ensure an allegation of physical abuse was thoroughly investigated, affecting one resident of three reviewed for abuse. Resident #70, who had intact cognition and no memory impairment, reported that another resident, Resident #32, entered his room and physically assaulted him by grabbing his right knee, which had recently undergone replacement surgery. Despite Resident #70's complaints of severe pain and a disheveled bandage, the facility's Director of Nursing (DON) and staff did not find evidence of physical abuse and suspected Resident #70 of seeking additional pain medication. The facility's investigation did not include skin checks of non-interviewable residents or interviews with other residents, and it did not address the physical abuse allegation in detail. Resident #32, who had severe cognitive impairment and a history of behavioral disturbances, was involved in the incident. On the day of the reported incident, Resident #32 was aggressive with staff, striking a nurse, and was subsequently placed on one-to-one supervision and sent for psychiatric evaluation. The facility's investigation concluded that there was no intent by Resident #32 to harm Resident #70, and the incident was classified as verbal abuse rather than physical abuse. However, the investigation lacked thoroughness, as it did not include detailed witness statements or address the physical abuse allegations made by Resident #70. The Ombudsman and Resident #70 both reported the physical abuse allegations to the facility, but the DON did not file a self-reported incident (SRI) for physical abuse with the Ohio Department of Health. The facility's policy on abuse, neglect, and misappropriation requires accurate and timely reporting of incidents and a thorough investigation, which was not adhered to in this case. The deficiency represents noncompliance identified during the investigation of the complaint.
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.



