Carriage Inn Of Steubenville
Inspection history, citations, penalties and survey trends for this long-term care facility in Steubenville, Ohio.
- Location
- 3102 St Charles Drive, Steubenville, Ohio 43952
- CMS Provider Number
- 365271
- Inspections on file
- 24
- Latest survey
- February 27, 2026
- Citations (last 12 mo.)
- 5
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Carriage Inn Of Steubenville during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
Surveyors observed that the facility did not follow its approved menus and diet spreadsheets for multiple residents on reduced concentrated sweets (RCS) and pureed diets. Several residents with type 2 DM, morbid obesity, CKD, severe protein-calorie malnutrition, dementia, Parkinson’s disease, COPD, and dysphagia, who were ordered RCS or RCS mechanical soft diets, were served white or chocolate cake with frosting or fruit shortcake instead of the chilled peaches specified for RCS diets. Residents on pureed diets, whose menu called for pureed fruit shortcake, were instead given vanilla pudding because the cook had not prepared the pureed dessert. A nurse supervisor acknowledged that menus were not always followed and that diabetic residents received desserts they should not have, while dietary staff and the RD confirmed that the RCS and puree spreadsheets should have been followed and that the desserts served were not appropriate for the ordered diets.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment and upper extremity weakness was not assessed for hot liquid safety and was given hot tea in a Styrofoam cup without a lid, resulting in second-degree burns when the beverage spilled on her lap. The hot water dispenser used was not temperature-monitored and dispensed water at 176°F. Additionally, a required fall prevention intervention (Dycem in the wheelchair) was not in place as ordered and care planned.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment and multiple health conditions, including chronic kidney disease and diuretic use, did not have water maintained at her bedside as required by her care plan. Observations revealed that water was either not present or placed out of the resident's reach, and staff confirmed the resident could not access drinks as needed.
A resident with dementia and chronic kidney disease returned from the hospital with a UTI diagnosis and was prescribed Keflex, despite urine culture results showing the infection was caused by Enterobacter Cloacae, which was not sensitive to that antibiotic. The acting IP identified the mismatch but incorrectly documented the organism and did not ensure the antibiotic was changed, resulting in the resident receiving a full course of an ineffective antibiotic, in violation of the facility's antibiotic stewardship policy.
A hole in the wall behind a resident's bed, measuring about eight inches by eight inches, was found during observation and confirmed by a CNA and an LPN, who had not previously noticed it. Review of maintenance records showed no work order for repair in the past six months.
A facility failed to notify hospice of a resident's refusal to use a CPAP machine, as prescribed. The resident, with a diagnosis including Parkinson's disease and receiving hospice services, refused the CPAP treatment on all but one day over a period of time without hospice or the physician being informed. Observations showed the resident's oxygen equipment was not in use as ordered, and staff confirmed the lack of current physician orders for oxygen administration.
A facility failed to implement fall interventions for a high-risk resident with Parkinson's disease, resulting in multiple falls. The resident's care plan was not updated after a fall, and necessary interventions like a grabber and proper footwear were not provided. Staff were unaware of the resident's fall history and interventions, leading to non-compliance under Complaint Number OH00159914.
A facility failed to provide proper care for a resident's respiratory equipment, including a CPAP machine and oxygen tubing. The resident, with multiple diagnoses including acute respiratory failure, had outdated oxygen tubing on the floor and a CPAP mask with black spots on a window sill. Staff interviews revealed a lack of current physician orders and specific CPAP settings, contrary to facility policy requiring physician orders and proper equipment maintenance.
The facility failed to administer medications as ordered, resulting in a 13.7% medication error rate. Two residents were affected: one with hypertension and other conditions did not receive Isosorbide or Lopressor despite blood pressure readings above the threshold for withholding, and another with cerebral infarction received ASA enteric-coated instead of the prescribed ASA. The facility's policy requires medications to be administered as prescribed.
A facility failed to maintain a complete medical record for a resident, as the Physician's Progress Notes lacked any resident-identifiable information. This issue was discovered during a complaint investigation, and the DON confirmed the incompleteness of the record due to the absence of identifying details.
An LTC facility failed to protect residents from medication misappropriation, affecting 13 residents. An LPN was observed accessing the narcotics drawer without proper documentation, leading to an investigation. Several residents did not receive their prescribed medications, and discrepancies were found in controlled drug records. The LPN was suspended and resigned, but the facility could not conclusively prove drug diversion.
Failure to Follow Therapeutic Diet Menus and Spreadsheets for RCS and Pureed Diets
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to follow physician-ordered therapeutic diets and the approved menu/spreadsheet for residents, particularly those on reduced concentrated sweets (RCS) and pureed diets. Surveyors observed the lunch tray line and found that multiple residents with orders for RCS diets, including those with morbid obesity, type 2 diabetes mellitus, chronic kidney disease, and severe protein-calorie malnutrition, were served high-sugar desserts that were inconsistent with their diet orders and the facility’s RCS policy. For several cognitively intact or moderately impaired residents who required setup or cleanup assistance and were care planned as being at nutritional risk, tray tickets specified chilled peaches as the dessert for RCS diets, yet staff placed large portions of white cake with cherry topping and whipped topping on their trays. Fruit was available and had been placed on other residents’ trays, but was not used for these RCS diet trays. Additional observations showed that residents on RCS mechanical soft diets were also served inappropriate desserts. Residents with diagnoses including type 2 diabetes with neuropathy, dementia, Parkinson’s disease, COPD, and dysphagia, and who were ordered RCS, no salt packet, mechanical soft diets, received chocolate cake with white frosting or fruit shortcake. The tray tickets for these residents indicated RCS mechanical soft diets, and in at least one case specified fruit shortcake, but the facility’s RCS spreadsheet indicated that RCS diets should receive chilled peaches instead of fruit shortcake. The registered dietitian and dietary technician later confirmed that chocolate cake with icing and fruit shortcake were not appropriate dessert choices for residents on RCS mechanical soft diets and that a glitch in the tray card system meant there was no spreadsheet breakdown for combination diets such as RCS mechanical soft. Surveyors also identified that the facility did not follow the puree diet spreadsheet for residents ordered pureed texture diets. The facility’s fall and winter menu and corresponding spreadsheet specified that residents on pureed diets were to receive pureed fish of the day, pureed vegetables, pureed dinner roll with margarine, and pureed fruit shortcake for lunch. However, during observation of the tray line, no pureed fruit shortcake was present, and residents on pureed diets were instead given small plastic bowls of vanilla pudding. The dietary director confirmed that the cook had not prepared the pureed fruit shortcake and that these residents were therefore receiving vanilla pudding in place of the menu-specified dessert. A registered dietitian and dietary technician confirmed that the spreadsheets needed to be followed and that residents on pureed diets should have received pureed fruit shortcake. The facility’s own policies on RCS diets and on menus and adequate nutrition required that meals be prepared consistent with RCS guidelines and that menus be followed, but these were not adhered to during the observed meal service. A registered nurse supervisor acknowledged during interview that menus were not always followed and stated that diabetic residents were receiving desserts they should not be getting, noting that everybody got cake for lunch that day. Across the cited examples, residents’ medical records consistently showed therapeutic diet orders, MDS assessments documenting therapeutic or mechanically altered diets, and care plans identifying nutritional risk with interventions to provide diet and fluids as ordered and to honor preferences as able. Despite this, the lunch service on the observed day did not follow the written menus, diet spreadsheets, or physician orders for RCS and pureed diets, resulting in desserts being served that were inconsistent with the residents’ prescribed diets and the facility’s written policies.
Failure to Assess and Implement Safety Measures for Hot Liquids and Fall Prevention
Penalty
Summary
A resident with severe cognitive impairment, upper extremity weakness, and a history of falls was not comprehensively assessed for safety with hot liquids, nor were appropriate interventions implemented to prevent burns. The resident required staff assistance with activities of daily living and had an occupational therapy plan indicating upper extremity weakness and a need for set-up or clean-up help for eating. Despite these needs, there was no assessment or care plan addressing the resident's ability to safely consume hot liquids, and no interventions were in place to reduce the risk of burns from hot beverages. On the day of the incident, the resident was provided hot tea in a Styrofoam cup without a lid by therapy staff, using water from a hot water dispenser that was not temperature-monitored and dispensed water at 176 degrees Fahrenheit. The resident attempted to balance the cup on her lap, resulting in the hot liquid spilling onto her left thigh and causing large second-degree burns. Immediate first aid was provided, and the resident required ongoing pain management and wound care. Interviews confirmed that the facility's policy required evaluation of residents for hot liquid safety and the use of lids on hot beverages, but these measures were not followed in this case. Additionally, the resident had a care plan and physician's order for the use of Dycem in her wheelchair as a fall prevention intervention, but this intervention was not in place at the time of observation. Staff interviews and observations confirmed that the Dycem was not present in the resident's wheelchair, despite being ordered and care planned. The lack of adherence to both hot liquid safety protocols and fall prevention interventions contributed to the resident experiencing actual harm.
Failure to Maintain Accessible Hydration for At-Risk Resident
Penalty
Summary
A resident with multiple complex medical conditions, including Alzheimer's disease, dementia, diabetes, chronic kidney disease, and a history of falls, was identified as being at risk for dehydration. Her care plan specifically required that water be maintained at her bedside at all times to support adequate hydration, especially given her use of diuretic medication and potential for fluid imbalance. During an observation, it was noted that the resident did not have any water or beverage available in her room, and there was no evidence of a Styrofoam cup or other drinking vessel as provided to other residents. A CNA confirmed that she had not provided water to the resident that morning and could not locate a cup in the room, suggesting it may have been discarded by housekeeping, although this was not the case in other rooms. On a subsequent observation, the resident was found to have a Styrofoam cup with water, but it was placed on an overbed table near the entry door, out of the resident's reach. Another CNA confirmed that the placement of the table and cup made it inaccessible to the resident, preventing her from obtaining a drink when needed. These findings demonstrate that the facility failed to ensure the resident had water maintained at her bedside and within reach, as required by her care plan.
Failure to Implement Effective Antibiotic Stewardship for UTI Treatment
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to implement an effective antibiotic stewardship program when a resident returned from the hospital with a new order for Keflex to treat a urinary tract infection (UTI). The resident, who had diagnoses including Alzheimer's disease, unspecified dementia, and chronic kidney disease, was sent to the emergency room for chest pain and returned with a UTI diagnosis and an order for Keflex. Hospital records showed that a urine culture identified Enterobacter Cloacae as the causative organism, which was not sensitive to Keflex. Despite this, the resident received the full seven-day course of Keflex as ordered. The acting Infection Preventionist (IP) at the facility was responsible for reviewing antibiotic use for residents returning from the hospital. The IP identified that the organism causing the UTI was not sensitive to the prescribed antibiotic and completed an antibiotic time-out, reaching out to the resident's physician. However, the Antibiotic Time Out report incorrectly documented the organism as E. coli, for which Keflex would have been appropriate, rather than Enterobacter Cloacae. The physician was informed of the incorrect organism and did not respond until the antibiotic course was nearly complete, instructing to finish the course despite its ineffectiveness against the identified organism. Facility policy required the IP to monitor antibiotic use, review laboratory results, and ensure antibiotics were appropriate for the identified infection. The policy also stated that the Medical Director was responsible for setting standards for antibiotic prescribing and overseeing adherence. In this case, there was no evidence that the antibiotic was changed to one effective against the organism identified in the culture, and the resident received an ineffective antibiotic regimen, contrary to the facility's antibiotic stewardship policy.
Failure to Repair Wall Damage in Resident Room
Penalty
Summary
A hole measuring approximately eight inches by eight inches was observed in the wall behind the head of a resident's bed, near the baseboard. This issue was identified during an observation and was confirmed by interviews with a CNA and an LPN, both of whom stated they had not previously noticed the hole. Review of the facility's maintenance work orders for the past six months showed no documentation of a request to repair the hole in the resident's room. The deficiency was identified as part of a complaint investigation and had the potential to affect one of five resident rooms observed, with a facility census of 78 at the time.
Failure to Notify Hospice of Respiratory Treatment Refusal
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to notify hospice of a resident's refusal of respiratory treatments, specifically the use of a CPAP machine. Resident #83, who was admitted with a diagnosis including Parkinson's disease, was receiving hospice services and had a history of falls. The resident was prescribed a CPAP machine to be worn at bedtime, but the order did not include the required settings. The resident refused the CPAP treatment on all but one day between November 1 and December 18, 2024, without hospice or the physician being notified of these refusals. Observations revealed that the resident was lying in bed with an oxygen concentrator present, but the nasal cannula was on the floor, and the oxygen tubing was dated from November 9, 2024. Interviews with facility staff, including a CNA and an LPN, confirmed that there were no current physician orders for the resident's oxygen administration, and the resident did not wear the oxygen continuously. The LPN verified the lack of notification to hospice or the physician regarding the CPAP refusals. This deficiency was identified during a complaint investigation.
Failure to Implement Fall Interventions for High-Risk Resident
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to implement fall interventions for a resident with Parkinson's disease who was severely impaired in daily decision-making and receiving hospice services. The resident had a history of falls, some resulting in injuries. Despite being identified as a high fall risk, the care plan interventions, such as keeping the call light within reach, assisting with proper footwear, and ensuring the resident wore glasses, were not consistently implemented. Observations revealed the resident was often without gripper socks, glasses, and the call light was not within reach, increasing the risk of falls. After a fall on 12/16/24, the resident's care plan was not updated to include new interventions, such as the use of a grabber or ensuring the resident was in a geri-chair when out of bed. Staff interviews confirmed a lack of awareness and education regarding the resident's fall and the necessary interventions. Additionally, the facility did not have the ordered grabber available for the resident's use, and no alternative interventions were implemented to prevent further falls. The deficiency was noted under Complaint Number OH00159914.
Inadequate Respiratory Equipment Care for Resident
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide appropriate care for oxygen and respiratory equipment for a resident diagnosed with Parkinson's disease, generalized anxiety disorder, pneumonia, and acute respiratory failure with hypoxia. The resident was admitted with orders for a CPAP machine to be worn at bedtime and to continue home settings, as well as hospice orders for oxygen via nasal cannula at two to five liters per minute continuously. Observations revealed that the oxygen tubing was lying on the floor and dated over a month old, while the CPAP mask was resting on a window sill with visible black spots and without a protective barrier. Interviews with facility staff, including a CNA and an LPN, confirmed that the oxygen and CPAP equipment should be stored in a bag and changed regularly. The LPN acknowledged the lack of current physician orders for the resident's oxygen and the absence of specific settings for the CPAP machine, indicating a need to contact the physician for clarification. The facility's policy on oxygen administration requires that oxygen be administered under physician orders and that equipment be cleaned and maintained according to facility policies. This deficiency was identified during a complaint investigation.
Medication Administration Errors in LTC Facility
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to administer medications as ordered, resulting in a medication error rate of 13.7%. This deficiency was observed during the medication administration for two residents. Resident #50, who was admitted with diagnoses including hypertension, congestive heart failure, coronary artery disease, and anxiety, had specific physician orders for medications such as chewable aspirin, Isosorbide Dinitrate, and Lopressor, with parameters to hold the latter two if the systolic blood pressure (SBP) was less than 100 mmHg. On December 17, 2024, RN #209 assessed Resident #50's blood pressure at 108/72 mmHg, which was above the threshold to withhold the medications. However, RN #209 decided not to administer Isosorbide or Lopressor, despite the blood pressure reading exceeding the parameters for withholding the medications. Resident #58, admitted with a diagnosis of cerebral infarction, had an order for ASA 81 mg. During the same observation period, RN #209 administered ASA enteric-coated 81 mg instead of the prescribed ASA 81 mg. The facility's policy on administering medications, revised in April 2019, mandates that medications be administered as prescribed. The failure to adhere to these orders and policies resulted in the identified medication errors, which were investigated under Complaint Number OH00159914.
Incomplete Medical Record Due to Lack of Resident Identification
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain a complete medical record for a resident, which was identified during a complaint investigation. A review of the closed medical record for a resident revealed that the Physician's Progress Notes, dated 10/25/24 and 10/31/24, were not labeled with any resident-identifiable information such as a name, identification number, or room number. This lack of identifying information made it impossible to verify which resident the notes pertained to. An interview with the Director of Nursing confirmed that the progress notes were part of the closed record for the resident, but without the necessary identifying information, the medical record was deemed incomplete.
Medication Misappropriation Incident
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to protect residents from the misappropriation of medications, affecting 13 residents. The incident was discovered when the Administrator observed suspicious activity by an LPN on the facility's video cameras. The LPN was seen accessing the narcotics drawer without documenting on the medication administration record or narcotic count sheets. An immediate investigation was launched, revealing that medications were unaccounted for, and some routine medications were found discarded in the trash. The investigation into the incident revealed that several residents did not receive their prescribed medications. For instance, one resident was not administered risperidone and buspirone as ordered, while another resident was missing doses of prednisone and sertraline. Additionally, discrepancies were found in the controlled drug records, with pills missing and not documented as administered. These findings were consistent across multiple residents, indicating a pattern of misappropriation. The facility's investigation could not conclusively prove that the LPN had committed drug diversion, but the evidence of discarded medications and discrepancies in narcotic counts substantiated the misappropriation allegations. The LPN was suspended and subsequently resigned. The facility's policy on abuse, neglect, and exploitation defines misappropriation as the wrongful use of a resident's belongings, which was evident 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.



