Vancrest Of Urbana, Inc
Inspection history, citations, penalties and survey trends for this long-term care facility in Urbana, Ohio.
- Location
- 2380 St Rt 68 S, Urbana, Ohio 43078
- CMS Provider Number
- 365437
- Inspections on file
- 24
- Latest survey
- July 9, 2025
- Citations (last 12 mo.)
- 1
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Vancrest Of Urbana, Inc during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
Staff failed to use appropriate equipment during a mechanical lift transfer, resulting in a resident sustaining a head laceration that required ER treatment. In a separate event, a resident with bilateral amputations fell from bed during care when a CNA worked alone, and the incident was not accurately documented or investigated. Both cases involved lapses in supervision, use of assistive devices, and adherence to safety protocols.
The facility failed to date dry products upon delivery, discard expired foods, and ensure proper glove use during food preparation. Undated and expired food items were found in the dry storage area, and a dietary aide was observed not changing gloves after touching various surfaces before handling food again. These deficiencies had the potential to affect all 67 residents receiving food from the kitchen.
The facility failed to serve palatable meals, affecting five residents. Complaints included cold, tasteless food and inconsistent quality. A test tray observation confirmed poor food quality, and Resident Council notes indicated ongoing concerns that were not addressed.
The facility failed to provide a resident with the Notice of Medicare Non-coverage (NOMNC) at least two days before the end of Part A services, as required by policy. The resident, who had chronic hepatitis and hypertension and was moderately cognitively impaired, received the notice on the last covered day instead.
The facility failed to ensure person-centered care plans for three residents, omitting critical areas such as incontinence care and psychotropic medication management. This was confirmed by staff interviews and record reviews.
The facility failed to ensure a resident had the proper diagnosis for the administration of an antipsychotic medication. The resident, admitted with delirium, Alzheimer's disease, and anxiety, was prescribed Zyprexa without a diagnosis of schizophrenia or bipolar disorder. The facility's policy and medical guidelines were not followed, leading to unnecessary medication use.
The facility failed to ensure that residents were offered the pneumococcal vaccine, affecting three of five residents reviewed. The DON confirmed that these residents were not offered the vaccine, despite the facility's policy requiring it within five working days of admission.
Failure to Ensure Safe Transfers and Fall Prevention
Penalty
Summary
Staff failed to safely transfer a resident with severe cognitive impairment and bilateral lower extremity functional limitations using a mechanical Hoyer lift. During a transfer to a recliner, staff used a Hoyer lift that was not wide enough to accommodate the recliner, but proceeded with the transfer regardless. As the resident was being lowered, the lift's bar swung back and struck the resident in the forehead, causing a laceration and bruising that required emergency room treatment and sutures. The incident involved both a hospice aide and a facility aide, and it was confirmed that the staff continued the transfer despite recognizing the equipment was not appropriate for the task. In a separate incident, another resident with bilateral below-knee amputations and chronic respiratory failure experienced a fall from bed during routine care. The resident, who was cognitively intact and required substantial assistance with bed mobility, was rolled onto his right side by a CNA working alone, after being unable to find another staff member to assist. The resident rolled out of bed and onto the floor. The fall report was found to be inaccurate, and the resident was not interviewed about the incident. The nurse on duty did not assess or interview the resident following the fall, and the fall investigation report was incomplete. Both incidents demonstrate failures in providing adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents, as well as failures in thoroughly investigating and accurately documenting resident falls. The facility's policies required staff to ensure resident safety during activities of daily living and to identify interventions related to specific fall risks, but these were not followed in the cases described.
Plan Of Correction
What corrective actions will be accomplished for those residents found to have been affected by the deficient practice: Resident #19 has been assessed and evaluated for appropriate transferring techniques, per facility policy, on multiple dates (note attached audit of completion). Through ongoing assessment, resident has been transferred, with no difficulty, and without injury obtained. Patient denies any concerns/discomfort with transferring techniques concluded. The oversized recliner was removed prior to survey initiation, per family request. Hospice provider has been advised to provide ample amount of time/notification for DME changes/removal to allow for appropriate transition of resident. Resident #25 has been interviewed for bed mobility preferences. Resident states he prefers to be a two person assist despite his ability to complete tasks with one individual. Resident's plan of care has been updated to identify specifics of patient preference (note attached). Facility staff educated on change of care, same date (included for reference). How will you identify other residents having the potential to be affected by the deficient practice and what corrective action will be taken: Managerial personnel will conduct random audits of bed mobility tasks and transfer completion guided per each individual's plan of care. Audits will be assessed daily, on each unit, at random time intervals x 1 week, twice weekly x 2 weeks, and once per week x 4 weeks. If concerns are identified, those individuals will be re-educated of the facility's transfer policy and procedures with hands-on guidance to be done. Initiation of a Performance Improvement Plan will be conducted, as needed. What measures will be put into place or what systemic changes will you make to ensure the deficient practice does not recur: Upon admission, each resident shall be assessed for safe transfers/bed mobility tasks guided per the functional status and personal preference expressed. Activities of daily living will be re-assessed quarterly, as needed, and with any significant medical changes following the initial admit, per facility designee, and will be reflected on the individualized plan of care. How the corrective actions will be monitored to ensure the deficient practice will not recur, ie., what quality assurance program will be put into place; and dates when corrective action will be completed: This plan of correction will be implemented, and the corrective action will be evaluated for its efficiency. The plan of correction is integrated into the facility's Quality Assurance Program. All auditing tools will be completed, as dictated, with thorough review. Any adverse findings/trends noted will be corrected immediately and brought to the Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement Committee for review. Please consider this plan of correction to be an allegation of compliance as if 07-18-2025. Resident #19's most recent assessment was done on 07/18/2025, which was completed by nurse on the unit. Hospice nurse was notified the date of the incident, which was 06/06/2025. The Director of Nursing, unit managers, and maintenance director reviewed wheelchairs and personal chair sizes to ensure mechanical lifts meet manufacturer guidelines when in use. No concerns were identified, and audit was completed the week of survey. Mechanical lift inspections are done monthly by the maintenance director. Maintenance Director reports any adverse findings to the Director of Nursing. A thorough investigation was completed per interdisciplinary team on 04/14/2025, which included Director of Nursing, Unit Manager, and MDS nurse. Initial interview incident was conducted per agency nurse at time of fall. Subsequent communication completed on 04/14/2025 per Unit Manager. In clinical care meeting on 04/14/25, resident #25 incident reviewed including preference stated by resident and during that time resident did not express any concerns with changes in the plan of care. During plan of correction review, resident was reinterviewed and expressed the desire to have two staff assist during bed mobility this time forward, which was 07/22/25. Plan of care updated with the following information. Yes, each fall investigation is led by the Director of Nursing and reviewed with the clinical team. The new processes were put into place and the implementation of the IPRO fall tracking tool alongside current facility policy and procedures for incident investigations. The licensed nurses and STNA are educated on transferring techniques including Hoyer lift policy and procedure at time of hire, annually, and with any manufacturer changes or new equipment. Upon hire would be our HR representative, annually or any changes would be completed by managerial nursing staff. Maintenance Director supplies any information regarding new lifts introduced into the facility. All nurses are oriented upon hire regarding risk management completion, interviewing staff/obtaining witness statements, and interviewing residents when applicable regarding cognition. In specific to this incident, agency staff was reeducated on thorough investigation; however, per risk management completion, it appears incident review was conducted accordingly. Director of Nursing reviews and signs each risk management. If concerns are identified, the Director of Nursing does a one-on-one reeducation with the staff member. Yes, all audits observed will include Hoyer transfers guided per resident’s individual plan of care. Yes, all falls are investigated to ensure thoroughness, including resident/staff interviews as applicable. Director of Nursing reviews with clinical staff. Every fall is reviewed and will continue to be reviewed indefinitely. Yes, it is the facility's utmost opinion that a thorough investigation was concluded on 04/14/2025 following the fall of resident #25. The initial interview of the incident was concluded immediately per agency nurse at the time of fall. Subsequent communication was completed, post ED return, per unit manager 04/14/2025. The new IPRO fall tracking tool was initiated 07/08/2025. The IPRO tracking tool has been utilized for all falls in July 2025. This new process will continue indefinitely. Yes, all staff (nurses and CNA's) have been educated on the proper transferring techniques, via Hoyer lift, post survey initiation and the AOC date, conducted per managerial nursing staff beginning 07/02/2025 through survey completion. Yes, all nurses have been re-educated on thorough fall investigation completion to include interviewing residents and staff (as applicable) after the survey start and prior to the AOC date. This guidance was transcribed per Director of Nursing and expressed to staff per nurse managers. The agency nurse was provided appropriate policy and procedure guidelines for incident/progress note completion on 04/14/2025 directly via the agency portal.
Food Storage and Handling Deficiencies
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to date dry products upon delivery, discard expired foods, and ensure proper glove use during food preparation. Observations revealed undated and expired food items in the dry storage area, including spiral noodles, vanilla wafers, yellow cake mix, powdered sugar, brown sugar, and three bean salad. Interviews with dietary staff confirmed these findings and indicated a lack of adherence to the facility's food receiving and storage policy, which mandates labeling and dating of dry foods and using a first-in, first-out system for rotation. Additionally, a dietary aide was observed preparing a cheeseburger without changing gloves after touching various surfaces, including the fryer basket handle, prep table, and tongs, before handling the food again. The dietary aide acknowledged the failure to change gloves or wash hands during the process, which is a violation of proper food handling procedures. These deficiencies had the potential to affect all 67 residents receiving food from the kitchen.
Failure to Serve Palatable Meals
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to serve palatable meals to the residents, affecting five out of 17 residents reviewed for dietary services. Resident #19 reported that the food was often cold when received. Resident #66 stated that the chicken and dumplings served for lunch were dry and that the quality of food varied significantly from day to day. Resident #22, who had moderately impaired cognition, found the chipped beef gravy tasteless and unappetizing. Resident #21 complained that her meals were cold, tasteless, and consisted mainly of carbohydrates, which she did not eat. She refused both lunch and dinner on one occasion due to the poor quality of the food. Resident #25, the Resident Council President, also reported that the food was usually served cold and tasteless, and despite addressing these concerns multiple times with the administration, no improvements had been made. A test tray observation revealed that the mashed potatoes were acceptable, but the chicken and dumplings were unrecognizable, dry, and flavorless, and the carrots were soggy and watered down. The Dietary Manager confirmed that the chicken and dumplings were prepared from frozen ingredients and combined with cream of chicken soup. Resident Council notes from February, March, and April 2024 indicated ongoing concerns about the food and menus, which had not been addressed by the facility administration.
Failure to Provide Timely Notice of Medicare Non-coverage
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that residents were given the Notice of Medicare Non-coverage (NOMNC) in a timely manner. This deficiency affected one resident, who had chronic hepatitis and hypertension and was moderately cognitively impaired. The resident was admitted on an unspecified date and discharged on another unspecified date. The NOMNC indicated that the resident's last covered day of Part A services was 10/17/23, and the notice was signed by the resident on the same day. An interview with the Business Office Manager confirmed that the resident did not receive the NOMNC until the last covered day, contrary to the facility's policy, which requires the notice to be issued at least two calendar days before benefits end.
Failure to Ensure Person-Centered Care Plans
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure care plans were person-centered to include all areas of concern for three residents. Resident #14, who had Alzheimer's disease, dementia, and age-related physical debility, was severely cognitively impaired and dependent on staff for toileting. Despite being incontinent of bowel and bladder, Resident #14's care plan did not address incontinence care. This was confirmed by the Quality Assurance Nurse (QAN) #122, who acknowledged that the care plan should have included incontinence care from the beginning of the resident's stay at the facility. Resident #50, diagnosed with Alzheimer's disease, dementia, anxiety, and insomnia, also had severe cognitive impairment and was receiving an antidepressant. However, the care plan did not include any information regarding the use of psychotropic medications. This omission was confirmed by the Director of Nursing. Similarly, Resident #72, who had metabolic encephalopathy, chronic kidney disease stage three, major depressive disorder, and adjustment disorder with anxiety, was dependent on staff for toileting and was incontinent of bowel and bladder. Despite this, there was no active care plan for incontinence care, as verified by both STNA #69 and QAN #122. The facility's policy on care planning, which emphasizes comprehensive, person-centered care plans based on resident assessments, was not adhered to in these cases.
Improper Diagnosis for Antipsychotic Medication Administration
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure a resident had the proper diagnosis for the administration of an antipsychotic medication. Resident #3 was admitted with diagnoses of delirium due to a known physiological condition, Alzheimer's disease, and anxiety. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment indicated severe cognitive impairment. Despite this, the resident was prescribed Zyprexa, an antipsychotic medication, for delirium without a diagnosis of schizophrenia or bipolar disorder, which are the conditions Zyprexa is commonly used to treat. The Director of Nursing confirmed that the resident did not have a diagnosis of schizophrenia or bipolar disorder. The facility's policy on antipsychotic medication use, dated 07/2022, states that a resident will only receive antipsychotic medication when necessary to treat a specific condition for which they are indicated and effective. However, the review of the guidance from Medscape revealed that Zyprexa is not approved for dementia-related psychosis in the geriatric population due to increased risks. This discrepancy indicates a failure to adhere to the facility's policy and proper medical guidelines, leading to the unnecessary use of antipsychotic medication for Resident #3.
Failure to Offer Pneumococcal Vaccine to Residents
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that residents were offered the pneumococcal vaccine, affecting three of five residents reviewed for pneumococcal immunization. Resident #19, admitted on an unspecified date, received the influenza vaccination but was not offered the pneumococcal immunization. The Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed this oversight. Similarly, Resident #20, also admitted on an unspecified date, had no evidence of being offered or receiving the pneumococcal vaccine prior to admission, as confirmed by the DON. Resident #50, admitted on an unspecified date, was also not offered the pneumococcal immunization, which the DON confirmed. The facility's undated policy stated that all residents should be offered the pneumococcal vaccine within five working days of admission, which was not adhered to in these cases.
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.



