Embassy Of Saxonburg
Inspection history, citations, penalties and survey trends for this long-term care facility in Saxonburg, Pennsylvania.
- Location
- 223 Pittsburgh St, Saxonburg, Pennsylvania 16056
- CMS Provider Number
- 395160
- Inspections on file
- 32
- Latest survey
- April 23, 2026
- Citations (last 12 mo.)
- 44 (2 serious)
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Embassy Of Saxonburg during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
A cognitively intact resident with bilateral above-knee amputations and opioid dependence, who was particular about receiving ordered oxycodone on time, began yelling when an LPN refused to enter the room and told the resident she did not have to come in while he was screaming. The resident and another cognitively intact resident reported that the NHA then entered, yelled at the resident, called him an addict, stated he sounded like an idiot, and threatened to beat him if he had legs, while the Director of Maintenance repeatedly removed the NHA from the room. Other residents reported hearing prolonged yelling and commotion. The LPN admitted she may have given the resident the middle finger and acknowledged telling him she would not come into the room until he calmed down, while she went outside to smoke. The resident documented these events in a letter to an RN supervisor, reporting feeling unsafe and humiliated, and the DON later confirmed that the facility failed to protect the resident from verbal abuse, resulting in severe psychosocial harm and an Immediate Jeopardy finding.
The facility failed to follow its abuse and neglect policy by allowing a social worker to begin work without a completed criminal background check and by not identifying, reporting, or investigating an allegation of abuse/neglect involving a resident. A cognitively intact resident with bilateral above-knee amputations reported verbal and attempted physical abuse by the NHA and inappropriate behavior by an LPN, documented the concerns in a letter given to an RN supervisor, and stated that nothing was done and the alleged perpetrators continued working. Staff interviews confirmed that the NHA had to be removed from the resident’s room during a verbal altercation, that the NHA continued to work afterward, and that the incident was not entered into the facility’s incident system or reported to required agencies at the time, leading surveyors to cite immediate jeopardy.
The facility failed to provide sufficient nursing staff and used inaccurate staffing assignments, resulting in unmet care needs for multiple residents. Several residents reported not receiving scheduled showers, not being assisted out of bed or back to bed, not having wounds dressed, and waiting extended periods for help such as obtaining portable oxygen. Staff interviews revealed that there were too few aides to turn and reposition residents, that non-nursing personnel such as a cook and a social worker were pulled to provide care without proper NA orientation, and that staffing sheets listed individuals who were not actually delivering resident care. On one shift with over 50 residents, an LPN reported having only one aide per hallway, and the administrator confirmed the facility did not have sufficient nursing staff to meet residents’ physical, mental, and psychosocial needs.
The facility assigned a Nurse Aide to function as the Kitchen Manager and Food Service Director without the required Certified Dietary Manager credentials or other documented qualifications. Over a three‑month period, this individual managed daily dietary operations despite lacking evidence of meeting regulatory requirements for the role. The Interim NHA and DON later confirmed that the facility had no documentation to show that the staff member met Food Service Director qualifications, resulting in noncompliance with state management regulations.
The Nursing Home Administrator failed to effectively manage the facility to ensure residents were free from abuse and to ensure that abuse policies were implemented, creating an immediate jeopardy situation. Review of the NHA’s job description, facility and clinical records, and staff interviews showed that, despite being responsible for directing day-to-day operations in accordance with applicable regulations, the NHA did not ensure that fundamental principles of treatment and care were provided. As a result, residents did not consistently receive treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice and facility policies, leading to citations under 28 Pa Code 201.14(a) and 28 Pa Code 201.18(b)(1)(e)(1).
The facility did not maintain an accurate and current facility assessment used to determine needed resources for resident care. The assessment listed former key personnel instead of the current NHA, DON, and ADON, contained census information tied only to a prior year-to-date period, and included resident information that had not been reviewed or updated since a previous assessment date. An interim NHA confirmed that the assessment had not been accurately completed and that resident information reflected data from the last time this employee worked at the facility, rather than current conditions.
The facility failed to follow its own policy requiring that initial comprehensive visits be completed by a physician, not by mid-level practitioners. For three residents—one with anxiety, depression, and lung cancer; one with gastroparesis, anemia, and esophagitis with bleeding; and one with emphysema, O2 dependence, and alcohol dependence with withdrawal—clinical record review showed that a CRNP conducted the initial admission or readmission assessments. Late entry notes documented these initial visits by the CRNP, and during interview the DON and interim administrator acknowledged that physician-completed initial visits did not occur as required.
Surveyors found that the facility did not timely document progress notes for four residents with conditions including anxiety, depression, lung cancer, dementia, tremor, history of falls, gastroparesis, anemia, esophagitis with bleeding, emphysema, O2 dependence, and alcohol dependence with withdrawal. Late entries were made several days after key clinical encounters, including an admission assessment, a right shoulder injection, evaluation of bilateral lower extremity swelling, and assessment for nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea. The DON acknowledged that progress notes were not documented in accordance with required clinical record standards.
Surveyors found that the facility did not provide required education on effective communication to an RN and four NAs hired over a span of several months. Review of staff training records showed no documentation of effective communication training for these direct care staff, despite regulatory requirements for staff development. The interim administrator confirmed during interview that these employees had not received the mandated communication training.
A resident with paraplegia and a Stage III pressure ulcer was care planned and had physician orders for q2h turning/repositioning, heel offloading while in bed, and use of offloading boots in bed. Documentation audits for two consecutive months showed multiple shifts without recorded turning and repositioning. The resident reported needing assistance and stated staff only turned him about twice per shift. During observation, the resident was in bed without the ordered offloading boots, which were found in a chair, and an LPN confirmed they were not applied as ordered. The DON acknowledged that interventions for residents at risk for pressure ulcers are expected to be implemented and documented each shift and confirmed the failure to document application of the offloading boots and to ensure ordered interventions were consistently provided.
The facility failed to maintain required NA staffing ratios per resident per shift, resulting in noncompliance on the majority of shifts reviewed. Despite prior education of the NHA and DON on state CNA ratio requirements, the facility used an outdated staffing hours calculator that did not reflect current regulations and did not maintain or provide the assignment grids that were supposed to guide NA staffing. Review of staffing worksheets and staff interviews showed that required NA coverage was not consistently provided, and surveyors determined the facility did not make a good faith effort to correct and sustain improvement for a previously cited staffing deficiency.
The facility did not maintain sufficient nursing staff to meet residents’ ADL and activity needs, resulting in missed showers, long call light response times, and residents sometimes remaining in bed because there were not enough aides to get them up or return them to bed. Activities such as Bingo and card games were cancelled, and some residents were unable to go to the dining room for meals due to inadequate staff to assist with transport and supervision. Staff reportedly told residents that these cancellations and limitations were due to staffing shortages, and the administrator confirmed that nursing staff levels were insufficient to support residents’ physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being.
A resident with a history of HTN, seizure disorder, and hyponatremia experienced a fall and was found on the floor, laughing, with no apparent injuries and stable VS. Facility policy and the 72-hour neuro assessment protocol required a series of scheduled neuro checks after falls, especially when unwitnessed or involving potential head impact. Although documentation indicated that neuro checks were initiated per protocol, review of the neuro assessment sheet showed that only 8 of 18 required checks were completed. The NHA and DON confirmed that the facility failed to ensure completion of the ordered neurological assessments following the fall.
A resident with dementia and moderate cognitive impairment was confronted in a public hallway by the NHA and a sheriff's deputy about a large unpaid bill, despite having a POA responsible for financial matters. The resident became confused and tearful during the incident, which was witnessed by staff and other residents. Staff expressed concerns about the public nature of the confrontation and the resident's ability to understand, and the NHA later acknowledged the failure to protect the resident from mental/emotional abuse.
A resident with moderate cognitive impairment, diagnosed with Multiple Sclerosis and other conditions, personally signed a Notice of Medicare Non-Coverage form instead of the responsible party. Facility policy requires that information and documentation be provided in a manner appropriate to the resident's cognitive status, but there was no evidence that the responsible party was informed or signed the necessary financial papers.
A resident with moderate cognitive impairment and a documented POA was directly confronted by the NHA and a sheriff's deputy regarding a large unpaid balance, despite the facility's awareness of the POA's authority. The facility failed to involve the resident's legal surrogate in legal actions related to non-payment, resulting in the resident being distressed and confused during the encounter.
A resident with dementia, hypertension, and anxiety was confronted in a hallway by the NHA and a sheriff's deputy regarding an alleged debt, resulting in the resident becoming visibly distressed and tearful. Multiple staff members witnessed the incident, considered it emotional or mental abuse, and submitted written statements. Despite facility policy requiring prompt reporting of abuse allegations, the incident was not reported to the state agency, and staff were discouraged from pursuing the matter.
A resident with dementia and other medical conditions was confronted in a public hallway by the NHA and a sheriff's deputy regarding a large outstanding bill, resulting in the resident becoming visibly distressed and tearful. Multiple staff witnessed the event, reported it as possible verbal and psychological abuse, and submitted statements, but the facility failed to properly investigate the allegation or follow required reporting procedures.
The facility did not employ a qualified activities director, as the individual in the role lacked prior experience in activity programs and did not meet federal standards, which was confirmed by both the employee and the administrator.
The facility did not post complete or accessible contact information for the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman and State Survey Agency, omitting required details such as names, addresses, emails, and a statement about residents' rights to file complaints. The Nursing Home Administrator confirmed these omissions.
Surveyors identified that the facility did not provide a clean, safe, and comfortable environment in two rooms, including stained ceiling tiles, unpainted wall repairs, and dark discoloration between tiles in the shower room. A resident reported towels turning black after showers, and the DON confirmed these findings.
Surveyors observed that multiple food items, including lettuce, tuna, garlic, celery, and apple pies, were stored in the Main Kitchen without proper labeling or receive dates as required by facility policy. The Assistant Dietary Manager confirmed the lack of compliance with labeling and dating procedures.
The facility did not ensure that necessary information was communicated to receiving health care providers during transfers for two residents, and failed to provide written notification of the bed-hold policy to three residents or their representatives at the time of hospital transfer. Additionally, the facility did not notify the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman upon hospital transfer for these residents, as confirmed by the DON and record review.
A resident with multiple diagnoses was discharged from the facility to home/community after the family chose to take the resident out AMA, but the MDS assessment incorrectly documented the discharge status as a transfer to a short-term general hospital. The DON confirmed that the MDS did not accurately reflect the resident's actual discharge location.
Two residents did not receive care in accordance with physician orders and established protocols. One resident used knee immobilizer braces without a documented order or care plan, while another had physician orders for NPO status and oral medications that were not followed. The DON confirmed these lapses in care.
A resident with PTSD and a history of trauma reported anxiety and discomfort with male caregivers, which was documented in their social service history. However, the care plan did not address this trigger or include interventions to prevent re-traumatization, and the facility administrator confirmed the failure to provide trauma-informed care.
Three residents with significant mobility impairments did not receive showers as ordered due to ongoing shower room renovations, resulting in prolonged reliance on bed baths that were inadequate for their needs. Facility staff and administration confirmed that the available shower stalls could not accommodate required equipment, and resident interviews indicated dissatisfaction with the substitute hygiene care provided.
The facility failed to provide the required number of nurse aides on two shifts, with insufficient staffing on the evening shift for a census of 65 residents and on the night shift for a census of 63 residents. This was confirmed by the Nursing Home Administrator.
A resident with peripheral vascular disease, hypertension, and atrial fibrillation experienced a significant change in condition, including abnormal urine color and decreased oxygen saturation, requiring oxygen therapy. Despite the facility's protocol to notify family representatives of such changes, the family was not informed. This deficiency was confirmed by the DON.
A facility failed to provide timely laboratory services for a resident with peripheral vascular disease, hypertension, and atrial fibrillation. Despite a physician's order for weekly lab tests, the tests were not conducted as scheduled. This deficiency was confirmed by the DON.
The facility failed to label and date food products in the cooler and freezer, and maintain sanitary conditions in the kitchen, risking cross-contamination. Observations revealed unlabeled sandwiches, salad, foam containers, and hoagie buns, as well as ice cream on the freezer floor. A dietary employee was seen drying dishes with a towel, violating infection control practices.
A facility failed to maintain a resident's dignity during a dressing change. An LPN performed the procedure and then marked the dressing with a date, which was deemed undignified. The LPN later confirmed the lack of dignity in the process, violating the facility's policy on Resident Rights.
A resident with a history of Parkinson's disease and other conditions was slapped by another resident during dinner, leading to an unreported incident of resident-to-resident abuse. Although the incident was documented and the family and medical staff were notified, the facility failed to report the altercation to the state agency as required by their policy.
A resident with dementia and other conditions was prescribed an antibiotic for a urinary tract infection, but the care plan was not updated to include this treatment. An LPN confirmed the oversight, indicating a failure to revise the care plan to meet the resident's specific needs.
A resident with dementia and other conditions was observed with a palm guard on the left hand, but the facility lacked physician orders and care plan instructions for its use. Staff interviews revealed unawareness of the palm guard's application schedule, indicating a failure to provide necessary treatment to prevent a decline in range of motion.
The facility failed to provide adequate supervision for two residents, resulting in a fall for one and potential chemical exposure for another. A resident with severe cognitive impairment and high fall risk was left unattended in a shower room, leading to a fall. Another resident, also with severe cognitive impairment, was found alone with an unsecured chemical spray bottle within reach. The DON confirmed these supervision failures.
A resident with a history of diabetes, high blood pressure, and heart failure expressed suicidal ideation, stating they had nothing to live for except their sister. Despite this, the LTC facility failed to monitor or follow up on the resident's mental health needs, as confirmed by the DON. Observations and staff interviews indicated the resident's ongoing depressive state.
The facility failed to date opened insulin pens and properly store medications in one of the medication carts. An LPN and the DON confirmed that the Middle medication cart contained undated insulin pens for a resident, violating the facility's medication storage policy.
The facility failed to prevent cross-contamination during a dressing change for a resident and did not maintain a sanitary environment in the shower room. An LPN did not wash hands before donning new gloves and allowed the resident's gown to contaminate the wound. The shower room was found unsanitary with various items and substances present. The DON confirmed these deficiencies.
Verbal Abuse and Threats by Administrator and LPN Toward Resident Requesting Pain Medication
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to protect a resident from verbal and mental abuse by facility leadership and nursing staff, resulting in severe psychosocial harm in the form of embarrassment and humiliation. The facility’s own abuse policy, reviewed with a date of 1/21/26, states that the facility will not tolerate abuse, neglect, or exploitation and defines abuse as the willful infliction of injury, intimidation, or punishment resulting in physical harm, pain, or mental anguish, including verbal and mental abuse. Despite this policy, a cognitively intact resident with bilateral above-knee amputations and opioid dependence, who had a physician’s order for oxycodone 10 mg every four hours, reported that when he requested his pain medication, an LPN refused to assist and told him she would not come into his room while he was screaming. The resident stated that this led him to yell and scream for help. The resident reported that the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) then came to his room and verbally abused and threatened him. According to the resident, the NHA told him he sounded like an idiot and stated that if the resident had legs, he would beat his “a**,” and also yelled out the resident’s medical history, including calling him an addict, in a manner that could be heard by others. The resident stated that the Director of Maintenance had to pull the NHA out of his room twice. Another cognitively intact resident confirmed witnessing the altercation, stating that the NHA physically threatened the resident, referenced his medical information, and called him an addict, and that the Director of Maintenance had to carry the NHA away twice. Two additional residents reported hearing yelling and commotion lasting approximately 20 minutes, describing it as sounding like people fighting and exchanging words. The LPN involved acknowledged that the resident was screaming for his medications and that she told him his pain medication was scheduled every four hours and that she did not have to come into the room if he continued screaming, stating she would not enter until he calmed down. She reported going outside to cool down and smoke a cigarette while the resident continued to scream, and she admitted that she may have given the resident the middle finger. The resident reported that the LPN gave him the middle finger behind the curtain and then directly to his face when confronted, and he documented these events in a written letter given to an RN supervisor, stating he felt verbally and physically threatened by the NHA, unsafe with the NHA around, and that his personal information was being yelled in the hall. The RN supervisor confirmed receiving the written concern and hearing from several employees that the incident was “pretty bad.” The DON acknowledged that the NHA was asked to see the resident and confirmed that the facility failed to protect the resident from verbal abuse, which caused severe psychosocial harm. Surveyors determined that this failure created an Immediate Jeopardy situation for one of six residents reviewed.
Removal Plan
- Identify root cause of the Immediate Jeopardy as staff failure to follow the facility abuse policy.
- Assess Resident R1 for adverse outcomes related to the abuse/neglect allegation.
- Offer Resident R1 coping and trauma support by RN Supervisor or designee.
- Ensure appropriate services are provided to Resident R1 if adverse outcomes occurred from abuse/neglect by Mobile DON or designee.
- Assess/interview all residents for abuse/neglect by Mobile DON or designee for indications of fear, trauma, or abuse/neglect.
- Notify physician/POA (if applicable) of any adverse findings and update the medical record.
- Review and update care plans as appropriate by Mobile DON or designee.
- Ensure appropriate services are provided to residents if adverse outcomes occurred from abuse/neglect.
- Report to appropriate agencies by Mobile DON or designee.
- Complete head-to-toe skin assessments for all residents, document findings in the medical record, notify attending physicians of any negative results, and ensure appropriate services are provided if adverse outcomes occurred.
- Interview staff by Regional Director of Operations or designee for allegations of abuse/neglect that have not been reported.
- Review incidents by Mobile DON or designee to ensure no incidents occurred that went unreported and immediately report any identified incidents that meet criteria.
- Review the Abuse/Neglect Policy for appropriateness and what to do if the alleged perpetrator is the DON or NHA and update if needed, including adding the corporate compliance number for staff to use if DON/NHA is involved or staff feel uncomfortable reporting to facility leadership.
- Re-educate all house staff by Regional Director of Operations or designee on the abuse/neglect policy, including the corporate compliance number for staff to use if DON/NHA is involved or staff feel uncomfortable reporting to facility leadership.
- Conduct audits to ensure no abuse or neglect is identified by reviewing residents.
- Review nursing documentation by Mobile DON or designee to ensure no incidents occurred that were unreported to administration.
- Review all audits and policy changes related to the Immediate Jeopardy at an Ad Hoc QA meeting.
- Have the QAPI committee review all findings upon completion of audits.
Failure to Follow Abuse Policy, Conduct Timely Background Checks, and Protect Resident from Alleged Abuse
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to follow its own abuse, neglect, and exploitation policy, including required criminal background checks and mandated reporting and investigation of abuse/neglect allegations. The facility’s written policy stated that all employees must have criminal background checks completed prior to hire and that records of such checks must be retained in employee files. Review of the social worker’s (Employee E1) personnel file showed a hire date of 1/27/26, but the criminal background check for this employee was not completed until 3/12/26. During an interview, the DON and NHA confirmed that this staff member began working without a completed background check, contrary to facility policy. The deficiency also includes the facility’s failure to identify, report, and investigate an allegation of abuse/neglect involving one resident, and failure to protect that resident from the alleged perpetrators. Resident R1, who had bilateral above-knee amputations and opioid dependence and was documented as cognitively intact with a BIMS score of 15, reported that on 3/11/26 he experienced verbal and attempted physical abuse from the NHA and felt unsafe when the NHA was in the facility. The resident stated he wrote a letter detailing the events and gave it the same day to an RN supervisor (Employee E3), whom he described as the only person he trusted. The resident reported that the facility did nothing, did not investigate, and allowed the alleged perpetrators to continue working. Multiple staff interviews corroborated that an incident occurred and that the NHA continued to work afterward. A COTA (Employee E5) stated he arrived about five minutes after the incident, described the NHA as intimidating with a short fuse, and confirmed the NHA worked the remainder of that day. The Director of Maintenance (Employee E4) confirmed he had to remove the NHA from the resident’s room to deescalate the situation and that the NHA continued to work that day. The resident’s written letter described verbal and attempted physical abuse by the NHA, a HIPAA violation involving personal information being yelled in the hall, and an LPN (Employee E2) making an obscene gesture behind a curtain and then directly to the resident when confronted. The RN supervisor (Employee E3) confirmed receiving the written concern on 3/11/26 and stated she was unsure to whom to give it because the allegation involved the NHA. The facility failed to document or process this allegation as an incident and did not report it to the State Agency or other required entities at the time it occurred. Review of facility incident logs and information submitted to the State Agency on 3/11/26 and 3/12/26 showed no inclusion of Resident R1’s abuse/neglect allegation. The DON acknowledged being aware of a verbal altercation on 3/11/26 and stated that the NHA was asked to see the resident and that corporate instructed them not to call the police. The DON confirmed that the NHA and LPN E2 were not suspended and continued to work in the facility, and that the facility failed to timely report, investigate, notify appropriate agencies, and protect residents from further abuse/neglect related to this event. The NHA was only suspended two days after the alleged abuse/neglect occurred. These failures, combined with the lack of a timely background check for Employee E1, resulted in an immediate jeopardy situation as cited by surveyors.
Removal Plan
- Identify root cause of the Immediate Jeopardy as staff failure to follow the facility abuse policy.
- Assess Resident R1 for adverse outcomes related to the abuse/neglect allegation.
- Offer Resident R1 coping and trauma support by RN Supervisor or designee.
- Ensure appropriate services are provided to Resident R1 if adverse outcomes occurred from abuse/neglect by Mobile DON or designee.
- Assess/interview all residents for abuse/neglect for indications of fear, trauma, or abuse/neglect by Mobile DON or designee.
- Notify physician/POA (if applicable) of any adverse findings and update the medical record.
- Review and update care plans as appropriate by Mobile DON or designee.
- Complete head-to-toe skin assessments for all residents and document findings in the medical record.
- Notify attending physicians of any negative results from resident assessments.
- Report any adverse outcomes/findings to appropriate agencies.
- Interview staff for allegations of abuse/neglect that have not been reported in the last 30 days by Regional Director of Operations or designee.
- Review incidents to ensure no incidents occurred that went unreported and immediately report any that meet criteria by Mobile DON or designee.
- Review the Abuse/Neglect Policy for appropriateness, including what to do if the alleged perpetrator is the DON or NHA, and update if needed.
- Add the corporate compliance hotline number to the abuse/neglect policy for staff to use if DON/NHA are involved or staff are uncomfortable reporting to facility leadership.
- Re-educate all house staff on the abuse/neglect policy, including use of the corporate compliance hotline when leadership is involved, by Regional Director of Operations or designee.
- Educate HR (or designee) that criminal background checks must be completed prior to hire.
- Audit all staff HR files to ensure all background checks are present and do not allow any employee to return to work until a missing criminal background check is completed.
- Conduct audits to ensure all existing employee files contain criminal background checks and all new hires have checks completed prior to start date.
- Conduct audits of resident care needs to ensure no abuse/neglect is identified.
- Review nursing documentation to ensure no incidents occurred that were unreported to administration by Mobile DON or designee.
- Review all audits and policy changes related to the Immediate Jeopardy at an ad hoc QA meeting.
- Have the QAPI committee review all findings.
Insufficient Nursing Staff and Inaccurate Staffing Assignments
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to provide sufficient nursing staff to meet residents’ needs and to ensure accurate staffing practices. The facility’s own policy dated 1/15/26 states it will maintain staffing practices consistent with federal regulations, state law, and professional standards while supporting safe and effective care. However, multiple residents reported that the facility was understaffed, resulting in missed showers, inadequate hygiene, and insufficient assistance with mobility and positioning. One resident stated they were not showered before a doctor’s appointment, did not have a buttocks wound dressed, and were left sitting on their buttocks all day. Another resident reported not getting out of bed for months due to lack of staff and not receiving regularly scheduled showers on Tuesdays and Fridays. Additional residents described similar issues related to inadequate staffing. One resident reported that when they get up during the day, there often are not enough staff to put them back to bed. Another resident stated that staff are “plugged into” nurse aide positions but do not provide care or remain on the floors. A resident with Lyme disease, whose skin becomes very itchy, reported receiving only five showers in six weeks despite being scheduled for two per week and stated there were days they were not cleaned up at all. Another resident reported waiting over an hour for staff to obtain a portable oxygen tank so they could leave their room. Staff interviews and staffing records further demonstrated insufficient and inaccurately represented staffing. A nurse aide reported there were not enough staff to turn and reposition residents and that it was hard to find help when two-person assistance was needed. Multiple staff members stated the facility “lies” on the staffing sheet by listing employees who are not actually providing resident care, including a cook and a social worker who were pulled to the floor without nurse aide job descriptions or orientation in their files, and a nurse aide who was scheduled but found folding linens in the laundry instead of providing care. On a shift with a census of 52 residents, an LPN reported having only two, possibly three aides, effectively leaving one aide per hallway. The interim administrator confirmed that the facility failed to have sufficient nursing staff to provide nursing and related services to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for the identified residents.
Unqualified Staff Assigned to Food Service Director Role
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to employ a qualified Food Service Director to manage the daily operations of the Dietary Department for a three‑month period from January 2026 through March 2026. Staff interviews and review of employee files showed that the individual functioning as the Kitchen Manager, Employee E21, had been hired on 1/21/26 and had worked as Kitchen Manager since 1/28/26, but was a Nurse Aide and not a Certified Dietary Manager. During an interview on 3/12/26, at 9:57 a.m., Employee E21 confirmed she was not a Certified Dietary Manager. In a subsequent interview on 7/21/24 at 1:40 p.m., the Interim NHA (Employee E12) and the DON confirmed that the facility could not provide documented evidence that Employee E21 met the qualifications required for the Food Service Director position, resulting in noncompliance with PA Code 201.18(e)(6) regarding management. No specific residents, medical histories, or clinical conditions were mentioned in relation to this deficiency in the report.
Failure of Facility Administration to Implement Abuse Policies and Professional Care Standards
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) failing to effectively manage the facility to ensure residents were free from abuse and to ensure the facility implemented its abuse policies, resulting in an immediate jeopardy situation. A review of the NHA’s job description showed that the primary purpose of the position was to direct the day-to-day functions of the facility in accordance with current federal, state, and local standards, guidelines, and regulations governing LTC facilities so that the highest degree of quality care could be provided to residents at all times. However, based on review of the job description, facility and clinical records, and staff interviews, surveyors determined that the NHA did not fulfill these responsibilities, as the facility failed to provide fundamental principles that apply to treatment and care, and failed to ensure that residents received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice and facility policies. These failures were cited under 28 Pa Code 201.14(a) Responsibility of licensee and 28 Pa Code 201.18(b)(1)(e)(1) Management. The report does not provide specific resident identifiers, clinical histories, or detailed descriptions of individual abuse incidents, but it establishes that the facility’s administration and management, under the NHA’s direction, did not ensure implementation of abuse policies or adherence to professional standards and facility policies in the treatment and care of residents.
Failure to Maintain Accurate and Current Facility Assessment
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to accurately complete and update its facility-wide assessment used to determine necessary resources for competent resident care during routine operations and emergencies. Review of the Facility Assessment dated 3/26/25 showed that the section listing key personnel still identified the previous Nursing Home Administrator, previous Director of Nursing, and previous Assistant Director of Nursing rather than current leadership. The census section referenced a time period of the 2025 year to date without current information, and the section titled “Information about our residents” had not been reviewed or updated since 3/26/25. During an interview on 3/14/26, the Interim Nursing Home Administrator (Employee E12) confirmed that the facility failed to accurately complete the Facility Assessment and that all information about the residents reflected the last time this employee had worked at the facility, rather than current resident data. These findings were cited under 28 Pa. Code 201.18(b)(3)(e)(2) related to management requirements.
Failure to Ensure Physician-Completed Initial Visits
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to ensure that a physician completed required initial comprehensive visits, as mandated by facility policy and state regulations. The facility’s “Physician Visits and Physician Delegation” policy, dated 6/1/24 and last reviewed 1/21/26, specifies that a PA, NP, or CNS may not perform initial comprehensive visits. Despite this, review of clinical records showed that initial visits for three residents were conducted by a Certified Registered Nurse Practitioner (CRNP), identified as Employee E20, rather than by a physician. For one resident admitted with anxiety, depression, and lung cancer, a late entry note dated 3/1/26 (effective 2/25/26) documented that the CRNP completed the initial admission visit. For another resident with gastroparesis, anemia, and esophagitis with bleeding, who had been discharged home and then readmitted, a late entry note entered on 2/25/26 (effective 2/23/26) showed that the CRNP assessed the resident following readmission, constituting the initial visit. For a third resident admitted with emphysema, oxygen dependence, and alcohol dependence with withdrawal, a late entry note entered on 6/26/26 (effective 6/25/26) documented that the CRNP performed the initial visit. During an interview, the DON and Interim Nursing Home Administrator acknowledged that the facility failed to ensure a physician completed the initial visits for these three residents.
Untimely Documentation of Resident Progress Notes
Penalty
Summary
Surveyors identified a deficiency in the facility’s failure to appropriately and timely document progress notes in the clinical records for four residents. For one resident with anxiety, depression, and lung cancer, the initial admission visit was documented as a late entry on 3/1/26 for an encounter that occurred on 2/25/26, resulting in a four-day delay in documentation. Another resident with dementia, tremor, and a history of falling received a right shoulder injection on 3/5/26, but the corresponding progress note was not entered until 3/13/26, eight days later. A third resident with gastroparesis, anemia, and esophagitis with bleeding was seen for increased swelling in both lower extremities on 1/19/26, but the progress note was entered as a late entry on 1/23/26, four days later. A fourth resident with emphysema, oxygen dependence, and alcohol dependence with withdrawal was evaluated for nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea on 2/23/26, yet the related progress note was not entered until 2/25/26, two days later. During an interview, the Director of Nursing acknowledged that the facility failed to appropriately and timely document progress notes in the clinical records for all four residents, in violation of 28 Pa. Code 211.5(f)(g)(h) regarding clinical records.
Failure to Provide Effective Communication Training to Direct Care Staff
Penalty
Summary
Surveyors determined that the facility failed to provide required training on effective communication for five of five sampled direct care staff members. Review of the facility’s employee listing showed that one RN and four NAs were hired on various dates between 10/30/23 and 12/4/24. Examination of facility-provided education documents and individual training records for these staff members revealed no evidence that they had received education on effective communication as required by facility policy and state regulations. During an interview on 3/14/26 at 1:00 p.m., the Interim Nursing Home Administrator confirmed that the facility had not provided effective communication training to these identified staff members. The deficiency was cited under 28 Pa Code: 201.14(a) Responsibility of licensee, 28 Pa Code: 201.18(b)(1) Management, and 28 Pa Code: 201.20(a)(6)(d) Staff development, based on the lack of documented training and the administrator’s acknowledgment of this omission.
Failure to Implement and Document Ordered Pressure Ulcer Interventions
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide necessary treatment and services, consistent with professional standards of practice, for a resident with a pressure ulcer. Facility policy on Pressure Injury Prevention and Management required that treatment and services be provided to heal pressure injuries, that preventive interventions be implemented for all residents with pressure injuries, and that these interventions be documented in the care plan and communicated to staff. The resident, admitted with abnormal posture, paraplegia, and a right ankle pressure ulcer, had an MDS indicating a current Stage III pressure ulcer. The care plan and physician orders directed staff to encourage turning and repositioning every two hours and as needed, float heels while in bed, and apply offloading boots when in bed. However, review of the resident’s Documentation V2 Reports for February and March showed missing evidence of turning and repositioning each shift, with a total of 39 undocumented instances in February and 17 in March. During interview, the resident reported getting out of bed only once a day, needing assistance with turning and repositioning, and stated that staff turned and repositioned him maybe twice a shift. Observation found the resident lying in bed without the ordered offloading boots in place; the boots were seen in a chair, and the resident stated staff had not offered to put them on that day. An LPN confirmed the offloading boots were not on as ordered. The DON stated that for residents at risk for pressure ulcers or with wounds upon admission, interventions such as turning and repositioning, air mattress, wedges, or bunny boots are entered upon admission and are expected to be documented at least each shift, and confirmed the facility failed to document that the offloading boots were applied while the resident was in bed each shift. The Nursing Home Administrator and DON confirmed the facility failed to ensure necessary treatment and services were provided for the resident’s pressure ulcer, in violation of 28 Pa. Code 211.12(d)(5) Nursing services.
Failure to Maintain Required Nurse Aide Staffing Ratios
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to provide the required number of Nurse Aides (NAs) per resident per shift as required by state regulations. Surveyors determined that, for the period from 1/25/26 through 2/13/26, the facility did not meet required NA staffing ratios for 40 of 63 shifts. A review of the facility’s staffing worksheet showed that the facility was using an outdated staffing hours calculator that did not reflect current NA ratio regulations, and the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) confirmed that the incorrect calculator was being used. The documentation provided by the facility also lacked the assignment grids that were supposed to designate required NA ratios and be reviewed during labor meetings. Based on review of documents and staff interviews, surveyors concluded that the facility failed to make a good faith effort to correct and sustain improvement for a previously cited deficiency related to NA staffing ratios (Citation P5520). Despite prior education provided to the NHA and Director of Nursing (DON) on the required state Certified Nurse Aide ratios, the facility’s practices did not result in compliance with current staffing requirements. The failure to maintain required NA staffing levels and to use accurate tools to calculate staffing was cited under 28 Pa. Code: 201.14(a) Responsibility of licensee, 28 Pa. Code: 201.18(b)(1) Management, and 28 Pa. Code: 211.12(d)(1)(2)(3)(4)(f.1)(i)(2) Nursing services.
Insufficient Nursing Staff Leading to Missed ADLs and Cancelled Activities
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide sufficient nursing staff to meet residents’ needs for activities of daily living (ADLs) and activities participation, resulting in unmet care needs for five of six interviewed residents. Facility policies dated 1/15/26 required staff to provide necessary services for bathing, dressing, grooming, oral care, transfers, ambulation, toileting, eating, and communication, and to assist residents to and from activities with accommodations in schedules and timing. Multiple residents reported that there were not enough aides, especially on the 2 p.m. to 10 p.m. shift, leading to missed showers on scheduled shower days, prolonged call light response times of up to an hour, and residents sometimes not being gotten out of bed at all because there was not enough staff to return them to bed. Residents also reported that activities, including Bingo and card games, were repeatedly cancelled or not attended because of insufficient staff to assist with transport and supervision. Several residents stated that Bingo, normally held three times a week, had not occurred for about a week, and that they were sometimes unable to go to the dining room to eat because there were not enough staff to supervise and help those who needed assistance. Staff reportedly informed residents that activities and dining room attendance were being limited or cancelled due to staffing shortages, particularly on specific shifts. The Nursing Home Administrator confirmed that the facility did not have sufficient nursing staff to provide nursing and related services necessary to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of the affected residents.
Failure to Complete Required Neurological Checks After Resident Fall
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to complete required neurological assessments following a resident fall. Facility policy on Fall Prevention and Management dated 1/15/26 states that in the event of a fall, a licensed nurse will assess the resident, the physician/NP and responsible party will be notified, and appropriate documentation and interventions will be completed. The 72-Hour Neurological Assessment Sheet further specifies that for all falls, neurological checks are to be completed at defined intervals (initial assessment, then every 15 minutes x4, every 30 minutes x4, every hour x2, and once per shift for 72 hours), and that unwitnessed falls or falls in which the head is struck require neuro checks and physician notification for any change in condition. The resident involved, identified as R1, had diagnoses including hypertension, seizure disorder, and hyponatremia, and experienced a fall on 1/18/26. A nursing progress note documented that at 4:15 p.m. the resident was found on the floor in his room, sitting on his buttocks, laughing, with the wheelchair at bedside and the bed on its side. The resident denied pain or discomfort, range of motion was within normal limits, no apparent injuries were noted, and vital signs were stable. The note stated that neuro checks were initiated per facility protocol. However, review of the 72-Hour Neurological Assessment Sheet dated 1/18/26 showed that only 8 neurological checks were completed out of 18 required opportunities. In an interview, the Nursing Home Administrator and Director of Nursing confirmed that the facility failed to ensure the resident received the neurological assessments after the fall, resulting in the cited deficiency under 28 Pa. Code 201.14(a), 211.10(d), and 211.12(d)(1)(5).
Failure to Protect Resident from Mental Abuse and Intimidation During Public Debt Collection
Penalty
Summary
A deficiency occurred when a resident with moderate cognitive impairment and a diagnosis of dementia and anxiety was subjected to mental abuse and intimidation by facility staff in a public hallway. The resident, who had a Power of Attorney (POA) assigned to handle financial matters, was confronted by the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) and a sheriff's deputy regarding an outstanding facility bill of $26,827. The confrontation took place in a public area, with other residents and staff present, and involved repeated verbal statements about the resident owing money and threats of issuing 30-day notices. The resident became visibly distraught, tearful, and expressed confusion about the situation, stating they did not understand why they were being held or what the debt referred to. Multiple staff members witnessed the incident and expressed concern about the appropriateness of discussing private financial matters in a public space, especially given the resident's cognitive status. Written statements from staff described the resident as confused and tearful during and after the incident. Some staff members reported feeling pressured not to report the event as abuse, and there was a lack of a formal investigation into the incident. The facility's own policies required that such matters be handled privately and with the appropriate responsible party, in this case, the POA, rather than the resident. Interviews with staff and a representative from the sheriff's office confirmed that the resident's POA should have been the party served with legal or financial documents, not the resident with dementia. The NHA acknowledged that the situation was not handled appropriately and that the resident was not protected from mental/emotional abuse. The incident resulted in psychosocial harm and mental anguish to the resident, as evidenced by the resident's emotional response and the application of the reasonable person concept.
Failure to Obtain Responsible Party Signature for Financial Documentation
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that the responsible party signed financial papers for a resident with moderate cognitive impairment. According to facility policy, residents must be informed of their rights both orally and in writing, and information should be provided in a manner the resident can understand, taking into account any health or mental status limitations. The clinical record review showed that a resident with a BIMS score of 11, indicating moderate impairment, was admitted with diagnoses including Multiple Sclerosis, muscle wasting and atrophy, and hyperlipidemia. Despite this cognitive status, the resident personally signed a Notice of Medicare Non-Coverage (NOMNC) form. There was no documentation that the responsible party was informed or that they signed the necessary financial papers related to the ending of Medicare coverage. During staff interview, the Nursing Home Administrator confirmed that residents with moderate impairment should not sign NOMNC forms and acknowledged the failure to have the responsible party complete the required documentation. This deficiency was cited under 28 Pa. Code 201.18(b)(2) Management and 28 Pa. Code 201.29(a) Resident rights.
Failure to Utilize Resident's Power of Attorney in Legal Action for Non-Payment
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a resident's legal surrogate, specifically the designated Power of Attorney (POA), was utilized for legal actions regarding non-payment of bills. The resident in question had a documented diagnosis of dementia with moderate cognitive impairment, as indicated by a BIMS score of 10, and her son was identified as her POA in the clinical record. Despite this, the facility sent invoices for a significant outstanding balance to both the resident and her POA, but when legal action was initiated for non-payment, the facility did not engage the POA and instead involved the resident directly. On one occasion, the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA), accompanied by a sheriff's deputy, confronted the resident in a public hallway about the unpaid balance, repeatedly informing her of the debt and the facility's practice of issuing 30-day notices. The resident, who was visibly distressed and expressed confusion about the situation, was not given the benefit of her POA's representation during this process. The NHA later confirmed that the facility failed to utilize the resident's POA for the legal action, despite being aware of the POA's authority and the resident's cognitive impairment.
Failure to Report Alleged Abuse Involving Resident with Dementia
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to report an allegation of abuse involving a resident with dementia, high blood pressure, and anxiety. According to the facility's policy, all allegations of abuse, neglect, or exploitation must be reported to the Administrator and the Department of Health within 24 hours. On the date in question, the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA), accompanied by a sheriff's deputy, confronted the resident in a public hallway about an alleged debt, repeatedly stating the amount owed and referencing issuing 30-day notices. The resident became visibly distraught, crying and expressing confusion about the situation. Multiple staff members, including the Former Director of Nursing (FDON), Former Activities Director (FAD), and Former Social Worker (FSW), witnessed the incident and described it as emotional or mental abuse. Written statements were submitted by at least two staff members, detailing the resident's distress and the intimidating nature of the encounter. Despite these reports and the facility's policy, the incident was not reported to the state agency as required. The FDON acknowledged awareness of the situation but claimed not to have received any written statements, while other staff confirmed they submitted statements and were discouraged from pursuing the matter further. The NHA later confirmed that the facility failed to report the abuse allegation. A review of incidents submitted to the state agency showed no record of the staff-to-resident abuse allegation for the incident in question.
Failure to Investigate Alleged Abuse Incident
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to identify and investigate an incident of possible abuse involving a resident with dementia, high blood pressure, and anxiety. The incident occurred when the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA), accompanied by a sheriff's deputy, confronted the resident in a public hallway about a significant outstanding balance, repeatedly stating the amount owed and referencing issuing 30-day notices. The resident became visibly distraught, was crying, and expressed confusion about the situation. Witnesses, including staff members, observed the resident's emotional distress and reported the event as potential verbal and psychological abuse. Despite the facility's policy requiring immediate reporting and investigation of all abuse allegations, the incident was not properly addressed. Staff members were instructed to submit written statements, and some did so, but the Director of Nursing (DON) reported receiving no statements. Witnesses later confirmed that they had submitted statements, which were not acknowledged or acted upon. The former NHA gave conflicting accounts regarding whether an investigation was conducted, at first stating that no investigation occurred and later claiming an investigation file existed but could not be located. Multiple staff interviews confirmed that the event was witnessed, statements were submitted, and concerns about abuse were raised. However, the facility did not follow its own procedures for investigating abuse allegations, failed to notify the Department of Health as required, and did not document or analyze the evidence. The NHA ultimately confirmed that the facility failed to identify and investigate the abuse allegation involving the resident.
Failure to Employ Qualified Activities Director
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to employ a qualified activities director as required by federal and state regulations. Review of facility documentation showed that the individual serving as Activity Director, Employee E8, previously worked as a Nurse Aide and did not have prior experience in an activity program. The personnel file for Employee E8 did not contain documentation demonstrating that they met the federal standards for the position. During interviews, both Employee E8 and the Nursing Home Administrator confirmed that the facility did not have a qualified activities director in place from October 6, 2025.
Incomplete Posting of State Agency and Ombudsman Contact Information
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to post complete and accessible contact information for the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman program and the State Survey Agency as required by regulations. Observations revealed that the posted Ombudsman information in the front hallway was missing the Ombudsman's name, address, and email. Additionally, the State Survey Agency contact information was posted at an inaccessible height, in small print, and did not include an email address, current address, or a required statement informing residents of their right to file a complaint regarding suspected violations, including abuse, neglect, exploitation, misappropriation of property, non-compliance with advanced directive requirements, and requests for information about returning to the community. The Nursing Home Administrator confirmed these deficiencies during an interview.
Failure to Maintain Clean and Homelike Environment in Resident Areas
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain a clean, safe, comfortable, and homelike environment in two of five rooms, specifically C Hall and the Shower Room. Observations included two ceiling tiles with brown stains in one room and, in the shower room, walls with sections of missing paint, unpainted plaster repairs, and dark discoloration between tiles on the floor and lower walls. A resident reported that after showers, the towel under their feet became black, indicating a lack of cleanliness. The DON confirmed these findings during the survey. These deficiencies were identified through review of facility policy, direct observation, and staff and resident interviews.
Failure to Label and Date Food Products in Main Kitchen
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to properly label and date food products in the Main Kitchen, as required by facility policy. During an observation, surveyors found an opened bag of lettuce in the tray line refrigerator, two cans of tuna in the dry storage area, an open bag of garlic and a bag of celery in the walk-in refrigerator, and two apple pies in the walk-in freezer, all without appropriate labels or receive dates. The Assistant Dietary Manager confirmed that these food items were not labeled or dated according to policy. The deficiency was cited under relevant Pennsylvania Codes for responsibility of the licensee and management.
Failure to Communicate Transfer Information, Bed-Hold Policy, and Ombudsman Notification
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that necessary resident information was communicated to the receiving health care provider during facility-initiated transfers for two residents. Specifically, there was no documented evidence that the residents' care plan goals, advanced directive information, specific instructions for ongoing care, resident representative information, and all information necessary to meet the residents' specific needs were provided to the receiving facility upon transfer. This deficiency was confirmed by the DON during interviews and was evident in the clinical records of the affected residents, who had complex medical histories including diabetes, hypertension, chronic kidney disease, cerebral infarction, and muscle weakness. Additionally, the facility did not provide written notification of the bed-hold policy to the residents or their representatives at the time of hospital transfer for three residents. The clinical records lacked documentation of this required notification. Furthermore, the facility failed to notify the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman upon transfer to the hospital for these residents, as confirmed by the DON and a review of facility records. These failures were identified through policy review, clinical record review, and staff interviews.
Inaccurate MDS Discharge Status Documentation
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments accurately reflected the status of a resident. According to the Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) User's Manual, Section A2105 requires that the discharge status be coded to indicate the actual location to which a resident is discharged. In this case, a resident with diagnoses of anxiety, hyperlipidemia, and underweight was admitted and later discharged from the facility. The MDS assessment incorrectly coded the resident's discharge status as a transfer to a short-term general hospital, when in fact, the resident was discharged to home/community after the family decided to take the resident out of the facility against medical advice (AMA). Review of clinical records and staff interviews confirmed the error. Nursing progress notes detailed the events leading to the resident's discharge, including the family's decision to remove the resident and the completion of AMA paperwork. The Director of Nursing acknowledged that the MDS was completed incorrectly, with the discharge status and entrance status being flipped, resulting in inaccurate documentation of the resident's actual discharge location.
Failure to Provide Care According to Physician Orders and Resident Needs
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide appropriate treatment and care according to physician orders and resident needs for two residents. One resident, admitted with diagnoses including high blood pressure, PTSD, and orthopedic aftercare, was observed wearing knee immobilizer braces on both legs. However, there was no physician's order or care plan documented for the use and management of the knee immobilizer. The Therapy Director stated that the resident was required to wear the immobilizers at all times except during bed rest for skin checks and showering, but this protocol was not supported by any documented order or care plan. The Director of Nursing confirmed the absence of these required documents. Another resident, admitted with diagnoses such as cerebral aneurysm, hypertension, and muscle weakness, had physician orders indicating an NPO (nothing by mouth) status and specific oral medications to be administered. Despite these orders, the Director of Nursing confirmed that the physician's orders were not followed as required. These findings demonstrate that the facility did not ensure residents received care and treatment in accordance with physician directives and established care policies.
Failure to Provide Trauma-Informed Care for Resident with PTSD
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide trauma-informed care for a resident with a history of trauma, specifically Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). According to the facility's own policy, triggers that may re-traumatize residents should be identified and addressed through specific interventions in the care plan. Resident R39, who had a documented history of being assaulted and expressed discomfort with male caregivers, had this trigger identified in the social service history. The resident reported feeling anxious and reliving the traumatic experience when cared for by male staff. Despite this information, a review of the resident's care plan showed that it did not fully address the PTSD diagnosis or specify the trigger of male caregivers, nor did it include interventions to eliminate or mitigate this trigger. The Nursing Home Administrator confirmed that the facility did not provide trauma-informed care to prevent re-traumatization for this resident, as required by policy and regulation.
Failure to Provide Required Bathing Assistance Due to Inaccessible Shower Facilities
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide necessary assistance with activities of daily living (ADLs), specifically bathing and showering, for three residents with significant physical disabilities. These residents had physician orders specifying regular showers, but due to ongoing renovations in the shower room, they were only receiving bed baths. The affected residents included individuals with multiple sclerosis, quadriplegia, paraplegia, diabetes, peripheral vascular disease, and spinal stenosis, all of whom required the use of a shower bed or specialized equipment for safe bathing. Interviews with the residents revealed that they had not received a proper shower for several weeks to months, and expressed dissatisfaction with the adequacy of bed baths as a substitute. Facility policy required that residents unable to perform ADLs independently receive necessary services to maintain hygiene, including showers or baths according to their preferences and needs. However, the shower room under renovation could not accommodate the required shower beds, and only two stalls were available, neither suitable for these residents. Staff and administrative interviews confirmed the lack of appropriate facilities and the inability to meet the residents' prescribed bathing schedules. Resident council minutes also documented ongoing bathroom remodeling over several months, further corroborating the prolonged lack of access to proper bathing facilities for these residents.
Staffing Deficiency in Nurse Aide Coverage
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to meet the required staffing levels for nurse aides on two separate occasions. On the evening shift of April 20, 2025, the facility did not provide the mandated one nurse aide per 11 residents, as evidenced by staffing documents showing 45.69 actual hours against the required 48.75 hours for a census of 65 residents. Similarly, on the night shift of April 19, 2025, the facility did not meet the requirement of one nurse aide per 15 residents, with staffing documents indicating 36.43 actual hours against the required 42.95 hours for a census of 63 residents. This deficiency was confirmed by the Nursing Home Administrator during an interview on April 25, 2025.
Plan Of Correction
No residents were found to be negatively affected by the deficient practice of regulation. The facility will make every effort to meet minimum state regulation as required and calculated by PA DOH Minimum Staffing Ratios. 1. The Administrator and/or designee will have a staffing meeting each business day morning, for four weeks to ensure the proper staff to resident ratios meet shift requirements according to current censuses. Census will be reviewed to ensure staff to resident ratio. 2. The facility will utilize administrative staff that have nursing or certified Nurse Aide certification to maintain the required ratios for the CNA, in the event of unforeseen shortage of CNA. 3. The Administrator and Assistant Administrator will be educated by Regional Support Personnel on staffing ratios, particularly as it pertains to CNAs. 4. The Facility will utilize Open Shift program to make the schedule accessible to staff to see open shifts and pick them up, advertisement of open positions and hiring incentives, and ongoing recruitment efforts. 5. Results of staffing meetings and recruitment efforts will be reviewed weekly by Administrator and DON and monthly by QAPI committee.
Failure to Notify Family of Resident's Change in Condition
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to notify a family representative of a change in condition for one of the residents, identified as Resident R1. According to the facility's Change in Condition Notification Protocol, the facility is required to inform the resident, consult with the resident's physician, and notify the resident's legal or family representative when there is a significant change in the resident's condition. Resident R1, who was admitted with diagnoses including peripheral vascular disease, hypertension, and atrial fibrillation, experienced a change in condition on August 11, 2024. The resident's urine was noted to be an abnormal dark brown color, and the resident exhibited slight tremors and facial grimacing, reporting soreness in the right elbow and overall discomfort. Despite these changes, the resident declined to go to the hospital, and the RN supervisor was informed. Further assessment of Resident R1 revealed continued weakness, lack of appetite, and changes in vital signs, including a decrease in oxygen saturation to 85%, prompting the application of oxygen at 2 liters per minute via nasal cannula. The physician was notified of the updated vitals, and a physician order for oxygen was documented. However, the progress notes did not include any notification to the family regarding the change in condition or the initiation of oxygen therapy. This oversight was confirmed during an interview with the Director of Nursing, who acknowledged the failure to notify the family representative as required by the facility's protocol.
Failure to Obtain Ordered Laboratory Services
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide timely laboratory services as ordered for a resident diagnosed with peripheral vascular disease, hypertension, and atrial fibrillation. The resident had a physician's order dated April 9, 2024, for weekly laboratory tests, including CBC-diff and CMP, to be conducted every Tuesday. However, a review of the resident's clinical record revealed that the laboratory tests were not obtained on August 6, 2024, as ordered. This deficiency was confirmed during an interview with the Director of Nursing on August 19, 2024.
Improper Food Labeling and Sanitation Practices
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to properly label and date food products in both the reach-in cooler and walk-in freezer, as well as maintain sanitary conditions in the main kitchen, which created the potential for cross-contamination. During an observation, it was noted that six sandwiches, one uncovered salad, and four foam containers in the reach-in cooler were not labeled or dated. Additionally, two bags in the reach-in freezer were not secured, labeled, or dated, and six bags of hoagie buns in the walk-in freezer were also missing labels and dates. Furthermore, two boxes of magic cup ice cream were found on the floor of the walk-in freezer. In the dish room, a dietary employee was observed drying dishes with a towel, which is not in accordance with proper infection control practices. During an interview, the Dietary Manager confirmed these deficiencies, acknowledging the failure to properly label and date food products and the improper infection control practice in the dish room, which could potentially lead to foodborne illness.
Failure to Maintain Resident Dignity During Dressing Change
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain the personal dignity of a resident during a dressing change observation. According to the facility's policy on Resident Rights, dated 3/27/24, residents have the right to be treated with respect and dignity. During an observation on 6/30/24, at 10:15 a.m., an LPN performed a dressing change on a resident's abdomen. After placing the outer dressing, the LPN took a marker from her pocket and dated the dressing, which was considered undignified. In a subsequent interview at 10:25 a.m., the LPN confirmed that the experience was not dignified for the resident.
Failure to Report Resident-to-Resident Abuse Incident
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to report an incident of resident-to-resident abuse involving Resident R24, as required by their policy and state regulations. The incident occurred when Resident R24 was slapped on the cheek by another resident, Resident R15, during dinner. The nurse aide reported that Resident R15 accused Resident R24 of intending to harm him, which led to the altercation. Although the slap was not hard and Resident R24 did not sustain any visible injuries, the incident was documented in a clinical nurse progress note and an incident report was completed. However, the facility did not report the altercation to the local State field office as required. Resident R24 had a medical history that included Parkinson's disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, neurocognitive disorder with Lewy bodies, and hypertension. The incident was noted in the clinical records, and the family, doctor, and Assistant Director of Nursing were notified. Despite these actions, the Director of Nursing confirmed that the facility did not fulfill its obligation to report the incident to the appropriate authorities, which constitutes a deficiency in adhering to the facility's abuse, neglect, and exploitation policy.
Failure to Update Care Plan for Resident's Specific Needs
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to update and revise the care plan for a resident, identified as Resident R56, to reflect their specific care needs. The resident was admitted with diagnoses including unspecified dementia with behavioral disturbances, impulse disorder, and pain. A physician's order dated June 30, 2024, prescribed ceftriaxone, an antibiotic, to be administered intramuscularly for a urinary tract infection. However, the care plan reviewed on July 2, 2024, did not include any plan of care for the urinary infection or the antibiotic treatment. The deficiency was confirmed during an interview with the Licensed Practical Nurse Assessment Coordinator (LPNAC), who acknowledged that the care plan for Resident R56 was not updated to include the urinary tract infection and the prescribed treatment. This oversight was identified as a failure to ensure that the resident's care plan was revised to reflect their specific care needs, as required by the facility's policy and regulatory standards.
Failure to Provide Necessary ROM Treatment for a Resident
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide appropriate treatment and services to prevent a decrease in range of motion for a resident, identified as Resident R41. The facility's policy on the prevention of decline in range of motion, dated 3/27/24, mandates the provision of treatment and care in accordance with professional standards, including the use of appropriate equipment such as braces or splints. However, a review of Resident R41's records revealed a lack of physician orders for a left-hand palm guard, despite the resident being observed with a palm guard on multiple occasions. Additionally, the resident's care plan did not include instructions for the protection of the left fingers and palm. Interviews with facility staff further highlighted the deficiency. A nurse aide was unaware of the application or removal schedule for the palm guard, and the Director of Nursing admitted that the facility was unaware of the palm guard's presence, suggesting it was brought by the resident's family. This lack of awareness and documentation indicates a failure to provide necessary treatment and services to maintain or improve the resident's range of motion, as required by the facility's policy and professional standards.
Inadequate Supervision Leads to Resident Fall and Chemical Hazard
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide adequate supervision for two residents, resulting in a fall for one resident and potential interaction with an unsecured disinfectant for another. Resident R24, who has severe cognitive impairment, dementia, Parkinsonism, and unsteadiness on feet, was identified as high fall risk. Despite a physician's order requiring out-of-bed assistance from two staff members, the resident was left unattended on a shower chair toilet by a nurse aide who went to get supplies and assist another aide. The resident pulled the call light and was found on the floor by another nurse aide, although no injuries were noted. Resident R56, also with severe cognitive impairment and lacking safety awareness, was observed alone at a dining room table with an unsecured chemical spray bottle within reach. The Dietary Manager confirmed that the spray bottle should not have been left there. The Director of Nursing acknowledged the facility's failure to provide adequate supervision for these residents, which led to the incidents.
Failure to Address Behavioral Health Needs of a Resident
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to meet the behavioral health care needs of Resident R33, as evidenced by a lack of appropriate follow-up after the resident expressed suicidal ideation. Resident R33, who has a history of diabetes, high blood pressure, and heart failure, was noted to display depressive behaviors in their care plan. On June 28, 2024, a progress note documented that the resident expressed a desire to die, stating they had nothing to live for except their sister. Despite this significant expression of distress, there was no documentation of monitoring or follow-up in the progress notes dated July 1, 2024. Observations and staff interviews further highlighted the resident's depressive state. On June 30, 2024, the resident was observed sleeping in a wheelchair, and a nurse aide confirmed that the resident had been depressed lately. The Director of Nursing acknowledged the facility's failure to identify and address the resident's highest practicable psychosocial needs, confirming the deficiency in providing necessary behavioral health services.
Failure to Date and Store Medications Properly
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to adhere to its policy on the storage of medications, as evidenced by the lack of dating on opened insulin pens in one of the three medication carts observed. During an observation, it was noted that the Middle medication cart contained insulin pens for a resident, specifically Lispro and Tresiba, that were not dated with the time and date of opening as required. This deficiency was confirmed by an LPN and later by the Director of Nursing, who acknowledged the failure to date opened medications and properly store them in the medication cart.
Infection Control and Sanitation Deficiencies
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to prevent cross-contamination during a dressing change for Resident 42 and did not maintain a safe and sanitary environment in the shower room. During the dressing change, an LPN removed the soiled dressing and placed it in the trash can, then moved the trash can closer to the bed with her hands. She donned new gloves without washing her hands and proceeded to pack the wound with her fingers. Additionally, Resident 42's gown touched the open wound on three occasions, contaminating the site. The LPN confirmed these actions during an interview. The sole shower room was observed to be unsanitary, with a gallon jug of soap without a lid on the floor, a bucket under the shower chair, a bottle of shampoo on the shower bench, and a dirty washcloth and towel present. A brown substance was smeared on a shower chair and on the floor by the back door. An LPN confirmed these observations and the Director of Nursing acknowledged the facility's failure to prevent cross-contamination during the dressing change and to maintain a sanitary environment in the shower room.
Latest citations in Pennsylvania
A resident with dementia, psychotic disturbance, mood disturbance, and anxiety, residing on a locked unit with a wander guard, was able to leave the secured area by closely following a housekeeper through coded double doors and out a side door without being noticed. Staff did not check for residents before and after exiting the unit, and the resident left the premises, traveled into the community, and purchased food and a drink before being located by local police and returned without injury. The facility’s elopement policy required monitoring for missing residents and initiation of emergency procedures, but these measures were only implemented after the resident was discovered missing and an elopement alarm was activated.
Surveyors observed that dietary staff did not follow the facility’s personal hygiene policy requiring hair restraints, as two dietary employees worked over uncovered food on the tray line with uncovered mustaches. In the same food preparation area, equipment including a large mixer with an uncovered bowl, a Robot-coupe mixer, and a blender were stored and used beneath window frames with peeling paint, and a nearby window blind had dried food debris along its length. Another window frame above a storage rack of meal trays also had peeling paint, demonstrating unsanitary food storage and preparation conditions.
Surveyors determined that the facility failed to provide required written notices of transfers and discharges to multiple residents and/or their representatives, and did not notify the State LTC Ombudsman when residents were transferred to the hospital after changes in condition or left against medical advice. Record reviews showed repeated absence of documentation that residents or responsible parties received written information about the transfers, and that the Ombudsman was informed. The Administrator confirmed that these notifications were not sent.
The facility failed to address repeated grievances regarding slow responses to resident call bells. The grievance policy required acknowledgment and active resolution of both written and verbal complaints, yet multiple residents reported that call bells often went unanswered for more than 30 minutes. Resident council minutes over several consecutive months documented ongoing complaints about delayed call bell response, and grievance records showed multiple similar complaints over an extended period. The DON and the administrator acknowledged a pattern of complaints about slow call bell responses and confirmed that the facility had not responded to these grievances.
Surveyors found that the facility did not ensure a safe, clean, and comfortable environment on two nursing units, noting a shattered clear plastic fire extinguisher cover in a hallway between resident rooms, holes in bathroom walls, a dented and misshaped room entrance doorframe near the floor, a hole in the wall between resident beds, and dented, crumbling wallboard near a bathroom entrance. These conditions were cited under state regulations for licensee responsibility and management.
A deficiency was identified when a resident’s MDS assessment did not accurately reflect the resident’s need for corrective lenses. The resident had a history of diabetes mellitus and falls and was care planned for impaired vision with a requirement for glasses. Despite this, the MDS indicated that no corrective lenses were needed during the look-back period, while direct observation showed the resident wearing glasses, and the Administrator later confirmed the inaccuracy of the MDS documentation.
A resident with chronic kidney disease and DM was documented on the MDS as alert and frequently incontinent of urine, and the CAA indicated that urinary incontinence should be addressed in the care plan. Review of the resident’s current care plan showed no interventions related to urinary incontinence, and the DON confirmed there was no documented evidence that this identified care area was included in the plan.
A resident with chronic kidney disease, polyneuropathies, and muscle weakness, who had no cognitive impairment and required substantial staff assistance for showers and total assistance for transfers, was scheduled to receive showers twice weekly on the evening shift. Over a 30-day period, there was no documentation that showers were provided, offered, or refused, and the resident reported not having had a shower since admission. The DON confirmed the absence of documentation that shower care was offered or provided, resulting in a deficiency related to nursing services and ADL care.
Surveyors found that staff did not follow multiple physician orders for three residents. A resident with diabetes received ordered insulin even when blood glucose readings were below the ordered hold parameter. Another resident with cerebral palsy, DM, and heart failure had repeated significant overnight weight gains without evidence that the physician was notified as ordered. A third resident with anemia and CKD had ordered CBC and CMP lab tests that were not documented as completed. The DON confirmed there was no documentation that these physician orders were carried out.
Staff failed to follow facility policy and physician orders requiring documentation of non-pharmacological interventions (NPI’s) before administering PRN oxycodone for two residents. One resident with osteoarthritis, hip pain, and diabetes had orders for NPI documentation each shift and PRN oxycodone for moderate to severe pain, yet received the narcotic multiple times in a month without any recorded attempt of NPI’s beforehand. Another resident with a history of stroke, diabetes, hemiplegia, and hemiparesis also had orders to document NPI’s prior to PRN pain medication, but similarly received PRN oxycodone several times without documentation that NPI’s were tried first, resulting in noncompliance with state pharmacy and nursing service regulations.
Failure to Prevent Elopement From Secured Unit
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves a resident with unspecified dementia without behavioral disturbance, psychotic disturbance, mood disturbance, and anxiety who was admitted to the facility in November 2025 and resided on a locked, secured unit requiring a code to exit. The facility had a written "Wandering and Elopements" policy that directed staff, when a resident was missing, to initiate the elopement/missing resident emergency procedure, determine if the resident was on an authorized leave, search the building and premises if not authorized to leave, and notify administration, the resident’s representative, the attending physician, and law enforcement if the resident was not located. On the date of the incident, the resident closely followed a housekeeper through double doors on the ground floor into a back hallway and then out a side door, leaving the secured unit without authorization. The housekeeper was unaware that the resident had followed through the door, and staff failed to ensure the resident’s safety by not checking for residents before and after exiting the unit. An elopement alarm was later activated after the resident was found to be unaccounted for on the secured unit, and the facility’s established protocols were then initiated, including notification of local law enforcement. The resident was subsequently located off premises by local police, sitting in a relaxed manner, conversing appropriately with officers, holding a beverage, and with no visible injuries, and he denied pain or discomfort. Facility documentation showed that the resident had been able to travel far enough to purchase food and a drink at a restaurant, as evidenced by a receipt from a nearby McDonald’s. A progress note recorded that the resident had been noted not on the unit, an immediate search was conducted, administration and proper authorities were notified, and the resident was returned safely, with a skin check completed and the resident later observed in his room eating dinner. In an interview, the resident stated that it was taking too long to get out of the building, that he waited for an opportunity and took it, and that he wanted to leave and go back to his place. In a separate interview, the Nursing Home Administrator confirmed that staff failed to ensure the resident’s safety by not checking for residents before and after exiting the unit, leading to the elopement from the secured environment.
Unsanitary Food Storage and Staff Hygiene Practices in Dietary Department
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to store and handle food in a sanitary manner in the dietary department in accordance with its own policy and professional standards. The facility’s “Personal Hygiene” policy dated February 2, 2026, required all staff to wear hair restraints to effectively keep hair from contacting exposed food. During observation of the lunch meal service tray line on April 15, 2026, from 11:30 a.m. to 12:03 p.m., two dietary employees were observed working directly over uncovered food on the tray line with uncovered mustaches. In the same area, the window frame above the shelf where a large mixer with an uncovered bowl, a Robot-coupe mixer, and a blender were stored had peeling paint, while the Robot-coupe mixer and blender were actively being used to prepare resident food. Additionally, the blind in this window frame had dried food debris along its length, and another window frame above a storage rack of resident meal trays also had peeling paint. These conditions were cited under 42 CFR 483.60(i) Food Safety Requirements and 28 Pa. Code 201.14(a) Responsibility of licensee, and had been previously cited on March 26, 2025. No specific residents, medical histories, or clinical conditions were described in the report; the deficiency focused on environmental and staff hygiene practices in the dietary department during food preparation and tray line service.
Failure to Provide Required Written Transfer Notices and Ombudsman Notification
Penalty
Summary
Surveyors found that the facility failed to provide required written notifications of transfers and discharges to residents and/or their representatives, and failed to notify the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman for six residents who were transferred out of the facility. Clinical record review showed that one resident was transferred to the hospital after a change in condition on December 26, 2025, without documented evidence that the resident or responsible party received written information regarding the transfer or that a copy of the transfer notice was sent to the Ombudsman. Another resident was transferred to the hospital after a change in condition on January 9, 2026, with no documented evidence that the Ombudsman was notified of the transfer. Additional record reviews revealed that three more residents were transferred to the hospital after changes in condition on March 30, 2026, and March 12, 2026, without documentation that the residents and/or their responsible parties or legal representatives were provided written information regarding the transfers, or that the Ombudsman was notified. One resident left the facility against medical advice on February 3, 2026, and there was no documented evidence that the Ombudsman was notified of this transfer. In an interview on April 17, 2026, the Administrator confirmed that notifications of transfers were not sent to the residents and/or their representatives and that written notices of the transfers and discharge were not sent to the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman.
Failure to Address Repeated Grievances About Slow Call Bell Response
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to address ongoing grievances related to slow response times to resident call bells, as required by its grievance policy. The policy, last reviewed on February 24, 2026, stated that grievances could be either formal written complaints or verbal complaints to staff, and that the facility was to acknowledge and actively work toward resolution of such complaints. During a confidential resident group interview on April 14, 2026, all four participating residents reported that call bells were answered slowly, often taking more than 30 minutes. Review of resident council minutes from September 8, 2025, through December 11, 2025, showed repeated complaints about slow call bell responses at each monthly meeting, with no evidence that any resident council minutes were recorded in 2026. Additionally, review of resident grievances from October 31, 2025, through March 23, 2026, revealed multiple complaints about slow call bell responses on several dates in late 2025 and early 2026. In an interview on April 17, 2026, the DON and Nursing Home Administrator confirmed there was a pattern of complaints about slow call bell responses and that the facility had failed to respond to those grievances. These findings demonstrate that the facility did not honor residents’ rights to have grievances acknowledged and addressed, despite repeated verbal and written complaints documented through resident council minutes and the grievance process.
Damaged Walls, Doorframes, and Fire Extinguisher Cover Compromise Safe, Homelike Environment
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment on two of five nursing units, specifically the [NAME] and [NAME] units. During observations conducted over two days, surveyors noted that the clear plastic fire extinguisher cover in the hallway between rooms 135 and 137 was shattered. In one resident bathroom, there were holes on the left and right walls, and the doorframe at the entrance to another resident room was dented and misshaped near the floor. Additionally, there was a hole in the wall between the beds in another resident room, and the wallboard at the bottom of the wall to the right of the entrance to a bathroom in yet another room was dented and crumbling. These environmental deficiencies were directly observed in resident care areas and common hallways and were cited under 28 Pa. Code 201.14(a) regarding the responsibility of the licensee and 28 Pa. Code 201.18(e)(2.1) regarding management responsibilities.
Inaccurate MDS Documentation of Resident’s Need for Corrective Lenses
Penalty
Summary
A deficiency occurred when the facility failed to ensure that the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment accurately reflected a resident’s current status. Clinical record review showed that Resident 139 had diagnoses including diabetes mellitus and a history of falls, and the resident required glasses to correct impaired vision. The resident’s care plan documented a problem with impaired vision and indicated that glasses were required beginning March 8, 2022. However, the MDS assessment dated [DATE] documented in Section B (Hearing, Speech, and Vision) that the resident did not require corrective lenses during the previous seven days. On observation on April 14, 2026, at 11:00 a.m., Resident 139 was noted to be wearing glasses. In an interview on April 17, 2026, at 1:00 p.m., the Administrator confirmed that the MDS assessment for this resident was inaccurate, as it did not reflect the resident’s actual need for and use of corrective lenses during the assessment look-back period.
Failure to Include Urinary Incontinence in Comprehensive Care Plan
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan that addressed an identified care area for one resident. Clinical record review showed that this resident had chronic kidney disease and diabetes mellitus, and a Minimum Data Set completed on February 20, 2026, documented that the resident was alert and frequently incontinent of urine. The Care Area Assessment summary dated the same day specified that the resident’s urinary incontinence was to be addressed in the care plan. However, review of the current care plan revealed no evidence that interventions for urinary incontinence were included. In an interview on April 17, 2026, at 10:25 a.m., the Director of Nursing confirmed that there was no documented evidence that this identified care area was addressed in the resident’s care plan.
Failure to Provide Scheduled Showers and Document ADL Care
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide and document assistance with activities of daily living, specifically showering, for one resident who was dependent on staff for this care. The resident was admitted on March 12, 2026, with diagnoses including chronic kidney disease, polyneuropathies, and muscle weakness. A Minimum Data Set assessment dated March 19, 2026, showed the resident had no cognitive impairment, required substantial staff assistance for showers, and was totally dependent on staff for transfers. Facility documentation indicated the resident was scheduled to receive showers on Wednesdays and Saturdays during the evening shift. However, the resident reported on April 14, 2026, that they had not had a shower since admission, and review of the clinical record showed no evidence that a shower had been provided, offered, or refused during the previous 30 days. The DON confirmed on April 16, 2026, that there was no documented evidence that showers were offered or provided to this resident. This deficiency was cited under 28 Pa. Code 211.12(d)(1)(5) related to nursing services.
Failure to Follow Physician Orders for Insulin, Weight Monitoring, and Lab Tests
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to implement and follow physicians’ orders for three residents. For one resident with diabetes mellitus, a physician ordered Novolog insulin to be administered in the morning prior to breakfast, with instructions to hold the insulin if the resident’s blood sugar was less than 80 mg/dL. Review of the April 2026 MAR showed that staff administered the insulin on three occasions when the resident’s blood sugar was below 80 mg/dL, contrary to the physician’s order. Another resident with cerebral palsy, diabetes mellitus, and heart failure had a physician’s order to be weighed every night shift and to notify the physician if the resident gained more than 2 lbs in 24 hours or 5 lbs in one week. Clinical records showed multiple instances of significant weight gains over 24-hour periods, including gains of 4.7 lbs, 3.4 lbs, 6 lbs, 2.3 lbs, 5.8 lbs, 4 lbs, 2.4 lbs, and 3.3 lbs, without documented evidence that the physician was notified as ordered. A third resident with anemia and chronic kidney disease had a physician’s order for two blood tests (CBC and CMP), but the clinical record contained no documentation that these lab tests were obtained. The DON confirmed there was no documented evidence that care and services were provided in accordance with these physicians’ orders.
Failure to Document Non-Pharmacological Interventions Before PRN Narcotic Administration
Penalty
Summary
Facility staff failed to follow the facility’s pain management policy and specific physician orders requiring documentation of non-pharmacological interventions (NPI’s) and their effectiveness prior to administering as-needed narcotic pain medication for two residents. The policy, last reviewed February 24, 2026, required staff to document NPI’s and their effectiveness for patients receiving pain interventions. For a resident with left knee osteoarthritis, right hip pain, and diabetes, a physician ordered on March 17, 2026, that NPI’s be documented every shift, and on April 6, 2026, ordered oxycodone every four hours as needed for moderate to severe pain. Review of the MAR showed that this resident received as-needed oxycodone 23 times in April 2026 without documented evidence that NPI’s were attempted prior to administration. Another resident with diagnoses including cerebral infarction (stroke), diabetes, hemiplegia, and hemiparesis had a physician order dated February 7, 2026, directing staff to document NPI’s used before administering as-needed pain medication, and an order dated April 3, 2026, for oxycodone every four hours as needed for moderate to severe pain. MAR review revealed this resident received as-needed oxycodone nine times in April 2026 without documented evidence that NPI’s were attempted prior to administration, in violation of 28 Pa. Code 211.9(a)(1) Pharmacy services and 28 Pa. Code 211.12(d)(1)(5) Nursing services.
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.



