Fairpark Health And Rehabilitation
Inspection history, citations, penalties and survey trends for this long-term care facility in Maryville, Tennessee.
- Location
- 307 N Fifth St Box 5477, Maryville, Tennessee 37801
- CMS Provider Number
- 445286
- Inspections on file
- 17
- Latest survey
- July 1, 2025
- Citations (last 12 mo.)
- 5
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Fairpark Health And Rehabilitation during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
Surveyors found that an employee's personal food items were stored in the kitchen cooler with residents' food, and multiple boxes of frozen vegetables in the freezer were not properly sealed, resulting in exposure to air and visible discoloration. The Dietary Manager confirmed these practices did not follow facility policy or professional standards.
A resident with multiple medical conditions was given her roommate's medications after an LPN failed to properly verify her identity and medication details, despite the resident questioning the number of pills. The error was discovered after administration, and the resident experienced no adverse effects.
Sensitive health information was left visible and unattended on a medication cart, including data displayed on a computer screen and a written shift-to-shift communication sheet listing residents' names and medical conditions. An LPN failed to secure this information before leaving the cart, and the ADON confirmed the breach of confidentiality.
A resident with a history of Bipolar Disorder, Depression, and Anxiety, and a documented PASRR Level II outcome for serious mental illness, was not accurately coded for PASRR Level II status on a significant change MDS assessment. The error was confirmed by the RN MDS Coordinator during review, despite facility policy requiring accurate and comprehensive assessments.
Staff failed to perform hand hygiene after serving meal trays to three residents, did not wear required PPE when delivering a meal tray to a resident on contact isolation, and did not offer hand hygiene assistance to a dependent resident before a meal. These actions were confirmed by staff interviews and were not in accordance with facility infection control policies.
The facility failed to maintain a clean and homelike environment in one hallway and five resident rooms. Observations revealed dirty baseboards, scuffed floors, and unsanitary conditions in the rooms and hallway. The Administrator and Environmental Service Manager confirmed these findings.
The facility failed to complete a significant change assessment for a resident with multiple diagnoses who was ordered hospice care. Despite the hospice order, the required assessment was not completed within 14 days, and the resident's MDS assessment did not reflect hospice services. This was confirmed by an MDS RN.
The facility failed to accurately complete MDS assessments for three residents, leading to deficiencies in documenting anticoagulant use, hospice care, and physical restraints. One resident was incorrectly documented as receiving an anticoagulant, another was not coded for hospice care despite having an order, and a third was inaccurately documented as using physical restraints.
The facility failed to develop a baseline care plan for a resident within 48 hours of admission, as required by their policy. The resident, admitted with multiple diagnoses including Right Hip Fracture and Dementia, did not have a baseline care plan until 96 hours after admission. This was confirmed by the Area Nurse Director.
The facility failed to follow a physician's order for two residents who were prescribed double protein portions at all meals to promote wound healing. Due to a glitch in a new computer system, the dietary orders were not transferred correctly, leading to the residents not receiving the prescribed portions. Despite being on other protein supplements, the deficiency was confirmed through interviews and observations.
The facility failed to secure hazardous chemicals in a resident bathroom, leaving a bottle of bleach and another of odor control accessible to three residents. Despite the residents' assurances that they would not ingest the chemicals, the unsecured presence of these substances violated the facility's safety policies.
The facility failed to provide trauma-informed care for a resident with PTSD, as staff were unaware of the diagnosis and potential triggers. The resident's care plan did not include identified problems or triggers related to PTSD, despite the facility's policy requiring such measures.
The facility failed to maintain dryer lint screens in the laundry room, resulting in a thick layer of lint build-up on the screens and accumulation on the floor. The Lint Trap Clean Out Log was not completed, and the Environmental Services Manager could not confirm when the screens were last cleaned.
Improper Storage of Personal and Frozen Food Items in Kitchen
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to comply with its own food storage policy and professional standards by allowing an employee's personal food items, specifically a purple lunch box and a carbonated beverage, to be stored in the kitchen reach-in cooler alongside residents' food items. This was confirmed during an observation and interview with the Dietary Manager, who acknowledged that these personal items belonged to a dietary employee and should not have been stored with food intended for residents. Additionally, the facility did not ensure that frozen food items were properly sealed and stored in the reach-in freezer. Observations revealed that boxes of frozen peas, California blend vegetables, and sliced carrots were not sealed properly, resulting in exposure to air and visible discoloration on the food surfaces. The Dietary Manager confirmed that these items were not stored appropriately, as required by facility policy and FDA Food Code guidelines.
Medication Error Due to Failure to Follow Identification Procedures
Penalty
Summary
A medication error occurred when a resident, who was cognitively intact and had diagnoses including cerebral infarction, morbid obesity, and chronic pain syndrome, was administered her roommate's medications instead of her own. The error took place when an LPN prepared the roommate's medications, entered the resident's room, and, after verbalizing the roommate's name, gave the medication cup to the resident who responded. The resident questioned the number of pills, as it was more than she typically received, but ultimately took the medication. The LPN later realized the mistake after verifying the medications and confirmed that the wrong medications had been administered. Facility documentation and interviews confirmed that the medications given in error included Doxepin, Tylenol, Famotidine, Gabapentin, and Senna. The resident did not experience any adverse reactions following the incident. The error was identified and reported immediately to the appropriate staff, including the nurse practitioner, administrator, and director of nursing. The facility's policy required verification of resident identity and medication details prior to administration, but these procedures were not followed, resulting in the medication error.
Failure to Secure Residents' Health Information on Medication Cart
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain the privacy and confidentiality of residents' personal and medical records as required by its own policy. During an observation, sensitive health information was found displayed on the computer screen of a medication cart located in the 100 hall. Additionally, a written shift-to-shift communication sheet containing residents' names and various medical conditions was stored on top of the same medication cart. Both the computer screen and the communication sheet were left unattended and visible, making the information accessible to unauthorized individuals. The Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) assigned to the cart left the area without securing or covering the residents' personal and confidential medical information. Upon returning briefly to the cart, the LPN again failed to ensure the information was protected before leaving the cart unattended. The Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) confirmed during an interview that the residents' sensitive health information was not secured and acknowledged that it was available for public viewing.
Inaccurate MDS Assessment for Resident with PASRR Level II Status
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure the accuracy of Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments for one resident who was reviewed for MDS assessments. Specifically, a resident with a documented PASRR Level II outcome for serious mental illness, including diagnoses of Bipolar Disorder, Depression, and Anxiety, was not accurately coded for their PASRR Level II status on a significant change MDS assessment. The PASRR Level II screening had been completed prior to admission and indicated the need for certain care and services related to serious mental illness. Despite the resident's medical record and psychiatric notes confirming ongoing diagnoses of Bipolar Disorder and Anxiety, the significant change MDS assessment did not reflect the resident's PASRR Level II status. During a review and interview, the RN MDS Coordinator acknowledged the inaccuracy in the assessment. The facility's policy and federal regulations require accurate and comprehensive assessments using the RAI process, but this was not followed in this instance.
Failure to Perform Hand Hygiene and Use PPE During Meal Service
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to adhere to its infection prevention and control policies during meal tray distribution, as evidenced by multiple staff omissions in hand hygiene and use of personal protective equipment (PPE). Specifically, the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) delivered and set up lunch meal trays for three residents without performing hand hygiene after each interaction, despite facility policy requiring hand hygiene between resident contacts. These residents had varying degrees of cognitive and physical impairment, with some requiring setup or clean-up assistance with eating and personal hygiene. Additionally, the ADON failed to don appropriate PPE when delivering a meal tray to a resident who was on contact isolation, contrary to the facility's transmission-based precautions policy. The resident in question required setup assistance with eating and partial to moderate assistance with personal hygiene. The ADON acknowledged not wearing the required PPE before entering the room, despite being aware of the resident's isolation status. Furthermore, a Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) did not offer hand hygiene assistance to a resident who was dependent on staff for personal hygiene prior to serving the lunch meal. This omission was confirmed by the LPN during an interview. Both the Infection Preventionist and the Director of Nursing confirmed that staff are expected to perform hand hygiene before and after delivering meal trays, don appropriate PPE for residents on contact isolation, and offer hand hygiene assistance to all residents prior to meals.
Failure to Maintain a Clean and Homelike Environment
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain a safe, clean, and homelike environment in one of its hallways and in five resident rooms. Observations revealed that Resident #37's bathroom had a visibly dirty black mat under the sink, a dusty and dirty fan base, chipped paint on the sink doors, and dirty baseboards. Resident #418's room had dark scuff marks on the floor, broken baseboards, and visible dirt and debris behind the entrance door. Resident #1's room also had dark scuff marks, broken baseboards, and visible dirt and debris behind the entrance door. Resident #39's room had visible dirt, dust, and debris behind the entrance door, while Resident #15's room had a brown substance on the floor, loose particles behind the headboard, and dirty debris near the chest of drawers. Additionally, the 200-hallway had dirty baseboards, scuffed floors, and dirty entrance doors to all resident rooms. The housekeeping cart in the hallway was also found to be dirty and unsanitary, with crusty debris on the dustpan, a dried substance on the locked cabinet, and loose particles and a brown substance on the black tray at the bottom of the cart. During interviews, the Administrator and Environmental Service Manager confirmed the observations and acknowledged that the 200-hallway and the rooms of Residents #37, #418, #1, #39, and #15 were not maintained in a clean, sanitary, and homelike environment. The facility's policy on routine cleaning and disinfection, which aims to ensure a safe and sanitary environment, was not adhered to, leading to the observed deficiencies.
Failure to Complete Significant Change Assessment
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to complete a significant change assessment for a resident who had a significant change in condition. The resident, who had diagnoses including Diabetes, End Stage Renal Disease, Hypertension, and Anemia, was admitted to the facility and later had hospice care ordered. Despite the order for hospice services being effective on 8/21/2023, the facility did not complete a significant change assessment within the required 14 days. An annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment showed the resident had moderate cognitive impairment but did not indicate the resident was receiving hospice services. This deficiency was confirmed during an interview with an MDS Registered Nurse who acknowledged that the significant change assessment had not been completed within the required timeframe.
Inaccurate MDS Assessments for Anticoagulant Use, Hospice Care, and Restraints
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to accurately complete Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments for three residents, leading to deficiencies in the documentation of anticoagulant use, hospice care, and physical restraints. Resident #39, who was admitted with multiple diagnoses including Diabetes and End Stage Renal Disease, was inaccurately documented as receiving an anticoagulant when the medication prescribed was actually an antiplatelet (Clopidogrel). This error was confirmed by MDS RN #1 during an interview. Resident #36, who had moderate cognitive impairment and was receiving hospice care, was not coded correctly in the MDS assessments to reflect the hospice services, despite having an order for hospice care effective from 8/21/2023. This inaccuracy was also confirmed by MDS RN #1 during an interview. Resident #33, admitted with diagnoses including Cerebral Infarction and Functional Quadriplegia, was inaccurately documented as using physical restraints in the MDS assessment. Observations over several days showed that the resident did not have any restraints in use, which was confirmed by MDS RN #1. These inaccuracies in the MDS assessments indicate a failure by the facility to ensure accurate and complete documentation, which is essential for proper resident care and regulatory compliance.
Failure to Develop Baseline Care Plan Within 48 Hours
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to develop a baseline care plan for a resident within 48 hours of admission, as required by their policy. The resident, who was admitted with diagnoses including Right Hip Fracture, Dementia, Dislocation of Right Hip, Depression, and Adult Failure to Thrive, did not have a baseline care plan developed until 96 hours after admission. This was confirmed during an interview with the Area Nurse Director, who acknowledged the failure to meet the 48-hour requirement for developing a baseline care plan.
Failure to Follow Physician's Orders for Double Protein Portions
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to follow a physician's order for two residents who were prescribed double protein portions at all meals to promote wound healing. Resident #61, who had diagnoses including Hypertension, Diabetes Mellitus, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, and a Pressure Ulcer to the Buttocks, was not receiving the prescribed double protein portions. This was confirmed through interviews with the resident and observations of meal portions. Similarly, Resident #418, who had diagnoses including Cellulitis of the Left Lower Limb, Type 2 Diabetes with Hypoglycemia, Hypertension, and Peripheral Vascular Disease, also did not receive the prescribed double protein portions. Both residents' dietary orders were not transferred correctly to a new computer system implemented by the facility, leading to inaccurate dietary meal tickets. Interviews with the Dietary Aide, Dietary Manager, Regional Dietary Manager, Area Nurse Director, Registered Dietician, and Nurse Practitioner confirmed that the dietary orders for double protein portions were not followed due to a glitch in the new computer system. Despite the residents being on other protein supplements, the failure to provide double protein portions as ordered was identified. The residents' wounds were reported to be stable and had not deteriorated, but the deficiency in following the physician's orders was evident.
Unsecured Chemicals in Resident Bathroom
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that chemicals were secured in the bathroom shared by three residents, leading to a potential safety hazard. The facility's policy mandates that chemicals should be locked at all times, but during an observation, a 32-ounce bottle labeled as glass cleaner but containing bleach, and another bottle labeled as odor control, were found unsecured on the sink. Both bottles were confirmed to contain hazardous chemicals, which were accessible to the residents. This was confirmed by both an LPN and the Environmental Service Manager, who immediately removed the bottles upon discovery. Resident #37, who has diagnoses including Type 2 Diabetes and Congestive Heart Failure, was found lying in bed during the observation. Resident #8, diagnosed with Adult Failure to Thrive and Repeated Falls, was observed walking independently with a walker. Resident #41, who has Vascular Dementia and moderate cognitive impairment, was seen independently using a wheelchair. Despite their varying levels of mobility and cognitive function, the unsecured chemicals posed a risk to all three residents. Interviews with staff and residents revealed that the housekeeper had left the chemicals unsecured when she was called away. The residents, when asked, indicated they would not ingest the chemicals if they saw the labels, but the unsecured presence of these hazardous substances still violated the facility's safety policies. Observations over several days confirmed that there were no wandering residents in the hallway, but the failure to secure the chemicals still represented a significant oversight in maintaining a safe environment.
Failure to Provide Trauma-Informed Care for Resident with PTSD
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide trauma-informed care for Resident #54, who was admitted with diagnoses including Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, a fracture of the right femur, muscle weakness, and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). Despite the facility's policy requiring screening for trauma history and accounting for residents' experiences and preferences to mitigate triggers, Resident #54's comprehensive care plan did not identify problems or triggers related to PTSD. The resident, who had a BIMS score indicating cognitive intactness, reported a history of PTSD due to childhood abuse but stated that her current medication regimen kept her stable. However, the facility did not inquire about her PTSD or potential triggers upon admission, and no triggered episodes occurred during her stay at the facility. Interviews with various staff members, including CNAs, an LPN, and a Psychiatric Nurse Practitioner, revealed that none were aware of Resident #54's PTSD diagnosis or potential triggers for behavioral episodes. The Social Services Director confirmed that although a trauma-informed screening was completed, it did not include specific triggers, nor were they added to the resident's care plan. The facility's Administrator, Administrator in Training, and Area Nurse Director acknowledged that the facility's trauma-informed care policy had not been followed, leading to the deficiency in providing appropriate care for Resident #54.
Failure to Maintain Dryer Lint Screens
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain mechanical equipment in a safe operating condition, specifically in the laundry room. During an observation, both dryers were found with a thick layer of lint build-up on the screens and lint accumulation on the floor beneath them. The facility's policy requires lint screens to be cleaned and brushed every hour and after every load, but the Lint Trap Clean Out Log had not been completed for the observed date. The Environmental Services Manager confirmed the lint build-up and the lack of documentation for the cleaning of the dryer screens, noting that the responsible person had left for the day and she could not confirm when the screens were last cleaned.
Latest citations in Tennessee
Surveyors found that staff did not follow the facility’s infection prevention policies, including Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP), hand hygiene, and urinary catheter management. A respiratory therapist performed trach care and suctioning for two residents with tracheostomies without donning required gowns or masks, placed supplies and an inner cannula on the resident’s abdomen and linens, and left a room wearing contaminated gloves. An RN administered meds via a feeding tube for a resident with a gastrostomy, then performed eyelid scrubs without changing gloves or performing hand hygiene between routes of care and without using a gown despite EBP signage. CNAs delivered and set up lunch trays for three residents who required at least some assistance with hygiene or meals but did not offer hand hygiene before eating, contrary to policy. In addition, a resident with a urinary catheter was observed in bed with the drainage bag lying on the floor, rather than suspended from the bed as confirmed by nursing staff and the IP.
Administration allowed an unqualified individual to be hired and work as an LPN by failing to verify licensure and reconcile name discrepancies across hiring documents. The individual’s I-9, birth certificate, and out-of-state driver’s license reflected one last name, while the TN LPN license verification on file belonged to a different nurse with the same first name but a different last name. Abuse registry checks were completed under both names, but no national background check or documentation explaining the differing names was present. The person was offered a temporary/contract LPN position, worked multiple shifts, and had conflicting separation notices, with no documentation of a formal rehire. The HR Director confirmed there was no hiring policy and that the individual worked onsite as an LPN before being terminated for failure to attend or complete training.
Administration failed to ensure nursing services were provided by qualified personnel when an unlicensed individual was hired and allowed to work as an RN and Unit Manager using another nurse’s license. Pre-employment documents for this staff member contained inconsistent SSNs and birth dates across the application, background check, W-4, and I-9, and the background report noted the SSN could not be validated. No abuse registry check or RN license verification was completed before hire, and a later license verification showed the last name on the RN license did not match the individual’s last name. The imposter, a walk-in applicant without a resume, worked multiple shifts providing nursing services before being separated as a voluntary termination, and facility staff did not question the documented discrepancies.
Administration allowed an unlicensed individual to be hired twice and function as an LPN using another LPN’s Tennessee license. During the first hire, conflicting SSNs appeared on the application and tax forms, the I‑9 identified the imposter by her own name and out‑of‑state driver’s license, and the license verification was for a different nurse with only the same first name; no Tennessee Abuse Registry check was documented, and the imposter worked multiple shifts before resigning. During the second hire, a different SSN was used, no I‑9 or supporting identity documents were on file, and the same other nurse’s license was again used for verification; the imposter worked several days before resigning. The Administrator reported that the same resume was used for both hires and that the facility had no formal hiring policy, only a checklist.
Administration failed to ensure nursing services were provided by qualified personnel when an unlicensed individual was hired and worked as an RN using another nurse’s license. The facility’s own employment policy requiring HR completion of I-9 Section 2, consistent SSN use, and verification of license and abuse registry status was not followed. The imposter’s application and background check contained conflicting SSNs, names, and birthdates, and the I-9 was not signed by HR. An abuse registry check was run only on one SSN, and discrepancies were not investigated. Time records showed the imposter worked several shifts and had patient access, while leadership later confirmed she remained on the books until being treated as a voluntary termination for not picking up shifts.
Administration failed to ensure nursing services were provided by qualified personnel when an unlicensed individual was hired and worked as an RN under another nurse’s license. Facility records showed multiple unexplained discrepancies in the individual’s name, SSN, and birthdate across the background check, I-9, W-4, Consumer Information Sheet, and separation notice, and the I-9 was never completed or signed by facility staff. Time records confirmed the imposter worked several shifts as an RN before being terminated for no call/no show, and an abuse registry check was not completed until long after termination. The facility did not produce hiring policies or documentation that anyone questioned the conflicting identification information before or during this person’s employment.
Staff failed to honor a resident’s right to refuse care when CNAs proceeded with a scheduled shower despite the resident verbally declining. The resident, who had severe dementia with agitation and was dependent on staff for bathing, had a care plan directing staff to discuss objections, inform of risks, offer choices, and accept refusals. Instead, after the resident said they did not want a shower, one CNA pulled off the covers, and the CNAs placed the resident in a shower chair and continued with the shower because it was the resident’s assigned shower day, contrary to facility policy and the care plan.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment and multiple comorbidities was admitted for rehab and had clearly documented full code status in the face sheet, care plan, and physician orders. During the night, the resident was last observed awake and later found unresponsive with no heart sounds, pulse, or respirations. Staff initiated CPR and continued until the resident was pronounced deceased, but the record contained no evidence that EMS/911 was contacted or that an AED was obtained or used, despite facility policy and leadership expectations that full code residents receive CPR with 911 activation and AED use, and despite the presence of two AEDs in the facility.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment, type 2 DM, CKD, and a history of falls had physician orders for blood glucose checks before meals and at bedtime and for sliding scale insulin aspart four times daily. Facility policy required verification of insulin orders, blood glucose monitoring per orders, and documentation of results and doses. However, after an NP attempted to edit the sliding scale order in the EHR, the order remained unsigned and inactive in the queue, preventing it from appearing on the MAR. Nursing staff did not identify that the insulin order was missing, resulting in multiple missed blood glucose checks and insulin doses over several days, despite the resident’s care plan directing staff to follow physician orders for diabetes management.
The facility failed to maintain a clean and sanitary environment in multiple resident rooms and bathrooms, despite policies requiring routine cleaning and disinfection. Observations over several days found a motorized wheelchair and another wheelchair with attached cushion soiled with dried, multi-colored debris. Several resident bathrooms had unclean conditions, including a trash can without a liner and with dried brown residue, toilets with dried yellow residue on the seats, and yellow/orange or brown substances around the bases of multiple toilets. During an on-site check, the Administrator confirmed that the residue around one toilet could be wiped away and that the area was not clean.
Failure to Follow EBP, Hand Hygiene, and Catheter Practices During Respiratory, Enteral, and Daily Care
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to follow its own infection prevention and control policies, including Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP), hand hygiene, and urinary catheter management. The facility’s EBP policy required staff to perform hand hygiene, review EBP signage, and don gown and gloves prior to high-contact resident care activities such as tracheostomy care, suctioning, and device care, then remove PPE and perform hand hygiene before leaving the resident’s room. For Resident #1, who had epilepsy, acute on chronic respiratory failure, a tracheostomy, and ventilator dependence, a respiratory therapist entered the room where EBP signage was posted, used pocket hand sanitizer, and donned gloves but did not don a gown or mask. The therapist placed clean gauze and used split gauze directly on the resident’s abdomen, allowed the tracheostomy inner cannula to roll from the abdomen onto the linens, and then left the room carrying a box while still wearing the same contaminated gloves, only discarding them later at the respiratory therapy cart. The therapist acknowledged not setting up supplies appropriately, not discarding gloves and performing hand hygiene before leaving the room, and not following EBP, stating she believed EBP was only required for residents with an active infection. For Resident #8, who had traumatic brain injury, quadriplegia, acute respiratory failure, and a tracheostomy, the same respiratory therapist again entered a room with EBP signage and donned gloves but no gown or mask before performing tracheal suctioning using an in-line suction catheter. The resident had reflex coughing during suctioning. After completing suctioning, the therapist discarded gloves and used pocket hand sanitizer but again did not follow the full EBP requirements. The infection preventionist later confirmed that EBP was required for high-contact care such as tracheal care and suctioning, and that gloves should be discarded before leaving the room with hand hygiene performed each time gloves are removed. The facility also failed to follow EBP and hand hygiene practices during medication administration for Resident #22, who had chronic respiratory failure, quadriplegia, tracheostomy status, and gastrostomy status, and who had long- and short-term memory deficits with severely impaired decision-making. A registered nurse entered the resident’s room, where EBP signage was posted, donned gloves but not a gown, and administered medications via the gastrostomy tube using a piston syringe, flushing with water as ordered. With the same used gloves still on, the nurse rinsed the piston syringe in the room sink, set it on paper towels to dry, and then performed OcuSoft eyelid scrubs to both eyes without changing gloves or performing hand hygiene between the different routes of care. The nurse confirmed she did not don a gown and did not perform hand hygiene or change gloves between the feeding tube medication administration and the eye care, and the infection preventionist confirmed that EBP and hand hygiene with glove changes were expected between administering medications by different routes. Additional deficiencies were identified in hand hygiene assistance before meals and urinary catheter management. The facility’s resident handwashing policy required staff to offer hand hygiene before meals. Resident #47, who had acute and chronic respiratory failure, epilepsy, atrial fibrillation, and chronic pulmonary edema and was dependent for hygiene and feeding assistance, received a lunch tray from a CNA who set up the tray and left without offering hand hygiene assistance. Resident #31, with COPD, acute and chronic respiratory failure, morbid obesity, and a care plan indicating partial to moderate assistance with hygiene, also had a lunch tray delivered and set up by a CNA who exited without offering hand hygiene. Resident #66, with COPD, chronic respiratory failure, generalized muscle weakness, and substantial to maximal ADL needs including meal assistance, likewise had a lunch tray delivered and set up without being offered hand hygiene. One CNA acknowledged residents were to be offered hand hygiene before meals, and another stated she had not offered hand hygiene unless residents mentioned it. The infection preventionist confirmed staff were expected to offer hand hygiene assistance to all residents prior to meals. The facility further failed to maintain proper urinary catheter bag positioning for Resident #15, who had chronic osteomyelitis, depression, anxiety, paraplegia, and required assistance with ADLs, including urinary catheter care per orders and protocol. During observation, the resident was in bed with the urinary catheter drainage bag lying on the floor beside the bed. A licensed practical nurse confirmed the catheter bag should be hung from the bed, and the infection preventionist confirmed catheter bags were to be suspended off the ground to prevent infection. These observations demonstrated non-adherence to the facility’s infection prevention and control practices related to EBP, hand hygiene, and catheter management across multiple residents and care situations.
Imposter Hired and Employed as LPN Without Proper License Verification
Penalty
Summary
Administration failed to ensure that nursing services were provided by qualified personnel when an unlicensed individual was hired and worked as an LPN using another nurse’s Tennessee license. Personnel file review showed that the individual, referred to as Imposter Nurse A, had an I-9 form completed with her legal first and last name, supported by a birth certificate and an out-of-state driver’s license, and a Tennessee Criminal History Record Request indicating no Tennessee criminal history under that name. However, the nursing license verification in the file was for a different person, an LPN with the same first name but a different last name (LPN C). Two Tennessee Abuse Registry checks were present, one under LPN C’s name and one under Imposter Nurse A’s name, but there was no documentation explaining or reconciling the name discrepancies between the I-9, the license verification, and other employment documents. There was also no national background check in the personnel file. The facility issued an offer letter to Imposter Nurse A for a temporary/contract LPN position, and time sheets showed she worked multiple shifts on several dates. Two separation notices documented voluntary separation without notice, with differing last days worked, and there was no paperwork provided to explain her apparent rehire after the first termination. During interview, the Human Resource Director acknowledged there was no hiring policy, confirmed that Imposter Nurse A worked onsite as an LPN, and stated she was terminated for failure to attend or complete training and for failure to come in as needed. No information was provided to surveyors showing any cross-check or investigation of the inconsistent names across the employment application, I-9 form, and nursing license verification, resulting in the facility employing an unqualified person in an LPN role.
Imposter RN Hired and Allowed to Function Without Proper Verification
Penalty
Summary
Administration failed to ensure that nursing services were provided by qualified personnel when an unlicensed individual was hired and worked as an RN using another nurse’s Tennessee license. Facility policy titled “Abuse Program Policy” required pre-employment screening, including obtaining a copy of the state license for licensed positions and completing a criminal background check per state statute. The application for employment for the imposter nurse contained a scratched-out Social Security Number (SSN) with a different SSN written above that did not match the SSN on the I-9 form, and the birth date on the application also did not match the I-9. The background screening report showed an SSN and birth date that did not match the I-9 and included a note stating “UNABLE TO VALIDATE SSN.” A W-4 form contained an SSN that did not match the background check. The I-9 form listed the imposter’s legal first and last name, with a Social Security card and valid Tennessee driver’s license, but the birth date on the I-9 differed from the birth date on the background check. Review of the personnel file revealed no evidence that an abuse registry check was completed prior to hire, and there was no evidence that a license verification was done before the imposter nurse’s start date. Time cards showed the imposter worked multiple days in February and March as a Unit Manager. A later QuickConfirm license verification showed that the last name on the validated RN license did not match the imposter’s last name. Interviews with the DON, HR representative, and Administrator confirmed that the imposter was a walk-in applicant who did not provide a resume, that in-house HR was responsible for ordering background checks with corporate as backup, and that the imposter worked in the facility as a Unit Manager and was only separated as a voluntary termination for inability to uphold weekend schedule obligations. There was no evidence that the facility questioned the discrepancies in names, birth dates, or SSNs on the pre-employment documents, resulting in the employment of an unqualified person to render nursing services as an RN.
Imposter Nurse Hired Twice and Allowed to Function as LPN Without Proper Verification
Penalty
Summary
Administration failed to ensure that nursing services were provided by qualified personnel when an unlicensed individual was hired and allowed to function as an LPN on two separate occasions using another nurse’s Tennessee license. For the first hire, the personnel file showed an employment application dated 02/08/2023 with a Social Security Number (SSN) that did not match the SSN on the W‑4 form dated 02/13/2023. The I‑9 form dated 02/13/2023 listed the imposter’s legal first and last name, supported by a birth certificate and an out‑of‑state driver’s license, and the last name on the I‑9 matched the driver’s license. However, the license verification form in the file was for a different individual, an LPN with the same first name but a different last name, and there was no evidence that a Tennessee Abuse Registry check was completed prior to the 02/13/2023 hire date. Time punch records showed the imposter worked multiple shifts in February, March, April, and May 2023 before being terminated on 06/06/2023, with the termination form citing voluntary resignation due to chronic absenteeism and tardiness. For the second hire, the imposter was rehired with a personnel file showing that the SSN on the employment application, W‑4, and background check matched each other but differed from the two SSNs used during the first hire, meaning three different SSNs were used across the two employment periods. There was no I‑9 form or supporting identity documents in the file for the rehire. A license verification form again showed a nursing license in the name of the same LPN whose license had been used previously, with the same first name as the imposter but a different last name and a later expiration date. The background screening report dated 02/13/2024 used the SSN from the employee application, which did not match the SSN previously submitted on the I‑9 form from the first hire. Time punch data showed the imposter worked several days in May 2024 before a termination dated 06/24/2024, which documented voluntary resignation after failing to provide a schedule and not returning after orientation. In an interview, the Administrator stated the facility used the same resume for both hires and that the facility did not have a hiring policy, only a checklist.
Imposter RN Hired and Allowed to Work Without Proper License Verification
Penalty
Summary
Administration failed to ensure that nursing services were provided by qualified personnel when an unlicensed individual was hired and worked as an RN using another nurse’s Tennessee RN license. The facility’s Employment policy required the HR Director to complete Section 2 of the I-9, conduct background investigations, and verify licenses and abuse registry status using the applicant’s registration or Social Security number. Review of the imposter’s employment application showed a Social Security number scratched out and replaced with another number that did not match the SSN used on the background check. The background check listed both the imposter’s name and the legitimate RN’s name, and it showed the legitimate RN’s license number. The birthdate on the I-9 did not match the birthdate on the background check, and Section 2 of the I-9 was not signed by the HR Director as required by policy. Further review showed that an abuse registry search was completed using the SSN from the Social Security card submitted with the I-9, but no search was conducted using the SSN listed on the background check. The separation notice for the imposter listed her real first and last name with an SSN that again did not match the SSN on the background check, and documented employment from mid-June to late November with the reason for termination as voluntary due to not picking up shifts for over three months. Employee time entries showed the imposter worked multiple days in June and one day in July. The DON confirmed that the imposter used an online artificial intelligence website for charting and stated the imposter had access to patients for one day in July. The Administrator confirmed the imposter was considered employed during the stated period and was not formally fired or documented as having quit. There was no evidence that the facility questioned the discrepancies in names, birthdates, or Social Security numbers on the pre-employment documents, resulting in the employment of an unqualified person as an RN.
Imposter RN Hired and Allowed to Work Despite Multiple Identification Discrepancies
Penalty
Summary
Administration failed to ensure that nursing services were provided by qualified personnel when an unlicensed individual was hired and worked as an RN using another nurse’s Tennessee license. Personnel file and document review showed multiple inconsistencies in the imposter nurse’s identifying information that were not questioned by the facility. The background check dated 06/14/2024 used a Social Security Number (SSN) that did not match the SSN on the Social Security card submitted. The I-9 form dated 06/15/2024 listed the imposter’s legal first and last name, with a copy of her Social Security card and a valid Tennessee driver’s license, but the SSN on the I-9 did not match the SSN on the Social Security card. The I-9 form was not completed, signed, or dated by any facility representative. Time punch data showed the imposter nurse worked multiple days in June and July 2024. A separation notice dated 07/31/2024 listed the imposter’s real first and last name with an SSN that did not match the SSN on the I-9 form, and documented employment dates from 06/12/2024 to 07/31/2024 with termination for no call/no show. An undated Consumer Information Sheet listed the imposter’s first and last name with the legitimate RN’s last name as her middle name, a birth year that did not match the I-9, and an SSN that did not match the SSN on the W-4 form or the separation notice. The abuse registry check for the imposter was not completed until 08/04/2025, after termination. The facility did not provide any hiring policies and there was no evidence that staff questioned the discrepancies in names, birth dates, or SSNs on the pre-employment forms, resulting in the employment of an unqualified person as an RN.
Failure to Honor Resident’s Refusal of Shower and Right to Self-Determination
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves staff failure to honor a resident’s right to self-determination and refusal of treatment, specifically related to bathing. Facility policy on Resident Rights and Responsibilities states that residents have the right to refuse treatment and to be informed of the medical consequences of such refusal, and to exercise their rights without discrimination or reprisal. Resident #31, admitted in late 2023, had severe dementia with agitation, a BIMS score of 3 indicating severe cognitive impairment, and was dependent on staff for showering and personal hygiene. The resident’s care plan identified behavior problems and resistance to care related to dementia, knowledge deficit, denial of illness and risk factors, and mental/emotional illness, with interventions directing staff to discuss objections and fears, inform the resident of risks of non-compliance, offer choices, and accept and respect the resident’s right to refuse care. Despite these policies and care plan interventions, staff proceeded with a shower after the resident refused. A CNA assigned to the resident reported that the resident had refused a shower, and another CNA responded that it was the resident’s shower day and that the shower should be provided. According to written statements, when the CNAs entered the room and informed the resident it was shower day, the resident stated, “No I don’t want a shower.” One CNA then told the resident they were getting a shower and pulled the covers off the resident. The CNAs placed the resident in a shower chair and continued with the shower despite the expressed refusal. During a later interview, the CNA confirmed instructing the other staff member to go ahead and provide the shower because it was the resident’s scheduled shower day, demonstrating that the resident’s right to refuse care and the care plan interventions to respect refusals were not followed.
Failure to Contact EMS and Use AED During CPR for a Full Code Resident
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to follow its CPR and emergency response policy for a resident who was a documented full code. Facility policy required staff to call 911 for resident emergencies, obtain and use an AED, and initiate CPR for full code residents unless there was a POST form or other physician order to withhold CPR, or the resident showed American Heart Association (AHA) signs of clinical death. The 2020 AHA Adult Basic Life Support Algorithm directs healthcare providers to activate the emergency response system, obtain an AED, and use it as soon as available when a person has no breathing or only gasping and no pulse. The facility had two AEDs and staff were educated on AED use as part of CPR training. Resident #78 was admitted for rehabilitation and 24-hour skilled nursing care following a hospitalization due to a fall at home and had a medical history including atrial fibrillation with multiple cardioversions, dysphagia, chronic kidney disease, mild cognitive impairment with memory loss, hypertension, UTI, influenza, and type 2 diabetes mellitus. The resident’s profile, care plan, and physician’s orders all documented full code status. A 5-day MDS showed a BIMS score of 4, indicating severe cognitive impairment. On the evening prior to the event, an RN documented that the resident was sitting in a wheelchair watching television at 8:20 PM, was assisted to the bathroom at 10:00 PM, and was checked again at 12:00 AM. At approximately 2:00 AM, a CNA found the resident unresponsive and notified the RN, who assessed the resident and documented no heart sounds, pulse, or respirations. Staff initiated CPR and continued efforts until the RN pronounced the resident deceased at 2:45 AM. There was no documentation in the medical record that EMS/911 was contacted or that an AED was used during the resuscitation attempt, despite facility policy and the expectations stated by the DON, LPN, NP, and Medical Director that staff should call 911, obtain and use an AED, and continue CPR until EMS arrival for a full code resident. An email from the local fire department indicated there were no EMS reports for the resident on the date in question, and the DON stated she had no evidence to verify that EMS was contacted and no AED log to show whether an AED was used. The Administrator stated she expected staff to follow the CPR policy and properly document all care and services provided, but the record lacked evidence of EMS notification or AED utilization for this full code resident.
Failure to Activate and Follow Sliding Scale Insulin and Blood Glucose Orders
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to activate and carry out physician orders for blood glucose monitoring and sliding scale insulin for a resident with type 2 diabetes. Facility policy on insulin administration required verification that insulin type, dosage, strength, and method of administration corresponded with the physician’s order, checking blood glucose per physician order or facility protocol, and documenting blood glucose results and insulin doses. The resident’s care plan for diabetes directed staff to check blood sugar levels via fingerstick per physician orders and to administer medications per physician orders. The resident was admitted for rehabilitation and 24-hour skilled nursing care following a hospitalization due to a fall at home and had a medical history that included chronic kidney disease and type 2 diabetes mellitus. A 5-day MDS showed severe cognitive impairment with a BIMS score of 4 and an active diagnosis of type 2 diabetes, with insulin injections received. Physician orders directed staff to check the resident’s blood sugar before meals and at bedtime, four times a day, and to administer insulin aspart via a sliding scale four times a day. These orders were in place with a specified stop date and then renewed. Despite these orders, the medication record for the resident showed no documentation of blood sugar levels or administration of insulin aspart at multiple ordered times over several days. A family member reported concern that the resident’s blood sugar levels had not been checked for the past couple of days and that the resident was not on a short-acting insulin. A medication error report later identified that the NP had updated the sliding scale insulin order, but the update was not signed and remained in the unsigned order queue, leaving the insulin aspart order inactive on the MAR. As a result, nursing staff could not see the updated order and missed multiple doses of insulin aspart. The NP stated that she had intended to edit, not discontinue, the sliding scale order, but the electronic medical record required her to unsign the order to edit it, and she failed to reactivate it. The DON stated that nursing staff failed to identify that the insulin aspart order was missing and remained in the queue awaiting reactivation, and the Administrator stated that her expectation was for staff to follow company policy and for the DON or designee to verify that all active orders were visible for nurses when a plan of correction for missing insulin doses had been implemented. A physician statement documented that the resident had uncontrolled type 2 diabetes mellitus, CKD stage III, and hyperlipidemia, and that the resident received sliding scale insulin on one day but did not receive any sliding scale insulin on the following two days. The physician noted that the resident’s blood glucose reached a maximum level of 343 mg/dL during this period and that the sliding scale insulin order was later replaced and resumed. These findings collectively show that the facility did not provide treatment and care according to physician orders and the resident’s care plan for diabetes management, due to the failure to activate and monitor the sliding scale insulin and blood glucose orders in the electronic system and to recognize and correct the missing active order on the MAR.
Failure to Maintain Clean and Sanitary Resident Rooms and Bathrooms
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to maintain a clean and sanitary environment in multiple resident rooms and bathrooms, contrary to its own policies on routine bathroom cleaning and routine cleaning and disinfection. The facility’s policies, dated 6/2025, required providing a clean and sanitary environment, cleaning the entire toilet including the handle and underside of the flush rim with disinfectant and appropriate contact time, and reporting damaged items in need of repair. Observations conducted on several days showed that in one room, a motorized wheelchair had dried debris on the cushion, arms, and a large amount of multi-colored debris on the undercarriage. In another room, a wheelchair with a fabric heel protector cushion used as an armrest was spattered with small to pea-sized unknown multi-colored particles. Additional observations revealed that several resident bathrooms were not maintained in a sanitary condition. One bathroom had a trash can without a bag and with a dried brown substance on the outside, rim, and inside of the can, as well as a toilet seat with two areas of dried yellow residue and a yellow/orange substance around the base of the toilet. Other bathrooms in different rooms had yellow/orange or brown residue around or at the front base of the toilets. During an observation and interview in one of the bathrooms, the Administrator initially suggested the substance around the toilets might be related to the wax ring, but after wiping a small area with a wet wipe, the yellow/orange substance was easily removed, and the Administrator confirmed the area around the toilet was not clean.
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.
