Above average — CMS composite of the measures below.
Past the typical resurvey interval — a standard survey could occur at any time
Estimate from public CMS data, current as of July 2026. Survey timing is at the state agency's discretion.
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Bel Air At Teravista during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
A resident with advanced dementia and multiple comorbidities had a longstanding insulin regimen for type 2 DM discontinued and replaced with Metformin by an NP without prior notification to or consent from the resident’s family. Facility records showed the sequence of orders changing from Lantus to varying doses of Metformin and later back to insulin, with MARs indicating medications were given as ordered. The family later reported the resident developed symptoms they associated with Metformin and stated they would not have agreed to the change if informed. In interviews, the NP admitted she did not consult the family before changing the treatment, acknowledged this was a mistake, and recognized the resident’s and family’s right to be informed of treatment changes, risks, benefits, and alternatives. The MD and DON confirmed that the NP failed to communicate the medication change to the family, and staff described that residents have the right to know about medication changes and to accept or refuse treatment, demonstrating a failure to follow the facility’s resident rights policy.
A resident with Type 2 DM, hypothyroidism, bipolar disorder, and anxiety, who had moderate cognitive impairment and required some assistance with ADLs, had physician orders and a care plan for Insulin Lispro with specific blood glucose parameters to hold doses. Review of the MAR and a DON audit showed that an LVN administered insulin on multiple occasions when the resident’s blood sugar readings were below the ordered threshold, including a dose given when readings were documented as outside parameters, while another scheduled dose was not given. The resident had generally good meal intake during this period and later developed stroke-like symptoms and was sent to the hospital, where hypoglycemia was diagnosed; an NP noted that the short-acting insulin given earlier would have worn off by the following morning and could not be clearly linked to the low blood sugar.
A resident with multiple serious conditions and moderate cognitive impairment had new pain management orders including scheduled Robaxin, PRN Tramadol, and a Fentanyl patch, while Hydrocodone was discontinued. The charge LVN received the updated orders and entered the discontinuation of Hydrocodone but failed to enter the scheduled Robaxin order into the electronic system, resulting in missed doses and delayed initiation of the medication. The MAR showed gaps in Robaxin administration, and the DON confirmed that Robaxin and Tramadol were not provided as ordered, despite facility policy requiring timely and accurate documentation and implementation of new medication orders. The resident and family reported concerns about pain control during this period.
Multiple residents with respiratory conditions were observed to have nebulizer masks and oxygen cannulas left exposed on surfaces or the floor, rather than stored in protective bags as required for sanitation. Staff interviews revealed a lack of training and inconsistent practices regarding the storage of respiratory equipment, and the facility's policy did not address this requirement.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment and a UTI was started on a new antibiotic, but the responsible party was not notified as required by facility policy. Review of records and staff interviews confirmed that nursing staff did not inform or document communication with the family regarding the new medication order.
The facility did not complete required discharge summaries and recapitulation of stay documents for three residents, resulting in missing or incomplete information such as nursing services, therapy plans, medication disposition, and patient education. Staff interviews confirmed that discharge documentation was not consistently completed or verified, and family members reported not receiving necessary paperwork or follow-up information at discharge.
Multiple residents with serious infections did not receive their prescribed antibiotics as ordered, with missed and late doses documented. Despite established protocols and the use of pharmacy automation, lapses in medication reconciliation, order entry, and communication between hospital discharge paperwork and the facility's EMR led to these deficiencies. Nursing and leadership staff were not consistently informed of missed or late doses, contrary to facility policy.
Surveyors identified failures in food storage, preparation, and service, including undated and expired food items, unclean utensil drawers, dirty fryer grease, inconsistent food temperature monitoring, and lapses in hand hygiene by staff during meal service. These actions and inactions resulted in a deficiency related to food service safety standards.
A resident with multiple complex medical conditions did not have pharmacy consultant medication recommendations received or acted upon due to an email delivery failure, resulting in a delay in reviewing and implementing suggested medication changes. Facility leadership confirmed that the process for ensuring receipt and follow-up of pharmacy recommendations was not followed as required by policy.
A CNA in a LTC facility attempted to transfer a resident without the required mechanical lift and two-person assistance, as specified in the resident's care plan. The resident, who had multiple health issues, was lowered to the floor when the transfer was unsuccessful. Despite being aware of the transfer requirements, the CNA proceeded alone due to the absence of other staff. The resident later complained of arm pain, and an x-ray revealed a humeral fracture.
A medication aide in an LTC facility failed to supervise a resident during medication administration, leaving the medication with the resident without observing its intake. The resident, who was cognitively intact, did not have a self-administration assessment or care plan. Staff interviews confirmed the requirement for supervision unless a self-administration assessment is documented.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment eloped from the facility, resulting in a fall and facial injuries. Despite being assessed as a moderate elopement risk, the resident exited through the front door unnoticed. The facility's failure to supervise and monitor the resident adequately led to this deficiency, highlighting a lapse in staff communication and policy implementation.
The facility failed to ensure the resident call system was accessible to three residents, potentially endangering their health or safety. Observations revealed call lights on the floor, and interviews indicated staff awareness but inconsistent adherence to protocols.
The facility failed to maintain resident room water temperatures at a comfortable warm level, affecting six residents. Observations revealed water temperatures significantly below the required 100 degrees Fahrenheit, leading to discomfort and refusals of showers. Despite awareness and attempts to resolve the issue since a winter freeze in January, the problem persisted, impacting residents' personal hygiene and comfort.
The facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards. Observations revealed undated and unsealed food items in storage and improper beard covering by a cook during lunch service. Interviews confirmed lapses in food safety protocols.
The facility failed to maintain proper infection control during catheter and PICC line care for two residents. Staff did not follow sterile techniques, mishandled supplies, and failed to change gloves when necessary, increasing the risk of infection.
Failure to Inform Resident/Family of Diabetes Medication Change and Obtain Consent
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to ensure that a resident and the resident’s family member were informed of and allowed to participate in decisions regarding a significant change in diabetes treatment. The resident was an elderly male with multiple diagnoses including dementia, dysphagia, type 2 diabetes mellitus, hypothyroidism, protein-calorie malnutrition, muscle wasting, acute kidney failure, adult failure to thrive, hemiplegia/hemiparesis, and muscle weakness. His MDS indicated he was rarely or never understood and required substantial assistance with eating, oral hygiene, and personal hygiene. His care plan for diabetes included providing diabetes medications as ordered and monitoring and documenting side effects and effectiveness. Record review showed that the resident had been receiving Lantus (insulin glargine) 8 units subcutaneously at bedtime for diabetes until it was discontinued in mid-January and replaced with Metformin. Orders reflected a sequence of Metformin prescriptions: Metformin 500 mg twice daily, then Metformin 1000 mg every morning and at bedtime, followed by a later order to restart insulin glargine 6 units at bedtime with parameters to hold for blood sugar less than 100. Medication administration records for January and February showed that medications were administered as ordered. The facility’s own resident rights policy required that residents be informed of and participate in their treatment, including being informed by the physician or other practitioner of the risks and benefits of proposed care, treatment alternatives, and options, and being allowed to choose their preferred option. During interviews, the family member reported that the resident had been on insulin for a long time without issues and that, in mid-January, the NP discontinued insulin and started Metformin without informing the family or obtaining consent. The family member stated the resident was on Metformin for about two weeks and then developed swollen lips and throat, decreased appetite, dysphagia, stomach ulcers, and other complications, and that she would not have allowed the change had she been informed. In a separate interview, the NP acknowledged that she changed the resident’s insulin to Metformin for better diabetes control, based on the resident’s inconsistent blood sugar levels and her assessment that it was safe to start Metformin. She stated she did not consult the family before making the change, admitted this was a mistake, and acknowledged that it was the resident’s and family’s right to know about any change in the treatment plan and to have the risks, benefits, and therapeutic rationale discussed with them. The MD stated he was aware of the Metformin incident and that the NP was supposed to discuss any change in the treatment plan with the family and obtain their consent before initiating it. He indicated that the NP did not discuss the change with him beforehand and that, had she done so, he would have advised her to obtain the family’s consent as part of resident rights. The DON confirmed that the resident’s insulin was changed to Metformin and that the NP did not communicate this change to the family member, who later complained. Nursing staff interviewed described that residents have the right to know what medications they are taking, to be informed of changes, to understand effects and side effects, to be informed of alternative therapies, and to accept or decline medications. The ADM stated that the incident involved a failure to inform the family member of a change in the treatment plan and that the NP did not inform the resident and family about the change, which he identified as inappropriate. These findings collectively show that the facility failed to ensure the resident and family were informed in advance of the risks, benefits, and alternatives of the change from insulin to Metformin and to obtain their consent, in violation of the facility’s resident rights policy.
Insulin Lispro Dosing Errors Outside Ordered Blood Glucose Parameters
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to ensure a resident was free from significant medication errors related to insulin administration. A female resident with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus without complications, hypothyroidism, bipolar disorder, and an anxiety disorder was admitted to the facility and had a care plan that included receiving insulin as ordered, with monitoring and documentation for side effects and effectiveness. Her admission MDS dated 12/25/25 showed a BIMS score of 12/15, indicating moderate cognitive impairment, and she required some help with dressing and eating. The resident’s MAR and physician orders reflected an order for Insulin Lispro Injection Solution, 2 units subcutaneously three times a day for Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, with parameters to hold insulin for blood sugar less than 150 or if the resident was not eating, and a hypoglycemic protocol for finger-stick blood sugar less than 60. Record review and the DON’s audit revealed that between 12/19/2025 and 12/30/2025, the resident was administered insulin on multiple occasions outside the prescribed blood sugar parameters. Specifically, the DON identified that LVN B administered insulin outside of parameters on several dates in December, including when the resident’s blood sugar readings were 117 and 148 on 12/30/2025, which were below the ordered threshold for administration. On that date, the resident received insulin at 11:30 a.m. despite a blood sugar of 117, and did not receive insulin at 5:00 p.m. when the blood sugar was 148, both readings documented as outside the parameters. The resident’s meal intake on 12/30/2025 was recorded as 51–75% for breakfast and lunch and 76–100% for dinner. On 12/31/2025 at 6:30 a.m., the resident was reported to have stroke-like symptoms including lethargy and slurred speech and was transported to the hospital, where the diagnosis was hypoglycemia. An NP later stated that Insulin Lispro is short-acting and that, given the resident’s good food intake, the 11:30 a.m. insulin dose on 12/30/2025 would have worn off by the following morning and could not be definitively linked to the low blood sugar at 6:00 a.m. the next day.
Failure to Accurately Enter and Administer New Pain Medication Orders
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to provide pharmaceutical services that ensured accurate ordering, entry, and administration of prescribed pain medications for one resident. The resident was an older female admitted with multiple serious diagnoses, including Type 2 diabetes, chronic kidney disease, nonalcoholic cirrhosis, lumbar compression fracture, malignant breast cancer, and recurrent depressive disorders. Her MDS showed moderately impaired cognition (BIMS 12) and functional impairment in both upper extremities. Her care plan stated she would participate in making choices and decisions regarding pain management. Physician orders dated 01/10/2026 at 5:00 p.m. included Tramadol 50 mg by mouth every 6 hours as needed for pain, a Fentanyl 12 mcg/hr patch every 72 hours, and Methocarbamol (Robaxin) 500 mg by mouth every 8 hours for pain, with Hydrocodone-Acetaminophen discontinued at that time. Review of the MAR showed Tramadol PRN was administered on 01/11/2026 at 5:00 p.m., the Fentanyl patch was administered on 01/11/2026 at 7:42 a.m., and the Robaxin order, received on 01/10/2026 at 5:00 p.m., was not entered into the resident’s orders until 01/12/2026, with Robaxin first administered on 01/12/2026 at 12:00 a.m. The MAR reflected one missed dose of Robaxin on 01/11/2026 and two missed doses on 01/12/2026. During interviews, the resident reported that her daughter told her she had not received her pain medication on Saturday night and recalled her pain level as 5 out of 10, though she did not request pain medication and stated she believed the Fentanyl patch was helping. A family member reported the resident was without pain medication from the afternoon of 01/10/2026 until the afternoon of 01/11/2026. The DON stated that Robaxin was ordered and should have been given the same day the order was received, but none was given, and that Tramadol PRN was ordered and not given until later. The DON explained that LVN A changed the orders in the electronic system to discontinue Hydrocodone but forgot to enter the scheduled Robaxin order. LVN A confirmed she received the new orders by text, was responsible for updating the chart, and acknowledged not updating the orders immediately, despite the expectation that new medications be started as ordered. Facility policy required that new medication orders be documented with date, time, and signature, recorded on the physician’s order sheet and MAR, and that changed orders be correctly entered in the electronic system, which did not occur in this case.
Failure to Sanitize and Store Respiratory Equipment Properly
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that residents requiring respiratory care received such care in accordance with professional standards of practice. Specifically, for five residents reviewed, nebulizer masks and oxygen cannulas were not stored in protective bags when not in use. Observations revealed that these respiratory devices were left exposed on side tables, beds, or even on the floor, rather than being properly bagged or stored as required for sanitation. In several cases, there were no protective bags available in the residents' rooms, and residents were not educated on the importance of proper storage. The residents involved had significant medical histories, including acute and chronic respiratory failure, COPD, heart failure, and other serious conditions requiring the use of nebulizers and oxygen therapy. Despite physician orders and care plans specifying the use of these devices, staff did not consistently ensure that the equipment was stored in a sanitary manner. Interviews with nursing staff revealed a lack of in-service training on this subject, and some staff admitted to not following proper procedures for storing respiratory equipment. One nurse acknowledged it was her mistake for not ensuring the masks were protected from contamination. The Director of Nursing confirmed that the usual practice was to store nebulizer masks in drawers, but in reality, this was rarely done, and there was no system in place to ensure compliance. The facility's policy on oxygen administration did not address the need for storing respiratory equipment in protective bags. Additionally, national guidelines reviewed by surveyors indicated that nebulizer parts should be stored in clean, dry plastic bags between uses to prevent contamination, a practice not followed at the facility.
Failure to Notify Responsible Party of New Antibiotic Order
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to immediately notify a resident's responsible party when a new antibiotic was ordered to treat a urinary tract infection. The resident, an elderly male with severe cognitive impairment, dementia, and an indwelling catheter, was started on Sulfamethoxazole-Trimethoprim for a UTI after a positive urine culture. Review of the medical record and progress notes showed no documentation that the family was informed of the new medication order, despite facility policy requiring notification and documentation of significant changes in condition or treatment. Interviews with the RN who confirmed the order and the DON revealed that the expectation was for nursing staff to notify family members of new medication orders before administration and to document this communication. The RN acknowledged not remembering to notify or document family notification, and the DON confirmed that there was no record of the family being informed. The facility's policy also specified that both the physician and responsible party should be notified and that such notifications should be documented, which was not done in this case.
Failure to Complete Discharge Summaries and Recapitulation of Stay
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure the completion of discharge summaries, including a recapitulation of the resident's stay and final status at discharge, for three residents reviewed for discharge. For each of these residents, documentation was incomplete or missing, with key sections such as nursing services, physical function status, assistive devices, therapy plans, medication disposition, and skin condition left unaddressed. In some cases, discharge instruction forms were missing essential information such as dietary recommendations, skin condition, patient education, and required signatures. For one resident, the discharge instruction form was dated after the actual discharge date and lacked details in several sections, including dietary, skin, and patient education. The recapitulation of stay form was also incomplete, and no discharge note or summary was found in the medical chart. The family member reported that while medications were sent home, no paperwork or follow-up information was provided at discharge, and the only paperwork received was from a prior hospital stay. For the other two residents, similar deficiencies were observed. One resident's discharge instruction form was incomplete, and the recapitulation of stay document only included vitals and weight, with no comprehensive summary. Interviews with staff revealed that while there was an expectation for discharge summaries and recapitulations to be completed collaboratively by the interdisciplinary team, there was no process in place to ensure that all required information was completed and documented in the medical record. Facility policy required a discharge summary and post-discharge plan to be developed and provided, but this was not consistently done.
Failure to Administer Antibiotics as Ordered
Penalty
Summary
Surveyors identified that the facility failed to provide routine and emergency pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of several residents, specifically in the administration of antibiotics. For three residents reviewed, there were multiple instances where antibiotic medications were either not administered at all or were given outside of the prescribed timeframes. Documentation showed that one resident missed two doses and received 21 doses late, another missed four doses entirely, and a third missed one dose and received several doses late for two different antibiotics. These failures were confirmed through review of medication administration records, physician orders, and care plans. The residents involved had significant medical conditions requiring timely antibiotic therapy, including infections such as Methicillin Susceptible Staphylococcus Aureus (MSSA), infective endocarditis, osteomyelitis, and pneumonia. The care plans for these residents included interventions to administer antibiotics as ordered by the physician, yet the medication administration records revealed consistent lapses in following these orders. In some cases, the antibiotics were not available or not administered as scheduled, and in others, there was confusion or miscommunication regarding the reconciliation of hospital discharge orders and the facility's medication administration process. Interviews with nursing staff, the DON, and other facility leadership revealed that there were established protocols for medication reconciliation, order entry, and administration, including the use of pharmacy automation systems like Pyxis. However, staff interviews indicated issues with communication between hospital discharge paperwork, the facility's EMR, and pharmacy processes. There were also inconsistencies in documentation and notification procedures when medications were missed or administered late, with leadership not being informed of these occurrences as required by facility policy.
Deficient Food Storage, Preparation, and Service Practices
Penalty
Summary
Surveyors observed multiple failures in the facility's food storage, preparation, and service practices. In the walk-in refrigerator, several food items, including lemons, lemonade, lettuce, cucumbers, raw meats, and pureed foods, were found either undated, lacking discard dates, or past their expiration dates. Additionally, some food items were not labeled at all. Flour tortillas were also found with an expiration date approaching, and brown puree was not labeled. These observations were corroborated by staff interviews, which revealed inconsistent practices regarding checking and discarding outdated food. In the kitchen, serving utensils were stored in drawers containing food debris, and the fryer grease was observed to be dirty with visible food particles. Staff interviews indicated varying frequencies for cleaning utensil drawers and changing fryer grease, with some staff stating drawers were cleaned weekly and others after each shift. There was also inconsistency in checking for outdated food, with some staff reporting daily checks and others weekly or twice weekly. The facility's food temperature policy requires all hot food to be served at a minimum of 140 degrees Fahrenheit, but observations showed that food temperatures were not consistently taken before serving, specifically for fried chicken, mixed vegetables, and pureed bread. During meal service, a CNA was observed not sanitizing hands between handling food trays and delivering them to residents' rooms, despite being trained on food safety and infection control. Interviews with other staff confirmed the expectation for hand hygiene between serving trays, but the observed practice did not align with this standard. These combined actions and inactions in food labeling, storage, temperature monitoring, utensil cleanliness, fryer maintenance, and hand hygiene led to the identified deficiency in food service safety.
Failure to Receive and Act on Pharmacy Consultant Recommendations
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that drug regimen review recommendations from the pharmacy consultant were received and acted upon for one resident. Specifically, the pharmacy consultant sent recommendations regarding medication adjustments for a newly admitted resident, but these recommendations were not received by the Director of Nursing (DON) due to an email delivery failure. As a result, the recommendations were not reviewed or implemented in a timely manner, contrary to the facility's policy requiring monthly pharmacist review and appropriate communication of medication issues to prescribers and facility leadership. The resident involved was an elderly female with multiple complex diagnoses, including traumatic brain injury, fractures, diabetes, cognitive impairment, and other chronic conditions. Her medication regimen included pain management and several other medications. The pharmacist's recommendations included changes to the administration of metformin, consideration of a temporary hold on Lipitor, initiation of calcium/vitamin D supplementation, and a stop order for PRN Norco. These recommendations were not available to the care team or acted upon until the issue was discovered and the recommendations were resent. Interviews with facility leadership confirmed that the process for ensuring receipt and implementation of pharmacy recommendations was not followed as outlined in facility policy. The DON was unaware of who was responsible for verifying receipt of pharmacy communications, and the recommendations for the resident were missing from the pharmacy binder for the relevant month. This lapse resulted in a delay in reviewing and potentially implementing important medication changes for the resident.
Inadequate Supervision During Resident Transfer
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a resident received adequate supervision and assistance during a transfer, leading to a deficiency in care. A CNA attempted to transfer a resident from a wheelchair to a bed without the required mechanical lift and two-person assistance, as specified in the resident's care plan. The CNA did not see anyone available to assist and decided to proceed alone, resulting in the resident being lowered to the floor when the transfer was unsuccessful. The resident involved was an elderly female with multiple diagnoses, including cognitive communication deficit, pressure ulcer, dysphagia, difficulty walking, repeated falls, and osteoarthritis. Her care plan indicated she required substantial assistance with transfers, specifically a mechanical lift with two-person assistance. Despite this, the CNA attempted the transfer alone, which was against the established protocol and care plan. Interviews with staff revealed that the CNA was aware of the resident's transfer requirements but chose to proceed without assistance due to the absence of other staff in the immediate area. The incident was reported to the nurse, who assessed the resident and found no immediate injuries. However, the resident later complained of arm pain, and an x-ray revealed a humeral fracture. The facility's failure to adhere to the care plan and provide adequate supervision during the transfer led to this deficiency.
Failure to Supervise Medication Administration
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide adequate pharmaceutical services for a resident, identified as Resident #2, by not ensuring the proper administration of medications. During an observation, a medication aide (MA D) was seen leaving medications with Resident #2 and exiting the room without observing the resident take the medications. This action was contrary to the facility's protocol, which requires staff to supervise residents while they take their medications unless the resident has been assessed and approved to self-administer. Resident #2, who was cognitively intact with a BIMS score of 15, did not have a care plan or assessment for self-administration of medications. Interviews with staff, including the unit manager (UM), assistant director of nursing (ADON), and administrator (ADM), confirmed that the facility's policy mandates supervision of medication administration unless a self-administration assessment is completed and documented in the resident's care plan. MA D admitted to leaving the medication with Resident #2 because the resident did not want to be watched, despite knowing the importance of supervision to prevent potential risks such as choking. The facility's medication administration policy was requested but not provided before the survey exit.
Resident Elopement and Injury Due to Inadequate Supervision
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure a safe environment for Resident #1, who was at risk for elopement and falls due to severe cognitive impairment and other health conditions. Despite being assessed as a moderate risk for elopement and a high risk for falls, Resident #1 managed to leave the facility unsupervised. On the day of the incident, she was last seen in the activity room and was later found missing from her room during dinner tray distribution. The staff initiated a search, but Resident #1 was found by a passerby at a gas station approximately one mile away, having sustained a fall resulting in facial injuries. The facility's video footage revealed that Resident #1 exited the building through the front door, following a family member. This incident occurred despite the facility's policy that residents should not leave without proper authorization. Interviews with staff indicated that Resident #1 had not previously exhibited exit-seeking behaviors, and the facility's exit alarms were functioning correctly. However, the staff did not notice her leaving, and there was a delay in realizing she was missing, which contributed to the deficiency. The deficiency was identified as posing a potential risk for falls, injuries, and hospitalization for residents. The facility's failure to adequately supervise Resident #1 and prevent her elopement highlighted a lapse in monitoring and communication among staff. Although the facility had policies and procedures in place for elopement and emergency exits, the incident demonstrated a breakdown in their implementation, leading to Resident #1's unsupervised departure and subsequent injury.
Failure to Ensure Resident Call System Accessibility
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure the resident call system was accessible to three residents, which could endanger their health or safety if they are unable to call for assistance when needed. Resident #1, an elderly male with multiple diagnoses including pancreatic cancer and diabetes, required maximal assistance for various activities. His call light was found on the floor, and he reported that his calls for help often went unanswered, especially when experiencing frequent diarrhea. He mentioned that he sometimes had to wait up to an hour for assistance, indicating potential staffing issues at the facility. Resident #2, an elderly female with conditions such as deep vein thrombosis and hypertension, also had her call light on the floor. She required extensive assistance with daily activities and was observed needing to get up but unable to reach her call light. Despite a staff member briefly checking on her, the call light remained on the floor, indicating a lack of adherence to the facility's policy of ensuring call lights are within reach. Resident #3, an elderly male with Alzheimer's disease and other health issues, was similarly found with his call light on the floor. He required partial to moderate assistance with daily activities and had mildly impaired cognition. Interviews with staff members revealed that they were aware of the importance of keeping call lights within reach but failed to consistently follow this protocol. The Director of Nursing emphasized the critical nature of accessible call lights for resident safety, yet observations showed this standard was not maintained.
Failure to Maintain Adequate Water Temperature
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that residents had access to a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, specifically by not maintaining resident room water temperatures at a comfortable warm temperature of at least 100 degrees Fahrenheit. This deficiency was observed in the rooms of six residents, who experienced water temperatures significantly below the required threshold, ranging from 76.7 to 90.4 degrees Fahrenheit. These temperatures were recorded during observations and interviews conducted by surveyors on multiple dates in March 2024. Residents reported discomfort and dissatisfaction due to the cold water temperatures. For instance, one resident mentioned that since a freeze in January, the water had been too cold for showers, leading to refusals of baths. Another resident expressed feelings of anger and shame for having to attend a doctor's appointment without a shower due to the cold water. Multiple residents confirmed that the water took a long time to warm up, if at all, and some had to let the water run for extended periods, up to 45 minutes, without achieving a comfortable temperature. Interviews with staff, including CNAs and the Maintenance Supervisor, revealed that the facility had been aware of the issue since a winter freeze in January, which caused a pump failure and subsequent hot water loss in half of the building. Despite attempts to address the problem, the water temperature remained inadequate, particularly in the 300 hall. The Maintenance Supervisor and Administrator acknowledged the ongoing issue and stated that they were working on resolving it, but the problem persisted, affecting the residents' ability to maintain personal hygiene and comfort.
Food Safety and Hygiene Deficiencies in Kitchen
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food safety in the facility's only kitchen. Observations revealed that food items in the dry storage and walk-in freezer were not sealed or dated appropriately. Specifically, a box of fish fillet in the freezer and containers of thick and easy and grits in the dry storage were found opened and undated. Additionally, during lunch service, a cook was observed with improper beard covering, leaving parts of his facial hair exposed. Interviews with the Dietary Manager and the cook confirmed these lapses in food safety protocols. The Dietary Manager was unaware of the undated food items in the freezer and acknowledged that all opened food should be dated and sealed properly. The cook admitted to not fully covering his facial hair, believing it was unnecessary for short stubble. The Lead NSD confirmed that the cook had been instructed multiple times to cover his beard fully but continued to adjust the covering improperly. These failures could place residents at risk for food-borne illness and food contamination.
Infection Control Deficiencies During Catheter and PICC Line Care
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program, leading to several deficiencies in the care of two residents. For Resident #6, LVN E and CNA F did not follow proper infection control procedures during a catheter change. LVN E failed to maintain a sterile field, did not change gloves when necessary, and did not use hand sanitizer between glove changes. CNA F did not change her gloves after performing perineal care, which could lead to cross-contamination. These actions were observed during a catheter change, where supplies were mishandled, and sterile techniques were not followed, increasing the risk of infection for the resident. For Resident #75, RN C and LVN B did not adhere to sterile procedures during a PICC dressing change. RN C failed to maintain a sterile field by using soiled gloves to handle sterile supplies and did not change gloves when visibly soiled with blood. LVN B entered the room without gloves, opened a sterile kit, and handled scissors with bare hands, which could contaminate the PICC line insertion site. These actions were observed during a dressing change, where the insertion site was already compromised by blood, further increasing the risk of infection. Interviews with the involved staff revealed that nerves and the challenging nature of the procedures contributed to the mistakes. The DON and ADON acknowledged the importance of following sterile techniques and hand hygiene to prevent infections. The facility's policies on catheter and PICC line care were not followed, leading to potential cross-contamination and infection risks for the residents involved.
What surveyors are citing around you — mapped
All 10 risk areas, ranked with evidence
Repeat citations, what's rising near you, and quality measures — ranked so department heads know exactly where to look first.
Illustrative
What surveyors actually found near you
We read the 305 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — including the 19 immediate-jeopardy cases — and tell you exactly what happened, in plain English, matched to your record.
Resident with a documented fall history left unattended on the patio; found on the ground with a hip fracture.
Walk-in cooler logs missing for 12 days; expired supplements in the medication room fridge.
Illustrative
A prioritized, do-first checklist
Every risk area becomes concrete audit steps drawn from real citations at facilities like yours — run them this week, before your window opens.
Illustrative
Risk indicators are statistical estimates from public CMS data — not predictions, findings, or compliance advice.
Nursing homes near Round Rock
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| San Gabriel Rehabilitation And Care Center | 2.8 mi | ★★★★★ | 5 | 2 |
| Trinity Care Center | 3.9 mi | ★★★★★ | 9 | 0 |
| Hearthstone Nursing And Rehabilitation | 4.6 mi | ★★★★★ | 7 | 0 |
| Park Valley Inn Health Center | 4.8 mi | ★★★★★ | 9 | 0 |
| The Center At Parmer | 6.2 mi | ★★★★★ | 18 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Bel Air At Teravista.
100% money-back within 48 hours.
Trusted data, never guesswork. Every citation, penalty, rating and Plan of Correction on this page is sourced from public CMS records (latest release July 2026) and official state health department websites.