Below average — CMS composite of the measures below.
A standard survey is most likely before around December 2026
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 Bradley Estates Nursing And Rehab Llc during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
Surveyors found that multiple residents lived in rooms with significant uncleanliness and disrepair, including soiled items, dust, stains, and broken fixtures. Some residents reported that staff did not clean under beds or repair damaged areas. Facility records did not show evidence of required deep cleaning, and maintenance staff were unaware of needed repairs, despite facility policies requiring regular cleaning and upkeep.
The facility did not address or resolve grievances raised by residents during council meetings over several months. Multiple residents, including those who were cognitively intact and impaired, reported that their concerns about activities, food, and other issues were repeatedly discussed without follow-up or resolution. Staff responsible for handling grievances were not consistently involved in the meetings, and meeting records showed no evidence of timely feedback or action on the issues raised.
A resident with severe cognitive and physical impairments was physically abused by their cognitively impaired roommate, who was observed by a CNA hitting the resident in the chest. Both residents were unable to recall the incident, and neither sustained injuries. The event occurred despite facility policies requiring protection from abuse.
A resident was found hitting another resident, and while the immediate incident was addressed and documented, the facility failed to interview other staff or residents who might have witnessed the event or had relevant information, as required by policy.
Lack of Monitoring for Psychotropic Medications: The DON and RNC confirmed that several residents prescribed antipsychotic, antianxiety, and antidepressant medications did not have adverse reaction monitoring documented in their records. One resident also lacked a seizure care plan, and another lacked a dementia-specific care plan. The residents had diagnoses including dementia, depression, anxiety, insomnia, encephalopathy, and epilepsy, with cognitive status ranging from intact to severe impairment.
MDS assessments were inaccurately coded for 4 residents. One resident was incorrectly coded as receiving a hypnotic, another was omitted for anticoagulant use, and a third was incorrectly coded for antianxiety medication; all 3 also had MDS errors related to serious mental illness status. A fourth resident’s MDS also incorrectly indicated no serious mental illness despite diagnoses of anxiety, depression, and delusional disorder. The MDSC confirmed the coding errors during interview.
Medications and supplies were not properly labeled or dated in several medication carts, and expired syringes were found in a medication storage room. An LPN and RN observed inhalers, insulin, eye drops, liquid meds, and nebulizer vials without open dates for multiple residents, and the DON confirmed these items should have been dated. The surveyor also found expired syringes stored in the medication room.
The facility failed to maintain its infection prevention and control program when staff did not follow EBP during high-contact care for residents with dialysis devices and an indwelling catheter, including entering rooms without gowns and not always performing hand hygiene during catheter/peri-care. The facility also omitted two residents receiving doxycycline from the infection control line list for antibiotic use.
Missing Annual Protective Placement Reviews for Two Residents: The facility did not ensure annual court-ordered protective placement reviews were obtained for 2 residents with legal guardians. One resident had dementia, a traumatic subdural hematoma, hemiplegia, CHF, and COPD and was rarely/never understood; the other had dementia, post-stroke hemiplegia/hemiparesis, functional quadriplegia, and moderate cognitive impairment on BIMS. Records showed prior guardianship/protective placement documents and orders for continuing protective placement, but the most recent annual reviews were not found in the chart.
Incomplete Informed Consent for Psychotropic Medications: The facility did not ensure that residents or their legal representatives were fully informed and documented for prescribed psychotropic medications. A resident with severe cognitive impairment and an activated POAHC had outdated consents for buspirone, venlafaxine, and trazodone; another resident with moderate cognitive impairment and a Guardian lacked a consent for Seroquel, had an incomplete sertraline consent, and had an incorrect valproic acid diagnosis on the form; a third resident with an activated POAHC had no informed consent on file for sertraline before it was given.
The facility did not ensure timely notice of Medicare Part A coverage ending and financial liability for continued stay for two residents. One resident had moderate cognitive impairment, ESRD, and other diagnoses, and the other had severe cognitive impairment with dementia and dehydration. For both residents, the NOMNC and ABN documentation was incomplete, lacking required signatures, dates, or appeal information, and the medical record did not show that the POAHC or Guardian was informed of the coverage change and appeal rights.
Failure to Document and Resolve a Resident Grievance for Missing Clothing: A resident with intact cognition and diagnoses including AFib, CHF, DM, depression, and anxiety reported missing clothing, including T-shirts and sweatpants, but the issue was not entered into the grievance log or thoroughly investigated. Staff provided other residents’ clothing to wear, while the DON, GO, and NHA stated they were not aware of the grievance and that the complaint should have been escalated and addressed through the facility’s grievance process.
Failure to Complete and Transmit Discharge MDS Assessment: A resident admitted with non-traumatic brain injury was discharged to the hospital, but the discharge MDS was not completed or transmitted as required. During record review, the MDSC confirmed the assessment should have been done and stated the completion timeline was 7 days.
PASRR Level I screens were not updated for two residents when psychotropic medication changes were identified, and one resident did not have a PASRR Level II screen available. One resident with cognitive impairment and multiple mental health diagnoses was prescribed Seroquel, but the PASRR paperwork did not reflect it. Another resident with intact cognition and diagnoses including MDD and anxiety had a PASRR Level I screen that omitted Abilify, buspirone, and Wellbutrin, even though a referral summary indicated a partial Level II screen was needed.
PASRR requirements were not met for a resident with schizophrenia and paranoid schizophrenia. The resident had intact cognition and was responsible for healthcare decisions, but the Level I PASRR incorrectly indicated no mental illness despite the documented diagnoses, and no Level II PASRR was in the record. The DON, Admissions Director, and NHA all confirmed the resident's schizophrenia diagnosis and that the Level I screen should have identified a major mental disorder.
The facility did not consistently provide ADL assistance for three residents. Two residents with significant cognitive and physical impairments had poor nail care and repeated gaps in oral hygiene documentation, with staff confirming that undocumented care was not done. A third resident repeatedly requested showers but was told showers could not be provided because of a neck collar, despite the resident stating the collar could be removed for bathing. The resident’s care plan was incomplete, and bathing records showed showers that staff later said did not occur.
Failure to Follow Pressure Injury Prevention Interventions: Two residents with prior facility-acquired pressure injuries did not consistently receive ordered skin-protection interventions. One resident’s heels were not floated despite a care plan directive, and another resident was observed multiple times without the ordered left heel bootie. Staff, including the DON and an RN, verified the ordered interventions.
Incomplete Neuro Checks After Unwitnessed Falls: A resident with severe cognitive impairment, stroke-related hemiplegia/hemiparesis, and dementia had multiple unwitnessed falls in the room, including falls while attempting to transfer, walk, or go to the bathroom. Although neuro checks were initiated after each event, staff did not complete them in accordance with the facility’s flow sheet, and the DON confirmed the checks were started but not finished.
Failure to Monitor High-Risk Medications: Survey review found that the facility did not document monitoring for adverse reactions for a resident on an opioid and anticoagulant, another resident on a diuretic and anticoagulant, and a third resident on doxycycline for osteomyelitis. One resident’s care plan also did not reflect diuretic and anticoagulant use. The DON and RNC confirmed that monitoring for adverse reactions should have been in place.
The facility failed to protect residents from various forms of abuse and neglect, including physical, mental, and sexual abuse, as well as physical punishment, by any individual.
A resident with multiple medical conditions reported missing money from their room on two occasions. Despite facility policy requiring reporting of such allegations, the incident was not reported to the State Agency because staff believed there was insufficient evidence and inconsistencies in the resident's statements. The resident's care plan noted a preference to keep money on their person and refusal to use a lockbox.
A resident with intact cognition and multiple medical conditions reported missing money on two occasions, but the facility did not conduct a thorough investigation due to inconsistent statements and lack of evidence. The DON confirmed that no formal inquiry was initiated, and the incident was not documented in the resident's progress notes.
Surveyors found that a resident's room had a crooked window shade held up by hangers, large areas of missing paint, and a shared bathroom with uncovered linen and garbage carts emitting a strong fecal odor. A resident's wheelchair was also observed to be dirty with dried food and missing cushion parts. Staff confirmed these conditions were unacceptable and acknowledged improper storage and maintenance.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment and a history of falls was transferred without non-slip footwear and without a scoop mattress, both of which were required by the care plan. Staff inconsistently applied transfer methods, with some using a gait belt and assist of two instead of the required mechanical sit-to-stand lift. There was confusion among staff regarding the resident's transfer status, and no therapy evaluation was found to support changes in transfer method.
The facility did not act on or document responses to repeated grievances raised in resident council meetings regarding delayed call light responses and staff phone use. Multiple cognitively intact residents reported ongoing issues with staff not answering call lights and being inattentive, despite filing grievances and discussing these concerns in meetings. The facility conducted call light audits but did not document or communicate the results, and residents felt their concerns remained unaddressed.
Two residents with diabetes received insulin injections from LPNs who did not hold the insulin pen needle in the skin for the required five seconds after injection, contrary to the manufacturer's instructions. Both LPNs confirmed this practice, and the facility's policy referenced safe medication administration and the availability of manufacturer instructions online.
Two residents received insulin from multi-dose pens that were not labeled with the date and time of first use, contrary to facility policy and manufacturer instructions. Two LPNs administered insulin without ensuring the pens were properly labeled, and staff interviews revealed inconsistent knowledge of expiration guidelines. This resulted in the inability to verify whether the insulin was within its safe usage period.
An LPN failed to perform hand hygiene after removing gloves and before using the medication cart computer, and also did not clean the rubber septum of a new insulin pen before administering insulin to a resident. These actions were not in accordance with facility policy and were confirmed by the Unit Manager as not meeting expectations for infection prevention and control.
The facility did not have a qualified individual serving as the food and nutrition services director, as the current Dietary Manager had not completed or enrolled in an approved certification program or held a related degree, and the recently hired Assistant Dietary Manager only held a state-level certification. This affected all residents in the facility.
Surveyors found that multiple residents did not receive their medications as prescribed, with controlled substances not properly documented, incorrect dosages given, and numerous late or missed doses. LPNs failed to follow the facility's medication administration policy, and the DON and pharmacist confirmed these lapses in both timing and documentation.
Surveyors found that medication carts were left unlocked and unattended, and medications were stored in unlabeled and uncovered cups rather than in their original pharmacy packaging. Staff confirmed that these actions were not in line with facility policy, and these lapses had the potential to affect multiple residents.
Surveyors observed that staff did not serve the menu-listed cut potatoes to residents in the dining room and provided only half the required portion of potatoes to residents eating in their rooms. Staff interviews and record reviews confirmed that the posted menu and required serving sizes were not followed during the lunch meal.
Surveyors observed improper food handling and sanitation practices, including a dietary aide failing to follow hand hygiene and hair restraint protocols while plating food, and ice scoops being stored directly in or on top of ice in coolers. The dietary manager confirmed these actions did not meet facility policy or state food code requirements.
A resident with moderate cognitive impairment and an activated POAHC underwent pharmacogenomic testing without the POAHC being notified or providing consent. The resident verbally consented to the testing, and the facility could not determine which physician requested it, despite the Medical Director's signature on the order. The POAHC only learned of the testing through insurance correspondence, and the facility confirmed that proper notification and consent procedures were not followed.
A resident with significant physical disabilities did not receive scheduled weekly showers or regular toileting assistance as outlined in their care plan. Documentation of ADL care was inconsistent, with only two showers recorded and many shifts lacking completed records for required tasks. Staff confirmed that missing documentation meant care was either not provided or not charted, resulting in a deficiency related to unmet ADL needs and incomplete records.
An LPN was observed preparing and administering medications to two residents without performing hand hygiene, contrary to facility policy. The LPN acknowledged the omission, and the DON confirmed that hand hygiene is expected before medication preparation and administration.
A resident accessed a loaded firearm from a CNA's purse, and another resident suffered a third-degree burn from a leaking oxygen tank in an LTC facility. Both incidents were classified as immediate jeopardy due to the potential for serious harm, highlighting significant safety lapses and inadequate supervision.
A resident accessed a loaded gun from a staff's purse and carried it onto a secured memory care unit without notifying the POA. Another resident experienced skin irritation from an oxygen tank placement, but the physician and responsible party were not informed.
A resident with malignant neoplasms and repeated falls was transferred to the ER by family without receiving a bed hold notice, as required by the facility's policy. Staff interviews revealed a lack of communication and awareness regarding the bed hold policy, and the medical record confirmed no notice was provided.
A resident was not permitted to return to the facility after a hospital visit, despite the facility's policy allowing for such returns if needs can be met. Miscommunications and lack of documentation led to the resident being discharged against medical advice, and the facility initially refused readmission. The situation was resolved after intervention from an Ombudsman.
A resident with a Foley catheter experienced inadequate care and monitoring, resulting in hospitalization for urinary retention, UTI, and acute kidney injury. The facility failed to document urine output and genitourinary changes, and staff interviews revealed a lack of adherence to catheter management guidelines.
The facility failed to implement its abuse prevention policies by not conducting thorough background checks for three staff members. A Dietary Aide with a history of misconduct was hired without proper investigation, and a CNA was employed without timely DOJ documentation. Additionally, discrepancies in documentation for another staff member were noted, highlighting lapses in the facility's adherence to its policies.
A resident was verbally abused by a dietary aide who called them a derogatory name and threatened physical harm. The aide, who had a history of caregiver misconduct, was employed without a thorough background check. The incident required staff intervention, and the facility's failure to screen the aide properly contributed to the deficiency.
A resident with a history of aggressive behavior and severely impaired cognition was observed without the required 1:1 supervision on multiple occasions. Despite staff education on supervision expectations, the resident was left unsupervised in their room and dining area, contrary to their care plan. The facility's failure to adhere to supervision protocols was confirmed by staff and the Nursing Home Administrator.
A resident was discharged from an LTC facility without proper planning or medication after returning from a hospital stay. Despite planning to move into an apartment, the resident was told to leave following an argument with staff. The resident refused to sign AMA paperwork, and the facility did not provide medications upon discharge. Interviews revealed that the resident could have stayed until the apartment was ready, but this was not communicated, leading to a deficiency in care.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment and multiple eye-related diagnoses did not receive replacement glasses after their original pair was lost in the facility. Despite grievances filed by the resident's family, the facility did not document corrective actions or follow-up. Interviews revealed that the Grievance Officer was aware of the issue but did not act, and the Nursing Home Administrator admitted that new glasses should have been obtained.
A CNA in a long-term care facility was observed improperly handling clean towels by carrying them against their scrub top while delivering them to residents' rooms, contrary to the facility's infection control policy. An LPN corrected the CNA, emphasizing the need for using a cart to prevent contamination. The CNA acknowledged the mistake and the need for further training.
Two residents with epilepsy in a facility experienced significant medication errors, with one resident missing multiple doses of Lacosamide and Keppra, leading to hospitalization, and another missing doses of Clobazam due to staff unawareness of its location. The facility's medication management policies were not adhered to, resulting in these deficiencies.
Two residents were not involved in the development and implementation of their person-centered care plans. One resident, despite being cognitively intact, had no documented care conferences since admission. Another resident, with severe cognitive impairment, had no care conferences documented after March, despite multiple care plan revisions. The facility's policy requires patient involvement in care management meetings, but these were not conducted as required, partly due to staffing changes.
A resident's representative was not notified of significant treatment changes, including a rescheduled colonoscopy, an ER transfer, and medication adjustments. The facility's policy requires immediate notification, but documentation was lacking. The resident expressed a desire for their representative to be involved in all decisions, and the Nursing Home Administrator acknowledged the oversight.
Failure to Maintain Clean and Homelike Environment
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain a clean, safe, and homelike environment for eight residents, as evidenced by multiple observations of uncleanliness and disrepair in resident rooms and shared spaces. Surveyors observed used urinals, uncovered hampers with soiled clothing emitting strong odors, thick layers of dust on wall heaters and window shelves, sticky floors, candy wrappers, cobwebs, and broken sink drain plugs. Additionally, there were visible stains, splatters, and scrapes on walls and ceilings, missing tiles, and exposed pressed wood in closets. Residents confirmed that staff did not move beds to clean underneath or repair damaged walls, and maintenance staff were unaware of the areas needing repair. The residents affected included individuals with varying levels of cognitive impairment, as indicated by their BIMS scores, ranging from severely impaired to cognitively intact. The observations were confirmed by the Regional Manager of the contracted housekeeping service, who acknowledged staffing shortages and delays in cleaning due to call-offs and weather-related lateness. The facility was unable to provide evidence that deep cleaning had been performed in resident rooms for the month in question, as requested by surveyors. A review of facility policies revealed that daily cleaning procedures required high dusting and disinfection of high-touch surfaces, and the homelike environment policy emphasized providing a safe, clean, and comfortable setting. Despite these policies, the observed conditions did not meet the outlined standards, and the lack of documentation for deep cleaning further demonstrated the facility's failure to ensure a clean and homelike environment for its residents.
Failure to Resolve Resident Council Grievances in a Timely Manner
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to resolve grievances raised during resident council meetings in a timely manner for three out of six monthly meetings, as evidenced by interviews, record reviews, and policy review. Three residents, including two who were cognitively intact and one who was severely cognitively impaired, confirmed that issues such as requests for more puzzles, shopping trips, fresh fruit and vegetables, snacks, and specific meal preferences were repeatedly brought up in council meetings without follow-up or resolution. Meeting minutes from multiple months showed that concerns were documented but not addressed, and there was no evidence of feedback or updates provided to the council members regarding the status of their grievances. Staff interviews revealed that the Concierge, responsible for addressing grievances, was not invited to several resident council meetings and only recently began attending after being invited by the council president. Residents and council attendees expressed frustration over the lack of follow-up, with complaints remaining unresolved from month to month. The facility's policy requires that council recommendations and issues be reviewed by the Administrator and that responses be presented at the next meeting or sooner, but this process was not followed as documented in the meeting minutes and confirmed by staff and resident interviews.
Failure to Protect Resident from Physical Abuse by Roommate
Penalty
Summary
A deficiency occurred when a resident with severe cognitive impairment and limited physical mobility was not protected from physical abuse by their roommate, who also had cognitive and mobility impairments. The incident took place when a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) observed one resident hitting the other in the chest after hearing yelling from the room. The CNA immediately intervened and separated the residents. Both residents were unable to recall the incident or what led to it, and neither sustained injuries as a result of the altercation. The facility's records indicated that both residents had significant cognitive and physical limitations, with one resident having a history of Parkinson's disease, traumatic brain injury, and hemiplegia, and the other also experiencing hemiplegia and cognitive impairment. The facility's policy requires the protection of residents from abuse, neglect, and exploitation, but in this case, a resident was subjected to physical abuse by another resident in their shared living space.
Failure to Interview All Potential Witnesses in Resident-to-Resident Abuse Investigation
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to protect a resident from physical abuse by another resident. According to the documentation, a certified nurse aide (CNA) heard a resident yelling and discovered another resident hitting him in the chest. The CNA immediately separated the two residents and assessed the victim for injuries, finding none. The incident was documented, and statements were obtained from the CNA and attempts were made to interview both residents involved. However, the investigation did not include interviews with other staff or residents who may have had knowledge of the incident or witnessed similar events. This omission was contrary to the facility's policy, which requires identifying and interviewing all involved persons, including witnesses and others who might have knowledge of the allegation. The administrator confirmed that only the CNA was interviewed, as the incident was considered isolated.
Lack of Monitoring for Psychotropic Medications
Penalty
Summary
The facility did not monitor psychotropic medication use for 4 of 5 sampled residents, and the medical records for those residents did not include monitoring for adverse reactions to the prescribed medications. The facility’s Psychotropic Medication Management policy stated that residents prescribed psychoactive medications would receive adequate monitoring, including monitoring for mood, behavior, sleep, side effects, medication efficacy, and drug-specific side effects. The policy also stated that care plans would reflect pharmacological and individualized non-pharmacological interventions and include monitoring for side effects such as gait disorders, movement disorders, cognitive or behavioral changes, constipation, hypotension, and dry mouth. R3 had diagnoses including major depressive disorder, insomnia, vascular dementia, anxiety disorder, and epilepsy, and had severe cognitive impairment on the MDS staff interview for mental status. R3 was prescribed risperidone for dementia-related agitation, buspirone for major depressive disorder and anxiety disorder, venlafaxine for major depressive disorder and anxiety disorder, and trazodone for anxiety. The medical record did not include adverse reaction monitoring for these psychotropic medications. During interview, the DON and regional nurse consultant confirmed there was no adverse reaction monitoring in place for R3’s psychotropic medications. R5 had diagnoses including encephalopathy, adjustment disorder, major depressive disorder, anxiety disorder, dementia with mood disturbance, and alcohol abuse, and had moderate cognitive impairment on the MDS. R5 was prescribed quetiapine for anxiety disorder, sertraline for adjustment disorder, mirtazapine for anxiety disorder, and valproic acid for seizures. The record did not include adverse reaction monitoring for the psychotropic medications or a care plan for seizures. R94 had intact cognition on the BIMS and was prescribed aripiprazole, buspirone, trazodone, escitalopram, and bupropion for depression, anxiety, and insomnia, but the record did not include adverse reaction monitoring. R104 had diagnoses including anxiety disorder, dementia, alcohol dependence, insomnia, and depression, had moderate cognitive impairment on the MDS, and was prescribed risperidone, olanzapine, trazodone, and mirtazapine; the record did not include adverse reaction monitoring for the psychotropic medications or a dementia care plan. The DON and regional nurse consultant confirmed the lack of adverse reaction monitoring for these residents, and also confirmed that R104 did not have a dementia-specific care plan.
Incorrect MDS Coding for Medication Use and Serious Mental Illness
Penalty
Summary
The facility did not accurately code MDS 3.0 assessments for 4 residents. R3’s quarterly MDS indicated hypnotic medication use even though physician orders did not include a hypnotic, and R3’s comprehensive MDS indicated no serious mental illness despite diagnoses of major depressive disorder and anxiety disorder. R5’s comprehensive MDS did not indicate anticoagulant use even though R5 had an order for apixaban. R104’s comprehensive MDS indicated antianxiety medication use even though no such medication was ordered, and it also indicated no serious mental illness despite diagnoses including depressive disorder and anxiety disorder. R12’s comprehensive MDS also indicated no serious mental illness even though R12 had diagnoses of anxiety, depression, and delusional disorder. Surveyor review of the records showed that R3 had severe cognitive impairment and an activated POAHC, R5 had moderate cognitive impairment and a legal guardian, R104 had moderate cognitive impairment, and R12 had moderate cognitive impairment and made their own healthcare decisions. During interviews, the MDS coordinator confirmed the coding errors for each resident and stated the assessments were incorrectly completed.
Medications and Supplies Not Properly Labeled or Removed When Expired
Penalty
Summary
Drugs and biologicals in the facility were not labeled in accordance with accepted professional principles, and expired medical supplies were found in storage. Based on observation, staff interview, and record review, medications for 16 residents were found in 4 of 6 medication carts without required open dates or other appropriate dating. The affected medications included inhalers, insulin, eye drops, liquid medications, and nebulizer solution for residents including R97, R128, R81, R127, R136, R141, R78, R63, R118, R9, R124, R76, R72, R145, R165, and R35. The facility’s policies stated that outdated drugs were not to be used and that the date opened must be recorded when opening a multi-dose container. During observation of the 300 unit medication cart, the surveyor found multiple medications without open dates, including timolol eye drops, latanoprost eye drops, Novolin insulin, Lantus SoloStar insulin, albuterol nebulizer vials, chlorhexidine solution, lactulose, albuterol HFA inhaler, Advair Diskus inhaler, and Striverdi Respimat inhaler. On the 400 unit medication cart, Wixela, Incruse Ellipta, Breyna, and Zonisade were also missing open dates. The 400 unit medication storage room contained 20 expired Point 1 mL syringes. RN-E confirmed the missing dates and expired syringes, and the DON stated that the insulin vials, inhalers, and other listed medications should have open dates and that the expired syringes should be disposed of.
Infection control and EBP failures during resident care and antibiotic tracking
Penalty
Summary
The facility did not maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to prevent the development and transmission of communicable disease and infection for residents receiving enhanced barrier precautions (EBP) and for residents receiving antibiotics. During observation of care for one resident with an indwelling catheter who was on EBP, CNA-C provided peri-care and catheter care while wearing gloves and a mask but did not wear a gown. CNA-C also removed gloves and did not always perform hand hygiene before putting on clean gloves while continuing care. The resident had diagnoses including dementia, multiple sclerosis, quadriplegia, chronic kidney disease, and heart failure, and was dependent on staff for transfers, hygiene, dressing, and mobility. The facility also did not follow its EBP process for two residents receiving dialysis. One resident with a history of MRSA infection, end stage renal disease, dependence on renal dialysis, and an indwelling dialysis device had an EBP sign posted at the room entrance and a PPE cart nearby, but staff entering the room for care and transfer did not don gowns. PT-V and OT-Q entered the room to get the resident up for therapy, lunch, and dialysis, and later exited without gowns; CNA-R and CNA-S later entered the room and repositioned and boosted the resident without gowns. Another resident with type 2 diabetes, CHF, stage 5 kidney disease, end stage renal disease, and dependence on renal dialysis also had an EBP sign posted and a PPE cart nearby, but CNA-T and another staff member entered the room without PPE, and CNA-T transferred the resident with a Hoyer lift while wearing gloves but not a gown. The facility also failed to maintain its infection control line list for antibiotic use. Two residents had active doxycycline orders, one for gastrointestinal illness and one for chronic osteomyelitis, but neither resident was included on the facility's infection control line list for antibiotic use. The Infection Preventionist verified both omissions and stated the residents would be added to the line list.
Missing Annual Protective Placement Reviews for Two Residents
Penalty
Summary
The facility did not ensure annual court-ordered protective placement reviews were obtained for 2 residents, both of whom had legal guardians. R5 was admitted with diagnoses including dementia, traumatic subdural hematoma, hemiplegia affecting the left nondominant side, CHF, and COPD, and the MDS dated 7/28/25 indicated R5 was rarely/never understood. R5’s record contained a Guardianship and Protective Placement document dated 1/24/19, and the most recent Order for Continuing Protective Placement was filed on 7/7/23, but the surveyor requested the most recent annual Continuing Protective Placement document and did not find it in the record. R116 was admitted with diagnoses including dementia, hemiplegia and hemiparesis after a stroke, and functional quadriplegia. R116’s MDS dated 6/7/25 showed a BIMS score of 9/15, indicating moderate cognitive impairment. R116’s record contained a Guardianship and Protective Placement document dated 3/21/13, and the most recent Order for Continuing Protective Placement was filed on 7/7/23, but the surveyor requested the most recent annual Continuing Protective Placement document and did not find it in the record. Interviews with the VPOS-M and NHA-A confirmed continuing protective placement reviews should be completed annually, and the NHA stated the facility did not find another review aside from what was in the medical record.
Incomplete Informed Consent for Psychotropic Medications
Penalty
Summary
The facility did not ensure that residents or their legal representatives were fully informed in advance of the risks and benefits of prescribed psychotropic medications, and did not have timely or complete informed consent documentation for 3 of 5 sampled residents. The facility policy stated that risks and benefits would be explained and informed consent obtained for each psychoactive medication, with verbal consent documented if needed and consent reviewed annually or with a change. Survey review and staff interviews showed that the facility did not follow this process for residents with cognitive impairment or legal decision-makers in place. R3 had diagnoses including major depressive disorder, insomnia, vascular dementia, anxiety disorder, and epilepsy, and had severe cognitive impairment with an activated POAHC. R3 was prescribed buspirone, venlafaxine, and trazodone, but the consents in the record were completed in 2024 even though venlafaxine was ordered in 2025, and the DON stated more recent consents should have been completed. R5 had diagnoses including encephalopathy, adjustment disorder, major depressive disorder, anxiety disorder, dementia with mood disturbance, and alcohol abuse, with moderate cognitive impairment and a Guardian. R5 was prescribed Seroquel, sertraline, mirtazapine, and valproic acid; the record lacked a consent for Seroquel, the sertraline consent was incomplete and missing the Guardian’s signature, and the valproic acid consent listed the wrong diagnosis. R4 had vascular dementia, psychotic disorder with delusions, anxiety, and major depressive disorder, had intact cognition on MDS, and had an activated POAHC; R4 was prescribed sertraline, but the record did not contain an informed consent form before the medication was administered.
Failure to Document Medicare Coverage Termination Notices
Penalty
Summary
The facility did not ensure timely notification of Medicare coverage changes and financial liability for continued stay when Medicare Part A benefits ended for 2 sampled residents, R22 and R113. Survey review found that R22, who had diagnoses including end stage renal disease, metabolic encephalopathy, and dependence on renal dialysis and had a BIMS score of 8 indicating moderate cognitive impairment, had a Medicare Part A last covered day of 5/3/25. Although the record showed a NOMNC was issued to R22's POAHC by phone on 5/1/25, the ABN did not include the POAHC's date or signature, and the medical record did not show that the POAHC was informed of the coverage change or appeal rights when R22 remained in the facility. R113, who had diagnoses including dehydration and dementia and a BIMS score of 00 indicating severe cognitive impairment, also had Medicare Part A coverage end, with a last covered day of 8/14/25. The NOMNC for R113 did not include a signature or the date it was issued to the Guardian, and the ABN did not indicate whether an appeal option was chosen or include a signature or issue date. The medical record did not show that the Guardian was informed of the coverage and service changes or appeal rights when R113 remained in the facility. The MDSC stated that calls were made to the Guardian and that handwritten notes were kept, but the information was not documented in the medical record, and an email from the Guardian stated the communication about the end of coverage and services had not been received.
Failure to Document and Resolve Resident Grievance for Missing Clothing
Penalty
Summary
The facility did not document, investigate, or thoroughly resolve a grievance for one resident, R79, who reported missing clothing. The facility’s grievance policy stated that grievances should be resolved promptly within five calendar days and that complaints should be escalated to the supervisor and grievance official if not immediately resolved. R79, who had diagnoses including atrial fibrillation, CHF, diabetes, depression, and anxiety, had a BIMS score of 13 out of 15, indicating intact cognition. R79 told the surveyor that several items of clothing, including military T-shirts and sweatpants, had been missing for about a week and that staff had only brought other residents’ clothing to wear instead of resolving the missing clothing issue. R79 stated that no one had followed up with R79 about the missing items beyond the staff member who first received the report. Survey review found no grievance entry for R79 in the facility grievance log. On interview, the DON stated staff should follow grievance protocol when a resident reports a missing item and should report it to the Grievance Officer right away. The Grievance Officer was not aware of R79’s missing clothing and stated it was not acceptable that a grievance had not been generated; the GO said staff should have checked the laundry, reviewed the resident’s inventory sheet, and notified the GO so a grievance could be started. The NHA also stated staff should have reported the missing items and communicated with the Housekeeping Supervisor and Grievance Officer. R79 remained without the resident’s own clothing during the survey interviews and expressed frustration that the clothing had not been found or addressed through the grievance process.
Failure to Complete and Transmit Discharge MDS Assessment
Penalty
Summary
The facility did not ensure timely transmittal of a Resident Assessment Information/Minimum Data Set (RAI/MDS) assessment for one resident, R105, who was discharged from the facility on 5/7/25. Survey review of the medical record from 9/16/25 to 9/17/25 found that R105, who had been admitted with a diagnosis of non-traumatic brain injury, did not have a Discharge MDS Assessment in the record. The RAI Manual states that a Discharge MDS Assessment-Return Not Anticipated is to be completed no later than the discharge date plus 14 calendar days and transmitted 14 calendar days from completion, and the MDS Coordinator stated that a discharge MDS should have been completed when the resident was sent to the hospital. The MDS Coordinator also reviewed another resident's discharge MDS assessment and stated the timeline for completion was 7 days.
PASRR screens were not updated for psychotropic medication changes
Penalty
Summary
The facility did not ensure that PASRR Level I screens were updated and submitted for PASRR Level II reevaluation when newly evident mental disorders and medication changes were identified for 2 sampled residents. One resident had diagnoses including adjustment disorder, major depressive disorder, anxiety disorder, dementia with mood disturbance, and alcohol abuse, had moderate cognitive impairment on MDS, and had a legal guardian for healthcare decisions. That resident was prescribed Seroquel for anxiety disorder, along with sertraline and mirtazapine, but the PASRR Level I screen did not include Seroquel and the PASRR Level II screen also did not include the Seroquel order. Another resident had diagnoses including insomnia, major depressive disorder, and general anxiety disorder, had a BIMS score of 15 indicating intact cognition, and was responsible for healthcare decisions. That resident was prescribed Abilify, buspirone, Lexapro, and Wellbutrin, but the undated PASRR Level I screen only listed Lexapro and did not include Abilify, buspirone, or Wellbutrin. The medical record also contained a PASRR Level II Referral Summary indicating a partial Level II screen should be completed, but the facility did not provide a PASRR Level II screen. The Admissions Director confirmed the missing medication information on the PASRRs and stated the facility was not always aware when new medications were added.
PASRR Screening Not Completed Correctly for Resident With Schizophrenia
Penalty
Summary
PASRR requirements were not met for one resident with schizophrenia. The resident was admitted to the facility with diagnoses including schizophrenia and paranoid schizophrenia, and the resident's MDS assessment showed a BIMS score of 15 out of 15, indicating intact cognition and that the resident was responsible for healthcare decisions. The resident's record contained a PASRR Level I Screen completed on 11/10/23 that indicated the resident did not have a current mental illness diagnosis, even though the resident's medical diagnoses included schizophrenia and paranoid schizophrenia on that same date. The resident's record did not contain a PASRR Level II Screen. The MDS assessment dated 11/17/23 listed schizophrenia as an active diagnosis in Section I. During interviews, the DON stated the admissions department starts the PASRR process and it should be completed before the resident enters the facility. The Admissions Director stated the Level I Screen had not been completed by her and verified it incorrectly indicated the resident did not have a major mental disorder; she also stated that if she had completed it, she would have indicated the resident had a major mental disorder and submitted for a Level II Screen due to the schizophrenia diagnosis. The NHA confirmed the resident had schizophrenia and that the Level I Screen should have indicated a major mental disorder.
Failure to Provide ADL Assistance and Accurate Bathing Documentation
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide consistent ADL assistance for residents who were unable to complete hygiene-related tasks. The facility’s ADL policy stated that hygiene, bathing, grooming, and oral care were to be provided based on resident needs and choices, and the fingernail/toenail policy stated that nail care included daily cleaning and regular trimming. Survey observations and record review showed that R5, who had diagnoses including traumatic subdural hematoma, hemiplegia, CHF, COPD, and dementia and was rarely/never understood, had fingernails that were approximately 1/4 inch long with dark material under the nails and toenails that were approximately 1/2 inch long. Staff and a therapist confirmed the nails appeared dirty and gnarly. R5’s record also showed repeated gaps in oral hygiene documentation over multiple days, and the DON confirmed that if oral care was not documented, it was not done. R116, who had diagnoses including hemiplegia and hemiparesis after a stroke, dementia, and functional quadriplegia and had moderate cognitive impairment, was also observed with fingernails approximately 1/2 inch long. Record review showed repeated missing oral hygiene documentation over several days, and the DON again confirmed that if the task was not documented, it was not done. The findings showed that both residents did not receive consistent nail care or oral hygiene assistance as part of their ADL care. R161, a recent admission with diagnoses including spinal stenosis, cervical spinal cord disease, atrial fibrillation, and anxiety, reported that staff were not giving showers despite repeated requests. R161 stated staff told them they could not have a shower because of a neck collar, that the collar could not be removed, and that only bed baths were being provided. The resident’s care plan was incomplete and largely blank, yet it indicated showers on the Thursday PM shift. The DON, UM, and NHA acknowledged that a resident who asks for a shower should receive one and that the physician should have been contacted to clarify the shower request, but the bathing documentation included shower sheets that indicated showers had occurred when staff later stated only bed baths were provided. UM also stated it was a regular practice to complete and sign paperwork for others.
Failure to Follow Pressure Injury Prevention Interventions
Penalty
Summary
Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing was not ensured for 2 residents with a history of facility-acquired pressure injuries. R50 was admitted with diagnoses including CVA, MI, hemiplegia, diabetes, osteoarthritis, CAD, and lymphedema, and was dependent on staff for transfers, hygiene, and mobility with severe cognitive impairment. R50’s plan of care included floating the heels, but on multiple observations the heels were not elevated and were in direct contact with the mattress. The DON later verified that R50’s heels should have been elevated per the plan of care. R7 was admitted with diagnoses including epilepsy, atrial fibrillation, diabetes type 2, and dementia, and was dependent on staff for transfers, hygiene, and dressing with moderately impaired cognition. R7’s plan of care directed that a left heel bootie be worn at all times due to impaired skin integrity related to a medical device and a prior facility-acquired left lateral shin pressure injury from a leg brace used for foot drop. During several observations, R7 was seen without the left heel bootie in the dining room and in bed. An RN reviewed the TAR and verified that R7 had an order for the left heel bootie and did not have it on as ordered.
Incomplete Neuro Checks After Unwitnessed Falls
Penalty
Summary
The facility did not ensure neurological checks were completed after unwitnessed falls for one resident with severe cognitive impairment and multiple diagnoses including hemiplegia and hemiparesis following a stroke, vascular dementia, and polymyalgia rheumatica. The resident’s MDS assessment showed a BIMS score of 6 out of 15, indicating severe cognitive impairment, and the resident required assistance with transfers and wheelchair and walker use. The resident also had an activated healthcare decision maker and a care plan that indicated assistance was needed to lay down and for toileting. The resident experienced multiple unwitnessed falls in the room, including falls in which the resident was found on the floor, sitting on the floor, or lying on top of a wheelchair. After each fall, neuro checks were started but were not completed in accordance with the facility’s neurological flow sheet, which required checks every 15 minutes for 1 hour, every 30 minutes for 1 hour, every hour for 4 hours, and every 4 hours for 24 hours. The record showed incomplete neuro checks after several falls, including 15 of 16 checks, 13 of 16 checks, 14 of 16 checks, and 14 of 16 checks, and one event in which neuro checks were started late and one scheduled check was missed. The resident’s care plan was not updated with interventions following the falls, and the DON confirmed that the neuro checks were started following the falls but not completed.
Failure to Monitor High-Risk Medications
Penalty
Summary
The facility did not ensure monitoring for adverse reactions to high-risk medications was in place for three residents, and one resident’s care plan was not updated to reflect prescribed medications. Survey review found that R3, who had diagnoses including cerebral infarction due to unspecified occlusion or stenosis of the left posterior cerebral artery, acute embolism and thrombosis of an unspecified vein, and acute pain due to trauma, had severe cognitive impairment on the MDS and was prescribed oxycodone 5 mg every 6 hours as needed and apixaban 5 mg twice daily. R3’s medical record did not include monitoring for adverse reactions to either medication. Survey review also found that R5, who had diagnoses including encephalopathy, chronic systolic congestive heart failure, and paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, had moderate cognitive impairment on the MDS and was prescribed furosemide 40 mg via tube feeding once daily and apixaban 5 mg via tube feeding twice daily. R5’s medical record did not include monitoring for adverse reactions to furosemide or apixaban, and the care plan did not contain a plan for diuretic and anticoagulant use. In addition, R132, who had diagnoses including osteomyelitis, cellulitis of the right lower limb, and hypokalemia, had a BIMS score of 15 out of 15 and made own healthcare decisions. R132 was prescribed doxycycline hyclate for osteomyelitis, but the medical record did not indicate monitoring for adverse reactions to the antibiotic. During interviews, the DON and Regional Nurse Consultant confirmed that monitoring for adverse reactions to opioid, anticoagulant, diuretic, and doxycycline therapy should have been in place for these residents.
Failure to Protect Residents from Abuse and Neglect
Penalty
Summary
A deficiency was identified regarding the facility's failure to protect each resident from all types of abuse, including physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by any individual. The report notes that residents were not adequately safeguarded from these forms of mistreatment, indicating lapses in the facility's responsibility to ensure a safe and abuse-free environment for all residents. No specific details about the residents involved, their medical history, or their condition at the time of the deficiency are provided in the report.
Failure to Report Alleged Misappropriation of Resident Property
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to report an allegation of missing money to the State Agency (SA) as required by its own policy and regulatory expectations. A resident, who had diagnoses including end stage renal disease, schizophrenia, and blindness in both eyes, reported that $650 was missing from a pill bottle kept in a dresser drawer after returning from dialysis. The resident had previously reported another incident of missing money. The facility's grievance form documented that the resident changed the reported amount of missing money several times and was unable to specify the denominations. The facility searched the resident's room but did not find the money and noted there was no evidence the resident had the reported amount. The resident was informed that the facility was not responsible for the missing money, and the risks and benefits of using a lockbox or sending valuables home were discussed. Despite the facility's policy requiring that all alleged violations, including misappropriation of resident property, be reported to the required agencies within 24 hours, the allegation was not reported to the SA. The Director of Nursing confirmed that the incident was not reported because of the lack of evidence that the resident had the money and the inconsistencies in the resident's statements. The resident's care plan indicated a preference to keep money on their person and a refusal to use a lockbox, with ongoing encouragement documented to use safer storage options. There was no documentation in the resident's progress notes regarding the complaint of missing money.
Failure to Investigate Allegation of Missing Resident Money
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to thoroughly investigate an allegation of missing money for one resident. The resident reported that $650 was missing from a pill bottle kept in a dresser drawer after returning from dialysis. The facility's policy requires that all alleged violations, including misappropriation of resident property, be reported and investigated. However, the grievance form indicated that the facility did not find evidence that the resident had the money and noted inconsistencies in the reported amount and lack of knowledge about the denominations. The resident was informed that the facility was not responsible for the missing money, and the risks and benefits of securing valuables were discussed. The resident's care plan reflected a preference to keep money on their person and a refusal to use a lockbox, with interventions to encourage secure storage of valuables. Interviews and record reviews revealed that the resident had reported missing money on two occasions while residing in different units. The resident had intact cognition, as indicated by a BIMS score of 13 out of 15, and diagnoses including end stage renal disease, schizophrenia, and blindness in both eyes. The Director of Nursing confirmed that no investigation was conducted due to the lack of evidence that the resident possessed the money and the resident's changing statements regarding the amount. Progress notes did not document the resident's complaint of missing money, and the facility did not initiate a formal investigation into the allegation.
Failure to Maintain Safe, Clean, and Homelike Environment
Penalty
Summary
Surveyors observed that the facility failed to provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment for several residents. In one room, a window shade was found crooked and held up with plastic hangers, leaving half the window exposed, and the wall opposite the beds had large patches of missing paint, including one area approximately 8 feet long by 6 inches. The shared bathroom for four residents contained an uncovered linen cart filled to the top, another linen cart, and a large garbage can, all contributing to a very strong smell of feces. Additionally, a resident's wheelchair was found to have dried, crusty food particles and other unknown brown, crusty matter on various parts, with the left armrest missing parts of its cushion and beginning to expose the metal underneath. Staff interviews confirmed that the cleanliness of the wheelchair was not acceptable and that arrangements would be made to clean and sanitize it. The LPN stated that the linen and garbage bins were kept in the bathroom for easy access by CNAs and were used for all residents' linens and garbage. The acting administrator acknowledged that the window shade and wall required maintenance and that the storage of containers in the bathroom was inappropriate and could pose an infection issue. No additional information was provided regarding why proper storage and maintenance had not been completed.
Failure to Provide Adequate Supervision and Assistive Devices During Resident Transfer
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a resident with severe cognitive impairment and a history of falls received adequate supervision and assistive devices to prevent accidents. The resident, who is dependent on staff for transfers and has dementia, was observed being transferred from a wheelchair to bed without wearing non-slip footwear, contrary to facility policy and the resident's care plan. Additionally, the resident did not have a scoop mattress as documented in the care plan for fall prevention. During the transfer, staff used a mechanical sit-to-stand lift, but it was noted that the resident's transfer method had been inconsistently applied, with some staff using a gait belt and assist of two instead of the required mechanical lift. Interviews with staff revealed confusion and inconsistency regarding the resident's transfer status and required interventions. The CNA assigned to the resident reported using a gait belt and assist of two, while the LPN and ADON indicated the use of a mechanical sit-to-stand lift was required. The DON confirmed that changes to a resident's transfer status should involve therapy, but no therapy evaluation was found in the resident's record. The resident's Kardex and care plan both indicated the need for a sit-to-stand lift and a scoop mattress, but these interventions were not consistently implemented at the time of the survey.
Failure to Address Resident Council Grievances and Call Light Concerns
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to act upon grievances raised during resident council meetings and did not demonstrate a response or provide rationale for their actions regarding these concerns. Resident council meeting minutes over several months documented repeated complaints about staff not passing snacks, delayed call light responses, staff using phones while providing care or sitting at the nurses' station, and staff rarely being present on the units. Despite these ongoing concerns being raised in multiple meetings, there was no documented evidence that the facility addressed or responded to the issues. Additionally, call light audits were conducted, but the results were not documented or shared. Multiple residents, all cognitively intact according to their MDS assessments, reported persistent problems with staff not responding to call lights in a timely manner and staff being distracted by personal phone use. Some residents filed formal grievances, which were logged, but interviews revealed that residents felt their concerns were not addressed and that the issues continued. The facility administrator stated that grievances from resident council were supposed to be resolved through the grievance process, but could not provide documentation of actions taken or outcomes related to the concerns raised.
Failure to Follow Manufacturer's Instructions for Insulin Pen Administration
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that insulin was administered according to the manufacturer's instructions for two residents with diabetes mellitus who required insulin injections. Both residents had physician orders for insulin administration using a Humalog KwikPen. During medication administration observations, LPNs administered insulin to each resident but did not hold the pen needle in the skin for at least five seconds after injection, as required by the manufacturer's guidelines. Instead, the LPNs immediately withdrew the needle after injecting the insulin. Interviews with the LPNs confirmed that they did not follow the manufacturer's instructions regarding the required hold time after injection. The facility's policy stated that medications should be administered safely and as prescribed, and the insulin pen manufacturer's instructions were available online. The Unit Manager acknowledged that the instructions for insulin pen use could be found on the manufacturer's website.
Failure to Label Multi-Dose Insulin Pens with Open Date
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that multi-dose insulin pens were labeled with the date and time when first opened for two residents during medication administration. During medication passes, two different LPNs administered insulin using Humalog KwikPens that were not labeled with the date they were first opened, as required by facility policy and manufacturer instructions. One LPN retrieved a new insulin pen, administered the medication, and returned it to the cart without labeling it. When questioned, the LPN stated the pen was the only one open but did not provide a method for other staff to know when it was first used. The other LPN, an agency nurse, administered insulin from an already open pen and was unable to state when it was first opened, incorrectly stating the pen was good for ninety days. Interviews with staff, including a unit manager, confirmed that the expectation is for insulin pens to be labeled with the open and discard dates, and that the pens are only good for twenty-eight days after opening. Facility policies reviewed also require that the date opened be recorded on multi-dose containers and that expiration dates be checked prior to administration. The lack of labeling on the insulin pens created a situation where staff could not verify whether the medication was still within its safe usage period, as required by both facility policy and manufacturer guidelines.
Failure to Perform Hand Hygiene and Proper Medication Administration
Penalty
Summary
A deficiency was identified when a Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) failed to perform hand hygiene after removing gloves and before handling the medication cart computer mouse. The LPN discarded gloves in the trash and immediately began typing on the computer without sanitizing hands, contrary to the facility's Handwashing/Hand Hygiene policy, which requires hand hygiene after glove removal and as the final step after removing personal protective equipment. When questioned, the LPN indicated that hand hygiene would be performed after completing charting and also stated being an agency nurse. Additionally, during medication administration, the same LPN retrieved a new insulin pen for a resident and accessed the pen with a needle without first cleaning the pen's rubber septum. When asked about the requirement to clean the pen hub, the LPN stated that it was unnecessary for a new pen. The Unit Manager later confirmed that staff are expected to sanitize hands after glove removal and clean the insulin pen's hub before use, regardless of whether the pen is new. These actions were observed during medication administration for one resident and were inconsistent with facility policy, creating the potential for cross-contamination.
Lack of Qualified Food and Nutrition Services Director
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to designate a qualified individual to serve as the food and nutrition services director, as required by regulations. The person currently acting as Dietary Manager (DM) had worked at the facility for over a year and had completed ServSafe Managers training but was not enrolled in, nor had completed, an approved Dietary Manager or food service manager certification course, nor did they possess a related degree. The DM stated they were considering taking the Certified Dietary Manager (CDM) training but had not yet done so. An Assistant Dietary Manager was recently hired who held a State Food Safety Food Manager Certification, but this did not meet the federal requirements for the director position. This deficiency had the potential to affect all 147 residents in the facility.
Failure to Provide Timely and Accurate Medication Administration and Documentation
Penalty
Summary
Surveyors identified multiple failures in the facility's pharmaceutical services, specifically regarding the administration and documentation of medications for several residents. Controlled substances for three residents were not documented in the controlled substance log at the time of administration, and one resident received a lower dose of tramadol than prescribed. Additionally, several residents did not receive their scheduled medications within the required time frames, and some medications were not administered at all. These deficiencies were observed during direct medication passes, review of medication administration records, and interviews with nursing staff and the Director of Nursing. Residents affected by these deficiencies had a range of medical conditions, including degenerative nervous system disease, respiratory failure, anxiety, alcoholic cirrhosis, encephalopathy, end-stage renal disease, pulmonary hypertension, COPD, diabetes, schizophrenia, hypertension, major depression, influenza, spastic quadriplegia, and cerebral palsy. Cognitive status varied among the residents, with some having severe cognitive impairment and others being fully alert and oriented. The facility's own policy required medications to be administered safely, timely, and as prescribed, with a one-hour window for scheduled doses, but this policy was not consistently followed. The survey also revealed that one resident experienced a pattern of late or missed medication doses over a month-long period, with numerous instances where medications were not administered within the prescribed time frames or were omitted entirely. In some cases, medication doses were not spaced appropriately, failing to allow the intended interval between doses. Interviews with the DON and facility pharmacist confirmed these findings and acknowledged that the administration and documentation of medications did not meet the facility's standards or physician orders.
Improper Storage and Handling of Medications
Penalty
Summary
Surveyors observed that the facility failed to store drugs and biologicals in accordance with its own policy and accepted professional standards. On one occasion, an LPN left a medication cart unlocked and unattended in a hallway, with the drawers facing outward, while two residents in wheelchairs passed by. The LPN acknowledged that the cart should have been locked and stated that forgetting to lock it was an oversight. Another LPN was seen preparing and administering medication by removing a yellow pill from an unlabeled and uncovered medication cup in the top drawer of the medication cart, which contained several pills. This pill was then added to a resident's medication cup and administered. The LPN explained that the medication cart did not have the required medication, so they obtained a cup of the medication from another cart. Interviews with staff, including another LPN and the Director of Nursing, confirmed that medication carts should be locked when unattended and that all medications should be stored in their original packaging as dispensed by the pharmacy. The facility's policy specifies that only the issuing pharmacy is authorized to transfer medications between containers and that all compartments containing drugs and biologicals must be locked when not in use. These lapses in medication storage and handling had the potential to affect more than four residents in the facility.
Failure to Follow Menu and Serving Sizes During Meal Service
Penalty
Summary
Surveyors found that the facility did not follow its posted lunch menu or the required serving sizes for potatoes for residents eating both in the dining room and in their rooms. Specifically, residents in the dining room were not served the cut potatoes listed on the menu, and residents eating in their rooms on the first floor received only 2 ounces of potatoes instead of the required 4 ounces. The facility's Meal Distribution policy requires that all meals be assembled according to individualized diet orders, care plans, and preferences, but this was not followed during the observed meal service. During the lunch service, a dietary aide served pork with peppers and onions and mashed potatoes instead of the menu-listed cut potatoes and was unable to provide an explanation for the missing item. In the kitchen, a cook initially used a 2-ounce scoop to serve potatoes, providing only half the required portion, and only switched to a 4-ounce scoop after being prompted. The dietary manager confirmed that the correct menu and serving sizes were not followed for the meal service.
Deficient Food Handling and Sanitation Practices Observed
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that food was stored and prepared in a safe and sanitary manner, as observed by surveyors during meal service. A dietary aide was seen plating food while not following proper hand hygiene protocols, including not changing gloves or performing hand hygiene after touching various surfaces and before handling ready-to-eat food. The aide also changed gloves without washing hands in between, and continued to handle food and food service items with potentially contaminated gloves. Additionally, the aide's hair was not fully contained within the required hair restraint, with a portion of hair hanging down the back, contrary to both facility policy and state food code requirements. Surveyors also observed that ice scoops were improperly stored inside or on top of ice in coolers on multiple units, rather than in a clean, protected location as required. The dietary manager confirmed that these practices did not align with facility policy or state regulations, and acknowledged that nursing staff may have contributed to the improper storage of scoops. These deficiencies had the potential to affect more than four residents in the facility.
Failure to Notify POAHC of Pharmacogenomic Testing and Obtain Proper Consent
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to notify the Power of Attorney for Healthcare (POAHC) of pharmacogenomic testing performed on a resident with moderately impaired cognition and an activated POAHC. The resident, who had diagnoses including anxiety disorder, major depressive disorder, psychosis, and insomnia, was admitted with a BIMS score indicating moderate cognitive impairment. Despite the facility's policy requiring notification of changes in a resident's status to the resident's representative and physician, the POAHC was not informed about the pharmacogenomic testing, nor did they provide consent for it. Instead, the resident verbally approved the consent form provided by the laboratory company, and the form did not include the POAHC's signature or acknowledgment. Record review and interviews revealed that the facility could not determine which physician requested the testing, even though the order was signed by the Medical Director. The Medical Director was unaware of the specific testing for the resident and indicated that a blanket order process was used. The Nursing Home Administrator confirmed that there was no documentation of POAHC notification and acknowledged that the resident should not have given verbal consent without POAHC involvement. The POAHC only became aware of the testing after receiving insurance correspondence, and the resident was later discharged against medical advice due to care concerns.
Failure to Provide Scheduled ADL Care and Incomplete Documentation
Penalty
Summary
A deficiency occurred when a resident with spastic quadriplegic cerebral palsy and anxiety disorder did not receive assistance with activities of daily living (ADLs) as specified in their care plan. The resident was scheduled to receive weekly showers and required physical assistance for bathing, transfers, and toileting. However, documentation and staff interviews revealed that the resident did not receive weekly showers as planned, with only two showers documented during the resident's stay, and significant gaps of 12 to 16 days between showers. Additionally, staff reported that while the resident was checked and changed, they were not regularly transferred to the toilet as required by the care plan. Review of the resident's medical record showed inconsistent ADL documentation, with only 30 out of 71 shifts containing completed records for required ADL tasks such as transfers, toileting, and bathing. The facility's policies required that all showers, refusals, and assistance provided be documented, but records were incomplete, and staff confirmed that missing documentation indicated the task was either not performed or not recorded. The lack of consistent documentation and failure to provide scheduled care led to the deficiency.
Failure to Perform Hand Hygiene During Medication Administration
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program as required, specifically during medication administration for two residents. On April 1, 2025, an LPN was observed preparing and administering medications to two residents without performing hand hygiene beforehand, as required by the facility's Handwashing/Hand Hygiene policy. The LPN acknowledged during an interview that hand hygiene should have been completed prior to medication preparation and administration but confirmed it was not done. The Director of Nursing also confirmed that staff are expected to perform hand hygiene before these tasks.
Safety Lapses Lead to Immediate Jeopardy in LTC Facility
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain a safe environment for residents, leading to two significant incidents. In the first incident, a resident with dementia and aggressive behavior, who was under 1:1 supervision, accessed a loaded firearm from a CNA's purse. The CNA had brought the gun into the facility and left it in the resident's room while taking a break. The resident retrieved the gun and carried it onto a secured memory care unit, posing a potential threat to other residents. Staff intervened and removed the gun, but the incident highlighted a severe lapse in safety protocols. In the second incident, a resident with intact cognition suffered a third-degree cryogenic burn due to improper handling of a portable oxygen tank. The tank was placed on the foot pedals of the resident's wheelchair, leading to a leak that caused a burn on the resident's right ankle and heel. Despite the resident's complaints of pain, the wound was not properly monitored or treated until several days later, resulting in a severe burn that required surgical intervention and antibiotic treatment. Both incidents were classified as immediate jeopardy due to the potential for serious harm. The facility's failure to prevent these hazards and adequately supervise residents resulted in significant deficiencies in care. The incidents underscore the importance of adhering to safety protocols and ensuring that staff are properly trained to prevent such occurrences.
Removal Plan
- Notified the police and removed the employee and firearm from the building.
- Educated all staff on personal belongings, active violence training, and active shooter drills.
- Initiated psychosocial monitoring for all residents on the 500 unit.
- Initiated audits to ensure weapons are not brought into the facility.
- Educated licensed and certified staff on the facility's Oxygen Usage policy and procedure.
- Checked all resident and stock portable oxygen tanks to ensure proper function.
- Completed skin assessments on all residents who use portable oxygen tanks.
- Reviewed and/or revised the care plans of all residents at risk for oxygen burns.
Failure to Notify POA and Physician of Critical Incidents
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to notify a resident's Power of Attorney (POA) and physician of significant incidents affecting the residents. One resident, who was on 1:1 supervision due to aggressive behavior, accessed a loaded gun from a staff member's purse and carried it onto a secured memory care unit. Despite the severity of the incident, the resident's POA was not informed. The Nursing Home Administrator confirmed that the police were notified, and the staff member was charged, but the POA was not updated about the incident. In another case, a resident with intact cognition and multiple health issues, including a right ankle soft tissue infection, experienced skin irritation when a portable oxygen tank was placed near their leg. The resident reported the irritation, and a reddened area was observed, but the physician and responsible party were not notified. The Director of Nursing and a Registered Nurse acknowledged that the new skin concern should have been documented and communicated to the relevant parties, but this was not done.
Failure to Provide Bed Hold Notice for Resident Transferred to ER
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide a bed hold notice to a resident (R1) who was transferred to the emergency room (ER) by family members. R1, who had diagnoses including malignant neoplasms and repeated falls, was residing at the facility for rehabilitation services. On the day of the incident, R1 expressed feeling unwell and had not seen a physician, prompting family members to contact R1's hospital care team, who advised an ER visit. Despite the facility's policy requiring written bed hold information to be provided before hospital transfers, neither R1 nor the family received such notice. Interviews with staff revealed a lack of communication and awareness regarding the bed hold policy. The Registered Nurse (RN) and Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) on duty did not discuss or offer a bed hold notice to R1 or the family. The Unit Manager (UM) was unaware of the situation and did not provide the necessary information. The Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) was uncertain if a bed hold notice was required, as the family initiated the hospital transfer. The medical record review confirmed the absence of a documented bed hold notice, indicating a deficiency in following the facility's policy.
Failure to Permit Resident Return After Hospitalization
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a resident was permitted to return after a hospital visit, which exceeded the bed-hold policy. The resident, who was admitted for rehabilitation due to increased falls and had diagnoses including malignant neoplasms and repeated falls, was taken to the emergency room by a family member after feeling unwell. Upon attempting to return to the facility, the resident was informed that they had been discharged and could not return without a new referral, despite the facility's policy indicating that residents should be allowed to return if their needs can be met. The incident involved a series of miscommunications and lack of documentation. The resident's family was not informed of the process for leaving or returning to the facility, and the facility staff did not provide a bed-hold notice when the resident was taken to the ER. The Director of Nursing noted that the resident was discharged against medical advice, but there was no discharge summary or interdisciplinary note to support this. The facility's regional office initially decided not to accept the resident back, but after intervention from an Ombudsman, the facility agreed to readmit the resident. Interviews with staff and family members revealed that there was confusion about the resident's status and the process for readmission. The Nursing Home Administrator was under the impression that the resident had left with all their belongings and was not returning, leading to the discharge. The facility's failure to communicate effectively with the resident and their family, as well as the lack of proper documentation, contributed to the deficiency in allowing the resident to return after hospitalization.
Inadequate Catheter Care Leads to Resident Hospitalization
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide appropriate catheter care and monitoring for a resident with an indwelling catheter, leading to significant health complications. The resident had a Foley catheter inserted due to urinary retention, but from the time of insertion until a later date, staff did not monitor the resident's urine output or assess for genitourinary changes. This lack of monitoring and assessment resulted in the resident experiencing penile pain, increased confusion, low urine output, and a large amount of pus at the catheter site. The resident's medical record lacked documentation of urinary output, urine appearance, or genitourinary changes for a significant period. Additionally, urinary and catheter assessments were not completed on specific dates, despite the resident's complaints of pain and other symptoms. The resident was eventually transferred to the hospital, where it was discovered that the catheter was blocked and draining thick gray material, leading to diagnoses of urinary retention, a urinary tract infection, and acute kidney injury. Interviews with facility staff revealed that catheter drainage bags were supposed to be emptied every shift and documented, but there was no evidence of this documentation in the resident's medical record. The facility's guidelines for urinary indwelling catheter management were not followed, contributing to the resident's adverse health outcomes. The lack of proper catheter care and monitoring highlights a deficiency in the facility's care practices.
Failure to Implement Abuse Prevention Policies
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to implement its written policies and procedures to prohibit and prevent abuse, neglect, and exploitation, as evidenced by inadequate background checks for three out of nine staff members reviewed. Specifically, the facility did not conduct a thorough background check for a Dietary Aide (DA)-H, who had substantiated findings of caregiver misconduct and was prohibited from working in Department of Health Services (DHS) regulated facilities. DA-H also failed to report felony convictions on their Background Information Disclosure (BID) form. Despite these findings, DA-H was hired by a contracted company responsible for dietary services, and the facility's administration acknowledged that further investigation should have been conducted before employing DA-H. Additionally, the facility did not ensure timely completion of background checks for other staff members. A Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA)-J was hired without a Department of Justice (DOJ) letter or Government Findings Report until the date of the survey, and the facility's policy of completing background checks within 30 days was acknowledged as insufficient. Furthermore, the facility lacked documentation for DA-L's most recent hire date, with discrepancies in the BID form, DOJ letter, and Government Findings Report. These oversights indicate a failure to adhere to the facility's policy of conducting comprehensive background checks prior to employment.
Failure to Protect Resident from Verbal Abuse by Dietary Aide
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to protect a resident, identified as R3, from verbal abuse by a dietary aide, DA-H. On November 2, 2024, multiple staff members witnessed DA-H verbally abusing R3 by calling them a derogatory name and threatening physical harm with R3's walker. The incident occurred when R3 attempted to use the microwave, leading to DA-H's aggressive behavior. Although no physical contact was made, the situation required several staff members to intervene and remove DA-H from the dining room. R3, who was not cognitively impaired and made their own healthcare decisions, reported feeling shocked and taken off guard by the incident. The facility's failure to conduct a thorough background check on DA-H contributed to the deficiency. DA-H, hired by a contracted third-party provider for dietary services, had a history of caregiver misconduct, including substantiated findings of misappropriation of client property. Despite this, DA-H was employed in a role involving direct contact with residents. The background check process, managed by the contracted company's corporate Human Resources department, failed to identify these issues, resulting in DA-H being cleared to work at the facility. The Nursing Home Administrator and Dietary Manager acknowledged that the background check contained evidence of misappropriation, which should have prompted further investigation before employing DA-H. The facility's policy required screening potential employees for a history of abuse, neglect, or exploitation, but this was not adequately followed. The incident was reported to local law enforcement and the State Agency, and the facility's investigation substantiated the abuse allegation.
Inadequate Supervision of Resident Requiring 1:1 Care
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide adequate supervision for a resident, identified as R2, who required direct 1:1 supervision due to a history of yelling, threatening, and hitting peers and staff. R2's care plan, revised on 11/27/24, included interventions for 1:1 supervision to manage these behaviors and avoid triggers. However, on 1/7/25, the surveyor observed R2 without the required 1:1 supervision on multiple occasions, both in R2's room and in the dining room with other residents present. This lack of supervision was confirmed by CNA-C, who was assigned to supervise R2 from 6:00 AM to 6:00 PM. The facility had previously provided staff education on 11/19/24 regarding 1:1 supervision expectations, emphasizing that residents requiring such supervision should never be left alone and should always be within arm's length of staff. Despite this, the surveyor's observations indicated non-compliance with these guidelines. The Nursing Home Administrator confirmed that R2 was supposed to be under constant 1:1 supervision and acknowledged that the staff education was implemented following a previous incident where R2 was left unsupervised for approximately 10 minutes.
Resident Discharged Without Proper Planning or Medication
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to allow a resident, identified as R1, to remain in the facility after returning from a hospital stay, despite the resident's plan to move into an apartment 11 days later. R1 was admitted to the hospital with congestive heart failure and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbations and returned to the facility stable for discharge. However, following an argument with staff, R1 was told to leave the facility and was discharged to a relative's home without medication or a proper discharge plan. The incident occurred after R1 returned from the hospital and was adjusting well to being back in the facility. On the day of the incident, the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) and Social Services (SS) spoke with R1 about the discharge plan, which led to a confrontation. R1 was informed that they needed to find alternative accommodation until the apartment was ready, which resulted in a heated exchange. R1 refused to sign the Against Medical Advice (AMA) paperwork, and the facility did not provide R1 with medications upon discharge. Interviews with staff and the resident revealed that R1 was escorted out of the facility without a signed discharge plan or medication. The NHA admitted that R1 could have stayed in the facility until the apartment was ready, but this was not communicated to R1. The lack of proper discharge planning and communication led to R1 being discharged without necessary medications and a formal discharge plan, constituting a deficiency in the facility's care.
Failure to Provide Replacement Glasses for Resident
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a resident received necessary assistive devices to maintain vision, specifically replacement glasses after the resident's original glasses were lost within the facility. The resident, who had severe cognitive impairment and multiple eye-related diagnoses, including cataract, glaucoma, and retinopathy, was observed without glasses. The resident's family had filed grievances regarding the missing glasses, but the facility's grievance file lacked documentation of corrective action, resolution, or follow-up. Interviews with facility staff revealed that the Grievance Officer was aware of the missing glasses and the filed grievances but did not take action to obtain replacements, citing a lack of concern from the resident's Power of Attorney for Healthcare (POAHC). However, the POAHC later expressed the need for the resident to have glasses due to their diabetes and vision requirements. The Nursing Home Administrator acknowledged that new glasses should have been obtained, indicating a lapse in the facility's follow-up process.
Infection Control Deficiency: Improper Handling of Linens
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain an effective infection prevention and control program, as evidenced by the improper handling of clean towels by a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA). On the specified date, the CNA was observed carrying clean towels pressed against their scrub top while delivering them to residents' rooms, including two specific residents. This action was contrary to the facility's infection control policy, which mandates that linens be handled in a manner that prevents the transfer of microorganisms. The CNA was corrected by a Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) for not following the proper protocol, which includes using a cart to transport linens. The CNA admitted to delivering towels inappropriately and acknowledged the need for further training. The LPN confirmed the CNA's deviation from the facility's protocol and emphasized the importance of using a cart for transporting linens to prevent contamination. The incident highlights a lapse in adherence to the facility's infection control procedures, specifically regarding the handling and transportation of clean linens, which is crucial for preventing the spread of infections among residents.
Significant Medication Errors in Seizure Management
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that two residents, identified as R607 and R605, were free from significant medication errors. R607, who has a diagnosis of epilepsy, did not receive prescribed doses of Lacosamide and Keppra multiple times over several months. This resident was transferred to the hospital for seizures after missing several doses of these medications. The facility's medication administration records and notes indicated that the medications were often unavailable, and there was a lack of clarity on why the medications were not administered as ordered. R605, also diagnosed with epilepsy, did not receive Clobazam as prescribed on multiple occasions. The medication was available in the facility, but it was not administered due to staff not knowing where to find it or what it was. This resulted in 17 missed doses out of 90 opportunities. Interviews with facility staff revealed that the medication was kept in a locked narcotic drawer, and there was a lack of awareness among staff, particularly agency staff, about its location. The facility's policies require medications to be administered safely, timely, and as prescribed. However, the repeated failures to administer seizure medications as ordered for both residents indicate a significant lapse in adherence to these policies. The facility's staff, including the Director of Nursing and Unit Manager, were unable to provide adequate explanations for the medication errors, highlighting a systemic issue in medication management and staff training.
Failure to Involve Residents in Care Planning
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide two residents, R600 and R601, the opportunity to participate in the development and implementation of their person-centered care plans. R600, who was admitted with multiple diagnoses including Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and Major Depressive Disorder, was found to have no documentation in their electronic medical record indicating participation in care conferences since admission. Despite being cognitively intact, as evidenced by a BIMS score of 15, R600 and their representative were not included in interdisciplinary meetings to discuss ongoing care. R601, who was admitted with severe cognitive impairment and other health issues, also did not have adequate care conferences. The last documented care conference for R601 was held in March, with no further meetings documented before their discharge in August. Although R601's care plan was revised multiple times, there was no evidence that these changes were communicated to R601 or their Power of Attorney. The facility's policy requires initial and ongoing care management meetings to involve the patient and their representative, but these were not conducted as required. The facility acknowledged the issue, noting that the social worker responsible for care conferences had left, and an audit revealed that care conferences were not held quarterly as mandated. This lack of adherence to policy resulted in the residents not being involved in their care planning process.
Failure to Notify Resident's Representative of Treatment Changes
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to notify a resident's representative of significant changes in the resident's treatment and condition, as required by their policy. The resident, identified as R600, had several instances where their representative was not informed of important medical updates. These included the rescheduling of a colonoscopy, a transfer to the emergency room for leg swelling, and changes in medication and lab orders related to thyroid and potassium levels. The facility's policy mandates immediate notification to the resident and their representative in cases of significant treatment alterations or changes in condition. Despite this, there was no documentation in R600's electronic medical record indicating that the representative was informed of these changes. The resident expressed a desire for their representative to be involved in all medical decisions, highlighting the importance of this communication. Interviews with the resident and facility staff revealed a lack of clarity regarding the resident's power of attorney, which contributed to the failure in communication. The Nursing Home Administrator acknowledged the oversight and agreed that the representative should have been notified. The surveyor noted the absence of documentation for the hospital transfer and the lack of notification to the resident's representative about the changes in treatment and condition.
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 708 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 Milwaukee
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Amethyst Health Of Brown Deer | 0.7 mi | ★★★★★ | 58 | 2 |
| Avina Of Milwaukee | 1.7 mi | ★★★★★ | 49 | 0 |
| Complete Care At Glendale West | 3.8 mi | ★★★★★ | 4 | 0 |
| Luther Manor | 4.6 mi | ★★★★★ | 17 | 0 |
| Newcastle Place | 4.6 mi | ★★★★★ | 15 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Bradley Estates Nursing And Rehab Llc.
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.