Below average — CMS composite of the measures below.
The next survey window likely opens around June 2027
Estimate from public CMS data, current as of October 2026. Survey timing is at the state agency's discretion.
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Colonial Health Services during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
Food items in a common-area refrigerator were found without required labels, contents, or dates, including foods brought in for multiple residents and several opened items. A Dietary Manager was observed trying to identify and date the foods after the fact by asking residents when items were brought in. Surveyors also observed a cook failing to sanitize the thermometer, checking temperatures through foil and plastic wrap without stirring foods, and using hand towels instead of oven mitts to move hot pans, with the towels contacting uncovered food.
A facility failed to provide written transfer notices with the specific reason for hospital transfer for several residents. Records for residents with conditions including dementia, GERD, diabetes, and a ventral hernia showed only a generic statement that the transfer was necessary for the resident’s welfare, while the actual reasons included falls with pain, choking, mental status change, abdominal pain with suspected GI bleed, nausea/vomiting with possible bowel obstruction, and a persistent bloody nose. Staff interviews confirmed the transfer notice was expected to document the reason for the transfer.
A resident with PTSD, mood disorder, and psychotropic medication use remained in the facility far beyond a short-stay exemption period, but no PASRR Level II was completed after the resident became LTC. Surveyors observed the resident yelling and refusing care, and the DON acknowledged the Level II was not addressed once the resident stayed past the expected 30 days. An LPN stated Level 2 was needed if a resident stayed beyond 30 days but did not know how the facility tracked that requirement.
A resident with diabetes had a blood glucose of 60 mg/dL, but no documented hypoglycemic intervention, reassessment, or provider notification was found despite facility policy and standing orders requiring action for low blood sugar. In a separate event, a resident with dementia and dependence for toileting was left on a commode for an extended period, and staff observed an open slit between the buttocks that a CNA had seen previously but had not reported to nursing; the DON and LPN were unaware of the skin issue.
A facility failed to provide proper PI care for two residents. One resident was admitted with multiple DTIs, but the facility did not complete timely skin and wound assessments, did not consistently offload the heel, and the off-loading boots were found stored in a closet while the resident sat with the heel resting on a bedside table leg. Another resident with a stage 3 plantar foot ulcer had a worn post-op shoe, no documentation of new shoe or foam insert orders, and an ace wrap was observed loosely applied over a gripper sock with edema noted.
A resident with dementia, impaired cognition, and dependence for toileting and transfers was left alone on a commode without effective access to assistance. Surveyors observed the resident sitting on the commode for an extended period, confused about how to get help and unable to use the call light appropriately. The NP stated the resident should not have been left alone that long, and staff reported the resident sometimes refuses or cannot use the call light, with no documentation of periodic checks during the episode.
Failure to Monitor and Report Repeated Fluid Restriction Overages: A resident with CKD stage 5, HF, and renal dialysis had an ordered 1500 cc/day fluid restriction but exceeded it multiple times, with daily totals ranging from 1600 cc to 2080 cc. No documentation showed additional lung assessments or provider notification when the overages occurred, despite RN and DON statements that these steps were expected.
An LPN administered medication through a resident’s PEG tube by auscultating air over the epigastrium and aspirating gastric contents, but did not verify placement by gently tugging on the tube or confirming the external tube marking at the insertion site. The resident was nonverbal, had severe cognitive impairment, and received all medications via PEG for dysphagia and other diagnoses. The facility’s policy required proper placement verification before tube use, and the MAR showed only daily AM tube measurements rather than documentation with each medication or enteral feeding administration.
A resident with obstructive sleep apnea and asthma did not receive BiPAP as ordered. Staff observed the resident sitting in a recliner with eyes closed and snoring while the BiPAP was on the nightstand and not in use. A CNA said the BiPAP was only used at night, and an RN said it was used when the resident was in bed sleeping, despite the order stating it should be on whenever the resident was sleeping. The DON stated the BiPAP should be on if the resident was sleeping.
Medication administration errors exceeded the allowed rate after an LPN and a medication aide made multiple errors with two residents. One resident received crushed Phenytoin via PEG with undissolved particles left in the cup and a Lovenox injection given without proper skin pinching, while another resident was given 2 aspirin 81 mg tablets instead of the ordered 1 tablet.
A resident with dysphagia, spastic quadriplegic cerebral palsy, epilepsy, and severe cognitive impairment received phenytoin via PEG tube after an LPN crushed the tablet and mixed it in water, but the medication was not completely dissolved. The surveyor observed undissolved particles remaining in the cup before and after it was rinsed and administered, and the DON confirmed that crushed medications must be fully dissolved before PEG tube administration.
Infection prevention and control was deficient when a CNA entered a resident’s EBP room without hand hygiene or PPE, then provided transfer and peri-care while using only gloves after entry. The resident had intact cognition and was on EBP for wounds, including an open heel wound. In a separate observation, an MA directly handled prepackaged meds with bare fingers and placed them into applesauce without gloves or hand hygiene.
Staff did not promptly inform a resident, their physician, and a family member about important events such as injury, decline, or room changes, resulting in a breakdown of required communication.
A resident did not receive treatment and care in accordance with physician orders and their own preferences and goals, resulting in a deficiency related to the facility's failure to follow the established care plan.
Two residents did not receive care and treatment in accordance with professional standards. One resident with CHF was not adequately assessed or monitored for edema, with missing daily weights, incomplete lung and edema assessments, and improper use of Tubi grips. Another resident with cellulitis did not have consistent documentation or monitoring of the infection, including lack of erythema marking and incomplete skin assessments. Staff and the DON confirmed there was no standard practice in place for these assessments, leading to deficiencies in care.
Surveyors found that controlled medications belonging to two discharged residents were not destroyed in a timely manner, remaining in a locked narcotic box after discharge. Additionally, a resident with dementia was given a half dose of PRN alprazolam at family request, despite the prescriber's order specifying a full tablet, and without a new provider order. The DON confirmed the medication was administered in a dosage different from the order.
Two residents experienced medication administration errors when an LPN gave inhalers in the wrong sequence and administered Carafate after, rather than before, a meal, resulting in a medication error rate above 5%. Facility policy and physician orders were not followed in both cases.
Staff did not follow infection control protocols during resident care and insulin administration. A CNA failed to perform hand hygiene before handling clean clothing and after removing gloves post-peri care, then dressed a resident with clean items. Additionally, a nurse administered insulin to a resident using two pens without sanitizing the rubber caps as required by facility policy. Both staff members acknowledged the lapses, and facility leadership confirmed the expected procedures.
A resident experienced four episodes of tarry red stools, but the facility failed to monitor vital signs or notify a physician until the resident was sent to the emergency department. Despite the resident's history of gastrointestinal issues, the facility did not adhere to protocols for monitoring and reporting changes in condition. Staff interviews revealed inconsistencies in understanding the notification process.
Food Storage, Temperature Monitoring, and Handling Deficiencies
Penalty
Summary
The facility did not store and handle food in accordance with its own policies and professional standards in the resident refrigerator used by multiple residents. Surveyors observed opened and prepared food items in the common-area refrigerator that were not labeled with resident names, contents, or dates, including an opened package of prosciutto, sourdough bread, hard-boiled eggs, and an opened bottle of V-8 juice. Surveyors also found food brought in for three residents that was missing required information, including a container labeled as stir fry for R38 without a brought-in or opened date, a container labeled as chicken soup for R16 without a brought-in or opened date, and a container with R31’s name that appeared to contain pasta with meat soup or hotdish but was not labeled with content or brought-in date. The facility policy titled Use and Storage of Food Brought in by Family or Visitors stated prepared food brought in by family or visitors must be labeled with content and dated, and should be consumed within 3 days or discarded. During the observation, the Dietary Manager was seen going through the refrigerator and attempting to label and date the foods, and then going to resident rooms to ask when the foods had been brought in. The Dietary Manager stated foods needed to be labeled with resident names and dated when opened, that foods were checked every Monday morning, and that if foods with resident names were not dated, staff asked residents when the food was brought in and then dated it according to what residents stated. Surveyors also observed dietary staff using improper food handling and sanitation practices during meal preparation and service. The cook did not sanitize the thermometer with an alcohol wipe before inserting it into gravy, did not remove foil or plastic wrap from multiple food items before taking temperatures, and did not stir foods before checking temperatures. Later, the cook used hand towels instead of oven mitts to move a pan of gravy to the steam table, and the towels contacted the inside of the gravy pan and dragged across uncovered pans of chicken fried steaks and potatoes. The Dietary Manager stated the thermometer should be wiped with alcohol before, in between, and after temping foods, foods should be stirred first, and coverings should be removed before temperature checks; the Dietary Manager also stated oven mitts were available, though sometimes dirty laundry delayed their return.
Transfer notices lacked specific reasons for hospital transfers
Penalty
Summary
The facility did not ensure residents were notified in writing of the specific reason for transfer or discharge when they were sent to the hospital. This affected 4 of 5 residents reviewed for hospitalization, including R2, R3, R28, and R52, out of a sample of 13 residents. The notices in the records contained only a general statement that the transfer was necessary for the resident’s welfare and that the resident’s needs could not be met in the facility, but they did not state the specific reason for each transfer. R2, who had vascular dementia, depression, arthritis, a history of right hip fracture, and a hip replacement, was transferred to the hospital after a fall with pain. R2’s transfer notice did not identify the specific reason for the transfer. R3, who had non-Alzheimer’s dementia and gastroesophageal reflux and had a BIMS score of 3, was transferred to the hospital after choking, for change in mental status, and later for abdominal pain and suspected gastrointestinal bleed. The notices for these transfers also used only the general statement and did not list the specific reasons. R28, who had type 2 diabetes mellitus, a ventral hernia, constipation, and a BIMS score of 15, was transferred to the hospital multiple times for nausea, vomiting, and concern for bowel obstruction. The transfer notices did not include the specific reasons for those transfers. R52 was sent to the hospital for evaluation of a bloody nose that would not stop, but the notice again contained only the general statement and did not identify the specific reason. Interviews with RN, DON, LPN, and Business Office staff showed staff expected the reason for transfer to be documented on the transfer notice, but the reviewed forms did not contain that information.
Failure to Complete PASRR Level II for Resident With Mental Illness
Penalty
Summary
PASRR screening for mental disorders or intellectual disabilities was not completed for a resident with a serious mental disorder who remained in the facility well beyond the expected short-stay exemption period. The resident was admitted with diagnoses including PTSD and mood affective disorder, had a BIMS score of 10 out of 15 indicating moderately impaired cognition, and was taking paroxetine for mood disorder. Admission paperwork noted a hospital discharge exemption with a 30-day maximum and indicated the resident was not planned to stay longer than that period, but the resident was still in the facility almost a year later and no additional PASRR screenings were completed. Surveyor review showed that a Level 1 PASRR completed on admission identified the resident as suspected of having a serious mental illness and documented that the provider agreed and the resident was taking a psychotropic medication. During observation, the resident displayed yelling, refusal of care, and refusal of breakfast, and a CNA stated the resident had many days like that. The DON acknowledged the resident was not expected to stay greater than 30 days and that the facility did not go back and address the PASRR Level II when the resident became a long-term care resident. An LPN stated Level 2 was needed if a resident stayed past 30 days, but also stated they did not know how triggers were tracked to determine when the 30-day period had passed.
Failure to Follow Hypoglycemia Protocol and Monitor Toileting/Skin Integrity
Penalty
Summary
The facility did not ensure that diabetic care was carried out according to established hypoglycemia protocols for a resident with type 2 diabetes who was receiving QID blood sugar checks and sliding-scale insulin. The resident’s blood glucose was documented as 60 mg/dL, but the record did not show any additional assessment, hypoglycemic intervention, or provider notification. Facility policy stated that blood glucose readings of 70 mg/dL or below required use of the hypoglycemic protocol, follow-up blood glucose monitoring, and notification of the practitioner as ordered. Facility standing orders also directed treatment and provider notification for low glucose values, and staff interviews confirmed that hypoglycemic interventions and notification were expected to be entered and followed for diabetic residents. The facility also failed to provide appropriate toileting supervision and skin monitoring for a resident with multiple diagnoses including obstructive hydrocephalus, heart failure, COPD, type 2 diabetes, atrial fibrillation, dementia, and a history of TIA. The resident’s MDS showed moderately impaired cognition and dependence for toileting and transfers. The care plan identified the resident as at risk for altered skin integrity and directed toileting assistance of two staff members with transfer devices, along with daily observation of skin condition and reporting of abnormalities. Survey observation showed the resident left sitting on a commode for an extended period while staff were not present, and the resident stated they were done but remained on the commode until staff were found. During the commode episode, the surveyor observed an open slit between the resident’s buttocks in the crease, and the resident moaned in pain when the area was wiped. The CNA stated the open area had been seen the prior week and that all staff should know about it because barrier cream was to be applied each time the resident used the bathroom, but the CNA had not reported the skin issue to nursing staff. Nursing staff and the DON stated they were not aware of the open area, and the DON stated the CNA should have reported the skin concern right away. The DON also stated staff were expected to check on the resident periodically while on the commode and document attempts, but no documentation of prolonged commode use or related interventions was found.
Failure to Provide Proper Pressure Injury Care
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide appropriate pressure injury care and failed to prevent further deterioration of existing pressure injuries for two residents. One resident was admitted with three deep tissue injuries on the sacrum, right buttocks, and right heel, and the record showed the facility did not complete a comprehensive skin assessment on admission, did not complete weekly wound assessments as required, and did not implement offloading interventions consistently. The resident’s care plan was not created until after admission, and the right heel injury was not measured or fully assessed until several days after admission despite being present on admission. For the resident with the right heel injury, the record and survey observations showed the wound progressed from a suspected deep tissue injury to an unstageable wound and later to a stage 3 pressure injury. Facility documentation showed repeated wound measurements and specialty wound care treatment, but the facility did not have complete documentation of wound characteristics or peri-wound tissue, and the care plan did not include specific interventions to address the heel injury. During survey observations, the resident was seen sitting in a wheelchair with the right heel resting against the leg of a bedside table, and no off-loading boot was observed in the room or on the resident. Staff interviews showed the CNA did not know whether the resident was supposed to have a heel protector, the LPN found the off-loading boots stored in the closet behind clothes, and the ADON stated the boots should have been placed on the resident and that the order and care plan should have been updated. For the second resident, the facility failed to properly manage a right foot wound and failed to ensure the ordered ace wrap and footwear interventions were carried out correctly. The resident had a stage 3 pressure ulcer on the right plantar foot and was ordered to have an ace wrap applied from toes to below the knee and to wear a post-op shoe. The resident reported the shoe had been falling apart for months, and the chart did not contain documentation of ordering a new shoe or foam inserts. Survey observation found the ace wrap loosely applied over a gripper sock, with the resident’s foot and calf edematous when the wrap was removed. Staff stated the wrap should not have been applied that way, and the ADON acknowledged there was no documentation showing whether the boot or new insoles had been ordered.
Resident Left Unattended on Commode Without Effective Call Light Access
Penalty
Summary
The facility did not ensure adequate supervision for a resident at risk for falls when staff left the resident alone on a commode without effective access to assistance. The resident had diagnoses including obstructive hydrocephalus and unspecified dementia, had a BIMS score of 10/15, and was dependent for transfers and toileting. The care plan identified the resident as at risk for falls, required a soft touch call light, and included toileting assistance and transfer support, but the resident was observed sitting on the commode in the middle of the room without staff present. Survey observation showed two CNAs entered the resident’s room and later exited, after which the resident remained on the commode for an extended period. When the surveyor returned, the resident was still on the commode, was trying to scoot the commode back with feet on the floor, and stated confusion about why the chair would not move and that the resident was done. The surveyor asked about the call light, and the resident did not understand what it was. The surveyor could not find staff at that time, and when the NP later checked, the NP had to push the resident’s call light to get staff assistance. The NP stated that sitting on the commode that long was not appropriate and that the resident should not have been left alone that long because the resident had been declining in memory and should not be left alone to use the call light. The CNA stated the resident likes to sit on the commode for a while and that the CNA usually checks periodically, but also stated that no check occurred after placing the resident on the commode. The CNA further reported the resident uses the call light only about half the time and sometimes refuses to use it, while the family member stated the resident forgets what the call light is for and needs reminders or help to use it. The DON stated staff are expected to check periodically and document attempts, but the surveyor found no documentation of prolonged commode use or related interventions in the care plan.
Failure to Monitor and Report Repeated Fluid Restriction Overages
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a resident with stage 5 chronic kidney disease, heart failure, and dependence on renal dialysis maintained the ordered 1500 cc daily fluid restriction. R6 had physician orders for 24-hour fluid intake monitoring and, beginning 03/21/26, a 1500 cc fluid intake limit recorded each shift. Survey review of the MAR showed that R6 exceeded the fluid restriction on multiple dates, including 03/12/26, 03/13/26, 03/17/26, 03/22/26, 03/29/26, 04/19/26, 04/20/26, 05/10/26, 05/23/26, 05/29/26, 06/22/26, and 06/30/26, with daily totals ranging from 1600 cc to 2080 cc. No documentation was found showing that additional lung assessments were completed or that the provider was notified when the resident exceeded the fluid restriction. During interview, an RN stated that when a resident goes over a fluid restriction, the nurse should complete a thorough lung assessment, notify the provider, and document it in the chart. The DON stated that the overnight nurse tallies the daily total, the ADON reviews it daily, and any overages are discussed with the provider, and also confirmed that nursing was expected to complete additional assessments and notify the provider when the restriction was exceeded; however, no documentation was provided to show this occurred for R6.
Improper PEG Tube Placement Verification Before Medication Administration
Penalty
Summary
The facility did not ensure safe PEG tube placement verification for a resident who was admitted with dysphagia, spastic quadriplegic cerebral palsy, epilepsy, and a history of venous thrombosis and embolism. The resident was nonverbal, had a BIMS score of 0 indicating severe cognitive impairment, and received all medications via a PEG tube. During observation, an LPN administered medication through the PEG tube by auscultating above the epigastrium while injecting air into a syringe and aspirating less than 5 mL of gastric contents, but did not verify placement by gently pulling on the tube or confirming the tube marking/measurement at the insertion site before giving the medications. The facility policy stated that before beginning a feeding, flushing a tube, or administering medication via a feeding tube, proper placement and functioning would be verified, and for gastrostomy tubes the retention device would be checked by gently tugging on the tube and noting the marking on the tube. The resident’s physician order required daily measurement of the G-tube and recording in centimeters in the morning, and the MAR showed daily AM documentation of tube measurements. However, the MAR did not include documentation of tube measurements with each medication or enteral feeding administration throughout the day. The LPN stated she was not aware that auscultation is no longer recommended for checking placement and was not aware of recent standards of practice for verifying feeding tube placement. The DON stated feeding tubes should be measured from the insertion site prior to every medication or feeding administration.
BiPAP Not Applied While Resident Was Sleeping
Penalty
Summary
The facility did not provide the necessary respiratory care and services for one resident with obstructive sleep apnea and asthma when the resident’s BiPAP machine was not applied per provider orders. The resident’s record showed severe cognitive impairment with a BIMS score of 0/15 and dependence for all ADLs. The care plan identified the resident’s use of BiPAP for obstructive sleep apnea and included interventions to encourage use of CPAP/BiPAP. The physician order dated 06/11/26 directed that the BiPAP setting be 14/8 and that the resident have the BiPAP machine on when sleeping, even if it was not night, and also ordered oxygen bleed at 1 liter to the BiPAP three times a day related to sleep apnea. During multiple observations on 07/06/26, the resident was seen sitting upright in a recliner with eyes closed and snoring softly, while the BiPAP machine was on the nightstand and not in use. A CNA stated the BiPAP was only used at night, and an RN stated it was used when the resident was in bed sleeping and that the provider said it could be left off if the resident was sleeping in the chair. The DON stated the BiPAP should be on if the resident was sleeping.
Medication Administration Errors Exceeded Allowed Rate
Penalty
Summary
The facility did not ensure that its medication error rate remained below 5 percent and was cited for an 11.11% medication error rate involving two residents. One resident had diagnoses including dysphagia, spastic quadriplegic cerebral palsy, epilepsy, and a history of venous thrombosis and embolism, received all medications via PEG tube, and had orders for Enoxaparin (Lovenox) 30 mg subcutaneously each morning and Phenytoin 50 mg chewable tablets to be given via G-tube three times daily after dissolving in water. During observation, an LPN crushed the Phenytoin, mixed it in water, and administered it through the PEG tube while several particles remained undissolved in the cup and were later observed in the discarded cup; the LPN also administered the Lovenox injection into the right upper abdomen without grasping and pinching a fold of skin and without holding the skin fold throughout the injection. The DON stated that crushed medications must be completely dissolved before PEG administration and that subcutaneous injections require pinching a fold of skin during administration. A second resident with intellectual disabilities, morbid obesity, and a BIMS score of 9/15 had an order for Aspirin 81 mg once daily for antiplatelet therapy. During medication administration observation, a medication aide stated that 2 tablets of aspirin were to be given according to the MAR and administered 2 whole 81 mg tablets in applesauce, which the resident swallowed. The report states the physician order indicated 1 tablet, and the administration of 2 tablets resulted in overdosing of aspirin.
Significant Medication Error During PEG Tube Administration
Penalty
Summary
The facility did not ensure a resident was free from a significant medication error during administration of phenytoin via PEG tube. The resident had diagnoses including dysphagia, spastic quadriplegic cerebral palsy, epilepsy, and a history of venous thrombosis and embolism, was nonverbal, and had a BIMS score of 0/15. The physician ordered phenytoin chewable tablets to be given via G-tube three times daily and dissolved in water before administration for epilepsy. During observation, an LPN crushed the phenytoin chewable tablet, placed it into a cup of water, and mixed it with a spoon, but the medication did not completely dissolve. The LPN stated the phenytoin was difficult to completely dissolve and get out of the cup, then administered it via the PEG tube. The surveyor observed undissolved phenytoin particles attached to the sides and bottom of the cup, and after the cup was rinsed with a small amount of water and administered, additional particles remained in the cup when it was discarded. The DON stated that crushed medications must be completely dissolved without particles remaining before being administered into a PEG tube.
Infection Control Failures During Resident Care and Medication Administration
Penalty
Summary
Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program was deficient when surveyors observed failures in hand hygiene and PPE use during resident care and medication administration. R35 was admitted with diagnoses including displaced intertrochanteric fracture of the right femur, nonrheumatic aortic valve stenosis, anemia, hypertension, and arthritis, and had a BIMS score of 13/15 with intact cognition. R35 was on Enhanced Barrier Precautions due to wounds, including an open wound on the heel, and the facility’s policy identified transferring, providing hygiene, and changing briefs or assisting with toileting as high-contact care activities requiring PPE. During observation, CNA P entered R35’s room without sanitizing hands and without donning PPE, then transferred R35 to bed, changed the brief, and provided personal care while wearing only gloves after entering the room. The CNA also leaned over the bed with the scrub top touching the blankets and placed R35 in a wheelchair without using the correct PPE for the precautions in place. The report also documented improper medication handling for R47 during medication administration. While preparing medications, MA F removed each prepackaged bubble-pack medication directly into their fingers and then placed the medications into a cup with applesauce using their fingers, without gloves and without hand hygiene between medications. When questioned, MA F stated this was not the correct way to remove medications from packaging and said, "I was taught to pop the pills from the packs into the medication cups."
Failure to Notify Resident, Physician, and Family of Significant Events
Penalty
Summary
Facility staff failed to immediately notify the resident, the resident's physician, and a family member about situations that affected the resident, such as injury, decline, or changes in room assignment. This lack of timely communication was observed and documented by surveyors as a deficiency in the facility's process for keeping relevant parties informed about significant events impacting the resident's care or condition.
Failure to Provide Care According to Orders and Resident Preferences
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves a failure to provide appropriate treatment and care according to physician orders, as well as the resident’s preferences and goals. The report indicates that care was not delivered in alignment with the established plan or the expressed wishes and objectives of the resident, as required.
Failure to Follow Professional Standards for Assessment and Monitoring of CHF and Cellulitis
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide care and treatment in accordance with professional standards of practice for two residents. One resident with a history of congestive heart failure (CHF) did not receive adequate assessment and monitoring of edema. Despite orders and care plans specifying the need for daily weights, lung sound assessments, and monitoring for signs of fluid overload, there were significant lapses. Weights were not documented for a 10-day period during which the resident experienced a notable weight gain, and provider notification only occurred after this increase. Routine assessments did not include lung sounds, pedal pulses, or proper edema measurements such as circumference and length, as recommended by professional guidelines. Staff interviews revealed a lack of awareness and implementation of manufacturer instructions for Tubi grip sizing and use, and no standard practice was in place for edema assessment. Another resident with a diagnosis of cellulitis did not receive adequate assessment and monitoring of the condition. The care plan required regular skin inspections, but the facility could not provide documentation of nail care and inspection as ordered. After the resident developed pain and drainage from the toenail, there was no consistent documentation of erythema, tenderness, drainage, or other signs of infection before or after the diagnosis of cellulitis. The area of erythema was not marked to monitor for spread, contrary to current standards of practice. Staff interviews confirmed that there was no standard protocol for marking or monitoring the area, and assessments were only performed if specifically ordered by the provider. In both cases, the Director of Nursing and nursing staff acknowledged the absence of facility standards for assessment and monitoring of these conditions, relying instead on provider orders. This resulted in incomplete and inconsistent monitoring and documentation, which did not align with current professional standards of practice for managing CHF-related edema and cellulitis.
Failure to Dispose of Discontinued Narcotics and Administer Medications per Prescriber Orders
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide proper pharmaceutical services by not ensuring the timely and appropriate disposal of controlled medications after residents were discharged. During a medication storage room inspection, surveyors found that narcotic medications belonging to two discharged residents remained in a locked narcotic box more than a week after the residents had left the facility. Facility policy required discontinued or leftover medications to be removed from current medication supply in a timely manner, but staff were unable to explain why these medications had not been destroyed as required. Additionally, the facility did not ensure that medications were administered according to prescriber orders. In one instance, a resident with Alzheimer's disease and dementia was given a half dose of PRN alprazolam at the request of family, despite the physician's order specifying a full tablet. The DON confirmed that the medication was administered in a dosage different from the order and was unable to provide documentation of a provider order authorizing the change. This administration was not in accordance with the Wisconsin Nurse Practice Act, which prohibits nurses from altering medication dosages without a prescriber's order.
Medication Error Rate Exceeds 5% Due to Improper Administration
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain a medication error rate below 5%, as required, with 2 errors identified out of 37 observed medication administration opportunities, resulting in a 5.41% error rate. In one instance, an LPN administered three inhalers to a resident in the incorrect sequence, contrary to the facility's policy. The beta agonist inhaler was given first as required, but the corticosteroid inhaler was administered second instead of last, and the anticholinergic inhaler was given last instead of second. The LPN admitted uncertainty about the correct sequence and did not verify the order before administration. The Nursing Home Administrator confirmed that the facility policy was not followed in this case. In another instance, the same LPN administered Carafate to a different resident after breakfast, despite physician orders specifying that the medication should be given before meals. The LPN acknowledged the error, stating that the medication should have been administered prior to the meal but was not due to timing. The Nursing Home Administrator confirmed that the expectation was to follow the physician's order for Carafate administration before meals.
Failure to Follow Infection Control Practices During Resident Care and Insulin Administration
Penalty
Summary
Facility staff failed to implement infection control practices as required by facility policy and standard infection prevention protocols. During morning care for one resident, a CNA did not perform hand hygiene before handling clean clothing and supplies, nor after removing gloves following peri care, and proceeded to dress the resident with clean items. The CNA acknowledged during interview that hand hygiene should have been performed after glove removal and before touching clean items. The Director of Nursing confirmed that the expectation is for staff to perform hand hygiene when entering resident rooms for care and after removing gloves following peri care. Additionally, a registered nurse was observed preparing and administering insulin to a resident using two different insulin pens without sanitizing the rubber caps with an antimicrobial agent prior to attaching the needle, as required by facility policy. The nurse admitted to forgetting this step and acknowledged the requirement to sanitize the rubber tips before administration. The Nursing Home Administrator confirmed that the facility policy mandates sanitizing the rubber caps before insulin administration.
Failure to Monitor and Report Resident's Change in Condition
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a resident, identified as R2, received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, the Comprehensive Person-Centered Care Plan, and the resident's choices. R2 experienced four episodes of tarry red stools between 11:00 AM and 1:00 PM on August 31, 2024, but the facility did not monitor R2's vital signs or notify a physician until R2 was sent to the emergency department at 1:58 AM the following day. This lack of timely monitoring and communication with a physician was contrary to the facility's policies and professional guidelines. R2 was admitted to the facility with multiple diagnoses, including ankylosing spondylitis, dementia, gastrointestinal hemorrhage, and a history of gastrointestinal bleeding. The care plan for R2 included monitoring for signs and symptoms of anemia but did not specifically address monitoring for bleeding. Despite R2's history and the occurrence of red tarry stools, the facility did not take appropriate action to assess and report the change in condition, as required by their policies and professional standards. Interviews with facility staff revealed inconsistencies in understanding and implementing the protocol for notifying physicians of changes in a resident's condition. Some staff members indicated they would notify a physician after a second episode of symptoms, while others stated they would notify after the first occurrence. Additionally, a blood pressure reading for R2 on the same day was outside of normal parameters and was not reported to a physician, further highlighting the facility's failure to adhere to established protocols for monitoring and reporting significant changes in a resident's 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 71 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — 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 Colby
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Abbotsford Health Care Center | 1.9 mi | ★★★★★ | 27 | 0 |
| Clark County Rehabilitation & Living Center | 10.8 mi | ★★★★★ | 11 | 0 |
| Aspirus Care & Rehab-medford | 15.1 mi | ★★★★★ | 2 | 0 |
| Three Oaks Health Services | 17.4 mi | ★★★★★ | 9 | 0 |
| Norwood Health Ctr-central | 18 mi | ★★★★★ | 2 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Colonial Health Services.
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 October 2026) and official state health department websites.