Valley View Care Center
2120 N 10th St, Canon City, CO 81212 · For profit - Partnership · 60 certified beds · (719) 275-7569 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Jun 2025
- it has a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0568)
- it has 1 actual-harm citation
- inspectors recorded 1 serious finding as past non-compliance — the problem was found, fixed, and verified before the survey closed, so it is history rather than a current condition, but it is still worth asking what changed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (42) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $8,281 in federal fines (most recent 2025-02-26)
- its payroll- and facility-reported staffing and quality-measure scores sit well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
- its last standard health inspection was over 2 years ago — the star rating may not reflect current conditions
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 4 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's staffing and quality-measure ratings run 3 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself, and staffing on its payroll (PBJ) submissions — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 3 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 6.6% | 13.4% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 0.5% | 4.7% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.6% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.4% | 1.4% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 3.3% | 8.8% | 6.5% | better |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 3.6% | 3.4% | 3.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 8.1% | 13.3% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 14.6% | 11.5% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 91.2% | 94.7% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 0.0% | 3.4% | 4.7% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 17.0% | 21.2% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 70.0% | 20.0% | 17.1% | check this† — see note marked dagger below the table |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.27 | 1.38 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 3.03 | 1.74 | 1.80 | worse |
* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
† This value is several times the typical-state benchmark. It can be real, or it can be a coding artifact in what the facility submitted. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.15 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 11% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 30% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | not reported — Newly certified nursing home with less than 12-15 months of data available or the nursing home opened less than 6 months ago, and there were no data to submit or claims for this measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 60 beds and averages 58.2 residents a day — about 97% occupied, or roughly 2 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.15 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.62 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.92 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 2.51 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.42 on weekdays — 27% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.76 to 0.26 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 39% is about the same as the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
This trend is not current. The most recent of these two inspections was over 2 years ago; the arrow describes what inspectors found then, not what the home is like now.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
42 citations, most serious first. The 12 most serious are shown; the remaining 30 are one tap away and print in full.
- Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2025-02-26 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure one (#3) of three residents at risk for elopement out of 17 sample residents received adequate supervision and were kept free from elopement. Specifically, the facility failed to provide Resident #3 with the supervision necessary to prevent elopement. The facility's failures created a situation for the likelihood of serious harm to residents' health and safety if not immediately corrected. The facility was a totally secure building specializing in serving residents with severe mental illness, dementia and behavioral health issues. The entire campus had a six-foot high security fence around the whole campus with a wired overhang in the unrestricted front resident space to discourage anyone from climbing over the fence. The back fenced-in areas did not have the wired overhang, but access was restricted in the overnight hours when staff were not able to monitor residents in those areas. Staff and visitors had to be keyed in and out of the front…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Actual harm · G2021-12-02 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolatedProvide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure the nutritional and hydration needs were consistently met for two residents (#13 and #15) of three out of 26 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to implement interventions to prevent a significant weight loss for Resident #13 who was at nutritional risk due to poor nutritional intake and who required staff assistance for cueing at meals. The facility failed to identify assistance needed with meals in timely manner and address Resident #13's nutritional needs. Lack of timely interventions to aid Resident #13 to maintain her nutritional status led to a significant, unplanned weight loss of 13.4% in four months. In addition, the facility failed to ensure Resident #15 had consistent weekly weights obtained and implement interventions when Resident #15 had weight loss. Findings include I. Facility policy The Nutrition Parameter policy, date of review was 2020, provided by the corporate registered dietitian (CRD) on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-09-11 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure one (#1) of three residents at risk for elopement out of three sample residents received adequate supervision and were kept free from elopement.Specifically, the facility failed to provide Resident #1 with the supervision necessary to prevent elopement.Findings include:Record review and interviews confirmed the facility corrected the deficient practice prior to the onsite investigation on 9/10/25 to 9/11/25, resulting in the deficiency being cited as past noncompliance with a correction date of 9/8/25.I. Facility policy and procedure The Elopement and Wandering policy, dated 2/29/25, was received from the nursing home administrator (NHA) on 9/12/25 at 2:05 p.m. It revealed in pertinent part, To ensure the safety and well being of all residents with potential elopement risk. The goal of the facility is to provide a safe environment using least restrictive measures available in caring for residents who were exhibiting elopement behaviors. The…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-06-05 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — patternProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure that all residents were free from abuse, neglect and exploitation for six (#1, #4, #3, #2, #8 and #7) of eight residents reviewed out of 13 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Protect Resident #1 from physical abuse by Resident #8; -Protect Resident #4 from physical abuse by Resident #9; -Protect Resident #3 and Resident #8 from physical abuse by each other; -Protect Resident #2 from physical abuse by Resident #10; and, -Protect Resident #7 and Resident #8 from physical abuse by each other. Findings include: I. Facility policy and procedure The Abuse policy, dated 2/29/24, was provided by the nursing home administrator (NHA) on 6/4/25 at 10:57 a.m. The policy read in pertinent part, The facility does not condone resident abuse and shall take every precaution possible to prevent abuse by anyone. Residents have the right to be free from abuse. Providing a safe environment for the resident was an essential duty…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2025-02-26 · tag F0838 — failed to assess facility resources and resident needs — widespreadConduct and document a facility-wide assessment to determine what resources are necessary to care for residents competently during both day-to-day operations (including nights and weekends) and emergencies.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to conduct and document a facility-wide assessment to determine what resources were necessary to care for its residents competently during both day-to-day operations and emergencies. Specifically, the facility failed to develop a facility assessment that included all resources, education, staff competencies and facility based risk assessments for a facility that was a totally secured locked facility for residents with mental illness and dementia diagnosis. Cross-reference F689: failure to prevent a resident from eloping a secured locked facility. Findings include: I. Facility policy and procedure The Facility Assessment policy, dated October 2018, was provided by the nursing home administrator (NHA) on 2/26/25 at 5:26 p.m. It read in pertinent part, A facility assessment is conducted annually to determine and update our capacity to meet the needs of and competently care for our residents during day-to-day operations. Determining our capacity to meet the needs of and care for our residents during emergencies is included…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2025-02-26 · tag F0843 — widespreadHave an agreement with at least one or more hospitals certified by Medicare or Medicaid to make sure residents can be moved quickly to the hospital when they need medical care.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to have a written transfer agreement with one or more hospitals approved for participation under Medicare and Medicaid programs to reasonably ensure residents would be transferred from the facility to a hospital, and assured of timely admission to the hospital when transfer was medically appropriate. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure a written agreement was in effect with one local area hospital. Findings include: I. Record review A request was made to the nursing home administrator (NHA) on 2/26/25 at 2:10 p.m., for the facility's hospital transfer agreement. -The facility was unable to provide a written agreement for the one area hospital. II. Staff interview The NHA was interviewed on 2/27/25 at 2:53 p.m. The NHA said the facility could not locate a hospital transfer agreement. The NHA said she reached out to the local hospital and would get a transfer agreement completed since she could not locate a current agreement. She said it was important to have a hospital transfer agreement in case the facility needed to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-02-26 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations and interviews, the facility failed to maintain a sanitary, orderly, and comfortable environment in seven of 26 resident rooms and damaged areas in one of two resident halls out of two units. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Ensure blinds were intact in seven resident rooms; and, -Ensure the heating vents were intact and not falling off the heating units. Findings include: I. Facility policy and procedure The Homelike Environment policy, revised February 2021, was provided by the nursing home administrator (NHA) on 2/26/25 at 5:26 p.m. It read in pertinent part, Residents are provided with a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment and encouraged to use their personal belongings to the extent possible. The facility staff and management maximize, to the extent possible, the characteristics of the facility that reflect a personalized, homelike setting. These characteristics include: a clean, sanitary and orderly environment. II. Environmental tour and interview The…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-02-26 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — patternProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure five (#1,#7, #4, #10 and #3) of 15 residents reviewed for abuse were kept free from abuse out of 17 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Protect Resident #1 from physical abuse by Resident #6 and Resident #2; -Protect Resident #7 from physical abuse by Resident #2; -Protect Resident #4 from physical abuse by Resident #5; -Protect Resident #10 from physical abuse by Resident #11; and, -Protect Resident #3 from verbal abuse by a staff member. Findings include: I. Facility policy and procedure The Abuse policy, dated 2/29/24, was provided by the nursing home administrator (NHA) on 2/25/25 at 9:57 a.m. It read in pertinent part, The community does not condone resident abuse and shall take every precaution possible to prevent resident abuse by anyone, including staff members, other residents, volunteers, and staff of other agencies serving the resident, family members, legal guardians, resident representatives, sponsors, friends,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-02-26 · tag F0568 — isolatedProperly hold, secure, and manage each resident's personal money which is deposited with the nursing home.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to establish and maintain a system that assures a full and complete and separate accounting, according to generally accepted accounting principles, of each resident's personal funds entrusted to the facility on the resident's behalf for one (#8) of four residents reviewed for personal funds out of 17 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to provide Resident #8 a copy of her personal funds statement on at least a quarterly basis. Findings include: I. Resident status Resident #8, age [AGE], was admitted on [DATE]. According to the February 2025 computerized physician orders (CPO), diagnoses included major depressive disorder and borderline personality disorder. The 1/28/25 minimum data set (MDS) assessment revealed the resident was cognitively intact with a brief interview for mental status (BIMS) score of 15 out of 15. She required no assistance with her activities of daily living (ADL). II. Resident interview Resident #8 was interviewed on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-05-15 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — patternHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations and interviews, the facility failed to provide a meal service for residents in a manner and in an environment that maintained or enhanced the residents' dignity and respect in full recognition of their individuality for residents served in two of two dining rooms. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure an adequate system was in place to provide meal services in a timely fashion to residents waiting to be served and seated in the dining room. I. Facility policy The Frequency of Meals policy, revised July 2017, was provided by the nursing home administrator (NHA) on 5/15/24 at 1:27 p.m. It read in pertinent part, The facility will serve at least three meals or their equivalent daily at scheduled times. Meals will be served four to six hours apart to help assure that residents receive nutritional requirements. A schedule of meal times and snacks shall be posted in resident areas. II. Posted meals The posted meal times for the main dining room were scheduled to begin breakfast at 7:00 a.m. to 8:30 a.m., lunch at 11:00 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. and dinner at 5:00 p.m.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-05-15 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure food was prepared, distributed and served under sanitary conditions in the kitchen. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Ensure the walk-in refrigerator maintained a safe operating temperature of 41 degrees Fahrenheit (F) or below to prevent food from spoiling; and, -Ensure all damaged tiles were repaired to ensure all surfaces in the kitchen were cleanable. Findings include: I. Ensure the walk-in refrigerator maintained a safe operating temperature of 41 degrees F or below to prevent food from spoiling A. Professional reference The Colorado Retail Food Regulations, (1/1/19), were retrieved on 5/17/24 from https://cdphe.colorado.gov/environment/food-regulations. It revealed in pertinent part, Time/temperature control for safety food cold holding shall be maintained at 5 degrees Celsius (C) (41 degrees F) or less. B. Facility policy and procedure The Kitchen Sanitation and Infection Control policy and procedure, undated, was provided by the nursing home administrator (NHA) on 5/15/24 at 4:30 p.m. It…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-15 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolatedHonor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure one (#10) of fifteen residents reviewed for choices out of 32 sample residents remained free of resident right restrictions in order to promote and facilitate resident self- determination. Specifically the facility failed to ensure Resident #10 received baths consistently according to his choice of frequency and bathing preference. Findings include: I. Facility policy and procedure The Dignity policy and procedure, revised February 2021, was provided by the nursing home administrator (NHA) on 5/15/24 at 4:30 p.m. It revealed in pertinent part, The facility culture supports dignity and respect for residents by honoring resident goals, choices, preferences, values and beliefs. This begins with the initial admission and continues throughout the resident' s facility stay. II. Resident #10 A. Resident status Resident #10, age less than 65, was admitted on [DATE]. According to the May 2024 computerized physician orders (CPO), diagnoses included…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
Show the remaining 30 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-05-15 · tag F0644 — isolatedCoordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to incorporate the recommendations from the PASRR (preadmission screening and resident review) Level II determination and evaluation report into the assessment, care planning and transition of care for one (#2) of five residents out of 32 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Take steps to ensure services were provided as recommend in Resident #2 's PASRR Level II report; and, -Ensure the PASRR recommendations were included in Resident #2 's care plan. Findings include: I. Facility policy and procedure The PASRR Completion policy, revised 9/26/23, was provided by the nursing home administrator (NHA) on 5/16/24 at 4:30 p.m. It read in pertinent part, If the resident has a PASRR Level II, the community is responsible for ensuring that any recommendations from the PASRR Level II are implemented and care planned for the resident. II. Resident status Resident #2, age less than 65, was admitted on [DATE]. According to the May 2024…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-15 · tag F0791 — failed to provide routine dental services — isolatedProvide or obtain dental services for each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure one (#23) of five residents reviewed for ancillary services out of 33 sample residents received routine dental care and 24-hour emergency dental care. Specifically, the facility failed to refer Resident #23 to the dentist to obtain dentures timely. Findings include: I. Facility policy The Ancillary Service policy and procedure, dated 11/4/13, was provided by the nursing home administrator (NHA) on 5/15/24 at 3:25 pm. It read in pertinent part Ancillary services, including, but not limited to dental, vision, audiology and podiatry will be provided to the resident per state and federal regulatory guidelines; at the resident/responsible family members request; and as needed. Any resident needing or requesting ancillary services such as dental, vision, audiology and podiatry will have their needs met timely. Social services/designee will be responsible for ensuring residents needing ancillary services receive needed/requested services…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-15 · tag F0908 — failed to keep essential equipment working — isolatedKeep all essential equipment working safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interviews and observations, the facility failed to maintain all mechanical, electrical, and patient care equipment in safe operating condition in the main kitchen. Specifically the facility failed to: -Ensure the kitchen's oven was maintained to function properly; -Ensure two of six burners were functioning properly; and, -Ensure the kitchen oven door was repaired to ensure the oven maintained consistent and appropriate cooking temperatures for cooked food. Findings include: I. Facility policies and procedures The Kitchen Sanitation policy and procedure, undated, was provided by the nursing home administrator (NHA) on 5/15/23 at 4:30 p.m. It read in pertinent, All utensils, counters, shelves and equipment are kept clean, maintained in good repair and are free from breaks, corrosions, open seams, cracks and chipped areas that may affect their use or proper cleaning. Seals, hinges and fasteners are kept in good repair. II. Observation On 5/13/24 at 9:06 a.m. the oven door was not latched and there was approximately a one inch gap between the oven door seal and the oven. The…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-10-18 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review and interviews, the facility failed to provide the necessary treatment and services to prevent pressure injuries from occurring for two (#1 and #2) of four residents reviewed out of four sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Notify the physician timely when a pressure ulcer was discovered and implement timely treatment orders for Resident #1; and, -Accurately complete a weekly skin assessment to reflect the Resident #1 and Resident #2's skin impairments. Findings include: I. Professional reference The National Pressure Injury Advisory Panel (NPIAP), Prevention and Treatment of Pressure Ulcers accessed on 10/17/23 from https://npiap.com/ read in pertinent part, steps to prevent the emergence of pressure ulcers in individuals identified as being at high risk include scheduled repositioning to avoid individuals being in a position that places pressure on a vulnerable area for a long period of time. II. Facility policy The Pressure Ulcer policy, dated 3/10/23,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-09-06 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure one (#1) out of three sample residents were kept free from abuse. Specifically, the facility: -Failed to prevent a resident-to-resident altercations between Resident #1 and #2. Findings include: I. Facility policy and procedure The Abuse Policy, revised 10/28/2020, was provided by the nursing home administrator (NHA) on 9/7/23 at 11:36 a.m., included in part, Abuse is defined as the willful infliction of injury, unreasonable confinement, intimidation, or punishment with resulting physical harm, pain, mental anguish, deprivation of goods or services that are necessary to attain or maintain physical, mental, or psychosocial well-being. Willful means the individual must have acted deliberately, not that the individual must have intended to inflict injury or harm. II. Altercation on 7/8/23 A. Record review for Resident #2 A progress note from Resident #2's record dated 7/8/23 at 7:01 p.m. included, Certified nurse aide (CNA) was notified by…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2023-01-24 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — widespreadHave a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to have a registered nurse (RN) scheduled eight hours consecutively a day for seven days a week. Specifically, the facility did not have a RN between 1/13/23 to 1/19/23. Findings include: I. Record review Review of the January 2023 schedule, the facility did not have a RN in the facility from 1/13/23 through 1/19/23. II. Staff interviews The nursing home administrator (NHA) was interviewed on 1/19/23 at 1:40 p.m. He said there was no RN in the building at that time. He said the director of nursing left the building pending an investigation on 1/13/23. Since that day, there has not been a RN in the building. He said he was actively looking to hire a full time RN. At 3:30 p.m. the NHA said the facility would have a RN start 1/23/23. He said until the RN started, he had reached out to the medical director, and the medical director said he would be available over the weekend for any needs the facility might need to include coming into the facility by phone. At 4:30 p.m. the NHA said the facility would have a RN start 1/20/23.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2023-01-24 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure food was stored, prepared, and served under sanitary conditions in the main kitchen. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure the dishwasher maintained sufficient levels of water temperature and sanitizing solution. Findings include: I. Chemical Sanitization A. Professional Reference According to the State Board of Health Colorado Retail Food Establishment Rules and Regulations (effective 1/1/19) pg. 132-137, read in part, Cleaning and sanitizing may be done by spray-type, immersion ware washing, or by any other type of machine or device if it is demonstrated that it thoroughly cleans and sanitizes equipment and utensils. Chemical sanitizing ware washing machines (single-tank, stationary-tank, door-type machines and spray-type glass washers) may be used provided that: 1) The temperature of the wash water shall not be less than 120°F (49°C); 2) The wash water shall be kept clean; and 3) Chemicals added for sanitization purposes shall be automatically dispensed; and 4) Utensils and equipment…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2023-01-24 · tag F0882 — widespreadDesignate a qualified infection preventionist to be responsible for the infection prevent and control program in the nursing home.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations and interviews, the facility failed to have an individual designated as an infection preventionist who had completed specialized training in infection prevention and control. Specifically, the facility had not had an infection preventionist (IP) employed since August 2022. Findings include: I. Facility policy The Infection Prevention and Control policy, revised October 2018, was provided by the nursing home administrator (NHA) on 1/25/23. It read in pertinent part, The infection prevention and control program is developed to address the facility-specific infection control needs and requirements identified in the facility assessment and the infection control risk assessment. II. Observations Between 1/17/23 and 1/24/23 during the survey while conducting an infection control investigation, there was no infection preventionist in the building. III. Staff interviews The NHA was interviewed on 1/19/23 at 1:40 p.m. He stated that there was no IP present in the building. He was actively seeking to hire a full time nurse to fill the IP role. The NHA was interviewed…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-01-24 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — patternHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations and interviews, the facility failed to provide a meal service for residents in a manner and in an environment that maintained or enhanced the residents' dignity and respect in full recognition of their individuality for residents served in two dining rooms. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Ensure residents had complete access to the dining room and ensure dining room doors were not locked during meal times; and, -Ensure an adequate system was in place to provide meal services in a timely fashion to residents waiting to be seated in the dining room. Findings include: A. Posted mealtimes The posted meal times for the main dining room were scheduled to begin breakfast at 7:00- 8:30 a.m., lunch at 11:00 a.m.-12:30 p.m. and dinner at 5:00 p.m.-6:30 p.m. B. Resident interviews Resident #32 was interviewed at 10:40 a.m. Resident #32 said he eats at 11:30 a.m., because he had a scheduled meal time and if he missed it he would have to eat in his room. On 1/19/23 at 11:19 a.m. Resident #52 was asked if he was waiting to go into the dining room. He said, Hell yes I…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-01-24 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations and staff interviews, the facility failed to maintain a sanitary, orderly, and comfortable environment for residents in 12 of 26 resident rooms, three of three hallways and kitchen. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure walls, baseboard coves, halls, floors, handrails, and ceiling tiles were repaired, painted and properly maintained. Findings include: I. Initial observations Observations of the resident living environment conducted on 1/23/23 at 10:57 a.m. revealed: room [ROOM NUMBER]: The corner next to the residents' bed had chipped and peeling sheetrock approximately three feet high by five inches wide, the metal corner piece was exposed. The room was painted a light yellow but had a section approximately five feet by four feet, which were repainted in a medium brown shade of paint. The flooring was damaged throughout the room with a section approximately six feet by five wide, which was black and worn. The corner next to the restroom had chipped and peeling sheetrock approximately…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-01-24 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — patternProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and record review the facility failed to prevent resident to resident altercations for six (#42, #40, #7, #17, #20 and #59) of six residents out of 21 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to prevent resident to resident physical abuse altercations between: -Resident #42 and Resident #40; -Resident #7 and Resident #17; and, -Resident #20 and Resident #59. Findings include: I. Facility policy and procedure The Abuse policy, modified on 11/15/19, was received from the nursing home administrator (NHA) on 1/19/23 at 10:47 a.m. It read in pertinent part: The facility does not condone resident abuse and shall take every precaution possible to prevent resident abuse by anyone, including staff member, other residents, volunteers, and staff of other agencies serving the resident, family members, legal guardians, resident representative, sponsor, friends, or any other individuals. Every resident has the right to be free from verbal, sexual, physical and mental abuse, corporal punishment…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-01-24 · tag F0726 — failed to have competent, trained nursing staff — patternEnsure that nurses and nurse aides have the appropriate competencies to care for every resident in a way that maximizes each resident's well being.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure certified nurse aides (CNA) were able to demonstrate competencies in skills and techniques necessary to care for residents' needs, as identified through resident assessments, and described in the plan of care. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure nursing staff had completed competencies prior to providing skilled services as described in the plan of care for six out of six CNAs reviewed for competencies. Findings include: I. Competency records Review of the facility competencies records revealed four CNAs had one competency for Hoyer (mechanical) lift use: CNA #9 on 10/11/22, CNA #1 on 9/14/22, CNA #5 on 9/13/22, and certified nurse aide with medication authority #1 on 9/13/22. The facility had no other competencies for six of six CNAs reviewed. II. Interviews The interim director of nursing (IDON) was interviewed on 1/24/23 at 11:00 a.m. She said competencies were important to ensure staff were safe to provide cares to residents. She said she would work on ensuring staff could provide care safely. The…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-01-24 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure drugs and biologicals were labeled and stored in accordance with accepted professional standards, in one of two medication carts, and one of one medication storage rooms. Specifically, the facility: -Failed to discard an expired vial of tuberculin; -Failed to date a vial of tuberculin when opened; and, -Failed to date a Breo inhaler and Advair inhaler when opened. Findings include: I. Professional references According to the Breo Ellipta inhaler website, retrieved [DATE] from: https://gskpro.com/content/dam/global/hcpportal/en_US/Prescribing_Information/Breo_Ellipta/pdf/BREO-ELLIPTA-PI-PIL-IFU.PDF, Safely throw away BREO ELLIPTA in the trash 6 weeks after you open the tray or when the counter reads '0', whichever comes first. Write the date you open the tray on the label on the inhaler. According to the Tubersol package insert, retrieved [DATE] from: https://www.fda.gov/media/74866/download, A vial of TUBERSOL which has been…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-01-24 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — patternSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure medical records were kept in a secure and confidential manner and the medical record was complete and accurate in keeping with accepted standards of practice for three (#54, #32 and #41) of five residents out of 21 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to keep all medical records for Resident #54, #32, and #41 information complete and accurate. Findings include: I. Resident #54 A. Resident status Resident #54, age under 65 years, was admitted on [DATE]. According to the January 2023 computerized physician orders (CPO), the diagnoses included bipolar disorder. The 11/30/22 minimum data set (MDS) assessment revealed the resident was not assessed for cognition and a brief interview for mental status (BIMS) was not done. B. Record review The elopement care plan, initiated on 11/23/22, documented the resident was an elopement risk/wanderer. The secure unit focus documented the resident required placement due to bipolar…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-01-24 · tag F0886 — failed to test for COVID-19 as required — patternPerform COVID19 testing on residents and staff.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to conduct testing in a manner that was consistent with current standards of practice for conducting COVID-19 tests all for 21 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to document in the resident records the results of COVID-19 tests for residents. Findings include: I. Record review Medical records were reviewed for 21 sample residents from November 2022 to 1/24/23. There were no COVID testing results in the resident's medical charts reviewed. II. Staff interview The interim director of nursing (IDON) was interviewed on 1/24/23 at 1:30 p.m. She said she did not know the results needed to be in the resident's charts, and would work with the facility to ensure the results were included in the resident's medical records going forward.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-01-24 · tag F0644 — isolatedCoordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to incorporate the recommendations from the preadmission screening and resident review (PASRR) level II determination and evaluation report into the assessment, care planning and transitions of care for two (#54 and #41) out of five residents reviewed for PASRR out of 21 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Take steps to ensure services were provided as recommended in the resident's PASRR level II for Resident #54; and, -Notify the state mental health agency recommendations could not be met for Resident #54 or #41. Findings include: I. Facility policy and procedure The Social Services PASRR (Pre-admission Screen and Resident Review) Policy, dated 11/3/17 was provided by the nursing home administrator (NHA) on 1/23/23. It revealed in pertinent part, The social services staff are responsible for assuring that the specialized services needed or recommended by the PASRR- level II are reviewed, implemented, and care planned within the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-01-24 · tag F0646 — isolatedNotify the appropriate authorities when residents with MD or ID services has a significant change in condition.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to notify the state mental health agency promptly after a significant change in the mental condition of three (#54 and #32) of five residents out of 21 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to notify the state mental health agency of Resident #54 and Resident #32 necessity for inpatient psychiatric hospitalizations. Findings include: I. Facility Policy and Procedure The Social Services PASRR (Pre-admission Screen and Resident Review) policy, dated 11/3/17, was provided by the nursing home administrator (NHA) on 01/23/23. It revealed in pertinent part, If a resident ' s status changes after admission, the social services staff are responsible for contacting OBRA (state mental health agency) coordinator via completion and submission of a post admission level I form (PAL) for a potential psychiatric status change review. If there is a change in category of psychiatric medications ordered or a psychiatric diagnosis change, significant…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-01-24 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to provide services that met professional standards of quality according to accepted standards of practice for one (#50) of five residents reviewed of 21 sample residents. Specifically, the facility: -Failed to communicate with other staff the care and treatment for a skin tear for Resident #50, and, -Failed to follow facility policy and write a treatment order received by the provider for Resident #50. Findings include I. Resident #50 Resident #50, age [AGE], was admitted on [DATE]. According to the January 2023 computerized physician order (CPO), diagnoses included dementia, psychotic disturbance, and unsteadiness on feet. The 11/17/22 minimum data set (MDS) assessment revealed the resident had severe cognitive impairment with a brief interview for mental status (BIMS) score of one out of 15. He was noted to have verbal behaviors one to three days in the past seven. No rejection of cares noted. II. Observation Resident #50 was observed on 1/19/23 at…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-01-24 · tag F0659 — isolatedProvide care by qualified persons according to each resident's written plan of care.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews and record review, the facility failed to provide services by qualified persons for one (#42) out of 21 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure Residents #42 was assessed by a registered nurse (RN) following a fall. Findings include: I. Resident status Resident #42, age [AGE], was admitted on [DATE]. According to the January 2023 computerized physician orders (CPO), diagnoses included dementia with agitation, epilepsy, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and acute kidney failure. According to the 11/10/22 minimum data set (MDS) assessment, the resident had severe cognitive impairment with a brief interview for mental status (BIMS) score of two out of 15. The resident had no behaviors. He required extensive assistance for bed mobility, transfers, grooming and toilet use. The MDS revealed no falls since admission. II. Record review The care plan, initiated 4/27/22 and revised 10/17/22, identified the resident was at risk for falls related to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-01-24 · tag F0676 — failed to keep up residents' daily-living abilities — isolatedEnsure residents do not lose the ability to perform activities of daily living unless there is a medical reason.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews, observations and record review, the facility failed to provide the necessary assistance with activities of daily living (ADL) for two (#54 and #32) out of five residents reviewed for ADLs out of 21 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to provide bathing according to the resident's preferences for Resident #54 and #32. Findings include: I. Facility policy The Activities of Daily Living (ADLs) Supporting policy, revised March 2018, was provided by the nursing home administrator (NHA) on 1/23/23. It read in pertinent parts, Residents will be provided with care, treatment and services as appropriate to maintain or improve their ability to carry out activities of daily living (ADLs). Interventions to improve or minimize a resident's functional abilities will be in accordance with the resident's assessed needs, preferences, stated goals and recognized standards of practice. II. Resident #54 A. Resident status Resident #54, age under 65 years, was admitted on [DATE]. According to the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-01-24 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident who was unable to carry out activities of daily living (ADLs) receives the necessary services and assistance for bathing for one (#50) of four residents reviewed for bathing assistance of 21 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to provide bathing for Resident #50. Findings include: I. Resident status Resident #50, age [AGE], was admitted on [DATE]. According to the January 2023 computerized physician order (CPO), diagnoses included dementia, psychotic disturbance, and unsteadiness on feet. The 11/17/22 minimum data set (MDS) assessment revealed the resident had severe cognitive impairment with a brief interview for mental status (BIMS) score of one out of 15. He was noted to have verbal behaviors one to three days in the past seven. No rejection of cares noted. He required extensive assistance with bathing. II. Record review The care plan, revised on 1/18/23, identified an ADL self-care performance deficit…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-01-24 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure residents who needed respiratory care were provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice for one (#2) of three residents reviewed for the use of supplemental oxygen of 21 sample residents. Specifically, the facility -Failed to ensure oxygen was administered according to physician orders for Resident #2, and -Failed to have a system in place to communicate oxygen concentrator settings for staff. Findings include: I. Resident #2 A. Resident status Resident #2, age [AGE], was admitted on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. According to the January 2023 computerized physicians orders (CPO), diagnoses included muscle weakness, venous insufficiency, and epilepsy. The 12/6/22 minimum data set (MDS) assessment revealed the resident's cognitive status was moderately impaired with a brief interview for mental status (BIMS) score of eight out of 15. He had no identified behaviors or rejections of care during the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-01-24 · tag F0700 — isolatedTry different approaches before using a bed rail. If a bed rail is needed, the facility must (1) assess a resident for safety risk; (2) review these risks and benefits with the resident/representative; (3) get informed consent; and (4) Correctly install and maintain the bed rail.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to assess/reassess, obtain consent, and review the risks and benefits for using side rails (transfer bars) with the resident/resident representative for one (#42) of one resident reviewed for use of bed rails for positioning use out of 21 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to assess and review the risk and benefits for using side rails (transfer bars) prior to the use by Resident #42. Findings include: I. Resident #42 A. Resident status Resident #42, age [AGE], was admitted on [DATE]. According to the January 2023 computerized physician orders (CPO), diagnoses included dementia with agitation, epilepsy, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and acute kidney failure. According to the 11/10/22 minimum data set (MDS) assessment, the resident had severe cognitive impairment with a brief interview for mental status (BIMS) score of two out of 15. The resident had no behaviors. He required extensive assistance for bed…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-01-24 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to two (#54 and #41) residents of five were free from unnecessary psychotropic medications out of 21 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure consents were obtained and contained black box warnings for the usage of psychotropic medications for Resident #54 and #41. Findings include: I. Resident #54 A. Resident status Resident #54, age under 65 years, was admitted on [DATE]. According to the January 2023 computerized physician orders (CPO), the diagnoses included bipolar disorder. The 11/30/22 minimum data set (MDS) assessment revealed the resident was not assessed for cognition and a brief interview for mental status (BIMS) was not done. B. Record review The comprehensive care plan, initiated on 6/14/22, revealed the resident exhibited obsessive and compulsive symptoms, severe manic and psychotic features and impaired decision making abilities. The resident was taking antipsychotic medications and antidepressant medications for…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-01-24 · tag F0849 — isolatedArrange for the provision of hospice services or assist the resident in transferring to a facility that will arrange for the provision of hospice services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure that the hospice services provided meet professional standards and principles that applied to individuals providing services in the facility for one (#42) of two residents reviewed for hospice services out of 21 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Have a written agreement for Resident #42 that included both the most recent hospice plan of care and a description of the services furnished by the long term care (LTC) facility; and, -Ensure that the LTC facility staff provide orientation regarding the policies and procedures of the facility, including patient rights, appropriate forms, and record keeping requirements, to hospice staff furnishing care to LTC residents. Findings include: I. Resident #42 A. Resident status Resident #42, age [AGE], was admitted on [DATE]. According to the January 2023 computerized physician orders (CPO), diagnoses included dementia with agitation, epilepsy, chronic obstructive…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2021-12-02 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — patternProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents had the right to be free from physical abuse for five (#2, #15, #25, #40 and #47) of seven residents out of 26 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure: -Residents #2, #15 and #47 were kept free from abuse by Resident #29; -Resident #40 was kept free from abuse by Resident #9; and, -Resident #25 was kept free from abuse by Resident 40. I. Facility policy and procedure The Abuse policy, last revised November 2019, was provided by the regional health information manager ([NAME]) on 11/29/21 at 12:00 p.m. It read in pertinent part, Providing a safe environment for the resident is one of the most basic and essential duties of our facility. Employees have a unique position of trust with vulnerable residents. This facility promotes an atmosphere of sharing with residents and staff without fear of retribution. Residents must not be subjected to abuse by anyone, including but not limited to facility staff, other…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2021-12-02 · tag F0809 — failed to serve meals on a reasonable schedule — patternEnsure meals and snacks are served at times in accordance with resident’s needs, preferences, and requests. Suitable and nourishing alternative meals and snacks must be provided for residents who want to eat at non-traditional times or outside of scheduled meal times.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, record review, and interviews the facility failed to ensure residents received their meals in a timely manner and the facility failed to have substantial nourishing snacks available. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure: -There were not more than 14 hours between a substantial evening meal and breakfast the following day; and, -Nourishing snacks were offered to residents at bedtime. Findings include: I. Facility policy The Frequency of Meals policy, developed 1/12/16 and reviewed 2020, was provided by the corporate registered dietitian (CRD) on 12/2/21 at 10:57 a.m. It read, in pertinent part, There must be no more than 14 hours between a substantial evening meal and breakfast the following day, except as provided when a nourishing snack is provided at bedtime, up to 16 hours may elapse between a substantial evening meal and breakfast the following day if a resident group agrees to this meal span, and a nourishing snack is served. The facility must offer snacks at bedtime. II. Meals served greater than 14 hours Posted meal times located on the back of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2021-12-02 · tag F0886 — failed to test for COVID-19 as required — patternPerform COVID19 testing on residents and staff.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, and interviews the facility failed to follow infection control measures to prevent the potential cross contamination of SARS-CoV-2 COVID-19, with two (#2 and #13) of two residents out of 26 sample residents. Specifically, the infection preventionist (IP) failed to wear proper personal protective equipment (PPE), a protective gown, consistently when collecting SARS-C0V-2 COVID-19 specimens from two residents. Findings include: I. Professional reference According to the CDC guidance, Guidance for SARS-CoV-2 Point-of-Care and Rapid Testing, updated 7/8/21, available from:https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/lab/point-of-care-testing.html#anchor_1615506986947, accessed on 12/6/21. It read in pertinent part: Rapid point-of-care tests provide results within minutes (depending on the test) and are used to diagnose current or detect past SARS-CoV-2 infections in various settings, such as: Long-term care facilities and nursing homes. Specimen Collection & Handling of Point-of-Care and Rapid Tests -Proper specimen collection and handling are critical for all…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2021-12-02 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure residents who were unable to carry out activities of daily living received the necessary services to maintain meal assistance for two residents (#13 and #5) of three residents reviewed out of 26 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure Resident #13 and #5 received assistance with meals and fluid intake. Finding include: I. Facility policy The Assistance with Meal policy, revised July 2017, provided by the corporated registered dietitian (CRD) on 12/1/21 at 2:30 p.m., it read in pertinent part; Policy Statement Residents shall receive assistance with meals in a manner that meets the individual needs of each resident. Policy interpretation and implementation Dining room residents: -All residents will be encouraged to eat in the dining room. -Facility staff will serve resident trays and will help residents who require assistance with eating. -Residents who cannot feed themselves will be fed with attention to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2021-12-02 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolatedEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure it was free of medication error rates of five percent or greater for two (#3 and #35) of four residents observed during medication administration. Specifically, there was an error rate of 6.67% percent with two errors out of 30 opportunities for error. Findings include: I. Facility policy and procedure The Medication Administration policy, revised 11/26/19, was provided by the corporate quality assurance nurse (CQAN) on 12/3/21 at 11:38 a.m. It read, in pertinent part, Medications are administered in accordance with written orders of the attending physician or physician or physician extender (an agent of the physician or licensed healthcare provider). II. Observation and interview of medication errors A. Resident #3 Licensed practical nurse (LPN) #1 was observed preparing and administering medication to Resident #3 on 12/1/21 at 6:29 a.m. The resident's orders included Docusate Sodium (stool softener) one tablet give 100 mg (milligram) by mouth two times a day for constipation, ordered 5/4/15. While…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
$8,281 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $8,281 — penalty dated 2025-02-26
Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to VIVAGE SENIOR LIVING — 6 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 3 of 5 | 3.5 | -0.5 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 2 of 5 | 2.5 | -0.5 vs chain |
| Staffing | 4 of 5 | 3.0 | +1.0 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 5.0 | ≈ chain avg |
The other 5 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.5★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BRAMMEIER, JOHN | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE OFFICER | 25% | since 04/01/2015 |
| MOSKOWITZ, JAY | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE OFFICER | 75% | since 04/01/2015 |
| DEREGO, PETER | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | — | since 05/01/2016 |
| KORETKE, MARY | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | — | since 01/04/2010 |
| PINON MANAGEMENT, LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 12/31/2011 |
| QP HEALTH CARE SERVICES LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 04/01/2024 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 8 rows in the source record cover these 6 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
2 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
About 98% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $260K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in CO
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Colorado Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 065347. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2024-05-15, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →
Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →
Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.