Durango Health And Rehabilitation
2911 Junction St, Durango, CO 81301 · For profit - Corporation · 133 certified beds · (970) 247-2215 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (31% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
- CMS has flagged it for abuse
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Mar 2026
- it has citations for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0565, F0567)
- it has 2 actual-harm citations
- a high number of inspection citations overall (48) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its payroll- and facility-reported staffing and quality-measure scores sit well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (1/5)
- 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 | 1 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 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 | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 4 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 2 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 | 8.3% | 13.4% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 6.4% | 4.7% | 5.4% | worse |
| 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 | 2.6% | 1.4% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 11.9% | 8.8% | 6.5% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 1.8% | 3.4% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 7.4% | 13.3% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 7.8% | 11.5% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 83.1% | 94.7% | 95.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 5.4% | 3.4% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 16.0% | 21.2% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 25.0% | 20.0% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 2.7% | 1.6% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 39.8% | 75.6% | 79.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 19.0% | 20.3% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 15.3% | 12.1% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.22 | 1.38 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.18 | 1.74 | 1.80 | better |
§ 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.
58.4% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 121 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 87.0% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 77 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.51 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 82% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 7% 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 | 58.4%CMS range 52.1–65.5 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | better than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 9.9%CMS range 6.6–14.0 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 87.0% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 77.9% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 61.0% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 95.2% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison 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 | 94.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.9% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 2.8% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 5.9%CMS range 3.1–9.7 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.84 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this 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 133 beds and averages 86.0 residents a day — about 65% occupied, or roughly 47 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. 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 2.90 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.78 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.36 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 3.06 on weekdays — 18% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.89 to 0.52 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 31% is below 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 more than at the previous inspection — worsening. 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.
48 citations, most serious first. The 12 most serious are shown; the remaining 36 are one tap away and print in full.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2021-11-11 · 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 prevent pressure ulcers from developing for two (#52 and #51) of five residents reviewed for pressure ulcers out of 34 sample residents. Resident #52 was admitted to the facility with intact skin, and no pressure ulcers, and developed multiple areas of skin breakdown to her buttocks, perineal area, heels and ankles. The facility failed to consistently and accurately assess and monitor the resident's skin and provide adequate pressure-relieving interventions. As a result, Resident #52 developed multiple pressure areas, some of which had healed. Her skin breakdown as of 11/11/21 included two unstageable pressure ulcers to her heel, irritated and reddened areas to her thigh from the strap that held her catheter tubing in place, irritation to her nose and ears from her oxygen nasal cannula and tubing. Resident #52 said she experienced discomfort, soreness and burning as a result of pressure areas acquired at the facility. Resident #51 was…
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 · Gcited before2021-11-11 · 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 the facility provided adequate supervision and monitoring for two (#38,#72) residents of six residents reviewed for falls and accidents out of 34 sample residents. Resident #38 who had severe cognitive deficits and resided on the facility's memory care unit (MCU), resulting in four falls in four months. One of the falls, which occurred on 8/4/21, resulted in harm to the resident. Due to a deep laceration to her right outer hand, Resident #38 required transport to the local emergency room for stitches. The facility also failed to provide supervision, monitoring and education to staff to prevent Resident #38 from eloping from the MCU's secured patio via a gate on 10/4/21, which led to the resident sustaining another fall in the community while away from the facility. The facility failed to thoroughly investigate and document every fall Resident #38 sustained in IDT meetings, including adding new and effective fall interventions to the resident's…
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 before2026-03-31 · 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 record review, observations and interviews, the facility failed to ensure residents were kept free from abuse for one (#3) of six residents reviewed for abuse out of six sample residents.Specifically, the facility failed to protect Resident #3 and Resident #4 from physical abuse toward each other. Findings include:I. Facility policy and procedure The Abuse Prevention and Reporting Guidelines policy, revised June 2025, was provided by the interim nursing home administrator (NHA) on 3/31/26 at 5:07 p.m. The policy read in pertinent part, Residents will be free from verbal abuse, physical abuse, mental abuse, sexual abuse, involuntary seclusion, neglect, and exploitation. Residents will not be subjected to abuse by anyone, including, but not limited to, facility staff, other residents, consultants, or volunteers, staff or other agencies serving the residents, family members or legal guardians, friends, or other individuals. Any staff member who has reasonable cause to believe or reason to suspect any…
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 before2025-12-09 · 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 observations, record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure an environment free of accident hazards for one (#1) of three residents reviewed for accidents/hazards out of three sample residents.Specifically, the facility failed to prevent an elopement for Resident #1 on 9/16/25.Findings include:Record review and interviews confirmed the facility corrected the deficient practice prior to the onsite investigation on 12/8/25, resulting in the deficiency being cited as past noncompliance with a corrective action date of 10/1/25.I. Elopement incident on 9/16/25Resident #1 who was at risk for elopement, required distractions from wandering and structured activities.On 9/16/25 at 12:45 p.m. Resident #1 was observed at the nurses' station. At approximately 1:00 p.m. a certified nurse aide (CNA) noticed Resident #1 had received a room tray for lunch but the CNA was unable to locate the resident in his bedroom. At approximately 1:13 p.m. the nurse manager notified the interdisciplinary team (IDT) 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 · Dcited before2025-02-04 · tag F0552 — isolatedEnsure that residents are fully informed and understand their health status, care and treatments.
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 inform the resident or consult with the residents representative regarding a change in the resident's treatment for one (#1) of three residents reviewed out of five sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to notify Resident #1's medical durable power of attorney (MDPOA) of a medication change. Findings include: I. Facility policy and procedure The Notification of Physician or Responsible Party policy, revised October 2021, was provided by the nursing home administrator (NHA) on 2/5/25 at 10:35 a.m. It read in pertinent part, It is the policy of this facility to notify the resident, his/her attending physician and/or family/responsible party of changes in the resident's condition and/or status. Unless otherwise instructed by the resident, the nurse supervisor will notify the resident's family/responsible party when: The resident is involved in any accident or incident which results in an injury including injuries of an unknown source; There…
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 · F2024-06-27 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — widespreadEnsure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
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 menus were followed to meet the residents' nutritional needs. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure food items served were consistent with the posted daily menu. Findings include: I. Facility policy and procedure The Menus policy, revised October 2022, was provided by the nursing home administrator (NHA) on 6/27/24 at 7:30 p.m. It read in pertinent part, Menus will be planned in advance to meet the nutritional needs of the residents/patients in accordance with established national guidelines. Menus will be developed to meet the criteria through the use of an approved menu planning guide. Procedures: Menu cycles will include standardized recipes,menus will be served as written, unless a substitution is provided in a response to preference, unavailability of an item or a special meal. Menu substitution log will be maintained on file. II. Resident interviews Resident #58 and Resident #40 were interviewed together on 6/24/24 at 3:04 p.m. Resident #58 said the facility menus offered a decent…
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 before2024-06-27 · tag F0552 — patternEnsure that residents are fully informed and understand their health status, care and treatments.
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 the resident's right to be informed of, and participate in his or her treatment for four (#4, #53, #70 and #41) of four residents out of 45 sample residents reviewed for the right to be informed and make treatment decisions. Specifically, the facility failed to inform Resident #4, Resident #53, Resident #70 and Resident #41 and/or their legal representative of the length of time the residents would be in isolation for COVID-19 and when they would be able to leave their rooms. Findings include: I. Facility policy and procedure The Changes In Resident Condition policy, dated 2/29/24, was provided by the nursing home administrator (NHA) on 6/27/24 at 7:29 p.m. It read in pertinent part, Purpose: the resident, attending physician and legal representative or interested family member are notified when changes in condition or certain events occur. Changes of condition are communicated from shift to shift through the 24 hour report management system.…
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 · E2024-06-27 · tag F0582 — patternGive residents notice of Medicaid/Medicare coverage and potential liability for services not covered.
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 inform three (#23, #81 and #82) of three residents reviewed for beneficiary notices out of 45 sample residents in a timely manner of changes to their services covered by Medicare. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Ensure Resident #23's Notice of Medicare Non-Coverage (NOMNC) included the last covered day and the appeal information; and, -Ensure Resident #81 and Resident #82 were provided a NOMNC letter upon changes to their Medicare coverage. Findings include: I. Resident #23 A. Resident status Resident #23, age greater than 65, was admitted on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. According to the June 2024 computerized physician orders (CPO), diagnoses included hemiplegia (condition that causes partial or complete paralysis on one side of the body, usually due to brain damage) and hemiparesis (symptom of the brain or nerve condition that causes partial weakness or an inability to move one side of the body) following cerebral infarction disrupted…
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 before2024-06-27 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — patternEnsure 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 observations, record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure an environment free from risk of accident hazards for four (#7, #27, #11 and #22) of five residents out of 45 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Ensure neurological checks were completed appropriately for Resident #7 following an unwitnessed fall; -Ensure Resident #7's fall care plan was reviewed and new interventions were added following an unwitnessed fall; -Ensure Resident #27 was appropriately assessed for self-administration of a wart removal medication and eye drops; -Ensure a safety assessments was completed for Resident #27 to determine if she was safe to use a hot tea kettle with a heating element in her room; -Ensure a safety assessment was completed for Resident #11 to determine if he was safe to use a space heater in his room; and, -Ensure a safety assessment was completed for Resident #22 to determine if he was safe to use a coffee maker with a heating element in his room. Findings include: 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 before2024-06-27 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — patternEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
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 it was free of a medication error rate of five percent (%) or greater. Specifically, the medication administration observation error rate was 10.34%, or three errors out of 29 opportunities for error. Finding include: I. Professional reference According to [NAME], P.A., [NAME], A.G., et.al., Fundamentals of Nursing, 10 ed. (2020), E.[NAME], St. Louis Missouri, pp. 606-607, retrieved on 7/9/24, Take appropriate actions to ensure the patient receives medication as prescribed and within the times prescribed and in the appropriate environment. Professional standards such as nursing scope and standards of practice apply to the activity of medication administration. To prevent medication errors, follow the seven rights of medication administration consistently every time you administer medications. Many medication errors can be linked in some way to an inconsistency in adhering to these seven rights: 1. The right medication 2. 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 before2024-06-27 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — patternEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interviews and observations, the facility failed to consistently serve food that was palatable, attractive and at a safe and appetizing temperature. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure resident food was served at palatable temperatures. Findings include: I. Facility policy and procedure The Food: Quality and Palatability policy, revised February 2023, was received by the nursing home administrator (NHA) on 6/27/24 at 7:30 p.m. It read in pertinent part, Food will be prepared by methods that can serve nutritive value, flavor and appearance. Food will be palatable, attractive and served at a safe and appetizing temperature. Proper (safe and appetizing) temperature: food should be at the appropriate temperature as determined by the type of food to ensure residents satisfaction and minimize the risk for scalding and burns. II. Resident group interview Six alert and oriented Resident's (#27, #37, #63, #32, #64 and #15), who were identified as alert and oriented per the facility and assessment, were interviewed in a group meeting on 6/26/24 at 10:00 a.m. Resident #27 and…
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 · E2024-06-27 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
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 maintain an infection control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary and comfortable environment to help prevent the possible development and transmission of infectious diseases. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Ensure housekeeping staff changed gloves and performed hand hygiene consistently when appropriate; -Ensure housekeeping staff properly sanitized resident rooms; -Dispose of contaminated medication pass water cups; -Offer hand hygiene to residents before meals; and, -Implement an effective water management plan. Findings include: I. Housekeeping failures A. Professional reference The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Environment Cleaning Procedures, (revised 3/19/24) was retrieved on 7/9/24 from https://www.cdc.gov/healthcare-associated-infections/hcp/cleaning-global/appendix-c.html. It read in pertinent part, High-Touch Surfaces: The identification of high-touch surfaces and items in each patient care…
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 36 citations
- Potential for harm · E2024-06-27 · tag F0947 — failed to train nurse aides adequately — patternEnsure nurse aides have the skills they need to care for residents, and give nurse aides education in dementia care and abuse prevention.
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) received the required 12 hours of training per year. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Ensure a system was in place to track CNA training to ensure they met the requirements; and, -Ensure CNA #9 and CNA #10 received the required 12 hours of training per year. Findings include: I. Record review A review of the CNA training records was completed on 6/27/24 at 2:00 p.m. -CNA #9's training records documented CNA #9 received seven hours of training in the previous calendar year. -CNA #10's training records documented CNA #10 received eight hours of training in the previous calendar year. II. Staff interviews The staff development coordinator (SDC) was interviewed on 6/27/24 at 4:04 p.m. The SDC said she did not have a system in place to monitor the CNAs yearly training. She said the CNAs were required to receive 12 hours of training per year. She said CNA #9 received seven hours of training in the calendar year and CNA #10 received eight hours of training in the calendar year, which did…
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 · D2024-06-27 · tag F0567 — failed to protect residents' money held by the home — isolatedHonor the resident's right to manage his or her financial affairs.
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 that the personal funds accounts were managed adequately for two (#2 and #30) of three residents reviewed for personal funds out of 45 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to notify Resident #2 and Resident #30, who were Medicaid funded, or their legal representative, when the resident's personal funds account reached $200.00 less than the eligibility resource limit for one person. Findings include: I. Record Review A. Resident #2 A review of the facility's current trust account on 6/27/24 revealed Resident #2 had $2,354.81 in her account, which was $354.81 dollars over the allotted $2000.00 eligibility limit for Medicaid funded residents. -There was no documentation to indicate the facility had notified Resident #2 or her legal representative when her personal funds account reached $200 less than the eligibility resource limit. B. Resident #30 A review of the facility's current trust account on 6/27/24 revealed Resident #30 had $3683.41in his account, which was $1,683.41 over the allotted $2000.00…
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 before2024-06-27 · 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 record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure three (#42, #52 and #68) of five residents reviewed for abuse out of 45 sample residents were kept free from abuse. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Protect Resident #42 from physical abuse by Resident #25; and, -Protect Resident #52 and Resident #68 from physical abuse by Resident #24. Findings include: I. Facility policy and procedure The Abuse Policy, dated 5/3/23, was provided by the nursing home administrator (NHA) on 6/27/24 at 7:30 p.m. It read in pertinent part, Community does not condone resident abuse and shall take every precaution possible to prevent resident abuse by anyone, including other residents. Residents have the right to be free from abuse. This includes physical abuse. Providing a safe environment for the resident is one of the most basic and essential duties of our facility. Resident abuse is defined as the willful Infliction of injury of a resident resulting in physical harm or pain and mental anguish. Physical…
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 before2024-06-27 · 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 observation and interviews, the facility failed to ensure that professional standards of practice were followed during medication administration for three (#67, #26 and #29) of nine residents reviewed out of 45 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Ensure medications and insulin supplies, including sharps, were not left at the bedside; -Ensure medications were not dispensed and stored in medication cups in a nurse's pocket; and, -Ensure medications were not contaminated by placing dispensed medication back into the original bottle. Findings include: I. Facility policy and procedure The Medication Administration policy, dated 2/29/24, was provided by the nursing home administrator (NHA) on 6/27/24 at 7:29 p.m. It read in pertinent part, Resident medications are administered in an accurate, safe, timely and sanitary manner. Do not leave medications with the resident. Follow the medication/pharmacy guidelines for storage. II. Resident #67 A. Resident status Resident #67, age less than…
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 before2024-06-27 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — isolatedProvide activities to meet all resident's needs.
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 one (#57) of six residents reviewed for activities out of 45 sample residents received an ongoing program of activities designed to meet needs and interests, and promote physical, medical and psychosocial well-being. Specifically, Resident #57 was not provided with meaningful activities or one-to-one activity staff visits per her individualized plan of care. Findings include: I. Resident #57 A. Resident status Resident #57, age less than 65, was admitted on [DATE]. According to the June 2024 computerized physician orders (CPO), diagnoses included non-ischemic myocardial injury (non-traumatic injury to the heart), acute on chronic diastolic (congestive) heart failure, hemiplegia (paralysis on one side of the body) and hemiparesis (weakness on one side of the body) following a cerebral infarction (stroke) affecting the left non-dominant side and type 2 diabetes mellitus with diabetic chronic kidney disease. The 5/27/24 minimum data…
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 · D2024-06-27 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
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 two (#58 and #67) of two sample residents received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice and the comprehensive person-centered care plan out of 45 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Notify the physician for high blood sugar readings for Resident #58; and, -Consistently monitor blood sugars according to the physician's order for Resident #67. Findings include: I. Facility policy and procedure The Diabetic Management policy, dated 3/19/24, was provided by the nursing home administrator (NHA) on 6/27/24 at 7:29 p.m. It read in pertinent part, Diabetic management involves both preventative measures and treatment of complications. The interdisciplinary team evaluates the diabetic resident and implements a plan of care: to ensure orders are received and are accurate related to blood glucose monitoring and anti-diabetic agents. Blood glucose orders should include parameters to follow in…
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 before2024-06-27 · 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 ensure one (#57) of five residents reviewed for pressure injuries out of 45 sample residents received care consistent with professional standards of practice to prevent pressure injuries. Specifically the facility failed to implement timely interventions to prevent Resident #57 from developing a Stage 2 pressure injury to her right lateral ankle on 5/25/24 and to prevent the potential for further pressure injuries to occur. Findings include: I. Professional reference According to the National Pressure Injury Advisory Panel, European Pressure Injury Advisory Panel and Pan Pacific Pressure Injury Alliance Prevention and Treatment of Pressure Injuries: Clinical Practice Guideline, third edition, [NAME] Haesler (Ed.), EPUAP/NPIAP/PPPIA (2019), retrieved from https://www.internationalguideline.com/guideline on 7/1/24, Pressure ulcer classification is as follows: Category/Stage 1: Nonblanchable Erythema (discoloration of the skin that does not…
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 · D2024-06-27 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolatedProvide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for 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 record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure one (#45) of two residents with limited range of motion received appropriate treatment and services out of 45 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to offer restorative nursing services as recommended by physical therapy to prevent decline in physical function for Resident #45. Findings include: I. Professional Reference According to the American Association of Post-Acute Nursing (AAPACN) Guidelines for Restorative Nursing Programs, retrieved on 7/1/24 from aapacn.org/restorative-programs-guide/, The risk for functional decline in long term care residents is a serious issue that often leads to falls, pressure ulcers/injuries, weight loss, depression, and other negative outcomes. To ensure quality outcomes and to comply with federal regulation, nursing facilities must have a comprehensive and effective restorative therapy program that encourages each resident's highest level of function. II. Resident #45 A. Resident status Resident…
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 · D2024-06-27 · 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 provide necessary respiratory care consistent with professional standards of practice in coordination with the resident plan of care for two (#4 and #3) out of four residents reviewed for respiratory care out of 45 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Ensure Resident #4 received supplemental oxygen therapy per the physician's orders; and, -Ensure Resident #3 could safely and appropriately perform her tracheostomy care independently. Findings include: I. Supplemental oxygen failure A. Professional reference According to [NAME], B. B. (2022, November 23). Oxygen saturation, retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK525974/ on 7/8/24, Cyanosis (bluish discoloration) may not develop until oxygen saturation reaches about 67%. As such, pulse oximetry is extremely useful because the signs and symptoms of hypoxemia may not be visible on physical examination. There is no set standard of oxygen saturation where…
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 · D2024-06-27 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such 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 interviews and record review, the facility failed to manage pain in a manner consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan and the resident's goals and preferences for three (#57, #58, #11) of three residents reviewed for pain out of 45 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure as needed (PRN) pain medications had established parameters for Resident #57, Resident #58 and Resident #11. Findings include: I. Professional reference The American Medical Directors Association (AMDA) The Society for Post-Acute and Long-Term Care Medicine Pain in the Post-Acute and Long-Term Care Setting Clinical Practice Guideline. [NAME], MD (2021) was retrieved on 7/7/24 from https://paltc.org/sites/default/files/2024-02/PainManagement2021CPGFinal.pdf. It read in pertinent part, PRN doses are offered or considered at specified intervals and given as needed, requested, or determined to be indicated. When several options for administering analgesics are…
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 · D2024-06-27 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolatedEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
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, record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure one (#67) of nine residents out of 45 sample residents were free from significant medication errors. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure Resident #67 was administered the correct insulin. Findings include: I. Professional reference According to [NAME], P.A., [NAME], A.G., et.al., Fundamentals of Nursing, 10 ed. (2020), E.[NAME], St. Louis Missouri, pp. 606-607, retrieved on 7/9/24, Take appropriate actions to ensure the patient receives medication as prescribed and within the times prescribed and in the appropriate environment. Professional standards such as nursing scope and standards of practice apply to the activity of medication administration. To prevent medication errors, follow the seven rights of medication administration consistently every time you administer medications. Many medication errors can be linked in some way to an inconsistency in adhering to these seven rights: 1. The right medication 2. The right dose…
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 before2024-06-27 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure 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
Based on observations and interviews, the facility failed to ensure medications and biologicals were properly stored and labeled in accordance with professional standards in two of six medication carts and one of two medication storage rooms. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Ensure medications were properly labeled with open dates; and, -Ensure expired medications were removed from the medication cart and storage rooms. Findings include: I. Professional reference The United States Food and Drug Administration (USFDA) (2/8/21) Don't Be Tempted to Use Expired Medicines, retrieved on 7/2/24 from https://www.fda.gov/drugs/special-features/dont-be-tempted-use-expired-medicines. It read in pertinent part, Expired medical products can be less effective or risky due to a change in chemical composition or a decrease in strength. Certain expired medications are at risk of bacterial growth and sub-potent antibiotics can fail to treat infections, leading to more serious illnesses and antibiotic resistance. Once the expiration date has passed there is no guarantee that the medicine will be…
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 · D2024-06-27 · tag F0805 — failed to prepare food in a form residents can eat — isolatedEnsure each resident receives and the facility provides food prepared in a form designed to meet individual needs.
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 one (#50) out of one resident reviewed for mechanically altered diets out of 45 sample residents received food prepared in a form designed to meet her needs. Specifically, the facility failed to provide Resident #50 the correct mechanically-altered diet as prescribed. Findings include: I. Facility policy and procedure The Diet and Nutrition Care Manual- Chapter two: Consistency alterations, revised in 2019, was provided by the dietary consultant (DC) on 6/27/24 at 12:02 p.m. It read in pertinent part, Dysphagia advanced diets: Vegetables included cooked, tender, chopped, shredded; protein foods included chopped or ground as tolerated. To achieve optimal intake, diets should be planned with the individual's preferences in mind. II. Resident # 50 A. Resident status Resident #50, age [AGE], was admitted on [DATE]. According to the June 2024 computerized physician orders (CPO), diagnoses included Parkinson's disease (disorder of 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 · D2024-06-27 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard 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 record review and interviews, the facility failed to maintain medical records on each resident that were accurately documented for one (#78) of one resident out of 45 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure Medical Orders for Scope of Treatment (MOST) forms were not destroyed when residents were discharged from the facility. Findings include: I. Facility policy and procedure The Advanced Directives policy and procedure, dated [DATE], was provided by the nursing home administrator (NHA) on [DATE] at 4:24 p.m. It revealed in pertinent part, The resident or legal responsible party will be provided with written information that explains their rights under law to give informed consent and to either refuse or accept health care and treatment. All advanced directives forms shall be kept in a binder at the nurses station. II. Resident #78 A. Resident status Resident #78, age [AGE], was admitted on [DATE] and passed away on [DATE]. According to the [DATE] computerized physician orders…
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 · E2024-03-07 · tag F0565 — failed to support the resident council — patternHonor the resident's right to organize and participate in resident/family groups in the facility.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and resident interviews, the facility failed to promptly address and attempt to resolve resident group complaints and grievances concerning issues of resident care and life in the facility that were important to the residents. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Ensure food was constantly palatable or available as requested; and, -Ensure residents felt their concerns with food temperatures were timely corrected. Findings include: I. Facility policy and procedure The Resident Group Grievance policy, dated 11/15/23, was provided by the nursing home administrator (NHA) on 3/7/24 at 1:35 p.m. The policy identified the facility would respond promptly to grievances. The grievances identified in a resident group meeting would be brought back up under old business as the group approves. The Statement of Resident Rights, undated, was provided by the nursing home administrator (NHA) on 3/7/24 at 1:35 p.m. The statement read the facility must make prompt efforts to resolve grievances. II. Resident interviews Resident #7 was interviewed on 3/5/24 at 1:25 p.m. Resident…
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 · E2024-03-07 · 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, interviews and record review, the facility failed to maintain a sanitary, orderly, and comfortable homelike environment for residents in the dining room and an outdoor resident door. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Ensure cigarette butts were properly disposed of and not littered on the ground in a resident outdoor space; and, -Ensure residents in the facility were not subjected to a ceiling that leaked water and in poor condition. Findings include: I. Facility policy The Statement of Resident Rights, undated, was provided by the nursing home administrator (NHA) on 3/7/24 at 1:35 p.m. The statement identified residents had the right to a safe, clean, comfortable environment. The Traditional Tobacco and Electronic Smoking Device policy, dated 5/10/23, was provided by the NHA on 3/7/24 at 1:35 p.m. The policy identified all residents who smoked or desire to smoke at the facility would be assessed under a smoking risk assessment. The resident would then be educated on safe smoking…
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 before2021-11-11 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — patternProvide activities to meet all resident's needs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY VI. Resident #25 A. Resident status Resident #25, age [AGE], was admitted on [DATE]. According to the November 2021 computerized physician orders (CPO), diagnoses included dementia without behavioral disturbances, personal history of transient ischemic attack (TIA), and cerebral infarction without residual deficits. The 9/23/21 minimum data set (MDS) assessment revealed the resident had severe cognitive impairment with a brief interview for mental status (BIMS) score of five out of 15. He required extensive assistance from two or more persons for bed mobility, transfers, toileting, dressing and personal hygiene. He required extensive physical assistance from one person for locomotion on and off the unit. B. Observations and resident interview Resident #25 was interviewed on 11/9/21 at 8:45 a.m. Resident #25 said he was bored to death. He said he missed having people to talk to and has not had activities offered to him inside or outside of his room for awhile. He said he also missed talking to his friends 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 · Ecited before2021-11-11 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — patternEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews and record review, the facility failed to provide food and drinks that were palatable, attractive and served at appetizing temperatures in four of four resident hallways. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Ensure food was prepared in a palatable manner, including over-cooking certain foods, especially meat; -Ensure foods such as green beans were seasoned in a flavorful manner; and -Ensure resident's choices of beverages were being honored. Findings include: I. Facility policy and procedure The Food: Quality and Palatability policy and procedure, revised 9/2017, was provided by the nursing home administrator (NHA) on 11/11/21. It documented the policy was created to ensure food would be prepared by methods that conserve nutritive value, flavor and appearance. Food would be palatable, attractive and served at a safe and appetizing temperature. It documented the dining services director and cook (s) were responsible for food preparation. It documented that menu items would be prepared according to the menu, production guidelines and standardized…
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 before2021-11-11 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure each resident was treated with dignity and respect and cared for in a manner and in an environment that promoted maintenance or enhancement of quality of life for three (#58, #65, #17) of six residents reviewed for dignity out of 34 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure Residents #58, #65, and #17 were treated with respect and dignity while receiving care from staff. Findings include: I. Facility policy and procedure A policy for promoting/maintaining resident dignity was provided by the staff development coordinator (SDC) on 11/11/21 at 2:54 p.m. The policy was not dated and read: It is the practice of this facility to protect and promote resident rights and treat each resident with respect and dignity as well as care for each resident in a manner and in an environment, that maintains or enhances resident's quality of life by recognizing each resident's individuality. II. Resident #58 A. Resident status Resident #58,…
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 before2021-11-11 · 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 (#69) of two residents reviewed for abuse out of 34 sample residents was kept free from abuse. Specifically, the facility failed to protect Resident #69 from verbal abuse by registered nurse (RN) #1. Findings include: I. Facility policy and procedure The Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation policy, revised 10/19/21, was provided by the nursing home administrator (NHA) on 11/9/21. It documented that the policy was created to provide protections for the health, welfare and rights of each resident by developing and implementing written policies and procedures that prohibit and prevent abuse, neglect, exploitation and misappropriation of resident property. It documented the facility would establish policies and procedures to investigate any such allegations and include training for new and existing staff on activities that constituted abuse, neglect, exploitation and misappropriation of resident property, including reporting procedures and resident…
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 · D2021-11-11 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
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 catheter care in a sanitary manner to prevent infection and promote comfort for one (#52) of one resident reviewed for catheters out of 34 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure nursing staff used the proper technique and products in keeping with professional standards when providing indwelling Foley catheter care for Resident #52. Findings include: I. Facility policy The Catheter Care policy, undated, was provided by the director of nursing (DON) on 11/10/21 at 1:39 p.m. The policy included the following: -Catheter care will be performed every shift and as needed by nursing personnel. -Empty drainage bags when bag is half-full or every 3 to 6 hours. -Compliance guidelines for catheter care: Gently separate the labia to expose the urinary meatus. Wipe from front to back with a clean cloth moistened with water and perineal cleaner (soap). Use a new part of the cloth or different cloth for each side. With a…
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 · F2019-08-21 · 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 minimize the risk for foodborne illness in a highly susceptible population in one of one facility kitchen. Specifically, the facility failed to follow industry standards for: -Proper hand hygiene and glove use; -Properly date marking and discarding expired foods; and -Ensuring stored utensils and dishware were dry and clean. Cross reference F802, sufficient and competent dietary support personnel. Findings include: I. Hand hygiene and glove use A. Professional references According to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Food Code (2017), pp. 48-50, foodservice staff shall use the following handwashing procedures: -Rinse under clean, running warm water; -Apply an amount of cleaning compound recommended by the cleaning compound manufacturer; -Rub together vigorously for at least 10 to 15 seconds while paying particular attention to removing soil from underneath the fingernails and creating friction on the surfaces of the hands and arms fingertips, and areas between the fingers; -Thoroughly rinse under…
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 · F2019-08-21 · tag F0867 — failed to act on quality-improvement findings — widespreadSet up an ongoing quality assessment and assurance group to review quality deficiencies and develop corrective plans of action.
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 develop and implement appropriate quality assurance and performance improvement (QA/QAPI) plans of action to correct identified quality deficiencies, potentially affecting all the residents in the facility. Findings include: I. Failure to prevent repeat citations Cross-reference F550, (resident rights/exercise of rights), F689 (accident hazards), F761 (label/store drugs and biologicals), F804 (nutritive value/appearance, palatable foods), and F812, (food procurement, store/prepare/serve-sanitary). These deficiencies were cited previously during a recertification survey ending 10/4/18. Although the facility corrected the deficiencies, based on the findings below, the facility had not maintained compliance with these regulatory requirements with the additional failures of self-determination, advanced directives, personal privacy and confidentiality, minimum data set (MDS) quarterly assessments, pre-admission screening and resident review (PASARR), care plan timing and revision, services provided met…
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 before2019-08-21 · 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, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure dignified care for seven of seven (#98, #45, #24, #256, #44, #52, and #83) residents reviewed for dignity of 46 sample residents, and several residents who actively participated in resident council. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Ensure residents were spoken to in a dignified, respectful manner; -Provide resident cares with dignity; and -Pass medications in a dignified manner. Residents used words such as rude, condescending, undignified and hateful to describe how some staff treated them. Residents said as a result they felt, as stated in their words, bad, angry, invisible, weird, and like I'm nobody. Findings include: I. Facility policy and procedure The facility's Resident Dignity & Personal Privacy policy, revised June 2007, provided by the district director of clinical services (DDCS) on 8/21/19 at 1:20 p.m. read, the facility provided care for residents in a manner that respects and enhances each resident's dignity, individuality, and right to personal privacy. Each resident's right 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 · E2019-08-21 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — patternHonor 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 observations, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to honor bathing, food and snack preferences for one (#256) of two residents reviewed for choices, and for residents who resided on the secured unit and main living area of the facility, out of 46 sample residents. Specifically, the facility: -Failed to offer and provide bathing opportunities for Resident #256; and -Failed to offer and provide food and snack preferences for the residents who resided on the secured unit and main living area of the facility. Findings include: I. Bathing choices A. Facility policy and procedure The Resident Rights policy and procedure, dated February 2017, was provided by the director of nurses (DON) on 8/21/19 at 3:51 p.m. It documented the facility protected and promoted the rights of each resident and ensured residents enjoyed freedom of choice regarding their daily existence and healthcare, to the maximum extent possible. B. Resident #256 status Resident #256, age [AGE], was admitted on [DATE]. According…
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 before2019-08-21 · 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
Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure safe narcotic and vaccine storage for four of six medication carts and two of two medication storage refrigerators. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Ensure double locking of schedule II narcotics; and -Store vaccines in a non-dormitory style refrigerator. Findings include: I. Facility policy and procedure The facility Storage and Expiration Dating of Medications, Biological, Sringes, and Needles policy, revised October 2016, provided by the director of nursing (DON) on 8/21/19 at 1:20 p.m. read to store all drugs and biologicals in locked compartments, including the storage of schedule II-V medications in separately locked, permanently affixed compartments, permitting only authorized personnel to have access. The facility should ensure that medications and biologicals for each resident are stored at their appropriate temperature according to the united states pharmacopeia guidelines for temperature ranges. Facility staff should monitor the temperature of vaccines twice a day for refrigeration…
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 · E2019-08-21 · tag F0802 — failed to prepare enough nourishing food — patternProvide sufficient support personnel to safely and effectively carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, staff interviews and record review, the facility failed to employ sufficient dietary support staff to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition services department in one of one facility kitchen. Specifically, insufficient numbers of adequately trained food and nutrition staff contributed to prolonged wait times for meals and overall decreased resident satisfaction with dining. Cross reference F804, food palatability. Findings include: I. Food production and service The facility had one production kitchen. Posted dining room meal times were: Breakfast: 8:00 a.m. Lunch: 12:00 p.m. Supper: 6:00 p.m. Two resident hallways were served room trays prior to the posted dining room meal times and two hallways were served following dining room service. There were no scheduled or posted times for the delivery of room trays. Dietary staff prepared resident plates and trays for delivery to dining rooms or resident rooms by nursing staff. II. Facility policies and procedures A. The Food and Nutrition Services policy and procedure, revised February 2017, was provided…
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 before2019-08-21 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — patternEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
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 consistently provide palatable foods for 10 (#45, #49, #73, #64, #24, #12, #37, #98, #91, #90) of 46 sample residents, residents who participated in resident council, and potentially all facility residents. Cross reference F802, sufficient dietary support staff. Findings include: I. Facility policies and procedures A. The Meal Service policy and procedure, revised March 2012, was provided by the nursing home administrator (NHA) on 8/20/19 at 11:20 a.m. The policy stated: Whether the resident meal is served in the dining room or in the resident's room, measures are taken to ensure a positive dining experience. B. The Food and Nutrition Services policy and procedure, revised February 2017, was provided by the nursing home administrator (NHA) on 8/20/19 at 11:20 a.m. The policy stated the facility took steps to ensure: -Each resident received received three meals per day at regular times; -Foods were palatable, attractive and at the proper…
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 · D2019-08-21 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
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 clarify resuscitation choices and document them accurately in the medical record for one (#305) of one resident reviewed for advanced directives of 46 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure the current physician orders (CPO) for Resident #305's code status accurately reflected the resident's choices for advanced directives. Findings include: A. Facility policy and procedure The Advanced Directives policy and procedure, revised February 2017, was provided by the district director of clinical services (DDCS) on [DATE] at 1:15 p.m. It documented the facility was responsible for notification of the resident's physician of a resident's choices for resuscitation, and was responsible to obtain and enter the information in the electronic health record (EHR). B. Resident #305 status Resident #305, age [AGE], was admitted on [DATE]. According to the [DATE] CPO, diagnoses included psoas muscle abscess, pneumonia and type two diabetes. 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 · D2019-08-21 · tag F0638 — isolatedAssure that each resident’s assessment is updated at least once every 3 months.
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 timeliness of minimum data set (MDS) assessments for one (#2) of two residents reviewed of 46 sample residents. Specifically, more than 120 days elapsed since Resident #2's most recent quarterly MDS. Findings include: I. Facility policy and procedure The Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) Process policy, revised February 2017, provided by the facility on 8/21/19, included: The facility must assess a resident using the quarterly review instrument . at least once every 3 months . II. Resident #2 Resident #2, age [AGE], was admitted on [DATE]. According to the 3/17/19 MDS assessment, diagnoses included anemia, hypertension and Parkinson's disease. The resident needed extensive assistance with activities of daily living. Record review on 8/21/19 revealed no evidence of a quarterly MDS assessment for Resident #2 since 3/17/19, more than five months before. III. Staff interviews The care management director and MDS coordinator were 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 · D2019-08-21 · tag F0645 — isolatedPASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
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 a preadmission screening/resident review (PASRR) Level II screen was completed for one (#17) of one resident reviewed for PASRR of 46 sample residents. Findings include: I. Facility policy and procedure The Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) policy, dated November 2017, was provided by the nursing home administrator (NHA) on 8/19/19 at 3:35 p.m. It documented pre-admission screening was coordinated for residents who were identified as having a mental disorder and recommendations from the PASRR Level II determination and the PASRR evaluation report were to be incorporated in the resident's assessment, care planning and transitions of care. The purpose of the policy was to ensure individuals with mental disorders received the care and services they needed. II. Resident #17 A. Resident status Resident #17, age [AGE], was admitted on [DATE]. According to the August 2019 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.
- Potential for harm · D2019-08-21 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
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 honor the residents' right to participate in the development and implementation of the person centered care plan process for two (#12 and #64) of two residents reviewed for participation in care planning of 46 sample residents. Specifically, the facility: -Failed to invite Resident #12 and #64 to their care planning conferences; and -Failed to hold quarterly care conferences for Resident #12. Findings include: I. Policy and procedure The Care Plan Conference policy and procedure, dated November 2017, was provided by the director of nurses (DON) on 8/21/19 at 3:51 p.m. It documented the interdisciplinary team (IDT), in conjunction with the resident and/or resident representative, would develop the plan of care based on the comprehensive assessment. The care plan conference was held to identify resident needs and establish attainable goals. Since the comprehensive care plan must be developed within seven days of completion of the comprehensive…
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 before2019-08-21 · 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
Based on observations, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to provide services to meet professional standards of quality, affecting two (#44 and #73) of nine residents reviewed for medication administration of 46 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure medications were handled in a sanitary manner during preparation for Residents #44 and #73. Findings include: I. Professional standard According to the 2009 American Society of Consultant Pharmacist (ASCP), Passing Medications: ASCP's Medication Administration Video Series handout, Tips for Administering Oral Medications, dated 2009, was provided by the nursing home administrator (NHA) on 8/20/19 at 11:22 a.m. It included the following recommendations: When using a standard pill crusher, place the tablet in a mediction cup, place another cup on top, then use the crusher device. This keeps the crushing device clean while preventing medication loss. Wear gloves whenever the handling of a medication is required. II. Facility policy and procedure The Medication Administration policy and procedure,…
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 before2019-08-21 · 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 observations, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to provide adequate supervision to ensure freedom from falls and accidents for two (#40 and #89) of five residents reviewed for accidents and hazards of 46 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure thorough and timely interventions to prevent falls for Resident #89. The facility failed to thoroughly assess and implement all possible fall interventions for Resident #89 in a timely manner, which included using a male certified nurse aide (CNA) for Resident #89's cares, moving the resident closer to the nurses' station to assist with frequent rounding in a timely manner, and ensuring appropriate footwear was maintained consistently. As a result, Resident #89 sustained 13 falls within the previous two months, five falls within the previous week. The resident sustained skin tears, bruising, head and facial injuries, and a visit to the local emergency room, after which the resident continued to fall. The facility further…
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 · D2019-08-21 · 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 maintain acceptable parameters of nutritional status for one (#12) of five residents reviewed for nutrition out of 46 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Adequately assess, monitor, and address the nutritional needs for Resident #12; -Obtain Resident #12's weight when he was readmitted to the facility; and -Identify and assess a weight loss of 8.76 percent (%) over a six-month period for Resident #12. Findings include: I. Facility policy and procedure The Weight Management policy, dated July 2017, was provided by the director of nurses (DON) on 8/21/19 at 3:51 p.m. It included a resident's nutritional status would be monitored on a regular basis to aid in the maintenance of acceptable parameters, such as body weight and protein levels, unless the resident's clinical condition demonstrates this is not possible. Residents are offered a therapeutic diet when there was a nutritional concern. The measurement of weight…
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 before2019-08-21 · 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 a medication error rate of five percent (%) or greater. Specifically, the medication administration observation error rate was 7.69%, or two errors out of 26 opportunities for error. Findings include: A. Facility policy and procedure The Medication Administration policy and procedure, dated June 2008, provided by the nursing home administrator (NHA) on 8/20/19 at 11:22 a.m., included medications were administered in accordance with written orders of the attending physician. For tablet form of medications, when possible, request that the provider pharmacy package tablets already scored for administration. Since unscored tablets may not be accurately broken, their use is discouraged if a suitable alternative is available. Use a tablet-splitter to avoid contact with the tablet if the tablet must be broken in order to administer the proper dose. If applicable and/or prescribed, take vital signs or tests prior to administration of the dose, e.g., pulse with digitalis, blood pressure with…
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
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to THE ENSIGN GROUP — 342 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 | 1 of 5 | 3.2 | -2.2 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 1 of 5 | 2.8 | -1.8 vs chain |
| Staffing | 3 of 5 | 2.7 | +0.3 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 4.4 | -0.4 vs chain |
The other 341 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.2★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 341; lowest-rated first.
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
CMS ownership filings flag an owner of this facility as an investment firm. That’s a fact worth knowing about who ultimately profits from the home. Read the inspection and staffing record above on its own merits.
- ENDURA HEALTHCARE LLC — investment firm · 100.00% share · 5% Or Greater Direct Ownership Interest
Source: CMS SNF ownership filings (PECOS). These flags are self-reported and undercount — federal auditors (GAO) and researchers find CMS captures only a fraction of true private-equity and REIT ties, so the absence of a flag on other homes is not proof they lack investor owners. How investor ownership affects care →
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| GREENBERG, DAVID | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 09/01/2024 |
| MOTT, DELANEY | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 06/21/2025 |
| JORGENSEN, DAVID | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 05/24/2024 |
| BURNAM, SOON | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 05/24/2024 |
| DUNYON, DAVID | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 05/24/2024 |
| KEETCH, CHAD | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 03/01/2011 |
| SATO, AMI | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 09/09/2024 |
| GLC GROUP | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 04/01/2021 |
| PORT, BARRY | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | since 06/21/2025 |
| ENSIGN SERVICES INC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 09/01/2024 |
| SMV DURANGO LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 04/01/2021 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 15 rows in the source record cover these 11 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
3 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 75% 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. 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 065243. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2024-06-27, 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.