Civita Care Northbridge
2875 Main Street, Bridgeport, CT 06606 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 145 certified beds · (203) 336-0232 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (32% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- CMS has flagged it for abuse
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Dec 2025
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- inspectors cited 1 immediate-jeopardy problem — the most serious level
- a high number of inspection citations overall (44) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $148,053 in federal fines (most recent 2026-03-24)
- 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)
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 | 4 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 1 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 | 16.4% | 18.0% | 15.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 2.4% | 6.5% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.7% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 1.3% | 1.5% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 5.0% | 22.3% | 6.5% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 3.9% | 3.5% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 15.6% | 16.4% | 16.1% | typical |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 18.6% | 17.6% | 18.9% | typical |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 93.5% | 93.5% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 3.7% | 4.0% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 23.2% | 24.7% | 21.2% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 14.8% | 17.8% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 1.5% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 55.7% | 69.7% | 79.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 36.4% | 24.3% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 7.8% | 10.7% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.82 | 2.06 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 0.87 | 1.46 | 1.80 | better |
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ 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.
45.2% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 67 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 69.2% 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 26 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 0.26 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 38% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 22% 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 | 45.2%CMS range 33.7–60.2 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 13.0%CMS range 9.5–17.2 | 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 | 69.2% | 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 | 34.6% | 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 | 57.7% | 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 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 | 5.7% | 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 | 6.9%CMS range 3.9–12.4 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.96 | 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 145 beds and averages 121.0 residents a day — about 83% occupied, or roughly 24 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.60 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.42 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.11 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 3.18 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.78 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.48 to 0.27 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 32% 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 fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
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.
44 citations, most serious first. The 14 most serious are shown; the remaining 30 are one tap away and print in full.
- Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2024-06-26 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, clinical record reviews, review of facility documentation, and interviews for 1 of 6 residents at risk for elopement (Resident # 8), the facility failed to implement interventions for a resident identified at risk for elopement. Resident #8 was able to exit the facility without staff knowledge and was found 0.6 miles away from the facility by law enforcement. This failure resulted in a finding of Immediate Jeopardy (IJ). The finding includes: Resident #8's diagnoses included paranoid schizophrenia, dementia, depression, anxiety disorder and psychosis. The clinical record identified Person # 3 as Resident # 8's conservator. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 2/23/2024, indicated Resident #8 as moderately cognitively impaired and noted no wandering behaviors had occurred at the time of the assessment. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 3/14/2024 for at risk of leaving the facility with a desire to go home, noted tendency to cut off wander guard. Interventions included: 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.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2026-03-24 · 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 observations, interviews, policy review, and clinical record review, for 2 of 3 sampled residents (Resident #16 and Resident #121), the facility failed to provide care and services consistent with professional standards of practice and the residents' care plans, as required at S483.25 (F684): (1) for Resident #16, the facility did not ensure ongoing, routine blood glucose monitoring after readmission, did not timely renew orders for blood sugar checks, and did not maintain/document provider orders for insulin administration, resulting in severe hyperglycemia ( HI >600 mg/dL), lethargy, hypoxemia, transfer to the ED, and hospitalization with metabolic encephalopathy; and (2) for Resident #121, the facility failed to develop and implement an individualized, 24 hour positioning plan, evaluate and monitor a custom tilt in space wheelchair, and educate staff on its use despite documented positioning needs and risk for impaired skin integrity. The findings include: 1.Resident #16's 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.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2025-12-02 · 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 clinical record review, facility documentation review, facility policy review, and interviews for one of four residents (Resident #3) reviewed for abuse, the facility failed to ensure the resident was free from mistreatment and failed to ensure adequate supervision of a resident (Resident #1) on one-to-one observation, resulting in the resident hitting Resident #3. The findings include:A. Resident #1 was admitted to the facility during 9/2025 with diagnoses that included dementia, sensorineural hearing loss, esophageal perforation, anxiety, and depression.Record review identified Person #1 was a court appointed Conservator of Person.The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of fifteen out of fifteen (15/15), indicative of being alert and oriented, had no behaviors noted, and ambulated independently. Physician order dated 9/29/2025 directed regular diet with thin liquids.The Resident Care Plan dated 10/7/2025…
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 before2021-12-07 · 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 review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #92) reviewed for accidents, the facility failed to follow the plan of care, facility policy and professional standards related to the use of a gait belt and necessary ambulation assistance to prevent a fall with an injury, additionally, for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for accidents (Resident #22) the facility failed to provide adequate supervision of a resident with an altered mental status who was in possession of smoking material and failed to provide adequate supervision of a resident to prevent an elopement. The findings include: 1. Resident #92 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included seizures, dementia, and paranoid schizophrenia. A physician's order date 10/15/21 directed to transfer the resident via a stand pivot with assistance of 1 staff. The quarterly MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #92 had severely impaired cognition, was always incontinent 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 · E2026-03-24 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews, review of facility documentation, and policy, the facility failed to ensure fans in resident rooms were maintained in a clean manner. The findings include:Observations on 3/16/26 at 11:01 AM ) identified a gray, fuzzy material on the edges of fan blades, bottom of the fan enclosure, and in the grills of fans located in the resident rooms: 411, 412, 415, 416, 417, 418, 419, 420, 422. Fans were used and running in rooms 411, 412, 416, 418 and 419.Observations on 3/17/26 at 9:31 AM identified a gray, fuzzy material on the edges of fan blades, bottom of the fan enclosure, and in the grills of fans located in the resident rooms: 411, 412, 415, 416, 417, 418, 419, 420, 422. Fans were used and running in rooms 411, 412, 415, 417, 418 and 422.3/18/26 at 10:35 AM (3 consecutive days) identified a gray, fuzzy material on the edges of fan blades, bottom of the fan enclosure, and in the grills of fans located in the resident rooms: 411, 412, 415, 416, 417, 418, 419, 420, 422. Fans were used and running in rooms 412, 416, 417, 419, 420, and 422.Interview on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-03-24 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — patternEnsure 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 interviews, review of the clinical record and policy for 1 of 5 sampled residents (Resident #121) reviewed for unnecessary medications, the facility failed to transcribe physician's orders for psychotropic (psychiatric) medications resulting in the medications not being administered for a resident experiencing mood and behavioral issues. The findings include:Resident #121's diagnoses included unspecified dementia with behavioral disturbances, anxiety disorder and adjustment disorder.The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #121 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status score of 11 indicating moderate cognitive impairment, and was dependent on staff for transfers and dressing, had a Resident Mood Interview score of 6 indicating a high likelihood of depression, and had physical behavioral symptoms directed toward others (defined as hitting, kicking, pushing, scratching, grabbing or abusing others sexually) occurring 1-3 days of the week.Review of the Resident Care Plan…
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 · E2026-03-24 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, review of the clinical record, and facility policy for 1 resident (Resident #64) during the initial resident screening process, the facility failed to ensure medications were not left unattended at the resident's bedside, for a resident without a self-administration physician orders and for 1 of 3 medication carts reviewed for medication storage, the facility failed to ensure medications and biologicals were stored according to professional standards and failed to ensure controlled medications were under double locked. The findings include: The findings include: 1.Resident #64's diagnoses included type 2 diabetes mellitus with diabetic neuropathy (nerve pain) and peripheral vascular disease. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #64's short-and long-term memory were okay and further identified the resident as being independent to make decisions regarding tasks of daily life. Resident #64's most recent MDS dated [DATE] was not completed…
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 · D2026-03-24 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolatedHonor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, policy, and interviews, for 1 of 3 sampled residents (Resident #38) reviewed for choices, the facility failed to honor a dependent resident's preference for oral hygiene. The findings include:Resident #38's diagnoses included quadriplegia, contractures of multiple sites and injury of unspecified nerves of the neck.The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #121 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status score of 15 indicating intact cognition and was totally dependent on staff to provide oral hygiene, personal hygiene, and all activities of daily living. The Resident Care Plan dated 1/9/26 and in effect through 3/19/26 Identified Resident #38 had oral /dental health problems due to poor oral hygiene. Interventions directed to brush teeth 3 times daily after meals per the Resident #38's request.A review of the Resident Care Card (Nurse Aid care guide) dated 12/4/25 and in effect through 3/19/26 directed staff to provide Resident #38 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-03-24 · 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, review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for 1 of 3 sampled residents reviewed for food and nutrition (Resident #15) and for the only sampled resident (Resident # 122) reviewed for hydration the facility failed to follow physician's orders for obtaining weights after a significant weight loss and failed to maintain intake and output fluid amounts for residents receiving Intravenous (IV) fluids. The findings include:1. Resident #15 's diagnoses included acute cholecystitis, diabetes, and encephalopathy.The admission Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #15 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 15 indicating no cognitive impairment and required substantial/maximum assistance with bed mobility, total staff assistance with transfers, and was independent with eating. Resident #15's weight was noted to be 177 pounds without a weight loss or gain.The Resident Care Plan dated 2/3/26 identified a potential for impaired…
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 · D2026-03-24 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services 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 clinical record review, facility documentation and policy and interviews for the only sampled resident (Resident #61) reviewed for hemolytic treatments, the facility failed to consistently maintain a fluid restriction according to the physician's orders. The findings include:Resident #61's diagnoses included End Stage Renal Disease (ESRD), cirrhosis of the liver, low sodium, and dependence on hemolytic treatments. The quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #61 was cognitively intact and required substantial/maximum assistance for toileting, bathing, dressing and personal hygiene and set-up assistance for eating and oral care.The Resident Care Plan in effect from 1/11/26 through 3/24/26 identified Resident #61 had a potential for impaired nutritional status due to ESRD on hemolytic treatment. Interventions included to document the percentage of food and fluids consumed, renal diet with thin liquids, and a fluid restriction of 1000 milliliters (ml) daily with the following…
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 · D2026-03-24 · tag F0814 — failed to dispose of garbage properly — isolatedDispose of garbage and refuse properly.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and review of facility policy during a tour of the kitchen, the facility failed to maintain the garbage and refuse storage area in a clean manner. The findings include:During a tour of the garbage and refuse storage area with the Food Service Director (FSD) 3/18/26 at 10:45 AM the following was observed:At the corner of the ramp down to the garbage dumpster area was a pair of used clear gloves inside out and two blue surgical masks on the stone to the left of the rampIn the dumpster area a pair of used clear gloves, a blue surgical mask, and multiple cigarette butts were observed.There were 3 dumpsters in a row, trash dumpster 1, trash dumpster 2, and recycling dumpster 3. The following was observed:The lid and side panel to dumpster #3 was open. A trash bag was visibly coming out of the side of the closed lid on dumpsterMultiple wrappers and pieces of paper were noted scattered around the 2 trash dumpsters to the front, side, and behind. Two wet pieces of cardboard were wedged under dumpster #1. Cigarette butts were scattered around the entire…
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 before2026-03-24 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide 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 observation, review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for 1 of 3 sampled residents (Resident #11) reviewed for a facility acquired Pressure Ulcer (PU), the facility failed to maintain appropriate infection control practices for a dressing change according to the facility policy. The findings include:Resident # 11's diagnoses included a stage 3 Pressure Ulcer (PU) of the coccyx region (lower back, top of buttocks), fracture of the right lower leg, and generalized muscle weakness. The quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #11 was moderately cognitively impaired, required supervision for eating and a substantial amount of assistance for bathing, toileting, and personal care.The Resident Care Plan dated 2/14/26 identified Resident #11 had a PU on the coccyx, required a mechanical lift for transfer, assist of 1 for care, was a fall risk, was staying as a long-term care resident, and was able to consent for themself.An Advance…
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 before2026-03-24 · tag F0947 — failed to train nurse aides adequately — isolatedEnsure 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 review of facility annual training for nursing staff, facility documentation and interviews, the facility failed to ensure the required 12 hours Nurse Aid training was completed. The findings include:Review of the facility's mandatory yearly in-service for 1 out of 5 nurse's aides, the facility failed to ensure that the required 12 hours of in-service training including abuse prevention, dementia care, effective communication, infection control, resident's rights, and behavioral health were provided to staff in 2025.Interview with the Staff Development Nurse (RN #2) on 3/24/26 at 12:12 PM, identified she was unable to locate the required educational in-service documentation and required competencies for NA #3 in the areas of Abuse/Neglect, Resident Rights, Dementia Care, Infection Control, Effective Communication, and Behavioral Health. RN #2 indicated she referred to the requested educational documentation as yearly competencies, and indicated she stored all the nursing staff's competencies into monthly binders located in the Staff Development office. RN #2 indicated she…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-12-02 · 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 clinical record review, facility documentation review, facility policy review, and interviews for one resident (Resident #1) reviewed for resident rights, the facility failed to allow an alert and oriented resident to leave the facility at his/her own will. The findings include: Resident #1's diagnoses included dementia, sensorineural hearing loss, anxiety, and depression. Record review identified Person #1 was a court appointed Conservator of Person. The Resident Care Plan dated 8/29/2025 identified Resident #1 was alert and oriented and can communicate daily needs to staff using a communication board. Interventions directed to encourage Resident #1 to ask questions, and orient to facility and routines. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of fifteen out of fifteen (15/15), indicative of being alert and oriented, and ambulated independently. A physician order dated 8/11/2025 directed Resident #1 may go…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
Show the remaining 30 citations
- Potential for harm · D2025-11-18 · tag F0628 — isolatedProvide the required documentation or notification related to the resident's needs, appeal rights, or bed-hold policies.
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 review of the clinical record, facility documentation, and facility policy, and interviews for one sampled resident (Resident #2) reviewed for discharge, the facility to develop and implement a discharge plan timely. The findings include: Resident #2 had diagnoses that included diabetes mellitus, anxiety, depression, and difficulty walking. The quarterly MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #2 had a BIMS score of fifteen (15), indicative of intact cognition, and was independent with personal care, transfers and ambulation with a cane. The MDS further identified Resident #2 had an active discharge plan with a plan to return to the community and a referral was made to the local contact agency. The RCP dated 9/18/2025 identified Resident #2 was admitted for long term rehab. Interventions directed to encourage to ask questions, orient to facility, and introduce self and function to resident at each interaction. Additional review of the care plan failed to identify a discharge plan. Record review failed 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 · D2025-11-18 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
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 review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for two of three residents (Resident #1 and Resident #2) reviewed for abuse, the facility to develop and implement a comprehensive care plan to address a relationship between the residents. The findings include: Based on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for two of three residents (Resident #1 and Resident #2) reviewed for abuse, the facility to develop and implement a comprehensive care plan to address a relationship between the residents. The findings include: 1. Resident#1 had diagnoses that included paraplegia, anxiety, and depression. The annual [NAME] Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of fifteen (15), indicative of intact cognition, and was independent with wheelchair mobility. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 8/28/2025 identified Resident #1 had a history of trauma with the potential for…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-11-18 · 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 review of the clinical record, facility documentation and facility policy, and interviews for one of three residents (Resident #1) reviewed for abuse, the facility failed to provide adequate supervision to prevent a resident-to-resident sexual incident. The findings include: 1. Resident #1 had diagnoses that included paraplegia, anxiety, and depression. The annual [NAME] Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of fifteen (15), indicative of intact cognition, and was independent with wheelchair mobility. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 8/28/2025 identified Resident #1 had a history of trauma with the potential for traumatization. Interventions directed to encourage express feelings/concerns, support as needed and to provide a safe place. 2. Resident #2 Resident #2 had diagnoses that included anxiety, depression, and difficulty walking. The quarterly MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #2 had a BIMS score of fifteen (15), indicative 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 before2025-05-05 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, facility documentation, and staff interviews for one of three residents (Resident #1) reviewed for accidents, the facility failed to ensure the RN supervisor was notified timely of a change in condition was identified, to ensure an Registered Nurse (RN) assessment was completed timely. The findings include: Resident #1 had a diagnosis of type 2 diabetes, anemia, and Charcot's joint of the left ankle (nerve damage). The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 (alert and oriented/intact cognition) and was independent after set up for showering and independent with transfers. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 2/24/2025 identified an Activities of Daily Living (ADL) deficit. Interventions directed to assist gathering and setting up clothing and toiletries. Facility reportable event form dated 4/12/2025 identified on 4/13/2025 Resident #1 indicated that he needed cream applied to the right leg…
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 before2024-12-19 · 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 observation, review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 1 of 1 resident (Resident # 1) reviewed for verbal communication, the facility failed to protect the Resident from verbal abuse. The findings include: Resident # 1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included Parkinsons Disease, unspecified dementia, and generalized anxiety disorder. The quarterly MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident # 1 had moderate cognitive impairment, was incontinent of bowel and bladder and required assistance with care with activities of daily living. The care plan dated 10/18/2024 identified an ADL deficit. Interventions included the assistance of one for ADLs and transfer via Hoyer lift. The nurse's note dated 12/13/2024 at 1:20 PM identified that a NA was overheard using foul language to the Resident. Review of the facility documentation dated 12/13/2024 identified that the Resident was yelling to get out of bed, NA#1 went into the Residents room 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 · D2024-11-14 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
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 review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 1 sampled Resident (Resident # 1) reviewed for an allegation of abuse, the facility failed to investigate the allegation. The findings include: Resident # 1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included heart failure, weakness and difficulty in walking. The admission MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident # 1 had severely impaired cognition, was frequently incontinent of bowel and bladder and required maximum to total assistance with activities of daily living. The care plan dated 10/14/2024 identified that the Resident was at risk for falls due to the recent admission, decreased endurance/strength and generalized weakness. Interventions included an assist of one with ambulation and rolling walker and instruct to ask for assistance prior to attempting to transfer or ambulate as needed. Review of the nurse's progress note dated 10/30/2024 at 10:05 PM by the DNS, identified that the DNS 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-11-06 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, facility documentation, and staff interviews for two one of four residents (Resident #2) reviewed for abuse, the facility failed to ensure the resident was free from abuse. The findings include: 1. A. Resident #1 had a diagnosis of anxiety, vascular dementia without behavioral disturbance and anxiety. The annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14 indicating intact cognition, was independent with mobility, and had no behaviors. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 8/19/2024 identified Resident #1 had impaired cognition and accusatory behaviors. Interventions directed to decrease visual or auditory stressors. B. Resident #2 had a diagnosis of depressive episodes. The quarterly MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #2 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 which indicated the resident was alert and oriented and had no behaviors. The RCP dated 8/5/2024 identified Resident #2…
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 before2024-11-06 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
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 clinical record review, facility documentation review, and staff interviews for one of four residents (Resident #4) reviewed for abuse, the facility failed to ensure staff reported an allegation of abuse in a timely manner. The findings include: Resident #4 had a diagnosis of adjustment disorder with depressed mood. The quarterly MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #4 had a BIMS score of seven (7) indicating severe cognitive impairment and had no behaviors in the prior seven (7) days. The RCP dated 9/4/2204 identified Resident #4 had verbally inappropriate behaviors. Interventions directed to decrease auditory stressors when over stimulated. The facility incident report dated 10/9/2024 at 11 AM identified a family member reported that Resident #4 stated NA #1 was intentionally aggressive and yelled at Resident #4 to get back to his/her room. The facility summary dated 10/18/2024 identified when NA #1 asked Resident #4 if he could help him/her, the resident did not answer so NA #1 repeated the question.…
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 · Fcited before2024-06-26 · tag F0726 — failed to have competent, trained nursing staff — widespreadEnsure that nurses and nurse aides have the appropriate competencies to care for every resident in a way that maximizes each resident's well being.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the facility Sufficient and Competent Nurse Staffing, facility documentation and interview, the facility failed to ensure competencies were conducted for Nurse Aides and Licensed Nurses to ensure staff was competent to provide care for and meet the needs of all residents. The findings include. An interview and review of facility documentation on 6/20/24 at 9:15 AM with the Administrator indicated mandatory in-service training was completed for all staff for the year of 2022. However, a review of the facility mandatory in servicing identified the facility was unable to provide any competencies for Nurse Aides or licensed nurses for the years of 2022 to present. An interview and review of facility documentation on 6/20/2024 at 2:00 PM with the Administrator found mandatory in servicing completed for all staff during the year of 2023 but was unable to provide any competencies for Nurse Aides or Licensed nurses for the years of 2022 to present. The Administrator indicated although ongoing…
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 · F2024-06-26 · 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 of the kitchen, review of facility documentation, review of policy and interviews, the facility failed to consistently document in the PH (check for the appropriate amount of sanitizer) log for the three-bay sink manual sanitizer. The findings include: On 6/12/2024 at 11:55 AM, a tour of the kitchen with the Dietary Director identified Dietary Aide #1 manually washing pots in the kitchen's three-bay sink. Further observations identified there was a pot submerged in a pink-tinged liquid in the three-bay sink's left-most bay. The Dietary Director indicated pots and pans do not go through the dishwasher and are sanitized in the three-bay sink. An interview with Dietary aide #1 in the presence of the Dietary Director identified s/he was unable to explain or demonstrate the procedure for checking if the sanitizing bay contained the appropriate amount of sanitizer. After prompting from the Dietary Director, Dietary Aide #1 was able to demonstrate how s/he would check the concentration of the sanitizer. However, at the time of the observation Dietary Aide #1 had…
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 · Fcited before2024-06-26 · tag F0947 — failed to train nurse aides adequately — widespreadEnsure 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 — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on review of facility documentation Sufficient and Competent Nurse staffing and interviews, the facility failed to ensure all nurse aides were monitored to ensure they received at least 12 hours of annual in-service training. The findings include. Interview and review of facility document with the Administrator on 6/20/2024 at 2:50PM identified in-servicing for all staff were conducted and many in-servicing sheets were lacked the duration of time of training and who conducted the in-service. The Administrator was unable to locate any tracking/ monitoring for the nurse aides to ensure each received at least 12 hours of annual training. An interview and review of facility documentation on 6/20/2024 at 2:00 PM with the Administrator indicated that although ongoing advertising for the position of staff development coordinator was in place, the facility had not been able to fill the position Staff Development position since March 2023.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-06-26 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — patternEnsure 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 clinical record reviews, facility documentation, policy review and interviews for 2 of 3 residents (Residents #286, #288) observed for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR), the facility failed to maintain a copy of licensed staff CPR certification card per facility practice and failed to complete the Code Blue transcription log per facility practice and policy. The findings included: 1. Resident #286 's diagnoses included pneumonia, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) and asthma. The admission Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #286 was cognitively intact and required maximum assistance for showering and toileting and set up assistance for oral hygiene. The Resident Care Plan dated [DATE] identified Resident #286 had pneumonia. Interventions included administering antibiotics as ordered, encouraging fluids, monitoring pulse oximetry, and providing oxygen as ordered. A physician's order dated [DATE] directed to administer oxygen at 1 liter per minute via nasal cannula…
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 · E2024-06-26 · tag F0678 — failed to provide CPR when needed — patternProvide basic life support, including CPR, prior to the arrival of emergency medical personnel , subject to physician orders and the resident’s advance directives.
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 clinical record review, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #286) observed for CPR, the facility failed to ensure an employee who administered CPR was appropriately trained as per facility practice and policy. The findings include: Resident #286 's diagnoses included pneumonia, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) and asthma. The admission Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #286 was cognitively intact and required maximum assistance for showering and toileting and set up assistance for oral hygiene. The Resident Care Plan dated [DATE] identified Resident #286 had pneumonia. Interventions included administering antibiotics as ordered, encouraging fluids, monitoring pulse oximetry, and providing oxygen as ordered. A physician's order dated [DATE] directed to administer oxygen at 1 liter per minute via nasal cannula and as needed for shortness of breath, administer Cefuroxime Axetil (antibiotic) 500 mg twice daily for…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-06-26 · tag F0554 — isolatedAllow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
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, clinical record review, and staff interviews, for 1 of 2 residents observed for accidents for (Resident #99), the facility failed to ensure a resident was assessed for self-medication administration. The findings include: Resident #99's diagnoses included diabetes mellitus, arthritis, and depression. The nursing evaluations for self-administration of medications dated 12/22/2023 and 2/27/2024 indicated Resident # 99 did not desire to self-administer medications. The MDS assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #99 was cognitively intact exhibiting no behaviors of rejecting care. The MDS further identified the resident as independent with transferring and requiring setup assistance for eating. A care plan dated 6/8/2024 identified Resident #99 had a deficit in performing Activities of Daily Living (ADL) due to generalized weakness. Interventions included: providing assistance when needed and keeping the call bell and other needed items within reach. The care plan did not identify 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 · D2024-06-26 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review and staff interviews for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for pain for (Resident #100), the facility failed to ensure the physician was notified of a resident new and ongoing pain after a fall. The findings include: Resident #100 was admitted on [DATE] with a diagnosis that included dementia, repeated falls, and osteoporosis. A quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #100 was severely cognitively impaired and required extensive assistance for bed mobility. Additionally, the MDS indicated the resident could not verbalize the presence of pain but had vocal complaints and protective body movements or postures as indicators of pain. The MDS further indicated the resident received hospice care and exhibited daily indicators of pain or possible pain. A physician's order dated 6/6/2022 directed to assess the resident's pain every hour and medicate if needed per order for pain, and to follow up with hospice/MD if the pain is uncontrolled with the regimen. A physician's order…
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 before2024-06-26 · 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 review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for 1 of 1 sampled resident (Resident #189) reviewed for abuse, the facility failed to ensure resident was free from verbal abuse from staff. The findings include: Resident #189's diagnoses included adjustment disorder, type 2 diabetes mellitus and hypotension. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified the resident as cognitive intact and required supervision for eating, limited assistance with bed mobility and transfers. MDS additionally indicated Resident 189 presented with feeling of hopelessness and feeling down/depressed. The care plan dated 5/19/22 identified Resident #189, has signs of history of depression. Interventions included: to encourage verbalization of feelings, provide emotional support as needed and for psychiatric consult. The nursing progress note dated 6/23/22 at 9:33 PM identified a report was received that a resident was being verbally abused by the charge. The note…
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 before2024-06-26 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
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, review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for the 1 of 1 sampled resident (Resident #189) reviewed for abuse, the facility failed to report and allegation of verbal abuse to an outside state agency timely. The findings include: Resident #189's diagnoses included adjustment disorder, type 2 diabetes mellitus and hypotension. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified the resident as cognitive intact and required supervision for eating, limited assistance with bed mobility and transfers. MDS additionally indicated Resident 189 presented with feeling of hopelessness and feeling down/depressed. The care plan dated 5/19/22 identified Resident #189, has signs of history of depression. Interventions included: to encourage verbalization of feelings, provide emotional support as needed and for psychiatric consult. The nursing progress note dated 6/23/22 at 9:33 PM identified a report was received that a resident was being verbally abused…
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 · D2024-06-26 · 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 clinical record reviews, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for 1 of 6 residents reviewed for elopement ( Resident #8), the facility failed to revised the resident's plan care timely regarding the need for wander guard device and for 1 2 of sampled residents, (Resident #88) reviewed for hospice, the facility failed to ensure the resident care plan was revised to reflect a change in code status for a resident receiving end of life care. The findings included: 1. Resident #8's diagnoses included paranoid schizophrenia, dementia, depression, anxiety disorder and psychosis. The clinical record identified Person # 3 as Resident # 8's conservator. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated [DATE], indicated Resident #8 as moderately cognitively impaired and noted no wandering behaviors had occurred at the time of the assessment. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated [DATE] for at risk of leaving the facility with a desire to go home, noted tendency to cut off wander guard.…
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 before2024-06-26 · 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 clinical record reviews, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for 1 of 3 sampled residents (Resident #6) reviewed for nutrition, the facility failed to evaluate the medical needs of a resident identified with significant weight loss in a timely manner and for 1 of 3 sampled residents (Resident #82) reviewed for dental services, the facility failed to ensure a resident was assessed for safe food consumption while awaiting dental services for a broken denture and for 1 of 1 resident ( Resident # 84) reviewed for utilization of ACE wrap, the facility failed to apply the ACE wrap as prescribed and for 1 of 3 sampled residents, (Resident #88) reviewed for hospice, the facility failed to ensure a change in code status was communicated to a community specialty service for a resident receiving end of life care and for 1 of 3 residents for ( Resident # 126) who utilized oxygen, the facility failed to obtain a physician's order for the oxygen. The findings include: 1. Resident #6 's diagnoses…
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 before2024-06-26 · 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 clinical record review, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for 1 of 3 sampled residents (Resident #6) reviewed for nutrition, the facility failed to ensure a resident weight was obtained according to policy and failed to evaluate the resident's nutritional needs following significant weight loss in a timely manner. The findings include: Resident #6's diagnoses included dementia, anemia, and hypertension. The annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #6 required one person assist with bed mobility and supervised assist with eating. The Resident Care Plan dated 1/5/24 identified Resident #6 had the potential for impaired nutrition related to impaired cognition and advanced age. Interventions directed to assist with meals as needed, monitor intake and complete nutritional assessments as needed. The Nutritional assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #6's current weight was 136.7 lbs., had impaired cognition, advanced age, variable intake on 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 · D2024-06-26 · 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, review of clinical records, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for 3 of 4 residents (Residents # 69, #84, and # 126) reviewed for oxygen, the facility failed to change and label the residents oxygen tubing weekly per facility policy and practice. The findings included: 1. Resident #69 's diagnoses included Acute on Chronic Congestive Heart Failure, pneumonia, Acute and Chronic Respiratory Failure. A physician's order dated 6/4/24 directed to administer oxygen at 2 liters per minute via nasal cannula. The Resident Care Plan dated 6/5/24 identified the resident has Congestive Heart Failure. Interventions included providing oxygen as ordered. The admission Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #69 as cognitively intact and required moderate assistance with toileting, personal hygiene, and maximum assistance with showering. Observations on 6/12/24 at 12:57 PM, identified Oxygen tubing was not dated. The Treatment Administration Record dated June 2024…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-06-26 · 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 clinical record review, review of facility policy and staff interviews for 1 of 3 residents observed for pain (Resident #100), the facility failed to ensure a resident was medicated appropriately for symptoms of pain. The findings include: Resident #100 was admitted on [DATE] with a diagnosis that included dementia, repeated falls, and osteoporosis. A quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #100 was severely cognitively impaired and required extensive assistance for bed mobility. Additionally, the MDS indicated the resident could not verbalize the presence of pain but had vocal complaints and protective body movements or postures as indicators of pain. The MDS further indicated the resident received hospice care and exhibited daily indicators of pain or possible pain. A physician's order dated 6/6/2022 directed to assess the resident's pain every hour and medicate if needed per order for pain, and to follow up with hospice/MD if the pain is uncontrolled with the regimen. A physician'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 · D2024-06-26 · tag F0791 — failed to provide routine dental services — isolatedProvide or obtain dental services for each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for 1 of 3 sampled residents (Resident #82) reviewed for dental services, the facility failed to ensure dental services was provided following a responsible party request for an evaluation for broken dentures. The findings include: Resident #82's diagnoses included dementia, anorexia, and dysphagia. The quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #82 as severely cognitively impaired and independent with activities of daily living skills. The Resident Care Plan dated 6/9/23 identified Resident #82 used partial dentures. Interventions directed to monitor/document/report any signs of oral/dental problems needing attention. A social service progress note dated 6/9/23 identified the responsible party had questions regarding the resident's dentures and Resident # 82 was referred to the dentist for evaluation of his/her lower dentures. The dental consults dated 2/8/23 and 9/11/23 identified broken or…
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 before2024-06-26 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide 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 observation, clinical record review, and policy review and staff interviews for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for pressure ulcers (Resident #57), the facility failed to ensure staff followed the appropriate infection control practices while performing a dressing change. The findings include: Resident #57 was admitted on [DATE]. The resident's diagnoses included dementia, weakness, and a history of Extended Spectrum Beta Lactamase (ESBL) resistance. The MDS assessment dated [DATE] indicated Resident #57 had severe cognitive impairment. The resident required extensive assistance with bed mobility and was dependent on transferring and toilet use. Additionally, the MDS indicated Resident #57 had an unhealed stage 3 pressure ulcer. A care plan dated 5/23/2024 identified Resident #57 was incontinent of bowel and bladder and had a history of infection with ESBL (a resistant micro-organism). Interventions included maintaining precautions. A wound specialist progress note dated 6/12/24 identified Resident #57 had 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 · D2023-08-01 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, facility documentation review, facility policy review, and interviews for one of three sampled residents (Resident #1) reviewed for nutrition, the facility failed to ensure assistance with meals was provided timely for a resident who required assistance to eat. The findings include: Resident #1 diagnoses included dementia, Asperger's syndrome, autistic disorder, dysphagia, and failure to thrive. The quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 had severe cognitive impairment and required extensive assistance with one-person for eating. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 6/16/2023 identified Resident #1 was at risk for aspiration related to dysphagia. Interventions directed to perform 1:1 feeding assistance. Continuous observations of the lunch meal on 8/1/2023 at 12:00 PM identified upon arrival to the 4th floor unit, two nurse aides (NAs) were assisting residents in the dining room by passing out their respective meals and providing assistance as…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2021-12-07 · 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 observation, review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 1 resident (Resident #92) reviewed for accidents, the facility failed to follow standards of practice after a fall to prevent further injury, for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #39), reviewed for an allegation of mistreatment, the facility failed to follow the plan of care, the facility policy and physician's order during a transfer to prevent a potential accident. The findings include: 1. Resident #92 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included seizures, dementia, and paranoid schizophrenia. A physician's order date 10/15/21 directed to transfer the resident via a stand pivot with assistance of 1 staff. The quarterly MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #92 had severely impaired cognition, was always incontinent of bladder, frequently incontinent of bowel and required extensive assistance for dressing, personal hygiene, transfers, locomotion on unit, and toileting with 1 person.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2021-12-07 · tag F0726 — failed to have competent, trained nursing staff — isolatedEnsure that nurses and nurse aides have the appropriate competencies to care for every resident in a way that maximizes each resident's well being.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of facility documentation and facility policy, the facility failed to ensure agency staff general training was completed prior to commencement of work on the unit. The findings include: Interview with Person #1 on 12/6/21 at 12:50 PM identified NA #1 was hired via the staffing agency on 11/10/21 and was first scheduled and worked at the facility on November 18th, 19th, 20th, 23rd, 24th, 26th and 27th. NA #1 worked November 18th - 27th without general orientation to the facility. Interview with RN #2 on 12/6/21 at 1:15PM noted the nursing scheduler informs the nursing supervisors or RN #2 if there will be a new agency person coming to the facility. RN #2 indicated all agency staff prior to working on the floor, on their first day are required to complete agency orientation with the mandatory education. RN #2 indicated the expectation was the supervisor goes over the packet with the nurse aide before they start on the unit. RN #2 noted she was responsible to keep the agency orientation packets for all agency staff and NA #1 did the orientation packet and the competency…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2021-12-07 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure staff followed the facility dress code policy regarding hand/fingernail hygiene. The findings include: Observations on 12/5/21 identified the following staff with extremely long fingernails: a. Interview with NA #3 on 12/5/21 at 5:30 AM identified she was not aware that her fingernails should not be that long and indicated that the facility did not give her an in-service regarding long fingernails (nail hygiene) during orientation. b. Interview with NA #8 on 12/5/21 at 7:16 AM identified she is from the agency. NA #8 identified she was not aware that her fingernails should not be that long and indicated that the agency and the facility did not in-service her regarding her long fingernails (nail hygiene). Interview with RN #2 on 12/5/21 at 11:00 AM identified she was not aware of the issue. RN #2 indicated her expectation is that all nursing staff are to follow the facility employee dress code standards policy. RN #2 indicated it is an infection control issue and the facility…
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.
- No harm found · B2026-03-24 · tag F0641 — patternEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
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, review of the clinical record, facility policy and interviews for 2 of 2 sampled residents (Resident #3 and Resident #101) reviewed for Resident Assessment, the facility failed to code a pressure ulcer for Resident #3 on the quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment and failed to submit a death record for Resident #101 to the Internet Quality Improvement Evaluation System (IQIES). The findings include:1. Resident #3 's diagnoses included diabetes, moderate protein calorie malnutrition and anemia.The admission quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #3 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 15 indicating no cognitive impairment and was independent with eating, hygiene, bed mobility and transfer, was at risk for pressure ulcers and currently did not have a pressure ulcer.The Skin assessment dated [DATE] identified a stage 2 pressure ulcer (top and bottom skin layers affected) blister on right lower leg with an onset of 1/18/26. A wound progress note…
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.
- No harm found · C2024-06-26 · tag F0946 — widespreadProvide training in compliance and ethics.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on review of facility documents and interviews during extended survey, the facility failed to ensure effective communication of standards, policies and procedures of its Compliance and Ethics program to its entire staff. The findings include. On 6/26/2024 at 2:45 PM an interview and facility document review with the Administrator who was unable to locate initial or annual in-service training that included communication of the Corporate Compliance program for all staff. The Administrator indicated annual in-service training would begin in 2024. The Administrator verified the facility's governing body operates five or more buildings. On 6/26/2024 at 2:50 PM an interview and facility employee files with the Human Resources Director identified 4 out of 6 employee staff files were missing the Compliance Certificate Statement, kept in the employee's personnel file at the time of hire that indicated the employee received, in part, Corporate Compliance training.
“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
$148,053 in federal fines across 3 penalties. 1 Medicare payment denial on record.
- $104,940 — penalty dated 2026-03-24
- $26,312 — penalty dated 2025-11-18
- $16,801 — penalty dated 2024-06-26
- Medicare payment denial — starting 2024-09-26 for 64 days
Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to ATHENA HEALTHCARE SYSTEMS — 22 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 | 1.5 | -0.5 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 1 of 5 | 1.7 | -0.7 vs chain |
| Staffing | 3 of 5 | 2.1 | +0.9 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 2.5 | +1.5 vs chain |
The other 21 homes this chain runs (chain average 1.5★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SANTILLI, LAWRENCE | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER | 13% | since 09/30/2017 |
| ROMAN, ERICA | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | — | since 01/01/2016 |
| MOSIER, MICHAEL | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 07/01/2007 |
| ATHENA HEALTH CARE ASSOCIATES, INC. | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 10/18/1996 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 6 rows in the source record cover these 4 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
1 organizational owner 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 86% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $2.4M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 14% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.
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 CT
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 Connecticut 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 075413. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-03-24, 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.