Complete Care At Harrington Court
59 Harrington Ct, Colchester, CT 06415 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 130 certified beds · (860) 537-2339 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- it has abuse, neglect, or exploitation citations (F0600, F0602) — most recent Apr 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 recorded 1 serious finding as past non-compliance — the problem was found, fixed, and verified before the survey closed, so it is history rather than a current condition, but it is still worth asking what changed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (46) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $25,974 in federal fines (most recent 2026-03-26)
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
- its payroll-based staffing 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 | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 1 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 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 — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| 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 fell from 4 to 3 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 24.4% | 18.0% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 2.8% | 6.5% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.2% | 0.7% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.0% | 1.5% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 66.7% | 22.3% | 6.5% | worse 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 | 2.3% | 3.5% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 28.2% | 16.4% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 22.0% | 17.6% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 93.5% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 2.1% | 4.0% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 31.0% | 24.7% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 22.1% | 17.8% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 3.2% | 1.5% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 94.4% | 69.7% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 19.5% | 24.3% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 7.1% | 10.7% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 0.20 | 2.06 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 0.35 | 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.
48.4% 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 117 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 73.7% 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 76 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 49% 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 | 48.4%CMS range 40.5–55.6 | 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 | 9.2%CMS range 5.9–12.6 | 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 | 73.7% | 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 | 69.7% | 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 | 64.5% | 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 | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 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 | 1.1% | 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 | 7.2%CMS range 4.1–11.5 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.13 | 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 130 beds and averages 117.3 residents a day — about 90% occupied, or roughly 13 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. 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 3.17 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.54 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.97 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 3.00 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.24 on weekdays — 7% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.60 to 0.37 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 49% is about the same as the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
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.
46 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 35 are one tap away and print in full.
- Immediate jeopardy · J2026-03-26 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolatedEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, interviews, and facility document review, the facility failed to ensure that medication orders were accurately transcribed and verified for one (1) of two (2) residents reviewed for medication administration (Resident #1), resulting in a significant medication error when Methotrexate, ordered to be administered one time per week, was incorrectly transcribed and administered daily for nine (9) consecutive days. The error was not detected through required reconciliation processes, including RN transcription, supervisory second check, APRN review, physician review, and pharmacy consultant review, despite active MAR dose warnings. As a result, Resident #1 developed progressive methotrexate toxicity characterized by mucositis, gastrointestinal symptoms, severe neutropenia, respiratory failure, ICU admission, and subsequent death, placing the resident in Immediate Jeopardy and demonstrating a failure to protect the resident's health and safety. The findings include: Resident #1's…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-03-26 · 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 reviews, facility documentation/policies and interviews for one (1) of two (2) sampled residents (Resident #3), reviewed for a change in condition, the facility failed to notify the residents Conservator of Person (COP), in accordance with facility policy, over an 8 day period, when the facility requested the provider evaluate the resident on two (2) occasions, due to a change in condition. The findings include: Resident #3's diagnoses included heart failure, atrial fibrillation, sick sinus syndrome, atherosclerotic heart disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and Alzheimer's Disease The provider's note dated [DATE] at 12:00 AM by APRN #1 identified APRN #1 was asked to see Resident #3 due to respiratory symptoms. APRN #1 directed Resident #3 continue cardiac medications and ordered a chest x-ray due to an episode of increased wheezing. APRN #1's plan was discussed with nursing.The quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 as cognitively intact…
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 before2026-03-26 · 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 review of clinical records, facility documentation/policy, and interviews for one (1) of three (3) sampled residents (Resident #3) reviewed for changes in condition, the facility failed to ensure the provision of necessary care and services to assess and address a change in condition when a provider-directed chest x-ray was not ordered and completed as indicated. The findings include: Resident #3's diagnoses included heart failure, atrial fibrillation, sick sinus syndrome, atherosclerotic heart disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and Alzheimer's Disease The provider's note dated 12/15/25 at 12:00 AM by APRN #1 identified APRN #1 was asked to see Resident #3 due to respiratory symptoms. APRN #1 directed Resident #3 continue cardiac medications and ordered a chest x-ray due to an episode of increased wheezing. APRN #1's plan was discussed with nursing.The quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 as cognitively intact (Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS)…
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 · D2026-03-26 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolatedEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
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 policies and interviews for one (1) of two (2) sampled residents (Resident #1), reviewed for medication administration, the facility failed to ensure the pharmacy reported irregularities in medication orders for Methotrexate to the physician when the frequency ordered was inconsistent with accepted standards of practice. The facility transcribed the medication dose for Methotrexate to be administered two (2) times per day instead of one (1) time per week. The pharmacy filled the medication at a daily frequency and when the monthly medication review for new admissions was conducted, the pharmacist failed to identify the order as a medication irregularity. The findings include: Resident #1's diagnoses included rheumatoid arthritis, dysphagia, metabolic encephalopathy, atrial fibrillation, and congestive heart failure. The hospital discharge orders dated [DATE] identified an order for Methotrexate (used to treat severe autoimmune conditions) 2.5 mg…
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 before2026-03-26 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record reviews, facility documentation, facility policies and interviews for one (1) of two (2) sampled residents (Resident #3), reviewed for a change in condition, the facility failed to maintain complete and accurate clinical records for Resident #3 in accordance with the facility Documentation Policy when they failed to document assessments related to Resident #3's change in condition. The findings include: Resident #3's diagnoses included heart failure, atrial fibrillation, sick sinus syndrome, atherosclerotic heart disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and Alzheimer's Disease The provider's note dated [DATE] at 12:00 AM by APRN #1 identified APRN #1 was asked to see Resident #3 due to respiratory symptoms. APRN #1 directed Resident #3 continue cardiac medications and ordered a chest x-ray due to an episode of increased wheezing. APRN #1's plan was discussed with nursing.The quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 as cognitively intact (Brief…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-08 · 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 one (1) of three (3) sampled residents (Resident #1) reviewed for Activities of Daily Living (ADLs), the facility failed to review and revise the plan of care to include the resident's refusal of showers and implement alternative interventions. The findings include:Resident #1's diagnoses included adult failure to thrive, anorexia, type II diabetes mellitus, muscle weakness and lack of coordination. The admission Record dated 8/13/25 identified a family member was named Power of Attorney for medical, care conference person, and authorized HIPPA contact. The Nursing admission assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 was alert and oriented to person, place, time and situation, required extensive assistance with bed mobility and was totally dependent on staff for transfers, personal hygiene and bathing. The Resident Care Plan dated 8/14/25 identified Resident #1 was at risk for decreased ability to perform ADLs…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-08 · 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 reviews, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for one (1) of three (3) sampled residents (Resident #1) who was at risk for weight loss, the facility failed to ensure weekly weights were obtained per the physician's order and failed to ensure a re-weight was obtained at the time a significant weight loss was identified and not wait one (1) week. The findings include:Resident #1's diagnoses included adult failure to thrive, anorexia, dysphagia (difficulty swallowing) and type II diabetes mellitus. The Nursing admission assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 was alert and oriented to person, place, time and situation, required full dentures but did not wear them and was independent with eating. A physician's order dated 8/14/25 directed to obtain the resident's weight every day shift every Thursday for four (4) weeks. The Resident Care Plan dated 8/14/25 identified Resident #1 met the criteria for moderate protein calorie malnutrition diagnosis due to weight loss…
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 before2025-11-13 · 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 clinical record reviews, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for one (1) of three (3) sampled residents (Resident #2) who had targeted behaviors, the facility failed to ensure a comprehensive care plan was developed and interventions implemented to address the resident's behaviors which included the tendency to transfer him/herself without assistance. The findings include:Resident #2's diagnoses included dementia without behavioral disturbances, depression, anxiety disorder, obsessive compulsive disorder and insomnia. A physician's order dated 9/16/25 directed Resident #2 was non-weight bearing to the right lower extremity every shift. The nurse's note dated 9/16/25 at 9:31 PM identified Resident #2 was admitted to the facility following a right third toe amputation. The note indicated Resident #2 was confused, restless, displayed poor safety awareness, required close observation for safety due to non-weight bearing status to the right foot, required assistance of two (2) 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 · D2025-04-10 · 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 review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policies, and interviews for 1 of 8 residents (Resident #35) reviewed for abuse, the facility failed to ensure a resident was treated in a dignified manner by nursing staff. The findings include: Resident #35 was admitted to the facility in September 2024 with diagnoses that included atrial fibrillation, congestive heart failure, and encephalopathy. The quarterly MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #35 had intact cognition, mood interview identified the following symptoms and frequency: little interest or pleasure in doing things (half or more days), feeling down, depressed, hopeless (several days), trouble falling asleep or staying asleep (several days), feeling tired or having little energy (half or more days), poor appetite or overeating (several days), feeling bad about yourself (several days), trouble concentrating on things (several days), and moving or speaking slowly that other people could have noticed (half or more days). The…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-10 · 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 review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 3 residents (Resident #9, 91 and 81) the facility failed to ensure the physician and resident representative were notified according to facility policy. For 1 of 5 residents (Resident #9) reviewed for medication administration, the facility failed to ensure the physician was notified when medications were not given per the physician order. For 1 of 3 residents (Resident #91) reviewed for pressure ulcer, the facility failed to ensure the physician and resident representative were notified when a new pressure ulcer was identified. For 1 of 5 residents (Resident #81) reviewed for unnecessary medications, the facility failed to notify the physician and resident representative with episodes of hypo and hyperglycemia, and when a medication was not administered. The findings include: 1. Resident #69 was admitted to the facility in February 2025 with diagnoses that included leg surgery, chronic kidney disease 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 · Dcited before2025-04-10 · 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 residents 4 of 8 residents (Resident #42, 88, 92 and 99,) reviewed for allegations of abuse, the facility failed to ensure the residents were free from abuse. The findings include: 1a. Resident #7 was admitted to the facility in August 2024 with diagnoses that included paranoid schizophrenia, borderline personality disorder, and diabetes. The care plan dated 11/7/24 identified Resident #7 exhibits or has the potential to exhibit physical behaviors related to psychiatric disorder and is combative with care. Interventions include postponing care/activity and allowing time to regain composure. The quarterly MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #7 had intact cognition and was independent walking 150 feet. The physician's order dated 1/1/25 directed to monitor behavior for hitting and swatting every shift. Review of the change in condition evaluation form dated 1/15/25 identified Resident #7 was observed by nursing…
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 35 citations
- Potential for harm · D2025-04-10 · 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 3 of 8 residents (Resident #69, 99 and 269) reviewed for abuse and misappropriation, the facility failed to immediately report the allegations of abuse and misappropriation to the Administrator and the State Agency according to established timeframes. The findings include: 1. Resident #69 was admitted to the facility in February 2025 with diagnoses that included chronic kidney disease, diabetes, and surgery of the left leg. A physician's order dated 2/13/25 directed Resident #69 may go on a leave of absence with medications and responsible party. The admission MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #69 had intact cognition and required moderate assistance with toileting, lower body dressing, transfers, and personal hygiene. The care plan dated 2/20/25 identified Resident #69 is resistive to care. Interventions included providing consistent, trusted caregiver, and structured daily routine, when possible. The social…
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 · D2025-04-10 · 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 of 8 residents (Resident # 99) reviewed for abuse, the facility failed to take immediate steps to prevent further abuse from occurring while the investigation was in progress. The findings include: Resident #99 was admitted to the facility in January 2024 with diagnoses that included Parkinson's disease, dementia, mood disturbance, anxiety disorder, hallucinations, delusional disorders, psychotic disorder with delusions, depressive disorder, and wandering in disease. The quarterly MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #99 was moderately cognitively impaired and required partial/moderate assistance with toileting hygiene. Additionally, Resident #99 had no behaviors of physical or verbal symptoms directed towards others, and no wandering. Further Resident #99 does not use a wheelchair. The care plan dated 2/26/25 identified Resident #99 is at risk for complications related to the use of psychotropic drugs:…
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 · D2025-04-10 · tag F0644 — isolatedCoordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility policy, and interviews for 2 of 3 residents (Resident #38 and 65) reviewed for Pre-admission Screening and Record Review (PASARR), the facility failed to ensure a PASARR rescreen was completed upon admission to the facility for a resident with a long-standing history of a serious mental health diagnosis and after a new mental health diagnosis was identified. The findings include: 1. Resident 38 was admitted to the facility in July 2024 with diagnoses that included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, tracheostomy, and body dysmorphic disorder. Review of a PASARR level 1 screen outcome dated 7/10/24, prior to admission to the facility, identified that Resident #38 had not received any mental health services in the past and did not have any legal intervention due to mental health symptoms or behaviors. The PASARR level 1 outcome determined a level II was not required due to no evidence of a PASARR condition related to an intellectual disability or serious…
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 · D2025-04-10 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, review of the clinical record, facility policy, and interviews for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #77) reviewed for medication administration, the facility failed to ensure a medication was administered in accordance with the physician's orders. The findings include: Resident #77 was admitted to the facility in November 2024 with diagnoses that included fractures of the left lower leg and patella, anemia, and bipolar disorder. A completed physician's order dated 1/24/25 with an end date of 2/21/25 directed to administer Cefadroxil oral capsule (antibiotic), give 500mg by mouth twice daily for four weeks, for septic arthritis. The quarterly MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #77 had intact cognition and was currently taking an antibiotic. The care plan dated 3/12/25 identified Resident #77 was at risk for impaired skin integrity due to immobility and presence of cam boot (orthopedic footwear used to immobilize the foot and ankle). Interventions included turning and repositioning 4 times per…
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 before2025-04-10 · 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 policy, and interviews for 4 residents (Resident #39, 69, 81, 268) the facility failed to provide care according to professional standards, facility policy and physician's orders. For 1 of 2 residents, Resident #39) reviewed for falls, the facility failed to ensure the functionality of a remote cardiac transmission device. For 1 resident (Resident #69) the facility failed to administer medications according to the physician's orders. For 1 of 5 residents (Resident #81) reviewed for unnecessary medications, the facility failed to follow the physician's orders and complete RN assessments when the resident had multiple episodes of hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia that required additional treatment. For 1 of 5 residents (Resident #268) reviewed for medication administration, the facility failed to ensure medications were administered per the physician's order. The findings include: 1. Resident #39 was admitted to the facility in January 2016 with 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 before2025-04-10 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #91) reviewed for pressure ulcer, the facility failed to ensure appropriate care according to professional standards and facility policy when a new pressure ulcer was identified. The findings include: Resident #91 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmission on [DATE] with diagnoses that included fall with left femur fracture, and dementia. The quarterly MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #91 had severely impaired cognition, was always incontinent of bowel and bladder and required moderate assistance with rolling left to right and transfers chair/bed to chair transfers. Additionally, Resident #91 required maximum assistance with perineal hygiene and dressing. Resident #91 was at risk for developing a pressure ulcer but did not have any pressure ulcers. The readmission nursing assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #91's skin was intact except for periorbital bruising 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 · D2025-04-10 · 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 observation, review of the clinical record, facility policy, and interviews for 2 of 3 residents (Resident #22 and 65) reviewed for respiratory care, the facility failed to ensure the CPAP (continuous positive airway pressure) tubing, filter, and mask were changed in accordance with the manufacturer's recommendations. The findings include: 1. Resident #22 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included sleep apnea, obesity, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The annual MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident # 22 had intact cognition and required a non-invasive mechanical ventilator (CPAP or Bi-pap). The quarterly MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #22 had intact cognition and required maximum assistance with toileting, bathing, and personal hygiene. and required a non-invasive mechanical ventilator (CPAP or Bi pap). The care plan dated 2/3/25 identified Resident #22 has altered respiratory status and difficulty breathing related to COPD and sleep apnea. Interventions…
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 · D2025-04-10 · tag F0742 — isolatedProvide the appropriate treatment and services to a resident who displays or is diagnosed with mental disorder or psychosocial adjustment difficulty, or who has a history of trauma and/or post-traumatic stress disorder.
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 policies, and interviews for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #65) reviewed for unnecessary medications, the facility failed to ensure a medication for the treatment of a mental health diagnosis was administered per the physician's order. The findings include: Resident #65 was admitted to the facility in November 2021 with diagnoses that included anxiety disorder, dysthymic disorder, major depressive mood disorder (MDD), and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The quarterly MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #65 had intact cognition, and the resident mood interview identified the following symptoms and frequency: little interest or pleasure in doing things (several days) and feeling down, depressed, or hopeless (several days). The care plan dated 3/27/25 identified Resident #65 was at risk for distressed/fluctuating mood symptoms related to diagnoses of dysthymic disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, and PTSD. Interventions included observing for signs 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 · Dcited before2025-04-10 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #269) reviewed for unnecessary medications, the facility failed to conduct a gradual dose reduction of Risperidone upon admission when the clinical record failed to reflect a psychiatric diagnosis. The findings include: Resident #269 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included cerebrovascular disease and dementia. Notice of PASRR Level 1 Screen Outcome dated 3/31/25 identified Resident #269 had no mental health diagnosis that was known or suspected. A physician's order dated 4/1/25 directed to give Risperidone (antipsychotic medication) 0.25mg by mouth 3 times a day. The psychiatric APRN #2 note dated 4/1/25 identified Resident #269 was seen and assessed today for initial evaluation and will continue Risperidone 0.25mg by mouth three times a day for a diagnosis of Bipolar (this diagnosis is in conflict with the hospital and facility clinical records). The care…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-03-28 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — patternProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for two (2) of thirteen (13) residents (Resident #1 and Resident #10) reviewed for abuse, the facility failed to ensure the residents were free from abuse. The findings include: 1. Resident #1's diagnoses included cerebral infarction (when blood flow to the brain is interrupted, causing brain tissue damage), legal blindness, anxiety disorder and depression. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 had a Brief Mental Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of fifteen (15) indicative of intact cognition and required moderate assistance with bed mobility and transfers. Additionally, the MDS identified Resident #1 ' s hearing was adequate with no difficulties. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 3/6/25 identified Resident #1 had the potential to be verbally aggressive related to ineffective coping skills, poor impulse control and poor anger management and Resident #1 alleged a staff 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 · Dcited before2025-02-21 · 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 review of clinical records, interviews, and review of facility policies for one (1) of three (3) residents (Resident #1) reviewed for accidents, the facility failed to ensure a resident's treatment order was entered correctly to ensure timely initiation of the practitioner's directive. The findings included the following: Resident #1 had diagnoses which included lymphedema, atherosclerotic heart disease, and adjustment order with anxiety. Review of Resident #1's Care Plan dated 1/7/25 identified the resident was at risk for skin breakdown related to reduced mobility and has actual skin breakdown and bilateral lower extremity lymphedema with interventions that directed to ace wraps as ordered for lymphedema. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 had a Brief Mental Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of thirteen (13) indicative of intact cognition. The MDS further identified Resident #1 was dependent with bathing and toileting hygiene, and required…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-02-21 · tag F0806 — failed to honor food preferences — isolatedEnsure each resident receives and the facility provides food that accommodates resident allergies, intolerances, and preferences, as well as appealing options.
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 clinical records, interviews, and review of facility policies for one (1) of three (3) residents (Resident #1) reviewed for accidents, the facility failed to ensure that a resident was not provided an allergen at meal time. The findings included the following: Resident #1 had diagnoses which included dysphagia, atherosclerotic heart disease, and adjustment order with anxiety. Review of Resident #1's Care Plan dated 1/6/25 identified a risk for allergic reaction related to known allergy to cephalexin, erythromycin, sulfa antibiotics, pineapple, and shellfish with interventions that directed to note allergy in Point Click Care (the resident's electronic medical record) and to notify the physician of any signs and symptoms of an allergic reaction. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 had a Brief Mental Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of thirteen (13) indicative of intact cognition. The MDS further identified Resident #1 was dependent…
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 before2024-12-03 · 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 reviews, review of facility policy, and interviews for one (1) of four (4) sampled residents (Resident #4) who were reviewed for a resident-to-resident physical altercation, the facility failed to ensure Resident #4 was free from physical abuse when Resident #4 was hit on the head. The findings include: Resident #4's diagnoses included multiple sclerosis, schizoaffective disorder, and major depressive disorder. The quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #4 was alert and oriented and required extensive assistance from staff with most activities of daily living. Resident #3's diagnoses included respiratory failure with hypoxia, schizoaffective disorder, adjustment disorder, and dementia. The Nursing re-admission assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #3 required assistance of facility staff for most activities of daily living and had severe cognitive impairment at baseline. The Resident Care Plan dated 10/23/24identified Resident #3 has an incident 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 · E2024-10-28 · tag F0602 — failed to protect residents from theft of their belongings — patternProtect each resident from the wrongful use of the resident's belongings or money.
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 four (4) of nine (9) residents (Residents #1, 2, 3 and 4) reviewed for misappropriation, the facility failed to prevent the misappropriation of the residents' controlled narcotic medications. The findings include: 1. Resident #1's diagnoses included chronic pain syndrome, low back pain and polyneuropathy (damage of the peripheral nerves, affecting the skin, muscles and organs). The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 had a Brief Mental Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of fifteen (15) indicative of intact cognition, frequently experienced moderate pain and was independent with eating, transfers and ambulation. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated [DATE] identified that Resident #1 has pain and receives pain medication related to gout, polyneuropathy and low back pain with interventions that included monitoring for non-verbal signs of pain, evaluating pain characteristics,…
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 before2024-10-28 · 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 review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for one (1) of four (4) residents (Resident #1) reviewed for medication administration, the facility failed to follow physician's orders when administering a medication. The findings include: Resident #1's diagnoses included insomnia (difficulty sleeping), chronic pain syndrome, low back pain and polyneuropathy (damage of the peripheral nerves, affecting the skin, muscles and organs). The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 had a Brief Mental Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of fifteen (15) indicative of intact cognition and was independent with eating, transfers and ambulation. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 6/19/24 identified that Resident #1 takes a sedative/hypnotic medication related to insomnia wit interventions that included to administer sedative/hypnotic medications as ordered by the physician and monitor and document side effects and effectiveness every shift.…
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 before2024-10-28 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for one (1) of four (4) residents (Resident #1) reviewed for medication misappropriation, the facility failed to ensure that as needed narcotics were documented as administered and evaluated for effectiveness in the clinical record. The findings include: Resident #1's diagnoses included chronic pain syndrome, low back pain and polyneuropathy (damage of the peripheral nerves, affecting the skin, muscles and organs). The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 had a Brief Mental Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of fifteen (15) indicative of intact cognition, frequently experienced moderate pain and was independent with eating, transfers and ambulation. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 7/19/24 identified that Resident #1 has pain and receives pain medication related to gout, polyneuropathy and low back pain. Interventions included monitoring for non-verbal signs of pain,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-08-21 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, facility documentation review, and interviews for one of three residents (Resident #3) reviewed for abuse, the facility failed to ensure the clinical record was complete an accurate to include an incident that required social service follow up. The findings include: Resident #3's included dementia with behavioral disturbance, delirium, and major depression. The 5-day Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] identified Resident #3 had no behaviors, was alert and oriented, and ambulated with supervision. The care plan dated 3/19/2023 identified a potential for verbal behaviors related to dementia. Interventions directed to evaluate the circumstances of verbal behaviors, provide psychiatric/behavioral health consultations, and social service visits to provide support. The psychiatric note dated 3/27/2023 identified asked to see Resident #3 for alleged inappropriate interaction with a male peer. The note indicated Social Services reported a male resident asked Resident #3 to show a body…
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 · D2023-08-08 · tag F0557 — isolatedHonor the resident's right to be treated with respect and dignity and to retain and use personal possessions.
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 sampled resident (Resident #1), who was reviewed for abuse, the facility failed to ensure a resident was treated in a respectful and dignified manner. The findings include: Resident #1's diagnoses included unspecified dementia and aphasia (unable to formulate language) following a cerebral infarction (death of brain tissue following lack of oxygen). The quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident # 1 had severe cognitive impairment and was independent with activities of daily living (ADL). The Resident Care Plan dated 4/18/23 identified Resident #1 expressed that it was important to engage in daily routines that were important to him/her and could demonstrate verbal behaviors related to cognitive loss with interventions that directed to monitor for perseverating behavior, remove from the environment while speaking in a calm, reassuring voice and allow time for expression of feelings, provide…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-08-08 · 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 sampled resident, (Resident #2), who was reviewed for medication administration, the facility failed to ensure medication was administered in accordance with physician's orders. The findings include: Resident #2 had diagnoses that included streptococcal meningitis. The admission nursing assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #2 was alert and oriented to person place time, situation and appropriate. A review of the admission clinical record identified Resident #2 was self-responsible. A physician's orders dated 7/18/23 directed ceftriaxone sodium injection solution (an antibiotic) reconstituted 2grams every 12 hours intravenously at 9:00 AM and 9:00 PM for a diagnosis of sepsis (a blood stream infection) through 8/7/23. (The medication was not ordered STAT (as soon as possible)). The Pharmacy receipt dated 7/19/23 identified ceftriaxone sodium injection solution reconstituted 2 grams was delivered to 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.
- Potential for harm · E2023-07-13 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — patternEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations of the dietary tray line, and review of facility documentation and interview, the facility failed to provide food at an appetizing temperature and failed to indicate holding temperature of sweet potatoes. The findings included: 1a. Observation of the dietary tray line and a test tray with Food Service Director of the lunch meal on 7/11/23 began at 11:23 AM identified the last cart left the kitchen at 12:46 PM and arrived at 600's wing at 12:48 PM, serving began at 12:52 PM, and the last resident tray was served to Resident #32 at 1:04 PM. A review of the food test tray with the surveyor in the presence of the Food Service Director on 7/11/23 at 1:04 PM identified the following food temperatures surveyor/ Food Service Director: the main meal item (ham with a temperature (in degrees Fahrenheit) of 103.5/103.4, sweet potatoes at 117/116, creamed spinach at 117.7/116.6, and fruit cup at 63.8/63.3. Interview with the Food Service Director at time of the observation identified the food should be held at 135 or greater. b. Review of Facility documentation of Holding…
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 · D2023-07-13 · tag F0655 — isolatedCreate and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
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 and interviews for 1 of 1 sampled resident (Resident #391) reviewed for constipation/diarrhea, the facility failed to ensure a baseline care plan was completed to address the resident's constipation. The findings include. Resident #391's diagnoses included polyneuropathy chronic pain syndrome, atrial fibrillation, deep vein thrombosis and Urinary Tract Infection (UTI). A physician's order dated 6/30/2023 at 8:50 PM directed to provide Senna (a stool softener) 8.6. Milligrams (MG) 2 tablets by mouth daily for constipation. A physician's order dated 6/30/23 at 8:57 PM directed to administer Macrobid (an antibiotic) 100 MG orally twice daily for UTI. A physician order dated 6/30/23 at 9:21 PM directed to provide Oxycodone Hydrochloride (a narcotic analgesic) 10 MG tablet one tablet by mouth every 8 hours as needed for pain. Physician orders dated 6/30/23 at 9:22 PM directed to provide Oxycontin 40 MG (narcotic analgesic) extended release every 12 hours one tablet 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 · Dcited before2023-07-13 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record reviews, observations, facility documentation review, facility policy review, and interviews for one of three residents (Resident #50) reviewed for wound prevention and healing, the facility failed to follow the residents plan of care and the physician's orders to off load/float heels when the resident was identified with wounds on both heels and for one of three residents ( Resident # 5) at risk for pressure ulcer development, the facility failed to ensure the resident's air mattress was set according to the plan of care. The findings included: 1. Resident #50's diagnoses included diabetes, osteomyelitis, malnutrition, pressure ulcer, malignant neoplasm of lung, disc degeneration lumbar region and chronic pain syndrome. The quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #50 had intact cognition, was at risk of developing pressure ulcer/injury, had one or more unhealed pressure ulcers/injuries and required extensive assistance with bed mobility, transfer,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-07-13 · 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 reviews, facility policy and interview for 1 of 2 sampled residents (Resident #389) reviewed for hydration, the facility failed to maintain fluid intake per physician's order. The findings included: Resident #389's diagnoses included chronic diastolic Congestive Heart Failure ( CHF), dyspnea, and hypertensive urgency. A physician's order dated 6/6/2023 directed to monitor a daily fluid restriction total of 1500ml per day. The admission Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #389 as cognitively intact, requiring extensive assistance with toileting and personal hygiene and indicated independent with eating. The Resident's Care Plan dated 6/22/23, revised on 7/7/2023, identified the resident was at risk for dehydration as evidenced by fluid restriction/insufficient intake. An intervention directs to monitor intake and output per protocol. The nurse's note and certified nursing assistant's fluid intake/output documentation dated 6/13/23 through 7/11/23 identified…
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 · D2023-07-13 · tag F0851 — isolatedElectronically submit to CMS complete and accurate direct care staffing information, based on payroll and other verifiable and auditable data.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of the facility Payroll Based Journal (PBJ) records, interview, and review of facility policy for 4 out of 4 quarters reviewed, the facility failed to maintain weekend staffing at a level that was above excessively low, and for 2 of 4 quarters, failed to ensure the facility did not receive a 1 star rating for staffing. The findings include: Review of the Payroll Based Journal records for the second, third, fourth and first fiscal quarters of 2022 identified that during the second quarter, (January 1 through March 31), the third quarter, (April 1 through June 30), the fourth quarter, (July 1 through September 30) and first quarter, (October 1 through December 31, 2022), the facility electronically reported excessively low weekend staffing. Additionally, during the third and fourth quarters, the facility had a 1 star rating for staffing. Interview with RN # 12 the corporate nurse on 7/13/23 at 1:40 PM identified that the facility did not actually have excessively low weekend staffing but, according to RN # 12, who had conducted extensive research into the PBJ system,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-07-13 · 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 observations, clinical record review, staff interviews, policy review, and facility documentation, for 1 of 1 sampled resident (Resident #65), reviewed for respiratory care, and for 1 of 1 sampled resident, (Resident #439), reviewed for infection prevention, the facility failed to ensure that infection prevention practices were followed and for one of six units, the facility failed to ensure bed pans were properly labeled and stored according to facility policy. The findings included: 1. Resident #65's diagnoses included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, heart failure, atrial fibrillation, diabetes mellitus, and dementia. An Annual MDS assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #65 was alert and cognitively intact, and required total dependence of one for toilet use, personal hygiene, extensive assistance of two with bed mobility, extensive assistance of one with dressing, and independence with set-up for meals. A Resident Care Plan revised dated 4/3/23 identified the resident required oxygen…
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 · D2023-07-13 · tag F0908 — failed to keep essential equipment working — isolatedKeep all essential equipment working safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations of the kitchen, facility documentation and interview, the facility failed to properly store food in sanitary conditions. The findings include: During the initial kitchen tour with the District Food Manager on 7/5/2023 beginning at 10:38 AM identified the following: The ice maker was noted to be filled with ice with outside scoop on wall in closed container. Further observation identified the inside of ice maker on the top right and left interior above the ready to be used ice with several dark black patches. Interview on 7/5/23 at 11:51 AM with District Food Manager identified the black patches as mold. She further indicated that the cleaning schedule is monthly and was last done in June 2023 and was not done correctly. Observation of facility documentation indicated that the ice maker was last cleaned on 6/27/23 and further identified the ice maker cleaning log was not signed off as cleaned in the month of May 2023. Manufacturer specifications for the Ice Maker's vendor notes interior of the bin is lined with antimicrobial-treated polyurethane, which helps…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2021-05-12 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — patternImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility policy and interview for one of five residents (Resident #30) reviewed for unnecessary medications, the facility failed to monitor recommended resident behaviors. The findings include: Resident #30's diagnoses included dementia with behavioral disturbances. The annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #30 had intact cognition, exhibited no behaviors and was independent or required supervisor with Activities of Daily Living (ADL). An Advanced Practice Registered Nurse (APRN) note dated 4/5/20 identified episodes of forgetfulness, depressive behaviors, anxiety and a recent readmission after a psychiatric hospitalization for combativeness. The note also indicated a low dose of Risperdal (an Antipsychotic medication) was initiated and that Trazodone (an Antidepressant medication) was replaced with Remeron (an Antidepressant medication). The APRN recommended to continue to monitor for behaviors of delusions and combativeness. 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 · E2021-05-12 · tag F0791 — failed to provide routine dental services — patternProvide 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 review of the clinical record, review of facility policy and interviews for one of two sampled residents (Resident #30) reviewed for dental, the facility failed to ensure dental services were provided to replace the resident's lost dentures. The findings include: Resident #30 diagnoses included dementia with behavioral disturbances, congestive heart failure and depression. The Oral Health Evaluations dated 10/2/19 and 10/2/20 identified the resident had both natural teeth, dentures/partials and upper full denture. The annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified the resident had intact cognition, was independent or required supervisor with Activities of Daily Living (ADL), experienced no weight loss and had no oral/dental issues. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) initiated 10/2/19 and last revised 4/6/21 identified the resident exhibited or was at risk for oral health or dental care problems. Interventions included: to brush/clean dentures two times per day and as needed, to monitor 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 · E2021-05-12 · tag F0882 — patternDesignate a qualified infection preventionist to be responsible for the infection prevent and control program in the nursing home.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of facility documentation, facility employee job description and interview, the facility failed to designate a specific individual (with the required training and qualification) to oversee the facility infection control program. The findings include: Interview with the DNS on 5/10/21 at 1:53 P.M. identified the facility does not have a dedicated Infection Preventionist Nurse. The DNS also indicated she oversees both the infection control program, and the DNS position. The DNS stated that she had been overseeing the infection control program since the Infection Preventionist Nurse resigned on 4/9/21. The DNS identified the facility had been without a dedicated Infection Preventionist Nurse since 4/9/21 (approximately one month) and indicated the facility did not have a second, qualified, Infection Preventionist Nurse as a backup employed for the facility. According to the DNS, the facility was in the process of hiring an Infection Preventionist Nurse. The DNS indicated she and the ADNS are in the process of going through the required infection Preventionist education…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2021-05-12 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, review of facility policy and interviews for one of twenty-four residents (Resident #26), reviewed for Advance Directives, the facility failed to ensure physician's order was in place that honored the resident's health care instructions for Advanced Directives. The findings include: Resident #26 with diagnoses that included dementia without behavioral symptoms and hypertension. The physician's orders dated [DATE] directed that Resident # 26 was a Do Not Resuscitate (DNR). The admission 5-day Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #26 was severely cognitively impaired requiring extensive assistance of 1 staff for bed mobility, transfer, and personal hygiene. A physician's progress note dated [DATE] at 12:40 P.M. identified that Resident # 26's code status was a DNR. Review of the facility's health care instructions (Advanced Directive form) dated [DATE] identified in the event of Cardiopulmonary Arrest, Resident # 26 was to have Cardiopulmonary…
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 before2021-05-12 · 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 review of the clinical record, review of facility policy and interviews for the only sampled resident (Resident # 56) reviewed for notification of change, the facility failed to notify the conservator of an abnormal diagnostic result. The findings include: Resident #56 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included cerebral infarction due to unspecified occlusion or stenosis of basilar artery, cognitive communication deficit and tracheostomy status. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #56 had severely impaired cognition and required extensive assistance with personal hygiene. The Situation, Background, Assessment, Recommendation (SBAR) Summary note dated 4/29/21 at 2:04 P.M. identified Resident #56's respiratory assessment revealed abnormal lung sounds (rales, rhonchi, wheezing), nursing observations, and recommendations were: Chest x-ray (CXR). The Physician Assistant (PA#1) was notified with new orders to obtain a chest x-ray. Resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2021-05-12 · 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 policy and interviews for one of three residents (Resident #67) reviewed for choices and for the only sampled resident (Resident #70) reviewed for specialized treatment, the facility failed to ensure a comprehensive person centered care plan was developed for the residents. The findings included: 1.Resident #67's diagnoses included tremors, diabetes mellitus and Parkinson's disease. A physician's order dated 4/11/21 directed to administer Carbidopa-Levodopa (Sinemet) 25-100 milligrams (mg), give two tablets by mouth three times a day for Parkinson's disease. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #67 was without cognitive impairment, required supervision with Activities of Daily Living (ADL) and was independent with eating. Interview with Resident #67 on 5/06/21 at 10:37 A.M. identified that within the last two to three weeks, she/he did not receive his/her Sinemet (Anti- Parkinsonian medication) for 36 hours and began…
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 before2021-05-12 · 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 review of the clinical record, facility policy, and staff interview for one of five residents in the survey sample reviewed for unnecessary medications, (Resident #17), the facility failed to revise the resident care plan related to antipsychotic medication use. The findings include: Resident #17's diagnoses included vascular dementia with behavioral disturbance. A quarterly Minimum Data Set ( MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified no cognitive problem, no mood or behavior problems, the resident had received antipsychotic medications for the last seven (7) days, and received antipsychotic medications on a routine basis. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 3/01/21 identified Resident #17 was at risk for complications related to the use of antipsychotic medications. Interventions included: to utilize the smallest most effective dose without side effects, conduct Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) assessments, behavioral monitoring, to monitor for mental status changes, and noted Gradual Dose…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2021-05-12 · 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 review of the clinical record and interviews for one of three sampled residents (Resident #67) reviewed for choices, the facility failed to ensure a medication was available and administered per the physician's order. The findings include: Resident #67's diagnoses included tremors, diabetes mellitus and Parkinson's disease. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #67 was without cognitive impairment, required supervision with Activities of Daily Living (ADL) and was independent with eating. A physician's order dated 4/11/21 directed to administer Carbidopa-Levodopa (Sinemet) 25-100 Milligrams (MG) Anti-Parkinson medication two tablets by mouth three times a day for Parkinson's disease. The April 2021 Medication Administration Record (MAR) identified the abbreviation NN (indicating to reference the nurse's notes). The abbreviation NN was used on the MAR instead of the licensed staff initials that would indicate Sinemet was administered to Resident #67 per 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.
- No harm found · C2023-07-13 · tag F0732 — widespreadPost nurse staffing information every day.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure nurse and nurse aide staffing information posted was accurate and up to date. The findings include: Observation on 7/5/23 identified the staffing information posted at the entrance receptionist desk area, and in the entrance foyer lounge area was dated 6/30/23. Interview and observation on 7/5/23 at 1:30 PM with the DNS identified that Human Resources was responsible for changing the staffing posting. Interview on 7/5/23 at 1:31 PM with the DNS and Human Resources identified the scheduler was normally responsible for the posting, however that individual was on vacation. Additionally, the DNS indicated Human Resources would be responsible for changing and updating the nurse staffing form. Subsequent to inquiry, on 7/5/23 the staff posting was updated and the 7/5/23 nurse staffing form was posted.
“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
$25,974 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $25,974 — penalty dated 2026-03-26
Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to COMPLETE CARE — 85 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 | 2 of 5 | 3.1 | -1.1 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 2 of 5 | 2.7 | -0.7 vs chain |
| Staffing | 1 of 5 | 2.3 | -1.3 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 4.4 | +0.6 vs chain |
The other 84 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.1★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 84; lowest-rated first.
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PC CT OPCOS LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 09/01/2021 |
| PC WTA OPCO HOLDCO LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 09/01/2021 |
| SMS 2021 TRUST | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 95% | since 09/01/2021 |
| HOCH, ROBERT | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | — | since 09/01/2021 |
| STEIN, SHALOM | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 09/01/2021 |
3 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
About 73% 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 $1.4M paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.
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 075253. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-04-10, 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.