Complete Care At Meriden
845 Paddock Ave, Meriden, CT 06450 · For profit - Corporation · 115 certified beds · (203) 238-2645 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (32% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0607, F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0565)
- 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 (41) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $8,827 in federal fines (most recent 2024-10-04)
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
- about 20% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies
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 | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 2 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 | 5 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 2 to 4 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 | 21.8% | 18.0% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 6.5% | 6.5% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.3% | 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 | 82.3% | 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 | 0.9% | 3.5% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 18.1% | 16.4% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 14.2% | 17.6% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 94.5% | 93.5% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 1.4% | 4.0% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 21.5% | 24.7% | 21.2% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 25.1% | 17.8% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 1.8% | 1.5% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 50.0% | 69.7% | 79.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 12.4% | 24.3% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 6.9% | 10.7% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.18 | 2.06 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 0.91 | 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.
52.9% 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 103 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 74.5% 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 98 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 0.31 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 51% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 20% 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 | 52.9%CMS range 43.2–62.1 | 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 | 9.6%CMS range 6.3–14.0 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 74.5% | 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 | 73.5% | 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 | 55.1% | 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 | 100.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.9% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 1.8% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 6.1%CMS range 4.2–11.9 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.04 | 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 115 beds and averages 106.8 residents a day — about 93% occupied, or roughly 8 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 3.33 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.68 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.92 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 2.93 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.50 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.77 to 0.45 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 32% is below the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
41 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 30 are one tap away and print in full.
- Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2024-10-04 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on a review of clinical records, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for one (1) of three (3) residents (Resident #1) reviewed for elopement, the facility failed to provide the necessary supervision to prevent elopement. As a result, Resident #1 who had cognitive impairment and was at risk for elopement was able to exit the building unsupervised, resulting in a finding of Immediate Jeopardy, past non-compliance. The finding includes: Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included metabolic encephalopathy, alcohol induced dementia and anxiety. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of seven (7) indicative of moderate cognitive impairment and required supervision with Activities of Daily Living (ADLs) including ambulation. A Social Work (SW) note dated 8/15/24 identified a family meeting was held due to Resident #1 walking all over the building and going into other…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2026-02-17 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — patternEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, review of the clinical record, facility policy, facility documentation, and interviews for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #127) observed for medication administration, the facility failed to ensure the medication error rate was not 5 percent (%) or greater (the error rate was 6.9%). The findings include: Resident #127 had diagnoses that included major depression, diabetes, heart failure, hypertension, and anemia. The quarterly MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #127 had intact cognition. Resident #127 had pain occasionally on average 2 out of the last 5 days, and received antipsychotic, antidepressant, diuretic, opioid, antiplatelet, and hypoglycemic medications during the last 7 days or since admission.The RCP care plan dated 11/28/25 identified Resident #127 received psychotropic medications. Interventions directed to administer medications as ordered by the physician.The physician's order dated 2/9/26 directed to administer Aspirin (medication used to thin blood) 81 milligrams (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 · Ecited before2026-02-17 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — patternSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, facility documentation review, facility policy review, and interviews for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #2) reviewed for medication administration, the facility failed to ensure the clinical record was accurate to include timely documentation when medications were administered, and for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #42) reviewed for wound care, the facility failed to ensure the clinical record was complete and accurate to include documentation of wound care provided. The findings included:1.Resident #2 had diagnoses that included neuromuscular dysfunction of the bladder, osteoarthritis, deep vein chronic embolism and thrombosis, and diabetes. The RCP dated 12/5/25 identified Resident #2 has pain related to osteoarthritis with interventions that directed to administer pain medications per physician's orders. The physician's order dated 12/31/25 directed to administer Tylenol 1000 milligrams (mg) three times a day for pain, Eliquis (medication to prevent and treat blood clots) 5 mg twice…
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 before2026-02-17 · 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 policy, observation, and interviews for 1 resident (Resident #2) reviewed for indwelling urinary catheter, the facility failed to ensure a urinary drainage bag was maintained in a manner that protected the resident's privacy and dignity. The findings include:Resident #2 had diagnoses that included urgency of urination, neuromuscular dysfunction of the bladder, and diabetes. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 12/5/25 identified Resident #2 requires an indwelling catheter due to neurogenic bladder. Interventions included providing privacy and comfort, catheter care per physician orders and as needed, keeping catheter off floor, and providing a privacy bag.The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #2 had moderately impaired cognition, was frequently incontinent of bowel, presence of an indwelling foley catheter, required moderate assistance with personal hygiene and dependent on staff for toileting, 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 · D2026-02-17 · tag F0554 — isolatedAllow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, review of the clinical record, and facility policy for 1 of 1 sampled resident identified to self-administer medication (Resident #91), the facility failed to assess Resident #91's ability to safely self-administer medication. The findings include:Resident #91 had diagnoses that included hypertension, hepatitis C, kidney disease, and pruritus (chronic itchiness). The RCP dated 2/3/26 identified Resident #91 had itching and was at risk for decreased ability to perform personal care tasks (ADL's). Interventions directed to administer medications as ordered, document effectiveness, and update the physician as necessary with any changes. The admission MDS dated [DATE], identified Resident #91 was cognitively intact, required the application of ointments/medications other than to his/her feet and was supervised or provided touching assistance for toileting, standing/transferring and bed mobility.Observation and interview on 2/5/26 at 10:38 AM identified Resident #91 was noted 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 · D2026-02-17 · 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, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews record review, interviews for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #127) reviewed for Advance Directives, the facility failed to ensure an advanced directives form was completed according to the resident's expressed wishes. The findings include:Resident #127 had diagnoses that included Type 2 Diabetes Meletus, congestive heart failure, and osteomyelitisThe Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 11/20/2025 identified Resident #127 had established advanced directives and was a Full Code. Interventions directed to activate resident's advanced directive as indicated, inform resident and/or healthcare decision-makers of any changes in status or care needs, and allow opportunities for expression of feelings and ask questions.A physician's order dated 11/21/2025 directed a Full Code (all life saving measures).The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #127 had a Brief Interview of 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 · D2026-02-17 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #11) reviewed for dignity, the facility failed to ensure a resident with respiratory concerns had a clean and sanitary homelike environment. The findings include:Resident #11 had diagnoses that included chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia, tracheotomy, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, stroke, and gastrostomy (g-tube) related to dysphagia. The quarterly MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #11 had intact cognition and was independent with ADLs. The physician's order dated 1/8/26 directed to administrator eternal tube feeding of 474 milliliters via g-tube bolus twice a day, perform tracheostomy care twice a day and as needed, and enhanced barrier precautions related to Extended-Spectrum Beta-Lactamases (bacteria resistant to a variety of commonly used antibiotics) in the secretions of the tracheostomy. The RCP dated 2/4/26 identified Resident #11 had a tracheostomy…
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 · D2026-02-17 · tag F0585 — failed to handle grievances — isolatedHonor the resident's right to voice grievances without discrimination or reprisal and the facility must establish a grievance policy and make prompt efforts to resolve grievances.
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 2 residents (Resident #96) reviewed for abuse, the facility failed to file a grievance for a resident who voiced concerns regarding treatment by a staff member. The findings include:Resident #96 had diagnoses that included overactive bladder, repeated falls, and congestive heart failure. Review of facility Grievance forms dated 1/1/2025 through 2/5/2026 failed to identify any grievances for Resident #96 regarding inappropriate staff behavior.The annual MDS assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #96 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, indicative of intact cognition, did not exhibit delusions or behavioral symptoms towards others, and was dependent with toileting hygiene and chair/bed-to-chair transfers.The RCP dated 11/4/2025 identified Resident #96 required assistance with activities of daily living. Interventions included assistance of two using a mechanical lift, assist of two…
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 · D2026-02-17 · 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, facility documentation, and interviews for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #8) reviewed for Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR), the facility failed to submit a request for a Level II screen subsequent to Resident #8's new psychiatric diagnoses. The findings include:Resident #8 had diagnoses that included paranoid personality disorder, anxiety, depression, and dementia.A PASRR Level 1 Screen dated 5/24/24 identified Resident #8 had no diagnosis of any mental illness and no diagnosis of dementia. The Level 1 screen indicated Resident #8 was approved for long term care.Review of Resident #8's clinical record identified on 6/24/24 diagnosis of paranoid personality disorder was added.A PASRR Level 1 Screen outcome dated 6/26/24 submitted by SW #2 dated identified Resident #8 had diagnoses of anxiety and dementia. The Level 1 outcome did not identify Resident #8's diagnoses of paranoid personality disorder and depression. The outcome from 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 before2026-02-17 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on the observation, review of the clinical record review, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 1 of 1 sampled resident (Resident #91) reviewed for medication storage, the facility failed to properly secure medication, and for 1 of 1 sampled resident (Resident #91) reviewed for medication administration the facility to ensure obtain physician's order prior to providing a resident with medication. The findings included:Resident #91 had diagnoses that included hypertension, hepatitis C, kidney disease, and pruritus (chronic itchiness). The RCP dated 2/3/26 identified Resident #91 had itching and was at risk for decreased ability to perform personal care tasks (ADL's). Interventions directed to administer medications as ordered, document effectiveness, and update the physician as necessary with any changes. The admission MDS dated [DATE], identified Resident #91 was cognitively intact, required the application of ointments/medications other than to his/her feet and was supervised or…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-02-17 · 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, review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #42) reviewed for pressure ulcers, the facility failed to maintain proper infection control during wound care and perform hand hygiene between glove changes and for 2 of 3 residents (Resident #53 and Resident #127) reviewed Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) the facility to wear appropriate Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) during care. The findings include:1.Resident #42 had diagnoses that included severe protein-calorie malnutrition, osteoarthritis, colonized MRSA, and peripheral vascular disease. The quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #42 had intact cognition, dependent on staff for all ADLs including bed mobility and transfers. The MDS identified a stage 4 pressure ulcer was present. The RCP dated 12/26/25 identified Resident #42 was non complaint with offloading heels, had a stage 4 pressure ulcer to the left hip, and discolored areas to the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
Show the remaining 30 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-08 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, facility documentation review, facility policy review, and interviews for one of three residents (Resident #1) reviewed for abuse, the facility failed to ensure the resident was treated with respect and dignity. The findings include: Resident #1's diagnoses included depressive episodes, anxiety, delusional disorders and auditory hallucinations. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of thirteen out of fifteen, required assistance with ADLs, and had no behaviors. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 2/22/2025 or last CP review completed dated 3/11/2025 identified a decreased ability to perform ADLs. Interventions directed to assist with ADLs. Review of Facility Reportable Events form dated 3/15/2025 at 1:30 PM identified according to witnesses (LPN #1 and Dietary Aide #1) Resident #1 and Nurse Aide (NA) #1 exchanged harsh words, Resident #1 became upset, claiming NA #1 had yelled at…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-10-04 · 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 three (3) residents (Resident #1) reviewed for elopement, the facility failed to ensure the resident who was a known to wander, had physician's orders and a care plan in place for a wanderguard in accordance with facility policy. The findings include: Resident #1 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses that included metabolic encephalopathy, alcohol induced dementia and anxiety. The nursing admission assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 was not able to ambulate, or self propel a wheelchair independently, therefore Resident #1 was not at risk for an elopement. The admission MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 had moderately impaired cognition and requires assistance with ADLs. A nurses note dated 8/12/24 at 5:18 AM written by LPN #2 identified Resident #1 slept partially that shift and a wanderguard was in place. Psychiatric notes dated 8/15/24 , 8/25, 8/28, 9/5/24 and 9/9/24 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 · Fcited before2024-04-04 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on tour of the kitchen, observations, facility policy and interviews, the facility failed to ensure food items in the dry storage were kept sealed from the environment and non-food items (detergent and open box of unused scrub pads) were not stored in the dry food storage and failed to ensure that daily food meal temperatures were consistently documented and failed to ensure the cook during plating food properly handle hamburger roll and the nourishment room ice machines was free from build up and pink build up on the ice outlet and the one machine was free from water overflow dish that overflowed onto the floor. The findings included: 1. Observation of the kitchen during the survey 4/1/24 with the Food Service Director of the dry storage area identified a large box with a bag of chocolate chips left open. The Food Service Director at the time of the observation indicated brownies were made 2 days ago, and immediately closed and knotted the bag while stating the bag should have been closed after use. Further observation of the kitchen identified 2 bottles of dishwashing…
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 · E2024-04-04 · tag F0700 — patternTry different approaches before using a bed rail. If a bed rail is needed, the facility must (1) assess a resident for safety risk; (2) review these risks and benefits with the resident/representative; (3) get informed consent; and (4) Correctly install and maintain the bed rail.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record reviews, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for 6 of 6 residents, (Residents # 27, # 28 , # 34, # 87 # 212 and # 215) reviewed for bed rails, the facility failed to acquire consent and physician's orders prior to the initiation of a bed rails, explain risk and benefits and failed to assess the function and perform maintenance to the bed rail according to facility policy. The findings included: 1. Resident #27 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), dementia, and bipolar disorder. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #27 was cognitively intact and dependent for personal hygiene, bathing, and toileting. The nursing quarterly assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #27 had side rails on each side of the bed which were indicated for safety and to promote independence with bed mobility. After surveyor inquiry, a consent for use of bed rails dated 4/4/24 identified 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 before2024-04-04 · 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 a record reviews, review of policy and interviews for 1 of 1 resident (Resident # 28) reviewed for dementia care, the facility failed to ensure a resident with a diagnosis of dementia was reflected in the resident care plan and for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #212) reviewed for accidents, the facility failed to ensure a care plan was developed to include a facial hematoma present on admission. The findings included. 1. Resident #28's diagnosis included dementia and Alzheimer's disease. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #28 had cognitive loss. The care plan dated 3/11/2024 indicated in part Resident #28 had behaviors such as yelling and striking out at staff, resistant to care. Interventions included: to have two staff members at all times while providing care, explaining all care before initiating and providing psychiatric consult/care as needed. The care plan did not mention dementia or Alzheimer's disease. An interview and record review with RN#4 on 4/02/24 at 8:50…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-04-04 · 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 and interviews for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #28) reviewed for accidents, the facility failed to revise the resident care plan regarding utilization of side rails timely. The findings include: Resident #28's diagnosis included dementia and Alzheimer's disease. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #28 had cognitive loss. The care plan dated 3/11/2024 indicated Resident # 28 was at risk for falls due to impaired mobility, cognitive loss, and lack of safety awareness. Interventions included, in part to keep the bed in a low position and tie the side rails in the down position to prevent Resident #28 from putting arms through the rails. An observation on 4/3/204 at 2;40 PM identified 2 half siderails on Resident # 28's bed. An observation with RN #7 on 4/4/2024 at 10:40 AM indicated 2 half side rails up on the sides of Resident#28's bed which was in the low position. An interview and record review on 4/4/2024 at 11:14 AM with the DNS indicated…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-04-04 · tag F0660 — isolatedPlan the resident's discharge to meet the resident's goals and needs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for 1 of 1 sampled resident, (Resident #104) reviewed for discharge, the facility failed to ensure a discharge transition plan was provided to the responsible party for a resident who was discharge Against Medical Advice (AMA). The findings Include: Resident #104's diagnoses included cerebral vascular disease and mild cognitive impairment. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #104 was severely cognitively impaired, independent with bed mobility, transfers and ambulation and required moderate assistance with toileting. The Resident Care Plan dated 12/30/23 identified Resident #104 had cognitive loss and had preferences for customary routines. Interventions directed to evaluate behavioral symptoms, provide morning care, and create opportunities to choose clothing for the day. A nurse's note dated 12/31/23 at 10:41 AM identified Resident #104's responsible party came to visit 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 before2024-04-04 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record reviews, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for 1 of 3 sampled residents (Resident #87) reviewed for accidents, the facility failed to ensure a resident reporting new pain following a recent fall was assessed. The findings include: Resident #87's diagnoses included end stage renal disease, hypertension, chronic pain syndrome, anxiety, and morbid obesity. A Fall Risk assessment dated [DATE] identified a score of 7 indicating Resident #87 was at moderate risk for falls. A quarterly Nursing assessment dated [DATE] identified two half side rails were in place for safety and to promote independence with bed mobility. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #87 as cognitively intact, required substantial maximal assist with bed mobility, total two person assist with transfers and had no reported falls. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 3/14/24 identified Resident #87 was at risk for decreased ability to perform activities of daily…
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 before2024-04-04 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for 1 of 3 sample residents (Resident # 87), reviewed for accidents, the facility failed to prevent an accident hazard for a resident who sustained a fall after being left in an unsafe position with the bed in a high position. The findings include: Resident #87's diagnoses included end stage renal disease, hypertension, chronic pain syndrome, anxiety, and morbid obesity. A bed rail inspection dated 1/21/22 identified the bed designated for room [ROOM NUMBER] A 'Passed' inspection. A Fall Risk assessment dated [DATE] identified a score of 7 indicating Resident #87 was at moderate risk for falls. A quarterly Nursing assessment dated [DATE] identified two half side rails were in place for safety and to promote independence with bed mobility. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #87 as cognitively intact, required substantial maximal assist with bed mobility, total two person assist…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-04-04 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record reviews, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for 1 of 1 of 3 residents, (Resident #87) reviewed for accidents, the facility failed ensure a recent fall was communicated to community center for a resident who subsequently required transfer to the Emergency Department (ED) while receiving specialized services. The findings include: Resident #87's diagnoses included end stage renal disease, hypertension, chronic pain syndrome, anxiety, and morbid obesity. A quarterly Nursing assessment dated [DATE] identified two half side rails were in place for safety and to promote independence with bed mobility. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #87 as cognitively intact, required substantial maximal assist with bed mobility, total two person assist with transfers and had no reported falls. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 3/14/24 identified Resident #87 was at risk for decreased ability to perform activities of daily living (ADL) and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-04-04 · 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, review of facility documentation, review of policy and interviews for 2 of 5 residents (Residents # 27 and #28) reviewed for unnecessary medications, the facility failed to ensure a pharmacy recommendation regarding a needed stop date for a medication was reviewed by the physician timely. The findings included. 1.Resident #27 was admitted on [DATE] with a diagnosis that included Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), dementia, and bipolar disorder. The care plan dated 6/2/23 identified Resident #27 as at risk for impaired swallowing related to an overall decline in medical condition. Interventions included providing thin-consistency liquids, assisting with feeding, and alternate small bites and sips. A pharmacy note dated 6/26/23 indicated the resident's medication regimen was reviewed and recommendations were made to the prescriber. The pharmacy notes further directed staff to see the medication regimen review report. A Drug Regimen Review report dated 6/26/23…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-04-04 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
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 2 of 4 sampled residents, (Resident #156 and Resident #159) reviewed for abuse, the facility failed ensure social service support was provided following an allegation of physical mistreatment within accordance to facility policy. The findings included: 1. Resident #156 's diagnoses included dementia and muscle weakness. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #156 as severely cognitively impaired and required one person assist with bed mobility, toileting, and two persons for transfer. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 11/1/22 identified Resident #156 required assistance with activities of daily living (ADL) and had preferences with daily routines. Interventions directed to assist with morning and evening care, provide assistance of two when transferring out of bed to the wheelchair using a mechanical lift and to allow the resident to choose when to go to bed. 2. Resident #159's…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-04-04 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record reviews, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for 1 of 4 sampled residents, (Resident #156) reviewed for abuse, the facility failed ensure an allegation of staff to resident physical mistreatment was reported to the state agency within required time frames. The findings include: 1. Resident #156 's diagnoses included dementia and muscle weakness. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #156 as severely cognitively impaired and required one person assist with bed mobility, toileting, and two persons for transfer. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 11/1/22 identified Resident #156 required assistance with activities of daily living (ADL) and had preferences with daily routines. Interventions directed to assist with morning and evening care, provide assistance of two when transferring out of bed to the wheelchair using a mechanical lift and to allow the resident to choose when to go to bed. 2. Resident #159's diagnoses included…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-04-04 · 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 clinical record reviews, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for 2 of 4 sampled residents, reviewed for abuse for (Resident # 156 and Resident # 159), the facility failed ensure the protection of other residents following an allegation of staff to resident physical mistreatment and the facility failed to ensure the protection of other residents following a witnessed resident to staff assault. The findings include: 1. Resident #156 's diagnoses included dementia and muscle weakness. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #156 as severely cognitively impaired and required one person assist with bed mobility, toileting, and two persons for transfer. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 11/1/22 identified Resident #156 required assistance with activities of daily living (ADL) and had preferences with daily routines. Interventions directed to assist with morning and evening care, provide assistance of two when transferring out of bed to the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-02-22 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record reviews, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for one of three sampled residents (Resident #1) who required staff assistance with eating, the facility failed to ensure an uncovered cup of hot coffee was not within Resident #1's reach to prevent a spill which resulted in a burn to the left leg. The findings include: Resident #1's diagnoses included metabolic encephalopathy, vascular dementia, and dysphagia. The annual Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 rarely or never made decisions regarding tasks of daily life and was dependent on staff with eating. The Resident Care Plan dated 1/12/24 identified Resident #1 required assistance or was dependent with activities of daily living. Interventions directed to provide assistance of one (1) staff member for feeding. The care plan identified a potential for nutrition and dietary deficits due to diet texture altered, dysphagia and required assistance with meals, one to one (1:1) feeding. 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 · E2021-11-17 · tag F0565 — failed to support the resident council — patternHonor the resident's right to organize and participate in resident/family groups in the facility.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews, the facility failed to respond to Resident Council group concerns in a consistent and timely manner. The findings include: Interview on 11/12/21 at 10:13 AM with the Resident Council group identified missing laundry as an ongoing issue. Although a Resident Council meeting had just been held the day before, on 11/11/21, with assurances the concern would be addressed, the concern had been brought up in previous meetings with the same response and no follow through. Review of Resident Council notes dated 11/5/20 through 11/11/21 identified missing laundry was discussed 9 of the 12 months, on 11/5/20, 12/3/20, 3/11/21,4/8/21,7/1/21, 8/21, 9/21, 10/21 and 11/11/21. The notes further indicated that disrespectful treatment by staff was reported 5 of the 12 months on 6/3/21, 7/1/21, 8/5/21, 9/2/21 and 10/1/21. Interview on 11/12/21 at 1:52 PM with the Director of Recreation identified Resident Council concerns were to be brought to the Administrator for follow up and deferred to appropriate disciplines to address…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2021-11-17 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — patternDevelop 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 observation, review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 2 of 4 residents (Resident #29, 35, 37 and 539) reviewed for wounds and who were at nutritional risk and for swallowing, the facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan. The findings include: 1. Resident #29 was admitted to the facility in October 2011 with diagnoses that included cerebrovascular disease, hemiplegia. Resident 29 began hospice services on 2/25/21. The quarterly MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #29 had moderate cognitive impairment, required assistance with bed mobility and transfer, was at risk for pressure ulcer development, and had no pressure ulcers or non-pressure related skin injuries. The care plan dated 6/25/21 identified Resident #29 was at risk for skin breakdown, bruising and skin tears related to neuropathy, limited mobility, incontinence, and frail skin. Interventions included to monitor skin for signs/symptoms of skin breakdown, reposition or offload as…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2021-11-17 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — patternProvide 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 1 resident (Resident #29) reviewed for a non-pressure skin condition, the facility failed to ensure a chronic skin condition was monitored on a consistent basis and failed to ensure the dietitian was notified, and for (Resident #539) reviewed for nutrition, the facilty failed to ensure snacks were provided to the resident according to the physician order and failed to supervise a resident during a meal. The findings include: 1a. Resident #29 was admitted to the facility in October 2011 with diagnoses that included cerebrovascular disease, hemiplegia. Resident 29 began hospice services on 2/25/21 The quarterly MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #29 had moderate cognitive impairment, required assistance with bed mobility and transfer, was at risk for pressure ulcer development, and had no pressure ulcers or non-pressure related skin injuries. The care plan dated 6/25/21 identified Resident #29 was at risk for skin…
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 · E2021-11-17 · 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 observation, review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 1 resident (Resident #34) reviewed for dental, the facility failed to ensure dental services were provided for a resident with newly identified missing dentures in a timely manner. The findings include: Resident #34 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included schizoaffective disorder, diabetes and hyperlipidemia. Observation on 11/10/21 at 2:13 PM identified Resident #34 edentulous pointing to mouth when asked if she/he had dentures. A dental consultation dated 9/12/19 identified Resident #34 had no lower dentures with a plan to reset lower teeth. A dental consult dated 12/11/19 identified Resident #34 received full lower dentures and was happy. Interview with the Unit Secretary (US #1) on 11/15/21 at 3:15 PM identified she was responsible for scheduling all dental visits. US #1 indicated she was unaware Resident #34 had lost his/her dentures. US #1 discussed the issue with Person #3 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 · E2021-11-17 · tag F0825 — patternProvide or get specialized rehabilitative services as required for a 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 observation, review of the clinical record, and staff interviews for 1 resident (Resident #539) reviewed for rehabilitation services, the facility failed to ensure specialized services were provided timely. The findings included: Resident #539 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses that included, stroke dysphagia, malnutrition, anxiety, and depression. The admission assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #539 had moderately impaired cognition, required a modified textured diet and liquids, and required a wet diet with gravy encouraged. The physician's order dated 11/3/21 directed a regular liberalized diet, dysphagia puree textured diet with extra gravy. The order directed a speech therapy evaluation and treatment as recommended. The care plan dated 11/8/21 identified a problem of nutritional risk related stroke, cancer, malnutrition, failure to thrive and history of weight loss, and dysphagia. Interventions included to provide diet as ordered and aspiration precautions due to altered liquid…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2021-11-17 · 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 and interview for 1 resident (Resident #80) who reported an allegation that he/she witnessed 2 other residents exhibit sexual behaviors, the facility failed to investigate the reported allegation. The findings include: Resident #80 had a quarterly MDS dated [DATE] that identified intact cognition and no signs or symptoms of psychosis or delirium. A social work note, written by SW #1, dated 7/13/21 at 10:37 AM indicated that psychosocial support was given to Resident #80 on 7/12/21 and 7/13/21 after the resident witnessed a female resident expose her breast to a male resident and the male resident exposed his genitals to the female resident. A psychological evaluation for Resident #80 dated 7/14/21 identified Resident #80 reported he/she witnessed inappropriate sexual behavior between two residents that made him/her anxious for a time. A care plan dated 7/23/21 indicated that Resident #80 exhibits or has the potential to exhibit psychological distress…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2021-11-17 · 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 #7 and 35) reviewed for pressure ulcers, the facility failed to provide care and services to promote healing of Resident #7's deep tissue injury (DTI) that progressed to a stage 4, and for Resident #35, the facility failed to ensure timely notification to the dietician when a pressure ulcer developed. The findings include: 1. Resident #7 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses that included dementia and anxiety. A care plan, revised on 2/7/20, with a target date of 1/19/21, identified Resident #7 was at risk for skin breakdown with interventions for heels up when in bed, pressure redistribution surfaces to bed and weekly skin and wound assessment by license nurse. Further, Resident #7 was incontinent of bowel and bowel with interventions to monitor for skin redness/irritation and report as indicated. The annual MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #7 had severely impaired cognition,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2021-11-17 · 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 review of the clinical, facility documentation, facility policy and interview for 2 of 6 residents (Resident s #32 and 44) reviewed for oxygen use, the facility failed to ensure oxygen was administered according to professional standards. The findings include: 1. Resident #32 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis that included COPD, sleep apnea, asthma and obesity. A physician's order dated 9/22/20 directed to administer oxygen at 3 liters/minute via nasal canula, titrate to maintain oxygen saturation greater than 90% as needed. The quarterly MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #32 had intact cognition and received oxygen within the past 14 days. The corresponding care plan identified Resident #32 had COPD with interventions that included to administer oxygen as ordered with the goal being to keep the pulse oximetry greater than 90%. A physician's order dated 10/12/21 directed to send Resident #32 to the emergency room due to complaints of chest pain and shortness of breath. A…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2021-11-17 · tag F0726 — failed to have competent, trained nursing staff — isolatedEnsure that nurses and nurse aides have the appropriate competencies to care for every resident in a way that maximizes each resident's well being.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, review of facility policy and interview the facility failed to ensure licensed staff had competencies related to oxygen humidification. The findings include: 1. Intermittent observation on 11/12, 11/15 and 11/16/21 identified Resident #32 was in his/her room, receiving oxygen at 4 liters/minute via nasal canula. The nasal canula tubing was dated 11/9/21, however, the Aquapak prefilled humidifier bottle (650ml sterile water for humidification) was dated 10/24/21, 23 days prior. The Aquapak sterile water had approximately ¼ solution left. Interview with LPN #5 on 11/16/21 at 9:35 AM identified she was not sure how often the Aquapak sterile water should be replaced or by whom. In a follow up interview with LPN #5 at 12:43 PM LPN #5 could not find a current oxygen order for Resident #32. Interview with the Infection Control Nurse, (RN #2), on 11/16/21 at 10:10 AM identified she thought the humidifier bottles were changed weekly on the night shift. A policy on oxygen administration was requested at that time. Interview with the DNS on 11/16/21 at 3:00 PM 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 · Dcited before2021-11-17 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, review of facility documentation and interview, the facility failed to store drugs, biologicals and IV equipment in a safe manner. The findings include: 1. Observation and interview with LPN #1 on [DATE] at 11:00 AM in the medication room on the 300/400 wing identified 30 expired IV heparin 3cc flushes (10u/ml). The expiration dates on individual IV heparin flushes ranged from [DATE] to [DATE]. LPN #1 identified that she believed the night shift would be primarily responsible to check expiration dates and dispose of expired items. She also stated the pharmacy would check the IV supplies when in and take out the expired items. Interview with the DNS on [DATE] at 10:30 AM identified that the responsibility would primarily fall to the night shift but that all nursing staff would be responsible to assure that the medications and IV supplies stored in the medication storage areas are not expired. She continued that the pharmacy would also check the IV supplies periodically but was unclear if…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2021-11-17 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolatedProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, review of facility documentation and staff interview the facility failed to ensure prepared food temperatures were logged according to policy. The findings included. Observation of Food Temperature Logs dated (11/3/21 through 11/9/21) on 11/10/21 at 10:55AM with FSD identified that food temperatures were not recorded for the dinner meal on 11/1, 11/3, 11/5, 11/6, 11/7, 11/8, 11/9 or 11/10/21. Interview with [NAME] #1 identified Coke #2 recorded temperatures on scrap paper and often forgets to log them in the food temperature log, and she had reminded him several times and he forgot. Interview with the Food Service Director (FSD) on 10/11/21at 10:58 AM identified the food temperatures should have been recorded immediately on the Service Line Checklist sheet and she was not aware [NAME] #2 was not recording the food temperatures. Interview with [NAME] #2 on 11/11/21 at 2:10 PM identified that he checked the temperature of the prepared food and recorded them on a separate piece of paper and forgot to record the temperatures because he was distracted, and 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 · D2021-11-17 · tag F0814 — failed to dispose of garbage properly — isolatedDispose of garbage and refuse properly.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, review of facility documentation and staff interviews the facility failed to ensure garbage was disposed of properly. The findings included: Observation and interview with the Director of Housekeeping #1 on 11/10/21 at 11:00 AM across from the dumpster area outside the service corridor hallway identified 2 bags of trash that contained food items such as empty yogurt containers, protein shakes and miscellaneous trash, lying on the ground. Additionally, 2 pumpkins were observed on the pavement, as well as a microwave and multiple cardboard boxes. Interview with the Director of Housekeeping #1 identified the trash was placed on the ground outside the door because the trolley cart that staff used to transport the trash to the dumpster was being used for a linen delivery and was not available. Additionally, the trash should have been discarded in the dumpster immediately and not placed outside the service hall door and indicated she would take care of the issue immediately. Review of the Disposal of Garbage and Refuse policy directed that all garbage would be…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · Bcited before2024-04-04 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — patternSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record reviews, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for 2 of 4 sampled residents, (Resident #156 and Resident #159) reviewed for abuse, the facility failed maintain a complete and accurate clinical record for residents involved in alleged physical mistreatment. The findings included: 1. Resident #156's diagnoses included dementia and muscle weakness. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #156 as severely cognitively impaired and required one person assist with bed mobility, toileting, and two persons for transfer. The Resident Care Plan dated 11/1/22 identified Resident #156 required assistance with activities of daily living (ADL) and had preferences with daily routines. Interventions directed to assist with morning and evening care, provide assistance of two when transferring out of bed to the wheelchair using a mechanical lift and allow to choose when to go to bed. 2. Resident #159's diagnoses included aneurysm of the artery of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · B2024-04-04 · tag F0851 — patternElectronically submit to CMS complete and accurate direct care staffing information, based on payroll and other verifiable and auditable data.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on review of Payroll Based Journal (PBJ) submissions for Quarter 4 of 2023, Quarter 3 of 2023, Quarter 2 of 2023, and Quarter 1 of 2023 and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure that PBJ data was complete and accurate. The findings include: The PBJ submissions for Quarter 4 of 2023 (July 1 through September 30), Quarter 3 of 2023 (April 1 through June 30), Quarter 2 of 2023 (January 1 through March 31), and Quarter 1 of 2023 (October 1 through December 31) identified excessively low weekend staffing. On 4/2/24 at 10:35 AM, an interview with the Administrator identified that data for the PBJ is inputted automatically through payroll and the facility did not capture the hours worked by agency or shared staff. Additionally, the Administrator indicated that agency staff do not punch in, and the issue had been fixed for 2024. A review of the facility policy for Nursing Services and Sufficient Staff identified that the facility is responsible for submitting timely and accurate staffing data through the CMS Payroll-Based Journal system.
- No harm found · B2024-04-04 · tag F0868 — patternHave the Quality Assessment and Assurance group have the required members and meet at least quarterly
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of facility documentation and interview, the facility failed to have a Quality Assessment and Assurance (QAA) committee consisting of the minimum required members. The findings include: The Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) meeting sign-in sheet dated 1/25/24 identified the Administrator, Director of Nursing Services (DNS), and six other staff members who attended the meeting. The Medical Director and the Infection Preventionist were not in attendance at the meeting. The QAPI meeting sign-in sheet dated 2/26/24 identified the Administrator, DNS, and nine other staff members who attended the meeting. However, the Medical Director and Infection Preventionist were not in attendance at the meeting. The QAPI meeting sign-in sheet dated 3/22/24 identified the Administrator, DNS, and seven other staff members who attended the meeting. The Medical Director and Infection Preventionist were not in attendance at the meeting. On 4/4/24 at 3:00 PM, an interview with the Administrator and DNS identified the Medical Director does not attend the monthly QAPI…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
$8,827 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $8,827 — penalty dated 2024-10-04
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 | 4 of 5 | 3.1 | +0.9 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 3 of 5 | 2.7 | +0.3 vs chain |
| Staffing | 2 of 5 | 2.3 | -0.3 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 | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | 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 72% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $2.6M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 20% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in CT
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Connecticut Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 075192. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-02-17, 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.