Lord Chamberlain Nursing & Rehabilitation Center
7003 Main Street, Stratford, CT 06614 · For profit - Corporation · 190 certified beds · (203) 375-5894 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (26% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Mar 2024
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has citations for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0567, F0570)
- it has 2 actual-harm citations
- a high number of inspection citations overall (46) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $7,443 in federal fines (most recent 2023-12-22)
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
- its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 2 of 5 |
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 | 2 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 3 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 1 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 2 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 22.9% | 18.0% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 8.5% | 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 | 2.1% | 1.5% | 2.0% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.0% | 22.3% | 6.5% | check this* — see note marked star 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 | 1.3% | 3.5% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 18.2% | 16.4% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 10.9% | 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 | 4.5% | 4.0% | 4.7% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 29.5% | 24.7% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 18.8% | 17.8% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 2.0% | 1.5% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 44.8% | 69.7% | 79.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 30.8% | 24.3% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 6.9% | 10.7% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.23 | 2.06 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.57 | 1.46 | 1.80 | better |
* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
‡ 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.
43.8% 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 158 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 36.7% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 49 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 0.18 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 19% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 18% 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 | 43.8%CMS range 34.4–51.5 | 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 | 12.3%CMS range 9.2–16.1 | 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 | 36.7% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 44.9% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 38.8% | 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 | 98.7% | 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 | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 2.6% | 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 | 9.3%CMS range 5.9–13.1 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.78 | 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 190 beds and averages 183.0 residents a day — about 96% occupied, or roughly 7 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.53 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.42 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.20 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.20 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.66 on weekdays — 12% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.51 to 0.22 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 26% is below the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
46 citations, most serious first. The 12 most serious are shown; the remaining 34 are one tap away and print in full.
- Actual harm · G2024-10-25 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility policy, and interviews for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #42) reviewed for a change in condition, the facility failed to ensure the physician/APRN was notified of the unavailability of a medication resulting in hospitalization, and for 2 of 2 residents (Resident #33 and Resident #38) reviewed for edema, the facility failed to notify the physician of weight increase of 5 pounds (lbs.) in one week for a resident with diagnosis of Congestive Heart Failure (CHF). The findings included: 1. Resident #42's diagnoses included Chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuritis (disorder of the autonomic nervous system), and dysarthria and anarthria.( a condition that results in complete or partial loss of speech due to a severe motor speech impairment). A physician's order date 7/25/24 directed to administer immunoglobulin 10% every 4 weeks. An Inter-Agency Referral Report dated 7/25/24 indicated the resident was to receive immunoglobulin 10% every 4 weeks intravenously. The…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2023-12-22 · 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 record reviews and staff interviews for one of three sampled residents (Resident #1) who required two (2) person assistance with turning and repositioning when in bed, the facility failed to ensure two (2) staff members were present at the bedside when the resident was turned onto a side to prevent the resident from sliding off the bed and sustaining a fracture of the right tibia and fibula. The findings include: Resident #1's diagnoses included abnormality of gait and mobility, dementia, and anxiety. The annual Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 had short- and long-term memory recall deficits, required extensive two (2) person assistance with turning and repositioning when in bed, and extensive one (1) person assistance with dressing and personal hygiene. A physician's orders dated 11/23/23 directed two (2) nurse aides to provide care every shift. Review of the Resident Care Card in place on 11/30/23 directed two (2) staff members to provide care to Resident #1. The nurse'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 · D2025-03-05 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, facility documentation review, facility policy review, and interviews for one of three residents (Resident #1) reviewed for abuse, the facility failed to ensure the State Agency was notified timely of an allegation of abuse (injury of unknown origin). The findings include: Resident #1's diagnoses included Alzheimer's disease, dementia and osteoporosis. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 12/23/2024 identified Resident #1 had osteoporosis with an increased risk for spontaneous fracture and pain. Interventions directed handle gently, and observe and support extremities during transfer and care. The annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of ninety-nine (99), indicative of not being able to complete the interview and required assistance of one (1) person assistance for ADLs (activities of daily living). A nursing note dated 2/16/2025 at 8:00 PM written by RN #1 identified at beginning of shift…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-10-25 · 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 record review, facility policy review and interviews for 1 of 2 sampled residents (Resident #128) reviewed for anticoagulation, the facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan for Resident #128 who was receiving an anticoagulant and for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #160) reviewed for urinary catheters, the facility failed to implement a care plan for a resident with a urinary catheter. The findings included: 1.Resident #128's diagnosis included dementia, hypertension, and respiratory failure. The physician's orders dated 5/6/24 directed to administer Lovenox (an anticoagulant medication) 40 ( MG) milligrams, to be injected subcutaneously at bedtime for prophylaxis. The Medication Administration Record from 5/7/24 through 10/23/24 further identified Resident #128 was receiving the anticoagulant Lovenox 40 MB every day at bedtime. The quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #128 was severely cognitively impaired and dependent for toileting, showering,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-10-25 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — patternDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record reviews, review of facility documentation, review of facility policy, and staff interviews for 1 of 3 sampled residents (Resident #27) reviewed for Advance Directives, the facility failed to revise the care plan when the resident changed his/her code status from a Full Code to Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) and for 2 of 8 residents reviewed for care planning (106, 113) the facility failed to revise the care plan timely. For Resident #232, the facility failed to revise the resident care plan following an unwitnessed fall, and for 1 of 8 residents (Resident #65), the facility failed to invite a resident to care plan meetings. The findings included: 1. Resident #27's diagnosis included Alzheimer's disease, hypertension, and heart failure. Review of the Advance Directive dated 6/8/23 identified Resident #27 was a Full Code and on 4/29/24 the code status was changed to Do Not Resuscitate (DNR). The physician's orders dated 4/29/24 identified that Resident #27 was a DNR. The quarterly Minimum Data…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-10-25 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — patternProvide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, review of the clinical record, facility policy, and interviews for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #38) reviewed for a limited Range Of Motion (ROM), the facility failed to apply hand splints per the physician's order. The findings include: Resident #38 's diagnoses included congestive heart failure, obesity, and diabetes. A physician order dated 8/21/23 directed a left resting hand splint and right grip roll hand splint to be applied with personal care at bedtime and removed in the morning with care. The quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #38 was severely cognitively impaired and dependent with upper body dressing, rolling left and right, with chair/bed to chair transfers, and had a functional limitation of range of motion on 1 side of the upper extremity. The Resident Care Plan dated 8/23/24 identified Resident #38 had neurological risks related to his/her history of a stroke and seizures. Interventions included to place and remove his/her left hand and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-10-25 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations of the kitchen and dry storage area, facility policy review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure the kitchen and dry storage area were kept in a clean and sanitary condition, and food temperature thermometers were sanitized prior to taking the temperature of food items per facility policy and failed to ensure opened unlabeled food items/supplements were labeled when opened and discarded. The findings included: 1.a. Tour of the facility kitchen, observation and interview with the Dietary Manager on 10/21/2024 starting at 10:10 AM and concluding at 11:10 AM identified an open paper bag containing cornstarch left open and not labeled, a large open bag of rice with rice spillage on the bag and surrounding area, an open unlabeled bag of brown sugar, a bag of opened unlabeled powdered cheese and a bin containing a large bag of breadcrumbs left open. Upon moving the bin off the shelf, a cobweb like debris was noted suspended from the back of the bin onto the back of the breadcrumb bag. The Dietary Manger disposed of the breadcrumbs further indicating the dry…
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 · D2024-10-25 · 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 review, facility policy review and interviews for 1 of 1 sampled resident (Resident #71) reviewed for dignity, the facility failed to investigate an allegation of mistreatment. The finding include: Resident #71's diagnosis included depression, anxiety, and breast cancer. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 7/13/24 identified Resident #71 had a history of suicidal thoughts or actions due to potential or actual mood and impaired coping. Interventions included to assess the resident for potential harm to self or others. The RCP also identified Resident #71 had psychotropic drug use related to anxiety, insomnia and bipolar disorder. Intervention included to monitor for a decline in mood, and behavior. The quarterly Minimum Data set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #71 was cognitively intact, independent with eating, toileting, personal hygiene, and transfers, and required supervision with bathing. An interview with Resident #71 on 10/21/24 at 11:30 AM identified that some of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-10-25 · 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 observation, staff interview, and facility policy for 1 of 4 residents, (Resident #44) reviewed for pressure ulcers, the facility failed to ensure pressure ulcer treatments were performed in accordance with infection control standards. The findings include: Resident #44's diagnoses included congestive heart failure, anxiety disorder, and unspecified atrial fibrillation (an irregular and fast heartbeat). The quarterly Minimum admission Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #44 was severely cognitively impaired and was dependent for eating, toileting and transfers. Additionally, the MDS identified Resident #44 was at risk for developing pressure ulcers and had two Stage 3 pressure ulcers. The Resident Care Plan dated 10/11/24 identified Resident #44 was at risk for skin issues due to fragile skin, and decreased activity and mobility. Interventions included to follow facility policies/protocols for the prevention/treatment of skin breakdown and obtain wound measurements and documentation of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-10-25 · 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 policy review and staff interviews for 1 of 8 residents reviewed for accidents and hazards (Resident #232), the facility failed to provide a safe and complete transfer from a chair to bed for a resident requiring assistance, resulting in a fall with major injury and for 1 of 3 sampled resident (Resident #71) who was reviewed for dignity, the facility failed to maintain an accident-free environment and for 2 of 8 residents (Resident # 24) who required supervision during meals, the facility failed to provide appropriate supervision for a resident on aspiration precautions. The findings included: 1. Resident #232 had diagnoses that included dementia with psychotic disturbance. The annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #232 was severely cognitively impaired, required hands on one-person moderate assist with bed mobility, transfers, toileting, and self-propelled using a wheelchair. The Resident Care Plan dated 7/3/24 identified Resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-25 · tag F0699 — isolatedProvide care or services that was trauma informed and/or culturally competent.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record reviews, facility policy and interviews for 1 sampled resident (Resident #139) reviewed for trauma informed care, the facility failed to ensure a resident with history of trauma was addressed to include identification of life event(s), triggers/stressors and management of care to prevent re-traumatization. The findings include: Resident #139's diagnoses included post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and dementia. The Social Service Initial assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #139 was alert, oriented, confused at times with a history of depression. The quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #139 was moderately cognitively impaired, required two person assist with activities of daily living and had an active diagnosis that included post-traumatic stress disorder, depression and anxiety. The Resident Care Plan dated 10/2/24 identified Resident had a diagnosis of depression, anxiety and was cognitively impaired. Interventions directed to explain what…
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 · D2024-10-25 · tag F0711 — isolatedEnsure the resident's doctor reviews the resident's care, writes, signs and dates progress notes and orders, at each required visit.
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, observation and staff interviews for 1 of 4 residents (Resident # 123) reviewed for physician visits, the facility failed to ensure electronic physician's orders were signed timely. The findings include: Resident #123's diagnosis included Congestive Heart Failure (CHF), acute respiratory failure and chronic kidney disease. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] indicated Resident #123 was cognitively impaired and was taking antidepressant, diuretic and anticonvulsant medication. An observation and record review with RN #1 and Unit secretary #1 on 10/24/2024 at 10:45 AM identified s/he was not able to find the resident's signed physician's orders (written or electronic signed by the physician for 30- or 60-day review and renew of orders). A review of Resident # 123's clinical record with Unit Secretary indicated s/he knows the physician reviewed the physician's orders because a progress note was written. RN #1 indicated the facility had only been utilizing…
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 34 citations
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-25 · 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, clinical record review and staff interviews for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #123) reviewed for physician's orders, the facility failed to ensure staff were trained in the procedure for using the electronic physician order system and their responsibility in ensuring physician orders were signed timely. The findings include: An observation and record review with RN #1 and Unit secretary #1 on 10/24/2024 at 10:45 AM identified s/he was not able to find Resident # 123's signed physician's orders (written or electronic signed by the physician for 30- or 60-day review and renew of orders). A review of Resident # 123's clinical record with Unit Secretary indicated s/he knows the physician reviewed the physician's orders because a progress note was written. RN #1 indicated the facility had only been utilizing the electronic system for a few months. Observation of the electronic record indicated in bold red lettering in the order section orders 55 days overdue. RN #1 and Unit secretary #1 could not recall any educational training for using the physicians order system in…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-25 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolatedEnsure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary 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 staff interviews, review of the clinical record, and facility policy for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #33) reviewed for unnecessary medications, the facility failed to prevent the administration of an unnecessary medication for constipation. The findings include: Resident #33's diagnoses included osteoarthritis, chronic pain, and polyneuropathy. The admission Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #33 was cognitively intact and required supervision or touching assistance with eating, partial/moderate assistance for rolling left and right, and was dependent with moving from lying to sitting on the side of the bed. A physician's re-admission order dated 8/26/24 directed to administer naloxegol oxalate 25 milligrams (mg) by mouth daily for Gastrointestinal (GI) upset. A nursing note dated 8/26/24 at 2:20 PM identified that MD #3 had been called following Resident #33's re-admission and all Resident #33's medications were reviewed and approved by MD #3. An Advanced Practice Registered…
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 before2024-10-25 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interviews, review of the clinical record, and facility policy for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #33) reviewed for unnecessary medications, the facility failed to implement a stop date for a psychotropic (drugs used to treat mental illness) medication. The findings include: Resident #33 's diagnoses included depression, anxiety disorder, and insomnia. The admission Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #33 was cognitively intact and required supervision or touching assistance with eating, partial/moderate assistance with personal hygiene, and was dependent with moving from lying to sitting on the side of the bed. The physician's re-admission orders dated 8/26/24 directed to administer trazodone 50 milligrams (mg) by mouth at bedtime for sleep and administer trazodone 25 mg by mouth 3 times a day as needed. The order lacked a stop date. A nursing note dated 8/26/24 at 2:20 PM identified that MD #3 had been called following Resident #33's re-admission and all of Resident #33's…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-10-25 · 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 observations, facility policy review and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure medications were secured during medication administration, and failed to discard expired heparin flushes and the facility failed to store a narcotic liquid medication securely, ensure expired over the counter medications were not in the medication cart for use and failed to ensure an insulin bottle was labeled with the resident's name and the date the medication was opened. The findings included: 1. a. An observation on 10/22/24 at 8:35 AM during medication administration identified Licensed Practical Nurse, LPN #2 dispense (3) medications from their blister packs, pick up the medication cup with medications and a drink and began entering resident room [ROOM NUMBER] without first securing (3) medication blister packs left on top of the medication cart and locking the cart. Surveyor intervene before LPN #2 entered room [ROOM NUMBER]. An interview with LPN #2 on 10/22/24 at 8:35 AM identified medications should not be…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-25 · tag F0800 — isolatedProvide each resident with a nourishing, palatable, well-balanced diet that meets his or her daily nutritional and special dietary 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 observation, facility policy and interview for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #10) reviewed for dinning, the facility failed to honor resident's food choices. The findings include: Resident #10's diagnoses included dysphagia, hypertension, and hyperlipidemia. A physician's order dated 4/19/24 directed to provide a no added salt, regular texture, thin diet. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #10 as cognitively intact and required set up assistance with eating and maximum assistance with bathing and dressing. The Resident Care Plan dated 10/15/24 identified resident had a potential nutritional risk. Interventions included to provide a no added salt diet and regular thin diet with food preferences as possible. In the initial screening with Resident #10 on 10/21/24 11:40 AM she/he identified s/he does not get the foods s/he chooses and gets food items that s/he does not like. For example, s/he does not like chicken on a bun and received the food for dinner. Resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-25 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — isolatedEnsure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations of the breakfast, policy review and staff interviews for 2 of 6 residents reviewed for food (Residents #67 and # 146), the facility failed to follow the resident meal ticket which resulted in food items missing from the breakfast meal. The findings include: 1. Resident #67 was admitted with diagnoses that included diabetes mellitus and heart failure. The annual MDS assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #67 was cognitively intact and independent with eating. A physician's order dated 9/30/2024 directed a heart-healthy regular-textured diet. A care plan dated 10/1/2024 indicated the resident had a potential nutrition risk related to diabetes mellitus and heart failure. Interventions included providing a cardiac regular texture diet with food preferences as possible. On 10/24/2024 at 9:10 AM during an observation with LPN #9 and RN #1 identified Resident #67 had received his/her breakfast tray that consisted only of two slices of toast on a white plate. Resident #67 questioned LPN #9 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 · D2024-10-25 · tag F0805 — failed to prepare food in a form residents can eat — isolatedEnsure each resident receives and the facility provides food prepared in a form designed to meet individual needs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations of the noon meal, review of facility policy and staff interviews for 1 of 6 residents reviewed for nutrition (Resident #82), the facility failed to provide appropriate food consistency for a resident on a pureed diet. The findings include: Resident #82 was admitted with diagnoses that included tongue cancer and a hip replacement. The quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #82 was cognitively intact and independent with eating. The MDS assessment also indicated the resident did not have a swallowing disorder but had been on a mechanically altered diet while a resident at the facility. A care plan dated 8/8/2024 identified that Resident #82 had a risk of swallowing difficulty, had a diagnosis of tongue cancer, and the resident requested pureed food. Interventions included monitoring the resident's response to the diet and serving requested foods if the diet allowed. An observation of Resident #82's lunch tray on 10/21/2024 at 1:03 PM identified the resident's meal ticket…
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 before2024-10-25 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, review of the clinical record, facility policy, and interviews for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #38) reviewed for limited range of motion, the facility staff failed to wear appropriate Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) when direct care for a feeding tube was provided to a resident who required Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP). The findings include: Resident #38's diagnoses included dysphagia, placement of a feeding tube, and aphasia following a stroke. The quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #38 was severely cognitively impaired and was dependent for eating, personal hygiene, and rolling left and right. The Resident Care Plan dated 8/23/24 identified Resident #38 was at risk of alteration in nutrition related to requirement of tube feeding due to dysphagia and history of a stroke. Interventions included to administer the tube feeding per physician's order, perform feeding tube site care per physician's order, and maintain EBP every shift related to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-04-22 · 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 change in condition, the facility failed to ensure the physician was notified when a resident refused medications. The findings include: Resident #1 had diagnoses that included depression, spondylolysis lumbar region, hypertension, and anxiety. An admission MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 had intact cognition, required moderate assistance with dressing upper body, maximal assistance personal hygiene, bed mobility, toileting, and was dependent with dressing lower body. A care plan dated 2/14/2024 identified Resident #1 had an ineffective airway clearance related to excessive tenacious secretions and exudate secondary to congestion. Interventions directed to auscultate for decreased breath sounds, wheezing, or any abnormality, assess respiratory rate, and administer bronchodilator per physician orders. A nurse's note dated 2/14/2024 at 6:31 A.M.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-04-22 · 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
Based on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for one (1) of three (3) residents (Resident #1) reviewed for change in condition, the facility failed to ensure vital signs were obtained and respiratory assessments was performed prior to and after administering respiratory treatments. The findings include: Resident #1 had diagnoses that included depression, spondylolysis lumbar region, hypertension, and anxiety. A care plan dated 2/14/2024 identified Resident #1 had an ineffective airway clearance related to excessive tenacious secretions and exudate secondary to congestion with interventions that directed to auscultate for decreased breath sounds, wheezing, or any abnormality, assess respiratory rate, and administer bronchodilators per physician orders. A nurse's note dated 2/14/2024 at 6:31 A.M. written by LPN #2 identified Resident #1 had increased phlegm and was expelling clear discharge. LPN #2 indicated she put a note in the APRN book to have Resident #1 assessed by the APRN. A APRN's note dated 2/14/2024 at 9:22 A.M. written by…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-03-27 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for one (1) of three (3) residents, (Resident #2), reviewed for abuse, the facility failed to ensure a resident was free from physical abuse. The findings include: 1. Resident #2 had diagnoses that included encephalopathy, heart failure, and hypertension. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] identified Resident #2 had severely impaired cognition, was occasionally incontinent of bowel, frequently incontinent of bladder, and was dependent with Activities of Daily Living. The care plan dated 2/14/2024 identified Resident #2 has cognitive loss with interventions that directed to use simple, direct communication, verbal cues, task segmentation, encourage socialization and recreation activity. 2. Resident #3 had diagnoses that included bipolar disorder, neurocognitive disorder with Lewy bodies, and Parkinson's disease. The quarterly MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #3 had moderately impaired cognition, was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-03-27 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for one (1) of three (3) residents, (Resident #1), reviewed for accidents, the facility failed to ensure a care plan was implemented to include interventions for a resident with impaired cognition and was at risk for falls who frequently got up unassisted resulting in falls. The findings include: Resident #1 had diagnoses that included dementia, anxiety, insomnia, history of falling, and muscle weakness. The fall risk evaluation dated 2/16/2024 identified Resident #1 at risk for falls. Review of a physical therapy evaluation dated 2/16/24 identified that the resident required assistance of one for transfers and ambulation. The care plan dated 2/17/2024 identified Resident #1 as a risk for falls with interventions that directed to keep the call bell within reach, encourage use of call bell, to educate based on current knowledge base and ability to learn. A nurse's note dated 2/17/2024 at 10:34 P.M. written by RN #6…
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 · D2024-01-09 · tag F0557 — isolatedHonor the resident's right to be treated with respect and dignity and to retain and use personal possessions.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on clinical record reviews, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for one (1) of two (2) residents, (Resident #1) who were reviewed for care and services, the facility failed to ensure a resident was treated in a dignified manner. The findings include: Resident #1's diagnoses included wedge compression fracture of thoracic 11-12 vertebra (mid spine). An inter-agency referral report dated 11/18/23 identified recommendations that included assist of one with a rolling walker to transfer from the bed to the commode. A nursing admission note dated 11/18/23 at 2:57 PM identified Resident #1 was alert and oriented to person, place, and time, communicated verbally with clear speech, was able to understand and be understood when speaking. A nurse's note dated 11/18/23 at 11:15 PM identified Resident #1 reported a complaint of being unhappy with care. Attempted to reassure h/her that the situation would be addressed. Resident #1 refused to accept the response. The RN supervisor was notified. A Grievance dated 11/18/23 identified Resident #1 was concerned that s/he was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-01-09 · 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 one (1) of two (2) sampled residents, (Resident #1), who were reviewed for care and services, the facility failed to ensure neurological assessments were initiated in accordance with facility policy. The findings include: Resident #1's diagnoses included wedge compression fracture of thoracic 11-12 vertebra (mid spine). The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 was without cognitive impairment and required supervised minimal touch assist with bed mobility, transfer, and toileting. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 11/30/23 identified Resident #1 Resident #1 exhibited a decline in the ability to ambulate, transfer, toilet, and positioning self in the bed with interventions that directed to provide assist of one with bed mobility, transfers, and toileting. Physician orders dated 12/22/23 directed modified independence with toileting using the wheelchair and grab bar. A facility…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2022-07-19 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — patternProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 3 residents (Resident # 40, 51 and 161) reviewed for respiratory care, the facility failed to ensure oxygen tubing was changed and dated on a weekly basis. Further, for Resident #40 the facility failed to obtain Covid testing following the development of respiratory symptoms in a timely manner, and for Resident #51, the facility failed to ensure respiratory equipment was stored according to policy and infection control standards and failed to respond to a specialty service recommendation to determine the ongoing need for oxygen therapy following the initiation of oxygen therapy. The findings include: 1. Resident #40 was admitted with diagnoses that included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), polyneuropathy and Type II diabetes. The annual MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #40 had intact cognition and required assist with personal care. The care plan dated 5/12/22 identified Resident #40…
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 before2022-07-19 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and interviews, the facility failed to ensure staff followed infection control practices regarding glove removal and hand hygiene. The findings include: 1. Observation on 7/17/22 at 10:05 AM identified NA #2 exited room [ROOM NUMBER] with gloves on both hands and touched a doorknob to close room door. NA #2 walked down the hallway with gloves on carrying soiled and dirty linen in hands. NA #2 indicated she should not have walked out of the room with gloves on both hands. NA #2 indicated she has been employed with the facility for 9 years. Interview on 7/17/22 at 10:10 AM with RN #5 identified she has been employed with the facility for 14 years. RN #5 indicated NA #2 did not follow the infection control practices. RN #5 indicated NA #2 should have removed one glove before exiting the room. RN #5 indicated NA #2 should not have touched the doorknob with gloved hand. 2. Observation on 7/17/22 at 10:27 AM identified LPN #5 at the medication cart in the hallway with gloved hands changing 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 · D2022-07-19 · tag F0553 — failed to let residents help plan their care — isolatedAllow resident to participate in the development and implementation of his or her person-centered plan of care.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interview for 1 resident (Resident #115) reviewed for care planning, the facility failed to ensure the resident had the right to participate in the development and implementation of his or her person-centered plan of care. The findings include: Resident #115 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included heart failure, hypertension, and atrial fibrillation. The care plan dated 1/4/22 identified a discharge plan with interventions to provide ongoing communication to the interdisciplinary team members, physician, and resident about the discharge process. The admission MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #115 had intact cognition and required limited assistance for transfers, dressing, toileting, and personal hygiene. Additionally, the MDS identified it was very important for the resident to choose own clothing, take care of personal belongings, and his/her bedtime. The social services quarterly progress notes…
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 before2022-07-19 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 1 resident (Resident #15) reviewed for dialysis, the facility failed to ensure an emergency pressure dressing kit was at bedside per facility policy and for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #136) reviewed for pressure ulcers, the facility failed to obtain a physician order for a specialized pressure relieving mattress,. The findings include: 1. Resident #15 was admitted to the facility in August 2020 with diagnoses that included chronic kidney disease stage 5, dependence on renal dialysis, and type 2 diabetes with diabetic peripheral angiopathy. The care plan dated 4/7/22 identified in the event of emergency: AV shunt begins to leak, or bleeding, maintain standard precautions, apply pressure to upper arm with tourniquet or pressure dressing to site of bleeding, vital signs every 15 minutes and immediately call attending physician and 911 per physician. The quarterly MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #15…
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 before2022-07-19 · 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 observation, review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #69) reviewed for pressure ulcers, the facility failed to ensure weekly assessments of the pressure ulcer. The findings include: Resident #69 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included stroke dysphasia, and dementia. The quarterly MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #69 had severely impaired cognition, had a feeding tube that provided over 51% of the calories per day and was at risk for a pressure ulcer or skin injury. A physician's order dated 3/21/22 directed to cleanse the skin under the flange of the feeding tube with normal saline, apply Aquacel AG and a dry dressing daily on the evening shift. The care plan dated 6/2/22 identified the resident had a skin integrity irritation around the feeding tube with interventions that included to complete treatments as ordered by the physician, keep wound dry and clean, and complete wound measurements 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 before2022-07-19 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #78) reviewed for accidents, the facility failed to ensure the residents bed was locked to prevent a fall. The findings include: Resident #78 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses that included dementia, pneumonia, and respiratory failure with a tracheostomy. A physician's order dated 6/1/22 directed to provide assistance of one staff with rolling walker for transfers. The significant change of condition MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #78 had intact cognition and required extensive assistance for bed mobility and transfers. A reportable event form dated 6/15/22 a 12:30 PM identified LPN #9 witnessed Resident #78 attempt to sit on the bed, which was not locked, and the resident slid to the floor. Resident #78 indicated as he/she went to sit on the bed it moved and was unlocked, and he/she slid to the floor. The care plan dated 6/15/22 identified an actual fall (sat on bed…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-07-19 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolatedProvide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #158) reviewed for nutrition, the facility failed to ensure follow the policy and reweigh the resident when a significant weight loss was identified. The findings included: Resident #158's diagnoses included stroke, epilepsy, diabetes, septicemia, sacral pressure ulcer, Alzheimer's disease, dementia and psychotic disorder. The care plan dated 6/20/22 identified Resident #158 had a potential nutrition risk related to dementia and need for tube feeding. Interventions included to monitor weight and nothing by mouth (NPO). The significant change in condition MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #158 had severely impaired cognition, required extensive assistance with bed mobility, dressing, eating, toilet use and personal hygiene, the resident weighed 160 lbs., had a feeding tube, had a stage IV pressure ulcer and was receiving nutrition and hydration intervention to manage skin problems. 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 before2022-07-19 · 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 the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 2 residents (Resident #126 and 147) reviewed for Medication Storage, the facility failed to ensure insulin pens/vials where dated when opened per facility policy. The findings include: 1. Resident #126 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses that included uncontrolled diabetes and cerebral infarction. The significant change of condition MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #126 had intact cognition and required limited assistance for dressing and personal hygiene. Additionally, receives insulin injections 7 days a week. The care plan dated 3/3/22 identified a type 2 diabetes with interventions that included to monitor blood sugars and medications as ordered. A physician's order dated 6/29/22 directed to administer Levemir (Insulin) 62 units in the morning, Levemir (Insulin) 70 units at bedtime, Humalog (Insulin) 24 units before meals and a Lispro (Insulin) sliding scale starting at 150 to 399 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 · Ecited before2019-11-26 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — patternProvide 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 observation, review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 3 of 4 sampled residents reviewed for pressure ulcers (Resident #19, Resident #30 and Resident #159), the facility failed to ensure the appropriate pressure relieving device was utilized and failed to complete weekly Braden Scale assessment per physician orders (Resident #159). The findings include: 1. Based on observation, review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 3 of 4 sampled residents reviewed for pressure ulcers (Resident #19, Resident #30 and Resident #159), the facility failed to ensure the appropriate pressure relieving device was utilized and failed to complete weekly Braden Scale assessment per physician orders (Resident #159). The findings include: 1. Resident #19 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included atrial fibrillation, Rheumatic aortic (valve) stenosis and vascular dementia with behavioral disturbance. 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 · Ecited before2019-11-26 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — patternImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on an observation, a review of the clinical record, staff interviews, a review of the facility documentation, and the facility policy, for one of four residents reviewed for the use of an antipsychotic medication (Resident #131), the facility failed to consistently monitor behaviors for a resident that was administered antipsychotic medication. The findings include: Resident #131 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included Alzheimer's disease, dementia with behavioral disturbances, diabetes, hypertension, and chronic kidney disease. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 10/20/19 identified Resident #131 received psychotropic medications for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease with behavioral disturbances. Interventions directed to monitor behaviors on a behavior tracking sheet and to monitor for a decline in mood. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] identified severe cognitive impairment, required extensive assistance with activities of daily living, bed mobility,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2019-11-26 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — patternEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to maintain food holding temperatures according to facility policy. The findings include: Observation and interview with Dietary Aide (DA) #1 in the second floor dining room on 11/25/19 at 12:38PM identified the following holding temperatures after the last meal was served: meatballs 123.4 degrees Fahrenheit and ground meatballs 115 degrees Fahrenheit. DA #1 identified the holding temperature should be 163, 175 or 190 degrees Fahrenheit and then identified he/she was not sure of the holding temperature. Further, the food pans were stored on the steam table with hot water under the pan. Interview with the Dietary Manager on 11/25/19 at approximately 12:40 PM identified the holding temperature should be 135 degrees or above and did not know the reason temperatures were low. Additionally, the Dietary Manager identified the food temperatures should be so far above the holding temp when they come from the kitchen and should not drop that low. Further, the Dietary Manager identified the heating…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2019-11-26 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review and interview for one of one resident in survey sample reviewed for fluid restriction (Resident #235), the facility failed to ensure Resident #235 did not exceed a physician directed fluid restriction. The findings included: Resident #235 was admitted to facility on 11/21/18 with diagnoses that included Congestive Heart Failure (CHF), atrial fibrillation (A-Fib), Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) and endocarditis. A Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 11/21/18 identified a problem with alteration in cardiac /circulatory status related to A-Fib. Interventions included to monitor intake and output as indicated. A RCP dated 11/21/18 identified a problem with CHF. Interventions included to monitor resident for signs and symptoms of CHF and to notify the medical doctor regarding any abnormal findings. Physician's orders dated 11/26/18 directed to obtain brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) to morning labs (an indicator for presence of CHF), obtain chest x-ray this morning and to give…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2019-11-26 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for accidents (Resident #89 and Resident #117), the facility failed to provide adequate supervision to a resident during the administration of a nebulizer treatment to prevent a burn injury (Resident #89) and failed to report a potential injury so an assessment could be completed by the Registered Nurse (Resident #117). The findings include: 1. Resident #89 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and diagnosis that included Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, acute and chronic respiratory failure, anxiety, and hypertension. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #89 was cognitively intact, required extensive assistance of one person for bed mobility, transfers, dressing, and personal hygiene. The Resident Care Plan dated 5/15/19 identified a problem with breathing with interventions that included to administer medication, inhalers…
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 · B2024-10-25 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — patternHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, review of the clinical record, facility policy, and interviews for 3 dining rooms (Resident #17, 43, 79, 80, 102, 105, 110, 154, 163) reviewed for dining, the facility failed to provide a dignified dining experience. The findings include: 1. Resident #17's diagnoses included dementia, anorexia, and adult failure to thrive. The quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #17 was severely cognitively impaired and was independent with eating, required setup or clean-up assistance with oral hygiene and partial/moderate assistance with chair/bed to chair transfers. The Resident Care Plan dated 8/23/24 identified Resident #17 was at risk for decreased nutrition related to dementia and failure to thrive. Interventions included monitor oral intake and set up and assist with meals as needed. Further identified was Resident #17 required assistance with activities of daily living (ADLs) related to failure to thrive. Interventions included to consider appropriate setting for…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · B2024-10-25 · tag F0567 — failed to protect residents' money held by the home — patternHonor the resident's right to manage his or her financial affairs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of the Resident Trust Accounts, interviews and facility policy for 2 of 2 sampled residents (Resident #94 and Resident #100) reviewed for personal funds, the facility failed to ensure interest was provided to the resident account. The findings On 10/24/24 at 9:10 AM, review of the Resident Trust Accounts with the Business Office Manager identified the following: 1. Resident #94 was admitted to the facility in March 2023 and currently has a payor source of Medicaid. On 10/24/24 at 9:10 AM, review of the Resident Trust Accounts with the Business Office Manager identified on 12/13/23 Resident #94 had a balance of 100.00 dollars ($), although interest was posted to other Resident Trust Accounts within the facility on 1/2/24, the Resident Fund Statement identified Resident #94 did not receive interest. On 2/1/24, Resident #94 had a balance of $65.00, interest was posted to other Resident Trust Accounts within the facility on 2/1/24, but Resident #94 did not receive interest. On 3/1/24, Resident #94 had a balance of $65.00, interest was posted to other Resident Trust…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · B2024-10-25 · tag F0570 — patternAssure the security of all personal funds of residents deposited with the facility.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on facility documentation and interviews for Resident Trust Accounts, the facility failed to ensure a Surety Bond was in place prior to October 24, 2024. The findings include: On 10/25/24 at 9:10 AM, interview with the Business Office Manager identified the Resident Trust Account balance was over 94,759.89 dollars ($). A review of the Resident Trust Fund Surety bond on 10/25/24 at 9:10 AM with the Business Office Manager identified the Resident Trust Fund Surety bond was in effect on 10/24/24 for $100,000.00 but was unable to provide a Surety Bond that was in effect prior to 10/24/24. An interview with the Business Office Manager on 10/25/24 at 9:15 AM identified the facility did not have a copy of the previous Resident Trust Fund Surety bond and would reach out to their corporate office to obtain a copy. A phone interview with the underwriter assistant on 10/25/24 at 9:26 AM identified that the facility had a Resident Trust Fund Surety Bond with an effective date from 10/24/24 to 10/24/25. Additionally, the interview identified through a search of their data base there was no…
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 · B2024-10-25 · tag F0625 — patternNotify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record reviews, facility policy and staff interviews for 2 of 4 residents reviewed for hospitalizations (Residents #63 and 167), the facility failed to provide the responsible party notice of the facility bed hold of the bed hold at the time of a facility transfer. The findings include: 1. Resident #63's diagnoses included gastroenteritis, Type II diabetes mellitus and dementia. The quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #63 was moderately cognitively impaired and dependent (2 person assist) with activities of daily living (ADL) care, one person assists with eating. The Resident Care Plan dated 5/29/24 identified Resident #63 had an Activities of Daily Living (ADL) deficit and was at risk for constipation. Interventions directed to be upright for all meals and feed with every meal in small bites. A review of the admission clinical record identified Resident #63 was not self-responsible. A nurse's note dated 7/27/24 at 6:24 PM identified Resident #63 was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · B2022-07-19 · tag F0623 — patternProvide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal 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 and interview for 2 residents (Resident #77 and 95), who had been transferred to the hospital, the facility failed to notify the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman of the hospital transfers. The findings include: 1. Resident #77 was admitted to the facility in June 2017 with diagnoses that included bipolar disorder, dementia, and hypertension. Review of the census form identified Resident #77 was transferred to the hospital and admitted on [DATE]. A nurse's note dated 5/19/22 at 1:51 PM identified Resident #77 was readmitted to the facility at 1:45 PM with primary diagnosis of major neurocognitive disorder due to possible Alzheimer ' s disease with behavior disturbances. Review of the admission/discharges to/from report for the month of May 2022 failed to reflect the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman had been notified of Resident #77 ' s hospitalization on 5/11/22. 2. Resident #95 was admitted to the facility on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · B2022-07-19 · 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 observation, review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 2 residents (Resident #40 and 51) reviewed for respiratory care, the facility failed to ensure the accuracy of the clinical record when documenting the PRN (as needed) use of oxygen therapy. The findings include: 1. Resident #40 was admitted with diagnoses that included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), polyneuropathy and Type II diabetes. The annual MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #40 had intact cognition and required assist with personal care. The care plan dated 5/12/22 identified Resident #40 had a diagnosis of congestive heart failure, and COPD with interventions that included administer oxygen and monitor effectiveness, elevate head of bed to assist and maintain maximal lung expansion and, completing assessments as needed/as ordered. Physician's orders dated 7/1/22 directed to administer oxygen at 0 - 15liters/minute via NC or non-rebreather mask as needed if oxygen saturation…
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 · B2019-11-26 · tag F0645 — patternPASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review and interview for 1 of 2 sampled residents (Resident #108) reviewed for Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR), the facility failed to ensure that a resident who had a thirty day exempted stay and a Level One positive screen was re-screened in a timely manner. The findings include: Resident #108 had a Level 1 PASARR with a review date of 10/7/19 that identified the resident had diagnoses that included bipolar disorder, anxiety disorder and depression. The PASARR assessment noted that Resident #108 was approved for a thirty day stay in the facility and was Level 1 positive, which indicated that the resident required a follow up Level 2 PASARR assessment to be completed at the end of the thirty day stay, if the resident remained in the facility. An admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified that the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] from an acute care hospital. The assessment further identified the resident had intact 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.
“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
$7,443 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $7,443 — penalty dated 2023-12-22
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 RYDERS HEALTH MANAGEMENT — 7 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 2 of 5 | 1.7 | +0.3 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 2 of 5 | 1.7 | +0.3 vs chain |
| Staffing | 3 of 5 | 3.4 | -0.4 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 2 of 5 | 2.4 | -0.4 vs chain |
The other 6 homes this chain runs (chain average 1.7★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| DR. ROBERT SBRIGLIO 2009 TRUST | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 25% | since 12/28/2012 |
| MARTIN SBRIGLIO 2009 TRUST | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 25% | since 12/28/2012 |
| SBRIGLIO, MARTIN | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | 25% | since 02/01/1995 |
| SBRIGLIO, ROBERT | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | 25% | since 02/01/1995 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 6 rows in the source record cover these 4 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
2 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
This home reported $2.2M paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in 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 075339. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2024-10-25, 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.