Civita Care Bayview
301 Rope Ferry Rd, Waterford, CT 06385 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 127 certified beds · (860) 444-1175 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (19% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
- it has abuse, neglect, or exploitation citations (F0600, F0603) — most recent May 2026
- 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 1 actual-harm citation
- inspectors recorded 1 serious finding as past non-compliance — the problem was found, fixed, and verified before the survey closed, so it is history rather than a current condition, but it is still worth asking what changed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (41) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $23,179 in federal fines (most recent 2025-12-04)
- its payroll-based staffing score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (1/5)
- its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)
- about 19% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 1 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 4 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 2 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's staffing rating runs 3 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the staffing score rests on the facility's own payroll (PBJ) submissions — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 2 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 1 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 2 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 1 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 23.9% | 18.0% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 6.2% | 6.5% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 2.1% | 0.7% | 0.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 1.8% | 1.5% | 2.0% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 2.2% | 22.3% | 6.5% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 6.2% | 3.5% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 24.3% | 16.4% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 15.7% | 17.6% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 93.5% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 6.2% | 4.0% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 26.8% | 24.7% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 23.9% | 17.8% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.8% | 1.5% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 89.4% | 69.7% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 29.3% | 24.3% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 10.6% | 10.7% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.25 | 2.06 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.85 | 1.46 | 1.80 | typical |
‡ 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.
57.1% 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 107 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 34.0% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 53 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.26 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 36% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 28% 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 | 57.1%CMS range 48.1–65.5 | 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 | 8.6%CMS range 6.4–12.3 | 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 | 34.0% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 20.8% | 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 | 35.9% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 100.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 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 | 2.8% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 8.1%CMS range 4.9–12.4 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.10 | 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 127 beds and averages 115.2 residents a day — about 91% occupied, or roughly 12 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.42 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.44 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.08 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 3.14 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.53 on weekdays — 11% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.49 to 0.33 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 19% 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.
41 citations, most serious first. The 12 most serious are shown; the remaining 29 are one tap away and print in full.
- Immediate jeopardy · J2026-03-04 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolatedEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record reviews, facility documentation, facility policies and interviews for one (1) of three (3) sampled residents (Resident #1) reviewed for medication administration, the facility failed to ensure the resident was free from a significant medication error when a schedule III opioid medication, which was prescribed for another resident, was inadvertently administered to Resident #1 causing the develop of an opioid-induced respiratory depression requiring hospitalization and treatment. The failure resulted in the finding of Immediate Jeopardy. The findings include: Resident #1's diagnoses included pulmonary embolism, depression, and difficulty walking.The five (5) day Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 had short and long-term memory recall deficits (Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 7), was dependent on staff for toileting, dressing, bed mobility, and transfers, was non-ambulatory and utilized a wheelchair. The Resident Care Plan dated 2/5/26…
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 · G2026-01-13 · 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, facility documentation, policy, and staff interviews for one (1) of three (3) sampled residents (Resident #1), who required two-person assistance and a mechanical lift for safe transfers, the facility failed to follow established transfer procedures during a transfer on 12/12/25. A Nurse Aide (NA #1) relied on an outdated assignment sheet indicating single-staff assistance, did not verify current transfer requirements on the resident care card, and attempted a manual pivot transfer without obtaining a second staff or mechanical lift. The wheelchair brakes were not reliably engaged, resulting in Resident #1 falling face-first, sustaining a bloody nose and nasal laceration requiring sutures and hospital transport. The findings include:Resident #1's diagnoses included vascular dementia without behavioral disturbances, muscle weakness and anxiety disorder. A physician's order dated 10/28/25 directed to transfer Resident #1 in and out of the bed and chair via a mechanical lift and the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2026-05-13 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — patternTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for three (3) of four (4) residents (Residents #1, #2 and #3) reviewed for neglect, the facility failed to ensure allegations of neglect were reported to the State Agency timely (within 2-hours). The findings include:1. Resident #1's diagnoses included mild cognitive impairment, chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia (low levels of oxygen in the body's tissues), Congestive Heart Failure (CHF), Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), depressive episodes and anxiety disorder.A physician's order dated 9/13/24 directed Resident #1 be placed on continuous oxygen at 2.0 to 4.0 liters per minute (lpm) via nasal cannula to keep oxygen saturation greater than 90 percent (%) and obtain oxygen saturation every shift.The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 had moderately impaired cognition (Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 12), required setup assistance with…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-05-13 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, facility policy review and staff interviews for two (2) of four (4) sampled residents (Residents #2 and #3) reviewed for neglect, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from neglect on the overnight shift when staff failed to respond timely to call bells, failed to provide incontinent and toileting care, failed to complete required rounds and failed to provide necessary supervision and assistance to residents on the short-term rehabilitation unit. The findings include:1. Resident #2's diagnoses included Enterocolitis due to Clostridium Difficile (C. Diff) (inflammation in both intestines caused by a bacteria that causes an infection of the colon), acute kidney failure, adult failure to thrive, need for assistance with personal care and weakness.The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #2 had intact cognition (Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15), was dependent on staff for personal hygiene and transfers, required…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-05-13 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for three (3) of four (4) residents (Residents #1, #2 and #3) reviewed for neglect, the facility failed to thoroughly investigate allegations of neglect. The findings include:1. Resident #1's diagnoses included mild cognitive impairment, chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia (low levels of oxygen in the body's tissues), Congestive Heart Failure (CHF), Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), depressive episodes and anxiety disorder.A physician's order dated 9/13/24 directed Resident #1 be placed on continuous oxygen at 2.0 to 4.0 liters per minute (lpm) via nasal cannula to keep oxygen saturation greater than 90 percent (%) and obtain oxygen saturation every shift.The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 had moderately impaired cognition (Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 12), required setup assistance with personal hygiene, was independent with 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 · Dcited before2026-05-13 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for one (1) of three (3) sampled residents (Resident #1) reviewed for activities of daily living (ADL) care and allegations of neglect, the facility failed to ensure Resident #1 received showers and related hygiene care in accordance with physician's orders and the resident's comprehensive care plan, failed to ensure refusals or missed showers were accurately documented in the clinical record, and failed to ensure the resident's responsible party was notified when showers were refused or not provided as directed. The findings include:Resident #1's diagnoses included mild cognitive impairment, Congestive Heart Failure (CHF), Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), depressive episodes and anxiety disorder. A physician's order dated 5/7/25 directed Resident #1 was to have supervision with showering and Activities of Daily Living (ADL) tasks and directed to provide increased verbal cues to complete personal hygiene…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-05-13 · tag F0685 — isolatedAssist a resident in gaining access to vision and hearing services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, and staff interviews for one (1) of three (3) sampled residents (Resident #1) reviewed for allegations of neglect, the facility failed to ensure Resident #1's hearing aids were timely sent for repair, monitored for return, and followed up on after staff identified the hearing aids were broken and unavailable beginning on 3/11/26. As a result, Resident #1 remained without hearing aids for approximately two (2) months. The findings include:Resident #1's diagnoses included mild cognitive impairment, depressive episodes and anxiety disorder. A physician's order dated 2/7/25 directed to apply hearing aids in the morning and remove at bedtime. The order directed to keep the hearing aids in the treatment cart and open the battery compartment. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 had moderately impaired cognition (Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 12), required setup assistance with personal…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-05-13 · tag F0790 — failed to provide dental care — isolatedProvide routine and 24-hour emergency dental care for each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for one (1) of three (3) sampled residents (Resident #1) reviewed for allegations of neglect, the facility failed to review and act upon in-house dental consult recommendations, coordinate recommended community dental appointments, document follow-up actions, and timely notify the resident's representative of dental findings and refusals of recommended care. As a result, recommended dental restorations were not completed and dental decline progressed from restorations being recommended to multiple teeth becoming non-restorable and requiring extractions. The findings include: Resident #1's diagnoses included dental caries (cavities/tooth decay), mild cognitive impairment, Congestive Heart Failure (CHF), Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), depressive episodes and anxiety disorder. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 had intact cognition (Brief Interview for Mental…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-01-13 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record reviews, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for two (2) of three (3) sampled residents (Resident #1 and #3) who were reviewed for falls, the facility failed to ensure a quarterly fall risk assessment was completed at the time the assessment was due. The findings include: 1. Resident #1's diagnoses included vascular dementia without behavioral disturbances, muscle weakness and anxiety disorder. The Resident Care Plan dated 11/13/25 identified Resident #1 was at risk for falls related to a history of several falls, generalized weakness, unsteadiness on their feet and forgetfulness. Interventions directed the resident required a mechanical lift and assistance from two (2) staff for transfers, to ensure the room was well lit and clutter free, ensure personal items were within reach, and provide frequent reminders to use the call light for assistance, and ensure the call light was within reach when in the room. Review of the quarterly Fall Risk Evaluation dated 12/2/25…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-12-04 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record reviews, facility documentation, facility policies and interviews for four (4) of sixteen (16) sampled residents (Residents #1, #2, #3, and #4) who were reviewed for medication administration, the facility failed to properly secure medications when left unattended at the residents' bedside without an order for the residents to self-administer the medications or the resident was sleeping. The findings include: 1.Resident #1's diagnoses included mild cognitive impairment, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and congestive heart failure. The quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 made reasonable decisions regarding tasks of daily life. Review of the October and November 2025 physician orders identified there was no physician's order for self-administration of medication. Interview with Resident #1 and observations conducted with the 7AM-3PM charge nurse, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #1 present, on 11/12/25 at 9:40 AM identified upon entering the room…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-04 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record reviews, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for one (1) of four (4) sampled residents (Resident #1) who required set up and reminders to complete daily hygiene care, the facility failed to implement the care plan and notify Resident #1's conservator when the resident refused to perform any portion of daily care. The findings include:Resident #1's diagnoses included mild cognitive impairment, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and congestive heart failure. The admission Record identified there was a family member that was appointed Resident #1's Conservator of Person (COP). The quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 made reasonable decisions regarding tasks of daily life, was independent with most daily living skills, and required set up for hygiene and showers. The Resident Care Plan dated 7/30/25 identified Resident #1 had a self-care deficit, occasionally refused showers and had a history of dental problems with dental caries.…
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 · F2025-12-03 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, review of facility documentation, facility policy and interviews, the facility failed to ensure kitchen dry goods were stored appropriately and the kitchen hood was cleaned and maintained. The findings include:Observation of the kitchen during initial tour on 9/15/25 at 9:40 AM with Dietary Director identified the following.Muffin Mix bag in the dry storage food area of the kitchen with a receipt date of 8/1 (no year) and no expiration date.Traditional stuffing mix 1 opened bag and 3 unopened bags. Best by date 8/7/25 on all 4 bags. One bag of croutons, opened, with no expiration date.Visible dust and debris present under the hood, matted to the underside, including fire suppression system. No date of last cleaning nor cleaning log was maintained or available to review. Interview on 9/15/25 at 10:15AM with Dietary Manager identified anyone who is in the dry storage is responsible for going through the food and seeing if things are labeled or expired. Usually, the Dietary Manager will go through the food to see if it is labeled and she talks to her staff…
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 29 citations
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-12-03 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of facility documentation, facility policy, and interview for water management, the facility failed to provide documentation of water sampling (for legionella and other waterborne pathogens), ice machine cleaning, and the facility failed to ensure the annual water management plan meeting was conducted with records maintained according to the facility's water management plan. The findings include: Review of facility documentation regarding monthly ice machine cleaning failed to identify the ice machines in the facility were cleaned from August 2024 through December 2024, 4 months. In addition, the records failed to identify any water sampling testing results for testing done on 1/29/24 and 1/27/25. Review of the Facility Water Management Plan with the Director of Maintenance and the Assistant Director of Maintenance on 9/18/25 at 2:23 PM identified the facility water management plan included flushing monthly, of water supply areas not frequently used, water sampling testing twice yearly for legionella, hot water temperature checks, and monthly ice machine cleaning. 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 · Ecited before2025-12-03 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — patternHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, review of facility documentation, review of facility policy/procedures and interviews for 3 of 3 sampled residents (Residents #1, 58 and 110) reviewed for advance directives, the facility failed to ensure the resident's choice for code status was honored. The findings include: 1. Resident #1 was admitted to the facility [DATE]. Diagnosis included dementia with agitation, Type II diabetes mellitus with hyperglycemia and difficulty in walking.The admission MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 had severely impaired cognitive skills for daily decision making.Review of the Facility Advance Directives Declaration Code Status form dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 was a Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) and Do Not Intubate (DNI) as received by Resident #1's daughter by phone. The bottom of the form notes the physician must write an order and a progress note in the resident's chart.Physician's order dated [DATE] directed full code status (perform CPR if Resident #1's heart…
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 · E2025-12-03 · tag F0603 — failed to not confine residents against their will — patternProtect each resident from separation (from other residents, his/her room, or confinement to his/her room).
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, review of facility policy and, interviews for three sampled residents residing on the first floor secure unit (Residents #58, #96 and #10) and for four sampled residents residing on the second floor (Residents #5, #7, #64, and #89) reviewed for involuntary seclusion, the facility failed to ensure the secured unit had established criteria for placement on the secured unit, failed to ensure the resident representative and/or resident was involved in the decision for placement on the secured/locked area, failed to ensure the resident's clinical record contained documentation of the clinical criteria met for placement, failed to indicate that the secured unit was the least restrictive setting, failed to include ongoing assessments of the continued appropriateness of the placement and failed to ensure that residents and visitors had access to the code for independent egress from the unit. The findings include: Observations on all days of the survey (9/15/25,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-12-03 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, review of facility policy and interviews, the facility failed to secure the keys that opened the medication cart and medication room on the dementia unit. The findings include:Observation on 9/18/25 at 2:30 PM identified the DNS handed a set of keys to RN #3. RN #3 accompanied this Nurse Consultant (NC) to the med cart and opened it. After the observation of the medication cart, and narcotic count, RN #3 opened the medication room door with the same set of keys. Once the review/observations were completed, RN #3 was noted to place the keys into a plastic 3 draw bin which was located on top of the nurse's station desk. Interview on 9/18/25 at 2:31 PM with RN #3 indicated that he/she has always placed the keys in that bin since he/she has worked at the facility. Interview on 9/18/25 at 2:57 PM with the DNS indicated the keys for the medication cart/medication room should be kept on the nurse's person for the whole 8-hour shift and then given to the oncoming nurse after report, no exceptions. The DNS identified RN #3 should not have left the keys to the medication…
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 · E2025-12-03 · tag F0919 — failed to provide a working call system — patternMake sure that a working call system is available in each resident's bathroom and bathing area.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, review of facility documentation, facility policy and interviews, the facility failed to ensure the call bell system was functioning properly. The findings include:Observation on 9/15/25 at 9:45 AM identified the resident call bell system was not functioning on the second floor. There was no audible ring when activating the call bell. The light functioned outside of the resident rooms, however observation at this time identified no staff in the hall to see the light. Bells were located at the bedside of the residents, however not present in the residents' bathrooms. Interview on 9/15/25 at 10:00 AM with several residents identified the call system had not been functioning for a while and they were provided with bells as an alternative, however they did not always have the bells in reach and did not have the bells in the restroom. Review of the resident council meeting minutes from July 2025 identified the call bell system does not have sound. The lights go on, but the bell system is not working. Hand bells had been handed out and in service had been given to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-03 · 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, facility policy review, and interviews for two of three sampled residents (Resident #13 and 126) reviewed for constipation, the facility failed to monitor bowel movements (BM) and administer the facility bowel regimen policy. The findings include: 1. Resident #13 's diagnoses included chronic kidney disease stage 3, hypertension, and venous thrombosis.The physician's order dated 8/29/25 directed to administer Senna 8.6 mg give 2 tablets by mouth at bedtime for constipation, administer Milk of Magnesia (MOM) (laxative) 400mg/5ml give 30ml as needed for constipation if no bowel movement for 3 days (a total of 9 shifts) on the 3-11 shift, give Bisacodyl suppository 10 mg insert 1 suppository rectally during the 11-7 shift as needed for constipation used for second step if MOM not effective, and give fleet enema insert 1 application rectally as needed for constipation during the 7-3 shift if Bisacodyl not effective, and call physician for further order if fleet enema was not…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-12-03 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for 2 of 2 residents (Resident #23 and 114) reviewed for respiratory care, the facility failed to order BiPAP equipment timely for Resident #23 and failed to follow a physician's order to change the oxygen tubing weekly for Resident #114. The findings include:1. Resident #23's diagnoses included sleep apnea, heart failure and anxiety. A physician's order dated 3/30/22 directed BiPAP on at bedtime with oxygen at 2 - 3 liters per minute. The annual Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #23 was cognitively intact, had sleep apnea and utilized oxygen. The care plan dated 7/9/25 identified Resident #23 used BiPAP with oxygen and the resident would maintain an effective breathing pattern during sleep and have restful sleep. Interventions included to keep BiPAP in the resident's room, monitoring for sleep and any complaints of insomnia or refusal's to wear BiPAP. Interview on 9/15/25 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 · D2025-12-03 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of clinical record, facility policy, facility documentation, and interviews for one of five sampled residents (Resident #11) reviewed for immunizations, the facility failed to ensure that the pneumococcal vaccine was offered to the resident upon admission. The findings include: Resident #11 was admitted to the facility in May 2024 and had diagnoses of anxiety, dementia, and hypertension. The quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #11 had moderately impaired cognition. Review of Resident #11 immunization consents and records identified the resident had received the Prevnar 13 on 06/06/2017 at age [AGE] years of age, and Pneumococcal vaccine (PPV23) on 6/2/2016 at age [AGE] years of age prior to been admitted to the facility. However, the clinical records and consent records failed to identify Resident #11 was offered the pneumococcal vaccine as to complete pneumococcal vaccine series on admission. Review of Resident #11 immunization consents and records with the Infection…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-08-11 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record reviews, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for one (1) of three (3) sampled residents (Resident #1) reviewed for medication administration, the facility failed to ensure a narcotic pain medication was refilled to prevent a delay in the administration and failed to obtain a physician's order to administer the medication the following day. The findings include:Resident #1's diagnoses included malignant neoplasms of the left breast, bone and lung and neoplasm related pain. The Nursing admission assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 was alert and oriented and required assistance with activities of daily living. The pain evaluation dated 7/9/25 identified Resident #1 experienced continuous nagging, radiating and deep pain that effected Resident #1's sleep, day to day activities, and appetite. The evaluation indicated the medications Fentanyl and Dilaudid relieved the pain. The Resident Care Plan dated 7/10/25 identified that Resident #1 utilized pain medications…
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 · D2024-07-11 · tag F0557 — isolatedHonor the resident's right to be treated with respect and dignity and to retain and use personal possessions.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record reviews, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for one of two sampled residents (Resident #5) who were reviewed for a potential allegation of abuse, the facility failed to ensure a resident was treated with dignity and respect when a staff member conducted oneself unprofessionally and used profanity in front of a resident. The findings include: Resident #5's diagnoses included multiple pelvic fractures, generalized anxiety disorder, and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). The admission Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #5 made reasonable and consistent decisions regarding tasks of daily life and required extensive assistance of one (1) staff person for dressing and personal hygiene. The Resident Care Plan dated 12/27/22 identified Resident #5 had anxiety and used anti-anxiety medication. Interventions directed to administer anti-anxiety medications as ordered by the physician, monitor for side effects and effectiveness, and monitor,…
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 before2024-07-11 · 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, review of facility documentation and interviews for two of five sampled residents (Residents #7 and #12) who were reviewed for hospice services, the facility failed to notify the Responsible Party of a referral to hospice or failed to ensure the resident or Responsible party was provided a choice of hospice services to contract. The findings include: 1. Resident #7's diagnoses included dementia, dysphagia (difficulty swallowing, type 2 diabetes mellitus and failure to thrive. The admission record identified a family member was Resident #7's Responsible Party. The quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #7 rarely or never made decisions regarding tasks of daily life, weighed 102 pounds, and received a mechanically altered diet. The Resident Care Plan dated 5/24/24 identified Resident #7 was a nutritional risk related to the diabetes mellitus, dysphagia and dementia. The care plan indicated Resident #7 had received hospice services that were…
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 · D2024-07-11 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record reviews, review of facility documentation and interviews for one of three sampled residents (Resident #7) who required a specialized treatment, the facility failed to ensure the resident received the dialysis treatment on the scheduled day. The findings include: Resident #9's diagnoses included type 2 diabetes mellitus, end stage renal disease and status post left hip fracture. A physician's order dated 10/26/22 directed dialysis days Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays every day shift. The admission Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #9 made reasonable and consistent decisions regarding tasks of daily life, was dependent on two (2) person assistance with getting in and out of the bed and chair, non-ambulatory and received dialysis treatments. The Resident Care Plan dated 11/7/22 identified Resident #9 required hemodialysis related to end stage renal failure. Interventions directed to monitor the access site, vital signs, and signs and symptoms of renal…
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 before2024-01-30 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — patternHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Basedonclinicalrecordreview reviewoffacilitypolicy andinterviewsfortwoofsixsampledresidents(Resident#39 & #97), reviewedforadvancedirectives thefacilityfailedtoensurethatadvancedirectiveswerereviewedwiththeresidentonadmissionandfailedtoensuretherewasasignedcopyoftheAdvanceDirectiveDeclarationCodeStatusformintheresidentsclinicalrecordtoindicatetheresidentsendoflifechoices Thefindingsinclude 1. Resident#39 wasreadmitted tothefacilityinJuneof2023 withdiagnosesthatincludedheartfailure type2 diabetesmellitus andbipolardisorder ThequarterlyMDSassessmentdated[DATE] identifiedResident#39 hadintactcognition requiredassistanceofonestaffmemberfordressing andpersonalhygiene ReviewofResident#39'sclinicalrecordon[DATE] at10:14 AMfailedtoidentifysigneddocumentationrelatedtoadvanceddirectives althoughthecurrentphysiciansordersidentifiedtheresidenthadacodestatusoffullcodewhichmeansthatifapersonsheartstopsbeatingandortheystopbreathing allresuscitationprocedureswillbeprovidedtokeepthemalive Thisprocesscanincludechestcompressions…
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 · E2024-01-30 · tag F0711 — patternEnsure 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, and interviews for one sample resident (Resident #14) who was admitted to the facility within the past six months, the facility failed to ensure physician's orders were signed and dated in a timely manner. The findings include: Resident #14 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included ulcerative colitis, hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction affecting left non-dominant side, dysphagia, and hypertension. The admission MDS assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #14 was moderately cognitively impaired and totally dependent on staff for bed mobility, hygiene, toileting, and transfers. Review of the physician's orders from October 2023 through 1/24/24 identified Resident #14 physician's orders were not signed on admission and not renewed every 30 days for 90 days. The physician's orders should have been signed on 11/1/23 (48 hours after admission) and renewed by 12/10/23 and again by 1/10/24. Interview with the Medical Director (MD #1) on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-01-30 · 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 clinical record review, facility policy review, and interviews for one of three sampled residents (Resident #52) reviewed for psychotropic medication side effects, the facility failed to ensure that an as needed order for Olanzapine (antipsychotic medication) was limited to14 days. The findings include: Resident #52 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included periprosthetic fracture of left hip, depression, anxiety, insomnia, and mild cognitive impairment. The physician's order dated 11/10/23 directed to administer Olanzapine 5 milligrams (mg) by mouth every 12 hours as needed for agitation and/or anxiety. Review of the physician's admission orders failed to identify a stop or discontinue date was set at fourteen days (11/24/23) for the as needed Olanzapine order. The admission MDS assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident # 52 had moderate cognitive impairment, required extensive assistance for dressing, hygiene, toileting, and transfers and received antipsychotic medication…
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 before2024-01-30 · 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
Based on review of facility documentation, review of facility policy, and interviews, the facility failed to provide documentation that environmental rounds were conducted on a quarterly basis, and failed to provide documentation that infection trends within the facility were monitored and analyzed monthly. The findings include: a. Review of the infection control environmental round documentation for the past two years with the Infection Preventionist (RN #6) on 1/25/24 at 1:00 PM identified that quarterly environmental rounds were not completed for the months of January 2022, October 2022, and January 2023. Interview with RN #6 on 1/29/24 at 1:55 PM identified that she was unable to locate the environmental rounds survey worksheets for the months of January 2022, October 2022, and January 2023. RN #6 further added that she started working at the facility in March of 2023 and it would have been the responsibility of the previous IP nurse. Interview with the DNS on 1/30/24 at 2:35 PM identified that she was not employed at the facility during the time when the environmental rounds…
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 · D2024-01-30 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolatedHonor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, clinical record review, review of facility policy and interviews for two sampled resident (Residents #13 & #76) with medication left at the bedside, the facility failed to ensure the resident was assessed for self-administration of medications. The findings include: 1. Resident #13's diagnoses included dementia, paraplegia, and osteomyelitis. The annual MDS assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #13 had moderately impaired cognition, required assistance of two staff members for transfers using a mechanical lift, dressing, and toileting hygiene. The assessment further identified Resident #13 required maximal assistance with oral hygiene and personal hygiene. Resident #13 shared a room with Resident #21 whose diagnoses included dementia, anxiety disorder, and multiple sclerosis. Resident #21's annual MDS assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #21 had severe cognitive impairment and required partial assistance with upper body dressing and locomotion on unit using a manual wheelchair.…
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 before2024-01-30 · tag F0685 — isolatedAssist a resident in gaining access to vision and hearing services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, review of the clinical record, review of facility documentation, review of facility policy and interviews, for one sampled resident (Resident #67) reviewed for communication/sensory, the facility failed to ensure that that there was follow up when a hearing device was lost. The findings include: Resident #67's diagnoses included dementia, anxiety, and depression. A nurse's admission assessment dated [DATE], identified a left hearing aid. The significant change assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #67 was severely cognitively impaired, had minimal difficulty with hearing, did not have hearing aids and required extensive assistance with bed mobility, transfers, and toilet use. The care plan dated 11/30/23 identified Resident #67 had communication difficulties related to a hearing impairment, dementia, and lost hearing aids. Care plan interventions included: offer a communication board, encourage head/hand gestures, and speak slowly and clearly when explaining all procedures. During the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-01-30 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, clinical record review, review of facility policy and interviews for one sampled resident (Resident #76) with medication left at the bedside, the facility failed to ensure a medication was appropriately secured. The findings include: Resident #76's diagnoses included alcohol dependence, bipolar disorder, and history of other mental and behavioral disorders. Observation on 1/22/24 at 11:20 AM identified a bottle of Peridex 0.12% (antiseptic mouthwash) mouthwash on Resident #76's bedside table. The monthly physician's orders for January/2024 directed to administer Peridex Solution 0.12% (antiseptic mouthwash) 15ml orally every day and evening shift preoperatively for dental extractions with directions to swish and spit the liquid out. Review of physician's orders for the month of January/2024 failed to identify an order for self-administration of medication and review of the clinical record failed to identify an assessment for self-administration of medication. Interview with LPN #6 on 1/22/24 at 11:39 AM identified she was aware of the Peridex at the bedside as…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2021-10-26 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — patternProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, clinical record review, review of facility policy and procedures and interviews for 3 sampled residents (Resident #92) reviewed for specialized services, (Resident #285) reviewed accidents, (Resident #400) reviewed for a significant change in condition, the facility failed to ensure that emergency supplies were kept in the resident's room per the facility policy and failed to ensure neurological assessments were completed after unwitnessed falls and failed to ensure that the resident's significant change in mobility and level of alertness was assessed. The findings include: 1. Resident #92's diagnoses included osteomyelitis of the right ankle and foot, peripheral vascular disease, type 2 diabetes mellitus with diabetic chronic kidney disease, end stage renal disease and dependence on renal dialysis. The Resident Care plan dated [DATE] identified Resident #92 received hemodialysis related to renal failure and had an arteriovenous (AV) shunt. Interventions included; encourage resident to go…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2021-10-26 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, review of facility policy and interviews for 1 of 8 sampled residents (Resident #16) reviewed for advance directives the facility failed to ensure the facility's policy was followed related to documentation of code status. The findings include: Resident #16's diagnoses included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes mellitus and dementia. The annual MDS assessment dated [DATE] identified resident was moderately cognitively impaired. The Care Plan dated [DATE] identified Resident #16 had an established advanced directive that expressed the resident's desire to have a code status of do not resuscitate (DNR), do not intubate (DNI), do not hospitalize (DNH) and no feeding tube. Interventions included; do not administer cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and RN may pronounce. The current monthly Physician's orders (October/2021) identified Resident #16's code status as DNR/DNI/DNH, no feeding tube and RN may pronounce. Review of the clinical record on [DATE] identified there…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2021-10-26 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, review of facility documentation, review of facility policy, and interviews for one of six sampled residents (Resident #285) reviewed for accidents, the facility failed to ensure the physician or advanced practice registered nurse was notified when the resident sustained a fall with injury. The findings include: Resident #285's diagnosis included dementia, atrial fibrillation requiring long term anticoagulants, congestive heart failure, and heart failure. The quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #285 had severe cognitive impairment, required extensive assistance of two staff members for bed mobility, transfers and toileting. The assessment further noted that the resident did not ambulate, utilized a wheelchair for mobility, was totally dependent on staff for locomotion and had a range of motion deficit of an upper extremity. Review of Resident #285's clinical record identified a lab result dated 12/4/20 that noted an INR (international normalized ratio) level…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2021-10-26 · 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, review of facility's documentation, and interviews for 1 of 3 sampled residents (Resident #72) reviewed for pressure ulcers, the facility failed to ensure the physician, dietician and responsible party were notified of resident's pressure injury. The findings include: Resident #72's diagnoses included end stage renal disease (ESRD), diabetes mellitus and urinary retention. An admission MDS assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #72 had intact cognition, required extensive assistance with activities of daily life (ADL's), did not ambulate, had a Foley catheter in place, was incontinent of bowel, received dialysis treatments in the last 14 days and utilized a wheelchair for mobility The assessment further identified that the resident was at risk for pressure ulcer development but did not have any current wounds. A pressure injury evaluation dated 8/27/21 identified an initial evaluation of facility acquired deep tissue injury (DTI) to Resident #72's right…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2021-10-26 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
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 conducted during a review of medication storage and labeling, the facility failed to remove medication/IV fluids before or on its expiration date. The findings include: Observation with the ADNS on [DATE] at 11:00 AM of the intravenous (IV) supplies located in a locked supply room located near the administrative offices identified twelve 1000 cc bags of IV fluids located in a bin. Six of twelve IV bags of fluids were expired. The expired IV fluids consisted of one bag of potassium chloride that had an expiration date of 9/2021, two bags of 5% dextrose that had an expiration date of 8/2021 and three bags of 5% dextrose with an expiration date of 5/202. Interview with the ADNS identified that the pharmacy usually checks IV supplies monthly but that the nurses were also responsible for checking for expired IV fluids. She further identified that when a resident is started on IV fluids, the facility's stored IV fluids are utilized at times. Subsequent to surveyor's inquiry, the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · C2025-12-03 · tag F0838 — failed to assess facility resources and resident needs — widespreadConduct and document a facility-wide assessment to determine what resources are necessary to care for residents competently during both day-to-day operations (including nights and weekends) and emergencies.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, review of facility documentation and interviews, the facility failed to ensure the facility assessment identified that they had secure nursing units and failed to indicate the criteria or policies and procedures related to the secure units. The findings include: Observations on all days of the survey (9/15/25, 9/16/25, 9/17/25, 9/18/25, and 9/22/25) identified the facility had a secured (locked) unit on the first and second floors. Both units require you to enter a code for egress off the unit. Review of the facility assessment dated [DATE] on 9/16/25 at 9:46 AM provided by the DNS identified that the assessment was signed by the Administrator, Medical Director, Director of Nursing, Plant Manager, a direct care staff representative and the resident council president.The facility assessment dated [DATE] identified the facility had 127 licensed beds with three nursing units consisting of a 37-bed dementia unit, a 30-bed subacute short-term care unit and a 60-bed long-term care unit. The…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · B2025-12-03 · tag F0628 — patternProvide the required documentation or notification related to the resident's needs, appeal rights, or bed-hold policies.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 3 sampled residents (Resident #5, 9 and 128) reviewed for hospitalization and had multiple hospitalizations, the facility failed to ensure the resident and/or resident representative were provided with written information regarding the bed hold policy at the time the resident was sent to the hospital. The findings include:1. Resident #5's diagnoses included congestive heart failure, atrial fibrillation, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #5 was cognitively intact. Review of the clinical record failed to reflect that written notice, which specifies the duration of the bed-hold policy, had been provided to the resident and/or the resident representative when the resident was transferred to the hospital on 7/6/25, 8/31/25 and 9/2/25. Interview with the DNS on 9/16/25 at 2:43 PM identified a copy of the bed hold policy should be provided to 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.
- No harm found · B2025-12-03 · tag F0641 — patternEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of clinical records, review of facility policy/procedures and interviews for 3 of 5 sampled residents (Residents #5,6,99) reviewed for Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR), the facility failed to ensure the MDS accurately reflected the residents' status. The findings include: 1. Resident #5's diagnoses included schizoaffective disorder, vascular dementia, bipolar disorder.The PASRR assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #5 was determined to have diagnoses that qualified him/her to have a positive level II PASRR. The annual MDS assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #5 was cognitively intact and did not display behaviors. The assessment further reflected that the resident did not have a positive level 2 PASRR. The assessment failed to reflect the resident's accurate status. 2. Resident #6's diagnoses included bipolar disorder, anxiety disorder, and depression. The PASRR level II screening dated 9/17/19 identified Resident #6 was determined to have diagnoses that qualified…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · C2024-07-11 · tag F0836 — widespreadEnsure the facility is licensed under applicable State and local law and operates and provides services in compliance with all applicable Federal, State, and local laws, regulations, and codes, and with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, review of facility documentation and interviews for 67 of 108 sampled residents who were reviewed for name bands, the facility failed to ensure the residents had a form the residents were wearing an identification bracelet or some other form of visible identification. The findings include: 1. Observations of the main lobby on 7/10/24 at 9:00 AM identified Resident #10 seated in a wheelchair near the entrance doors and it was noted Resident #10 was not wearing an identification bracelet. When questioned Resident #10 stated he was waiting for transportation to the dialysis center. Observations with the Director of Nursing (DON) and Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) both identified Resident #10 was not wearing an identification bracelet or other visible form of identification. Subsequently, an identification bracelet was placed on Resident #10's right wrist prior to leaving for dialysis. 2. Observations of the residents seated in the second-floor dining room, lounge area and nurse's station on 7/10/24 at 9:45 AM with the ADON identified of twelve (12)…
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 · B2024-01-30 · tag F0730 — patternObserve each nurse aide's job performance and give regular training.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of facility documentation, review of facility policy, and interviews for three sampled nurse aides (NA #3, NA #4, and NA #5) reviewed for yearly performance evaluations, the facility failed to complete performance evaluations for 2022 and 2023. The findings include: Review of NA #3's personnel file identified a hire date of 7/14/2015 and failed to identify that a yearly performance evaluation was completed for 2022 or 2023. Review of NA #4's personnel file identified a hire date of 5/5/22 and failed to identify that a yearly performance evaluation was completed for 2023. Review of NA #5's personnel file identified a hire date of 3/31/22 and failed to identify that a yearly performance evaluation was completed for 2023. Interview with DNS on 1/25/24 at 1:00 PM identified that each employee should have a performance review completed on an annual basis on the anniversary of their hire date. She further identified that she was responsible for ensuring the performance evaluation were completed yearly and could not find documentation to identify that performance…
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
$23,179 in federal fines across 2 penalties.
- $8,278 — penalty dated 2025-12-04
- $14,901 — penalty dated 2025-12-04
Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to ATHENA HEALTHCARE SYSTEMS — 22 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 1 of 5 | 1.5 | -0.5 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 1 of 5 | 1.7 | -0.7 vs chain |
| Staffing | 4 of 5 | 2.1 | +1.9 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 2 of 5 | 2.5 | -0.5 vs chain |
The other 21 homes this chain runs (chain average 1.5★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SANTILLI, LAWRENCE | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 33% | since 01/01/2016 |
| MOSIER, MICHAEL | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 01/01/2012 |
| ATHENA HEALTH CARE ASSOCIATES, INC. | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 07/12/2005 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 4 rows in the source record cover these 3 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
1 organizational owner listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
About 72% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $3.1M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 19% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in CT
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Connecticut Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 075324. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-12-03, 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.