Kentmere Rehabilitation And Healthcare Center
1900 Lovering Avenue, Wilmington, DE 19806 · Non profit - Other · 104 certified beds · (302) 652-3311 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has abuse, neglect, or exploitation citations (F0600, F0602) — most recent Nov 2024
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has 1 actual-harm citation
- a high number of inspection citations overall (33) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $8,278 in federal fines (most recent 2025-12-13)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 4 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 3 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 3 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 3 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 4 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 2 to 5 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 24.8% | 12.7% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 7.9% | 5.4% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.4% | 0.9% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 3.0% | 2.1% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 1.0% | 10.3% | 6.5% | better |
| 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 | 4.4% | 3.2% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 28.7% | 13.6% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 10.7% | 21.8% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 95.6% | 97.4% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 4.0% | 3.5% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 24.3% | 20.2% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 3.0% | 10.7% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 2.0% | 1.0% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 84.6% | 83.1% | 79.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 25.8% | 23.3% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 6.6% | 11.6% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.69 | 1.81 | 1.67 | typical |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.03 | 1.40 | 1.80 | better |
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
56.5% 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 159 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 55.2% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 67 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 0.30 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 49% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 10% 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 | 56.5%CMS range 48.4–63.1 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 9.5%CMS range 6.8–13.6 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 55.2% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 58.2% | 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 | 52.2% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | 97.7% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 1.2% | 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 | 2.4% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 6.4%CMS range 3.6–9.9 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.00 | 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 104 beds and averages 90.1 residents a day — about 87% occupied, or roughly 14 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 4.51 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.91 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.69 is at or above 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 4.19 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.63 on weekdays — 10% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.99 to 0.70 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 39% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 2 administrators have left in the past year — frequent leadership churn is a warning sign families often miss.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
33 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 22 are one tap away and print in full.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2025-12-13 · 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 observation, interview, record review, facility document review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to:1. Provide supervision to prevent a fall for 1 (Resident #110) of 3 residents reviewed for falls. While providing care to Resident #110 on [DATE], Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) #16 turned her back to the resident and the resident jerked and fell to the floor. Initially, the resident was transferred to a hospital and received four sutures for a skin tear to the left side of their forehead. Two days later, on the morning of [DATE], CNA #16 noted swelling to resident #110's left hip and thigh and the resident had limited range of motion (ROM) to the left leg. The resident's physician was notified, and an x-ray was obtained, which revealed a fracture and displacement to the resident's left femur (hip area). After consultation with the resident's Responsible Party (RP) regarding the resident not being a candidate for hip surgery, the RP chose not to send the resident to the hospital and initiated…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-12-13 · 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, interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure foods items stored in the walk-in refrigerator and freezer were covered, labeled and dated and expired food items were discarded. The facility further failed to ensure wash dishes as directed by the facility policy. Lastly, the facility failed to ensure hot foods were held on the tray line at a temperature of at least 135 degrees Fahrenheit. These deficient practices had the potential to affect residents who received food from the kitchen. Findings included:1. A policy titled, Food Receiving and Storage, revised 10/2017, indicated, Policy Statement Food shall be received and stored in a manner that complies with safe food handling practices. Per the policy, 8. All foods stored in the refrigerator or freezer will be covered, labeled and dated ( use by date).During a concurrent interview and observation of the walk-in refrigerator with the Dietary Director (DD) on 12/09/2025 at 4:15 PM, the following was noted: - One plastic bottle of horseradish sauce stored after opening did not have a label…
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 before2025-12-13 · 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
Based on interview, record review, document review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to timely report an allegation of abuse to the state survey agency that involved 2 (Resident #11 and Resident #19) of 7 sampled residents reviewed for abuse. The facility further failed to ensure staff immediately reported an allegation of abuse to the Director of Nursing and/or Executive Director for 3 (Residents #18, #34, and #37) of 7 sampled residents reviewed for abuse. Findings included:A facility policy titled, Abuse, Neglect, Mistreatment, Misappropriation, Exploitation and Reasonable Suspicions of Crime, updated 10/2019, revealed, Allegations of resident abuse shall be reported to the appropriate state regulatory authority within 2 hours.1. An admission Record revealed the facility admitted Resident #11 on 08/04/2021. According to the admission Record, the resident had a medical history that included diagnoses of neurocognitive disorder with Lewy bodies, dementia without behaviors, and mild cognitive impairment. An annual Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference…
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 · D2025-12-13 · 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
Based on interview, record review, document review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to interview all persons identified as involved or with knowledge of an occurrence for 2 (Resident #34 and Resident #93) of 7 sampled residents reviewed for abuse. Findings included:A facility policy titled, Abuse, Neglect, Mistreatment, Misappropriation, Exploitation and Reasonable Suspicions of Crime, updated 10/2019, indicated, Investigation *All alleged incidents involving abuse, neglect, mistreatment, misappropriation of resident property, or exploitation, including injuries of unknown source, shall be reported to the NHA [nursing home administrator] or designee immediately. *The NHA or designee will investigate allegations and report to appropriate regulatory agencies. *All persons identified as involved in or with knowledge of the occurrence will be interviewed.1. An admission Record revealed the facility admitted Resident #34 on 10/24/2024. According to the admission Record, the resident had a medical history that included diagnoses of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease…
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 · D2025-12-13 · tag F0925 — failed to control pests — isolatedMake sure there is a pest control program to prevent/deal with mice, insects, or other pests.
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 facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure they had an effective pest control program to address the infestation of rodents on 1 (3rd floor) of 4 floors in the facility. Findings included:A facility policy titled, Pest Control Program, revised 12/21/2024, indicated, Policy: It is the policy of this facility to maintain an effective pest control program that eradicates and contains common household pests and rodents. Per the policy, Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines: 1. Facility will maintain a written agreement with a qualified outside pest service to provide comprehensive pest control services on a regular and scheduled basis. 2. Facility will ensure that appropriate chemicals are used to control pests but can be used safely inside the building without compromising resident health. 3. Facility will maintain a report system of issues that may arise between scheduled visits with the outside pest service and treat as indicated.During an observation on the 3rd floor 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 · F2024-11-22 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — widespreadProvide 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
Based on interviews, record review, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure the narcotic count sheets on each medication cart for the oncoming nurse and off going nurse were documented prior to finishing the narcotic count to ensure accuracy of the narcotics for five of five medication carts reviewed of 40 sample residents. This failure had the potential for drug diversion. Findings include. Review of an undated facility's policy titled, Controlled Medication Storage and Accountability, revealed .Medications included in the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) classification as controlled substances are subject to special handling, storage, disposal and recordkeeping in the facility in accordance with federal, state and other applicable laws and regulations . 1. Review of the third floor 300-medication cart narcotic sheet with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) 1 on 11/19/24 at 4:19 PM, revealed the following missing initials on the narcotic count sheet: -11/07/24 at 3:00 PM, the oncoming nurse did not initial the form. -11/07/24 at 11:00 PM, the off going…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-11-22 · 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, interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure beard guards were worn during food production in accordance with professional standards for food service safety with the potential to affect 89 of 89 residents who consumed food from the kitchen. This failure had the potential for physical contamination of the food in the facility. Findings include: Review of the facility's undated policy and procedure titled, Food Safety and Preparation, revealed sanitary food preparation staff must wear gloves, hair net and beard net for facial hair if this applies to staff that has a beard . During observation of the noon meal preparation on 11/19/24 at 11:30 AM, two male kitchen staff members with beards did not have beard nets covering their beard at the food preparation station. During observation of the dinner meal preparation on 11/19/24 at 4:30 PM, two male kitchen staff members with beards did not have beard nets covering their beard at the food preparation station. During observation of the breakfast meal preparation on 11/20/24 at 7:45 AM, two male…
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 before2024-11-22 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — patternEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide adequate assistance to ensure accidents were avoided for one of one resident (Resident (R) 102) reviewed for accident hazards of 40 sample residents. This failure had the potential to elevate the hazard/accident risk for all residents residing in the facility. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Mechanical Lift (Hoyer and Stand), dated January 2017 and provided by the facility, revealed two staff members must be present to utilize a mechanical lift. Review of R102's admission Record located in the electronic medical record (EMR) under the Resident tab, indicated R102 admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses of major depressive disorder, recurrent, mild, muscle weakness, abnormal weight loss, unspecified dementia, anorexia, muscle wasting and atrophy. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 05/11/24 located in the EMR under the Resident tab,…
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 · E2024-11-22 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — patternEnsure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure menus were followed related to portion size for four of four residents (Resident (R) 76, R84, R88, and R62) who were on a mechanical soft diet and residents receiving regular texture diets of 40 sample residents. This failure had the potential to affect the residents on the dementia unit and could result in unintentional weight loss for those residents who were nutritionally at risk without providing the appropriate meal portions. Findings include: Review of an undated document provided by the facility titled Portion Control Chart indicated the following information for scoop sizes: dark gray handle scoop capacity held one half cup; and a light gray handle scoop capacity held two thirds of a cup. 1. Review of R76's electronic medical record (EMR) titled admission Record located under the Profile tab indicated the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of R76's EMR quarterly Minimum Data Set…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-11-22 · tag F0552 — isolatedEnsure that residents are fully informed and understand their health status, care and treatments.
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 interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure risks vs (versus) benefits, for the use of psychotropic medications, were obtained for one of five residents (Resident (R) 3) reviewed for unnecessary medications of 40 sample residents. This failure placed residents at risk of not being informed of proposed care and treatment options. Findings include: Review of an undated facility's policy titled, Resident Rights, revealed, .The Resident has the right to exercise his or her rights as provided herein. The Facility shall ensure that the Resident can exercise his or her rights without interference, coercion, discrimination, or reprisal from the Facility. The Facility will protect and promote the rights of the Resident and support the exercising of such rights .The right to be informed of and participate in, his or her treatment, including .The right to be fully informed of his or her total health status, including diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis . Review of R3's admission Record located in…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-11-22 · tag F0554 — isolatedAllow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, interviews, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure one of one resident (Resident (R) 26) of 40 sample residents was allowed to self-administer cough drops per the physician order. This failure placed the resident at risk of having his right to self-administer medications violated. Findings include: Review of a facility's undated policy titled, Resident Rights, revealed .The Resident has the right to exercise his or her rights as provided herein. The Facility shall ensure that the Resident can exercise his or her rights without interference, coercion, discrimination, or reprisal from the Facility. The Facility will protect and promote the rights of the Resident and support the exercising of such rights .The right to self-administer medication if determined that such practice is clinically appropriate . Review of R26's admission Record located in the Profile tab of the electronic medical record (EMR) revealed R26 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
Show the remaining 22 citations
- Potential for harm · D2024-11-22 · 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 record review, interviews, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure three of six residents (Resident (R) 103, R39, R105) reviewed for abuse was free from abuse. Findings include: Review of the facility's undated policy titled, Abuse, Neglect, Mistreatment, Misappropriation, Exploitation and Reasonable Suspicions of Crime, revealed abuse was defined as the willful infliction of injury, unreasonable confinement, intimidation, deprivation of goods or services, or punishment with resulting physical harm' pain or mental anguish, including such conduct facilitated or enabled through the use of technology. Physical abuse was unnecessarily inflicting pain or injury on a resident. 1. Review of R103's Resident Profile located under the Resident tab of the electronic medical record (EMR) revealed the resident was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction affecting right dominant side, dysphagia, acute embolism and thrombosis of left…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-11-22 · tag F0602 — failed to protect residents from theft of their belongings — isolatedProtect each resident from the wrongful use of the resident's belongings or money.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to protect two of two residents (Residents (R) 17 and R95) from misappropriation of property of 40 sample residents. This failure has the potential to affect all residents who choose to keep money and/or credit cards in their rooms. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Abuse, Neglect, Mistreatment, Misappropriation, Exploitation and Reasonable Suspicions of Crime indicated the following: .Misappropriation of resident property is the deliberate misplacement, exploitation, or wrongful, temporary, or permanent use of a resident's belongings or money without the resident's consent. 1. Review of R17's Resident Profile located in the electronic medical record (EMR) under the Resident tab, indicated R17 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction affecting left non-dominant side, obstructive sleep apnea, diabetes mellitus due to underlying…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-11-22 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, record review, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure that an allegation of potential abuse was reported to the State Survey Agency (SSA) in a timely manner for one of five residents (Resident (R) 108) reviewed for abuse/neglect of 40 sample residents. This failure had the potential for other allegations of abuse/neglect not to be reported in a timely manner. (Cross Reference F741) Findings include: Review of a facility's policy titled, Abuse, Neglect, Mistreatment, Misappropriation, Exploitation and Reasonable Suspicions of Crime dated 10/19 indicated .Witnessed or suspected incidents of abuse are to be reported immediately .neglect, mistreatment . Allegations of resident abuse shall be reported to the appropriate state regulatory authority within 2 hours . Review of R108's electronic medical record (EMR) titled admission Record located under the Profile tab indicated the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of dementia. Review of R108's EMR…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-11-22 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure 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 record review, interview, and review of the Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) Manual, the facility failed to ensure one of one resident (Resident (R) 36) of 40 sample residents had an accurate Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment. Failure to code the MDS correctly could potentially lead to inaccurate federal reimbursements and inaccurate assessment and care planning of the residents. Findings include: Review of the RAI manual, dated 10/24 and located at Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) Manual | CMS, revealed .It is important to note here that information obtained should cover the same observation period as specified by the MDS items on the assessment, and should be validated for accuracy (what the resident's actual status was during that observation period) by the IDT [Interdisciplinary] completing the assessment. As such, nursing homes are responsible for ensuring that all participants in the assessment process have the requisite knowledge to complete an accurate…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-11-22 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY .Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure activities of daily living (ADLs) were provided consistently according to the plan of care for two of six residents (Residents (R) 93 and R23) reviewed for ADLs of 40 sample residents. The facility failed to ensure R23 was provided with oral hygiene and R93 was provided with consistent showers twice weekly. This failure placed the residents at risk of a diminished quality of life. Findings include: 1. Review of R93's admission Record located in the Profile tab of the electronic medical record (EMR) revealed R93 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included dementia. Review of the annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) located in the MDS tab of the EMR with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 10/26/24 revealed that R93 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of zero out of 15 which indicated R93 was severely impaired in cognition. Review of the ADL Care Plan located in the Care Plan tab of the EMR,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-11-22 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure one Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) 1, who identified a skin alteration for one of two residents (Resident (R) 36's) reviewed for wound care, notified the Primary Care Physician (PCP) for treatment orders. In addition, the facility failed to ensure a physician ordered blood pressure was obtained prior to administering a hypertensive medication for one of five residents (Resident (R) 109) observed during the medication pass of 40 sample residents. This failure placed residents at risk for health complications. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Provider Notification of Resident Change in Medical Condition, dated 04/17, indicated .It is the policy of [Facility Name] Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center that staff communicate changes in a resident's medical condition to providers in a timely and accurate manner . Review of the facility's undated policy titled, Pressure Ulcer Identification…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-11-22 · tag F0687 — failed to care for feet properly — isolatedProvide appropriate foot care.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure nail care was provided to one of one resident (Resident (R) 1) reviewed for nail care of 40 sample residents. This had the potential to limit mobility for R1 or cause R1 pain if the nails were left untreated. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Nails, Care of Finger and Toe, dated May 2023, indicated . PURPOSE . To provide cleanliness . To prevent spread of infection . Review of an undated Face Sheet, provided by the facility, indicated R1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses of abnormalities gait, muscle weakness, and lack of mobility. Review of the five day Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 10/24/24 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 out of 15 which indicated R1 was cognitively intact. The assessment revealed R1 required limited assistance of one staff member for personal hygiene. During an observation…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-11-22 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolatedProvide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record reviews, interviews, and review of facility policies, the facility failed to ensure one resident (Resident (R) 36) was provided adaptive equipment (padded footrest) that was attached to her wheelchair and failed to ensure one of two residents (R23) was consistently provided with a physician ordered splint to her right arm/hand of 40 sample residents. This failure placed the residents at risk of improper support, positioning, and at risk of further decreased range of motion (ROM) and worsening contractures (a condition of shortening and hardening of muscles, tendons, and other tissue, often leading to deformity and rigidity of joints). Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Repositioning, dated 03/16, indicated .Lifting/handling and other assistive devices will be used whenever determined based on the practitioner order . Review of the facility's policy titled, Splints and Position Devices, dated 05/16, indicated .All residents are screened by therapy on admission…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-11-22 · tag F0741 — failed to have staff trained for behavioral health — isolatedEnsure that the facility has sufficient staff members who possess the competencies and skills to meet the behavioral health needs of residents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, interviews, facility document review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents were provided with appropriate dementia care interventions from one of one Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) 1 resulting in one of one resident (Resident (R) 108) sustaining harm with visible bruising, skin tears, and complaints of pain of 40 sample residents. This failure had the potential to affect resident safety at the facility. Findings include: Review of a facility's document titled Facility Assessment, dated 10/22/24 and provided by the facility, indicated under a section titled Staff Competencies revealed .Competencies for Certified Nurse's Aides (CNA) include the following .Behavioral Management . Review of a facility's policy titled, Dementia Care, dated 2023, indicated .It is the policy of this facility to provide the appropriate treatment and services to every resident who has signs of, or is diagnosed with dementia, to meet his or her highest practicable physical,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-11-22 · tag F0908 — failed to keep essential equipment working — isolatedKeep all essential equipment working safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, interviews, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure one of one resident's (Resident (R) 36) wheelchair was functioning properly. This had the potential for the resident to use a wheelchair that might not properly fit her body. Findings include: Review of a facility's policy titled, Maintenance Service, dated 12/09, indicated . Maintenance service shall be provided to all areas of the building, grounds, and equipment . Review of R36's electronic medical record (EMR) admission Record located under the Profile tab, indicated the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. During an observation on 11/19/24 at 3:46 PM, R36 was seated in a high back wheelchair. During an observation on 11/20/24 at 1:55 PM, R36 was seated in a standard wheelchair. During an observation on 11/20/24 at 5:19 PM with the Director of Rehabilitation (DOR) R36's high back wheelchair was in the resident's bathroom. The DOR stated this was the resident's original wheelchair. During…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2023-10-12 · 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, staff interview, documentation review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure food was stored in a sanitary manner; failed to ensure the dishwasher was at the correct temperature level to sanitize the residents' dishes; failed to ensure sanitizer was at the correct level, and failed to ensure a food storage container was maintained in a clean and sanitary manner. This had the potential to affect 98 of the 99 residents who receive meals from the kitchen. The facility identified one resident who received nothing by mouth (NPO). Findings include: 1. Observation on 10/09/23 at 9:15 AM revealed there was an undated/unlabeled plate of food (a bun with chopped meat on it and some other item) covered with another plate and a bag from a restaurant with leftover food that was not dated or labeled in the third-floor resident refrigerator. The Dietary Manager (DM) was present and verified the observation and stated the items should have been dated and labeled. 2. Observation on 10/09/23 at 9:18 AM revealed the second-floor resident refrigerator contained…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-10-12 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — patternSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY 5. Review of R65's clinical record revealed: 5/14/21 - R65 is admitted to the facility with multiple diagnoses including a stroke with hemiparesis (weakness or paralysis on one side of the body). 10/21/21 - A Physician's order was written for R65 to receive range of motion activity to both shoulders, elbows, wrists, hands knees and ankles twice a day, every day and evening shift. 10/11/23 - A review of R65's CNA task list in the facility Electronic Medical Record (Emr) revealed the task to perform range of motion activity to both shoulders, elbows, wrists, hands knees and ankles twice a day every day and evening shift. The Range of motion task was not documented as done on the day shift on the following days: 10/2/23, 10/3/23, 10/4/23, 10/6/23, 10/7/23, 10/8/23 and 10/10/23. 10/11/23 1:20 PM - During an interview, CNA6 confirmed that that the CNA range of motion documentation was not present for the day shifts on the following days: 10/2/23, 10/3/23, 10/4/23, 10/6/23, 10/7/23, 10/8/23 and 10/10/23. 10/11/23 1:30…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-10-12 · tag F0847 — patternInform resident or representatives choice to enter into binding arbitration agreement and right to refuse.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview, review of facility admission paperwork, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure that Residents and/or Resident Representatives (RRs) who signed the Arbitration Agreement would be allowed 30 days to rescind their signature, and failed to ensure the Arbitration Agreement was fully explained. This affected 34 (Residents (R)2,R7,R9, R10, R12, R14, R15, R17, R19, R20, R24, R28, R30, R31, R37, R44, R46, R49, R58, R64, R68, R69, R70, R74, R75, R77, R78, R79, R83, R85, R92, R93, R94, and R442 of 99 residents who had signed the Arbitration Agreement, and had the potential to affect any future residents who might sign the agreement. Findings include: Review of the facility admission paperwork that included an Arbitration Agreement showed: .The Resident understands that (1) the Resident should seek legal counsel concerning this Agreement, (2) the Resident does not have to sign this Agreement as a precondition to the Facility providing services to the Resident, and (3) this Agreement may be rescinded by written notice sent to the other party via Certified…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-10-12 · tag F0848 — patternProvide a neutral and fair arbitration process and agree to arbitrator and venue.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview, review of the Arbitration Agreement, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure that the Arbitration Agreement presented to Residents (Rs) and Resident Representatives (RR) during admission included a clause that a mutually convenient venue for the Arbitration would be selected. This had the potential to affect the 34 residents (R2, R7,R9, R10, R12, R14, R15, R17, R19, R20, R24, R28, R30, R31, R37, R44, R46, R49, R58, R64, R68, R69, R70, R74, R75, R77, R78, R79, R83, R85, R92, R93, R94, and R442) of 99 residents who had signed the Arbitration Agreement and any future resident who might the agreement. Findings include: Review of the facility provided Arbitration Agreement showed: .Notice that the Resident or the Facility wishes to arbitrate a dispute (''Notice) shall be provided to the other party in writing setting forth the basis of the dispute, including relevant dates, the alleged harm, and the requested relief, via Certified Mail, return receipt requested. The parties shall, within three (3) weeks of receipt of the Notice, mutually agree on an…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-10-12 · tag F0947 — failed to train nurse aides adequately — patternEnsure nurse aides have the skills they need to care for residents, and give nurse aides education in dementia care and abuse prevention.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on documentation review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure each Certified Nursing Aide (CNA) received at least 12 hours of in-service training per year. This involved three CNA5, CNA7, and CNA8 of five CNAs education records reviewed. Findings include: On 10/11/23 at 4:32 PM the training records of five certified nursing assistants (CNA) were reviewed with the Staff Development Coordinator (SD). Review of the training records revealed the following: 1.CNA4 had a hire date of 12/16/20. Review of her untitled list of training dated 12/16/21 through 12/16/22 revealed she received 10 hours of in-service training. The SD Coordinator verified CNA7 had not received 12 hours of in-service training in the last year of her employment. 2. CNA5 had a hire date of 12/15/21. Review of her untitled list of training dated 12/15/21 to 12/15/22 revealed she received four hours of in-service training. The SD Coordinator verified CNA5 had not received 12 hours of in-service training in the last year of her employment. 3. CNA8 had a hire date of 02/05/20. Review of her untitled…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-10-12 · tag F0623 — isolatedProvide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure two of three residents (Rs) and/or their representatives (RR) (R 17 and R79) reviewed for facility initiated emergent hospital transfer were provided with written notice of transfer that contained all required information. This failure had the potential to affect the resident and their RR by not having the knowledge of where and why a resident was transferred. Findings include: 1. Review of the Minimum Data State (MDS) tab of R17's electronic medical record (EMR) revealed she had a quarterly MDS assessment with an assessment reference date (ARD) of 07/12/23 with a Brief Mental Status Interview (BIMS) score of nine out of 15 indicating she was moderately cognitively impaired. Review of the Progress Notes tab of the EMR revealed she had a Nursing Note dated 06/30/23 and timed 11:26 PM stating the resident was unresponsive and she was transferred to the hospital. Review of the Progress Note dated 07/06/23 and timed 10:12 PM revealed…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-10-12 · tag F0625 — isolatedNotify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to notify the resident and the resident's representative of the bed hold policy upon transfer/discharge to the hospital. This involved two (Residents (R17 and R64) of three residents reviewed for hospitalization. Findings include: 1. Review of R17's Minimum Data Set (MDS) tab of R17's electronic medical record (EMR) revealed she had a quarterly MDS with an assessment reference date (ARD) of 07/12/23 with a Brief Mental Status Interview (BIMS) score of nine out of 15 indicating she was moderately cognitively impaired. Review of R17's Progress Notes tab of the EMR revealed she had a Nursing Note dated 06/30/23 and timed 11:26 PM revealing the resident was unresponsive and she was transferred to the hospital. Review of R17's Nursing Progress Note dated 07/06/23 and timed 10:12 PM revealed the resident was readmitted to the facility. Review of R17s' entire EMR revealed it was silent for a written bed-hold notice being issued when she…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-10-12 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff interview, record review, and review of the Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) Manual, the facility failed to provide an accurate resident assessment regarding a Level II screening of a Pre-admission Screening and Annual Resident Review (PASARR) on an admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for one (Resident (R) 67) out of 28 residents reviewed. Findings include: Review of R67's admission Record from the electronic medical record (EMR) Profile tab showed a facility admission date of 08/25/23 with medical diagnoses that included bipolar disorder - severe with psychotic features, panic disorder (episodic paroxysmal anxiety), suicidal ideations, depression, and cognitive communication deficit. Review of R67's EMR MISC (Miscellaneous) tab showed a Level II PASARR was completed on 08/15/23. Review of R67's admission MDS with an assessment reference date (ARD) of 08/31/23 (along with an 08/31/23 modification sent the same day) showed R67 was coded for not having a Level II PASARR completed. During a telephone interview on 10/12/23 at 11:06 AM, the covering MDS…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-10-12 · tag F0644 — isolatedCoordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure of one (Resident (R) 14) of 28 sampled residents reviewed had a Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) re-submitted upon a new mental health diagnosis. This had the potential to place the resident at risk for unmet care needs and not receiving appropriate mental health support/services as needed. Findings include: Review of R14's admission Record located in the electronic medical record (EMR) under the Profile tab showed a facility admission date of 04/11/22. Review of R14's Miscellaneous tab of the EMR revealed a PASARR dated 06/04/22. Review of R14's Diagnosis tab located in the EMR revealed medical diagnoses were input with the effective dates of: Schizoaffective Disorder - 06/08/23 Bipolar Disorder- 06/08/23 Review of R14's Minimum Data Set (MDS) located in the EMR under the MDS tab with an Assessment Review Date (ARD) of 08/17/23 included psychiatric/mood disorder to include schizophrenia (e.g., schizoaffective, and schizophreniform disorders). Review of R14's Care Plan…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-10-12 · tag F0700 — isolatedTry different approaches before using a bed rail. If a bed rail is needed, the facility must (1) assess a resident for safety risk; (2) review these risks and benefits with the resident/representative; (3) get informed consent; and (4) Correctly install and maintain the bed rail.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure that one of two residents (Resident (R) 441) reviewed for bed rail use had documented safety assessment for the use of bed rails and the Resident or Resident Representative (RR) were advised of the risks and/or benefits of rail use. This failure had the potential for the resident or the RR to be uninformed of the risks associated with bed rail use. Findings include: Review of R441's admission Record from the facility electronic medical record (EMR) Profile tab showed a facility admission date of 09/20/23 with medical diagnoses that included hemiplegia and hemiparesis (paralysis) following a cerebral infarction (stroke), muscle wasting and atrophy. A review of R441's EMR Assessments, MISC [Miscellaneous], and Progress Notes tabs on 10/11/23 at 9:40 AM did not reveal any assessments, risk/benefit advisements, or signed consents for the use of the bedrails. Observation and interview on 10/09/23 at 12:05 PM, with R441's RR was asked about the bilateral upper side rails on R441's bed and if they…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-10-12 · tag F0730 — isolatedObserve 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 documentation review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure a performance review was completed every 12 months for five (Certified Nursing Assistants (CNA)4, CNA7, CNA5, CNA8, CNA1) of five nurse aide performance reviews reviewed. Findings include: On 10/11/23 at 9:07 AM the personnel files and the performance reviews of five CNAs were reviewed with the Human Resources/Payroll Coordinator (HR). Review of the performance reviews revealed the following: 1. CNA4 had a hire date of 05/20/20. The last performance review in her personnel file was a 90-day evaluation dated 08/27/20. 2. CNA7 had a hire date of 12/16/20 and the last performance review was dated 02/05/22. 3. CNA5 had a hire date of 12/15/21 and the last performance review was dated 10/07/19. The HR stated CNA5 was a rehire and she had not had a performance review since she was rehired on 12/25/21. 4. CNA8 had a hire date of 02/05/20 and her last performance review was dated 03/30/22. 5. CNA1 had a hire date of 12/19/21 and her last performance review was dated 04/08/22. During an interview on 10/11/23 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 · D2023-10-12 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure there were no loose pills in the medication carts and failed to properly store medication for one (Resident (R) 79) that was located in another resident's room (R16). This had the potential for unauthorized residents or staff to access the medications. Findings include: 1.Review of R79's Order Summary Report located in the EMR under the Orders tab included an order for Voltaren Gel 1% (Diclofenac Sodium) to be applied to the left thumb base topically two times a day for thumb pain as of [DATE]. During an observation on [DATE] at 3:10 PM revealed Voltaren Gel (Diclofenac Sodium) 1% was on R16's over the bed table with a medication label for R79. Review of R16's Order Summary Report located in the EMR under the Orders tab did not include Voltaren Gel (Diclofenac Sodium) 1% (percent) (arthritic pain reliever). During an interview on [DATE] at 3:10 PM with R16 stated she was not aware of the cream on her over the 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.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
$8,278 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $8,278 — penalty dated 2025-12-13
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.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| GARTNER, JOHN | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; ADP OF THE SNF | since 03/01/2022 |
| MAZIE, ERIC | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; ADP OF THE SNF | since 10/01/2025 |
| KENTMERE HOME OF MERCIFUL REST SOCIETY INC. | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 03/20/2026 |
| JOHNSON, LESLIE | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 02/23/2026 |
| HEALTHPRO HERITAGE LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/01/2026 |
| RKL LLP | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/01/2026 |
| ZHU, YING | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/01/2020 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 11 rows in the source record cover these 7 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
3 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
About 74% 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. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2024. 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, FY2024). 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 DE
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 Delaware 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 085001. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-12-13, 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.