Timber Springs Transitional Care
1140 North Allumbaugh Street, Boise, ID 83704 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 120 certified beds · (208) 501-7200 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- CMS lists it as a Special Focus candidate — not on the watch list itself, but among the homes CMS is watching because of its recent inspection history
- CMS has flagged it for abuse
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Sep 2025
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0565)
- inspectors cited 1 immediate-jeopardy problem — the most serious level
- 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 (67) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $30,654 in federal fines (most recent 2025-09-12)
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (1/5)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 1 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 1 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 3 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 4 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 3 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 | 23.1% | 15.6% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 6.8% | 5.2% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 1.2% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 1.6% | 2.0% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 13.3% | 15.1% | 6.5% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 0.9% | 3.0% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 26.9% | 16.1% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 14.1% | 16.3% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 79.5% | 96.2% | 95.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 4.1% | 3.2% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 20.3% | 22.1% | 21.2% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 21.1% | 20.1% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 5.3% | 1.8% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 82.9% | 86.5% | 79.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 10.8% | 17.7% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 7.9% | 12.3% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 0.96 | 1.17 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 0.75 | 1.66 | 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.
44.5% 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 51 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 48.4% 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 62 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 0.60 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 88% 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 | 44.5%CMS range 33.1–57.0 | 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 | 10.6%CMS range 7.4–15.3 | 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 | 48.4% | 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 | 46.8% | 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 | 43.5% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 98.7% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 100.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | 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 | 1.3% | 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 | 2.7% | 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 | 6.3%CMS range 3.3–13.2 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.89 | 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 120 beds and averages 93.3 residents a day — about 78% occupied, or roughly 27 beds typically open. It usually has some room. 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 3.27 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.47 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.73 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 2.79 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.47 on weekdays — 20% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.54 to 0.31 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
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.
67 citations, most serious first. The 15 most serious are shown; the remaining 52 are one tap away and print in full.
- Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2023-05-08 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolatedProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on policy reviews, record review, observations and interviews, it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents were not served foods at high risk for transmission of food borne illness. This was true for 2 of 73 residents (#20 and #53) reviewed, who dined in the facility. This deficient practice placed Resident #20 and Resident #53 in immediate jeopardy of serious harm, impairment, or death related to Salmonellosis, an infection with Salmonella bacteria that causes diarrhea, fever and stomach pains when they consumed undercooked, unpasteurized whole shell eggs. Findings include: The CDC website, last reviewed 3/8/23, and accessed on 5/17/23, stated Salmonella illness can be serious and was more dangerous for some groups of people. These groups include children younger than 5 years, adults 65 years and older, and people who have a weakened immune system because of a health problem or medicine that lowers the body's ability to fight germs and sickness. The Food Preparation and Service policy, dated…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2025-09-12 · 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 policy review, record review, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure resident's right were protected to be free from abuse. This was true for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #87) reviewed for abuse. This failure caused harm to Resident #87 and placed all residents at risk for ongoing abuse and potential physical and psychosocial harm. Findings include:The facility's Reporting Reasonable Suspicion of a Crime policy revision date April 2025, documented it was the policy of the facility to protect its residents from abuse, neglect, exploitation, and misappropriate of resident property.Resident #87 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with the multiple diagnoses including parkinson's and dementia.Review of Resident #87's quarterly MDS, dated [DATE], indicated Resident #87 had a BIMS (Brief Interview For Mental Status) of 15, indicating no cognitive impairment.Resident #113 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including cerebral infarction (when blood…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2024-06-28 · 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 policy review, record review, review of the State Agency's Long Term Care Reporting Portal, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents' rights were protected to be free from sexual abuse. This was true for 1 of 9 residents (Resident #63) reviewed for abuse. Application of the reasonable person concept caused harm to Resident #63 when she was inappropriately touched by Resident #42. Findings include: The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Psychosocial Outcome Severity Guide, dated October 2022, states: The following are examples of circumstances in which a resident's psychosocial outcome may not be readily determined through the investigative process and the reasonable person concept should be used: - When a resident may not be able to express their feelings, there is no discernable response, or when circumstances may not permit the direct evaluation of the resident's psychosocial outcome. Such circumstances may include, but are not limited to, the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2023-05-08 · 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 policy review, record review, review of the State Agency's Long Term Care Reporting Portal, review of facility documents, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents were free from abuse by other residents and staff. This was true for 4 of 8 residents (Residents #53, #60, #63, and #233) reviewed for abuse and neglect. This failure resulted in the potential for residents to ongoing abuse and potential harm. Findings include: The facility's policy Recognizing Signs and Symptoms of Abuse/Neglect, revised 1/2011, defined abuse as the willful infliction of injury, unreasonable confinement, intimidation, or punishment with resulting physical harm, pain or mental anguish. The facility's Abuse Investigation and Reporting policy, revised 7/2017, stated our facility will not condone any form of resident abuse or neglect. These policies were not followed. a. Resident #63 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including hemiparesis (weakness of one side of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Actual harm · G2023-05-08 · 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 policy review, record review, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure professional standards of practice were followed to prevent the development and worsening of a wound. This was true for 3 of 9 residents (Residents #1, #326, and #329) reviewed for pressure ulcers. This failure resulted in harm when Resident #1, Resident #326, and Resident #329 developed new pressure ulcers, and Resident #326 and Resident #329's pressure ulcers worsened. Findings include: The National Pressure Injury Advisory Panel website, accessed on 5/10/23, defined pressure ulcer injuries for stage 2, stage 3, and unstageable as follows. - Stage 2 - Partial-thickness skin loss with exposed dermis (thick layer of living tissue below the epidermis which forms the true skin, containing blood capillaries, nerve endings, sweat glands, hair follicles, and other structures). The wound bed is viable, pink or red, moist, and may also present as an intact or ruptured serum-filled blister. Adipose (fat) is 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 · D2025-11-20 · tag F0553 — failed to let residents help plan their care — isolatedAllow resident to participate in the development and implementation of his or her person-centered plan of care.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure residents' representatives were provided the opportunity to participate in the development of the resident's care plan. This was true for 1 of 3 (Resident #115) whose record was reviewed for comprehensive care plans. This failure resulted in Resident #115's initial care conference being delayed beyond regulatory timeframes, creating the potential for miscommunication and unmet care needs. Findings include: Resident #115 was admitted on [DATE] with multiple diagnoses including mild cognitive impairment, cancer of multiple lymph sites, and adult failure to thrive.A Hospice agency delineation of care form, signed 9/3/25, documented that the facility was responsible for providing the date and time of interdisciplinary team meetings.On 11/18/25 at 3:20 PM, the Clinical Resource Nurse stated that initial care conferences were to be conducted within 72 hours of admission.On 11/19/25 at 11:12 AM, the Social Worker stated care conferences were 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 before2025-11-20 · tag F0585 — failed to handle grievances — isolatedHonor the resident's right to voice grievances without discrimination or reprisal and the facility must establish a grievance policy and make prompt efforts to resolve grievances.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, and staff interview it was determined the facility failed to ensure grievances were acted upon when facility staff were made aware of residents' missing items. This was true for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #29) whose records were reviewed. This deficient practice created the potential for psychosocial and physical harm when Resident #29's personal items were missing and not replaced. Findings include:Resident #29 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with multiple diagnoses including dementia and anxiety.A Comprehensive MDS Assessment,dated 8/6/25, documented Resident #29 had severe cognitive impairment.A. Resident #29's care plan, initiated 7/17/25, documented Resident #29 was at risk for a communication problem related to a hearing deficit. The care plan documented ear amplifiers were ordered, and Resident #29 preferred to keep his hearing amplifiers in his shirt pocket.Nursing progress notes documented the following:On 8/7/25, Resident #29 did not have his ear amplifiers.On 8/9/25,…
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 · D2025-11-20 · 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 record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure professional standards of practice were followed. This was true for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #115) whose record was reviewed for medication management. Specifically, the facility did not implement a physician's order for Haldol prescribed for symptom management during end of life care. This failure created the potential for untreated symptoms during the death and dying process. Findings include: The National Library of Medicine website accessed on 11/19/25, defines standard of care as the benchmark that determines whether professional obligations to patients have been met.Resident #115 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including mild cognitive impairment, cancer of multiple lymph sites, and adult failure to thrive.Resident #115's record documented she admitted to end-of-life services on 9/3/25 upon admission. Review of Resident #115's record located a document titled Symptom Control Prescription dated 9/3/25 and signed by a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-11-20 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolatedEnsure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure residents drug regimens were free from unnecessary medications. This was true for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #115) whose records were reviewed for unnecessary medications. Specifically, the facility administered Keflex (an antibiotic) beyond the prescribed duration without documented physician authorization or evidence of clinical justification. This failure created the potential for adverse outcomes, including the development of multi drug resistant organisms. Findings include:Resident #115 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including mild cognitive impairment, cancer of multiple lymph sites, and adult failure to thrive.Resident #115's record documented an order for Keflex 500 mg by mouth twice daily for 10 days to treat a cyst infection.A review of the MAR dated 9/3/25 - 10/14/25 documented the following physician orders:A Physician order dated 9/26/25 - 10/3/25: Keflex 500 mg by mouth twice daily for 10 days.A Physician order dated…
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 before2025-09-12 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and staff interviews, the facility failed to maintain a clean and homelike environment for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #2) reviewed for environmental conditions. This failure created the potential for embarrassment and psychosocial harm when Resident #2's room was repeatedly observed to have a foul urine odor and unclean conditions. Findings include:Resident #2 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including end stage heart failure, cirrhosis of the liver, and immunodeficiency.A social services progress note created on 9/8/25 at 3:51 PM, documented that on 9/8/25 at 7:47 AM, the Licensed Social Worker identified Resident #2's room to be cluttered and uncleanly. She documented she provided education to Resident #2 about decluttering his room and allowing the housekeeper to clean his room.A social services progress note dated 9/8/25 at 7:18 PM, documented when Resident #2 left the facility housekeeping services were provided. During the services provided, it was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-09-12 · 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 policy review, record review, staff interviews, and Bureau of Facility Standards Long-Term Care Reporting Portal, it was determined the facility failed to ensure interventions were implemented to prevent further resident to resident abuse incidents. This was true for 2 of 5 (Resident #87 and #113) reviewed for resident-to-resident abuse. This failure created the potential to cause psychosocial, verbal, and physical harm to residents residing in the facility. Findings include:The facility's Reporting Reasonable Suspicion of a Crime policy revised April 2025, documented it is the policy of the facility to protect resident from abuse, neglect, exploitation, and misappropriation of resident property.The facility's Reporting Alleged Violations of Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation, or Mistreatment policy revised April 2025, documented it is the policy of the facility that each resident has the right to be free from abuse, neglect, misappropriation of resident property, exploitation and mistreatment. Residents must…
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 · D2025-09-12 · tag F0628 — isolatedProvide 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 policy review, record review, and staff interviews it was determined the facility failed to ensure pertinent health information was provided to the receiving health facility for 2 of 6 residents (Resident #4 and #79) reviewed for transfers. This deficient practice had the potential to result in adverse outcomes if the residents were not treated in a timely manner due to a lack of information provided upon transfer. Findings include:The facility’s Criteria for Transfer and Discharge policy, revised December 2023, documented when the facility transfers or discharges a resident, the facility shall ensure the transfer or discharge is documented in the resident’s medical record and appropriate information is communicated to the receiving health care institution or provider. 1.Resident #4 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including epilepsy (a disorder in which nerve cell activity in the brain is disturbed, causing seizures) and anxiety. a) A Nurses Note dated 3/20/25, documented…
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 · D2025-09-12 · 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 and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure residents' Minimum Data Set (MDS) had correct assessment information. This was true for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #10) reviewed for accuracy of MDS assessments. This deficient practice created the potential for residents to not receive appropriate treatment and services to attain or maintain their highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial needs. Findings include:Resident #10 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including cerebral palsy (a movement disorder affecting the nervous system, causing problems with muscle control, movement, and posture) and major depressive disorder.On 4/30/25, Resident #10's physician order documented hydroxyzine HCL oral tablet 25 mg (anti-anxiety medication) by mouth at bedtime for anxiety.On 5/6/25, Resident #10's History and Physical documented to give hydroxyzine HCL 25 mg tablet by mouth at bedtime for anxiety.On 5/6/25, Resident #10's admission MDS, section I5700…
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 before2025-09-12 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interview it was determined the facility failed to ensure professional standards of nursing practice were followed 1 of 2 residents (Resident #17) reviewed for anticoagulant (AC) monitoring. This deficient practice created the potential for harm if Resident #17's anticoagulant therapy was not monitored for signs and symptoms of complications. Findings include: Resident #17 was readmitted on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including cerebral palsy (a group of disorders that affect a person's ability to move and maintain balance and posture), atrial fibrillation (a common heart rhythm disorder where the upper chambers of the heart (atria) beat irregularly and rapidly, which can cause the blood to pool in the atria and form clots, increasing the risk of stroke,) COPD (Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: a lung condition caused by damage to the lungs, leading to trouble breathing,) diabetes, schizophrenia, and high blood pressure. A physician order, dated 6/27/24, documented…
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 · D2025-09-12 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolatedEnsure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
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, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure physician orders were followed for 1 of 1 residents (Resident #72) reviewed for tube feeding. This failure created the potential for poor nutrition when the incorrect nutritional supplement was administered. Findings include:The facility's policy titled Medication Administration Via Feeding Tube, revised July 2025, directed staff to confirm the physician's order prior to administration.Resident #72 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with multiple diagnoses including cancer of the mouth, cancer of the esophagus, and cancer of other unspecified sites.Resident #72's care plan, initiated on 8/24/25, documented tube feeding as ordered.A physician order dated 8/20/25 directed staff to administer Jevity 1.5 nutritional supplement at 125 milliliters per hour for 16 hours to provide a total of 2,000 milliliters daily.On 9/10/25 at 9:45 AM, Resident #72 was observed connected via PEG tube to a pump delivering Glucerna 1.5 nutritional…
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 52 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-09-12 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interviews, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure oxygen therapy was provided as ordered by the physician for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #29) reviewed for oxygen therapy. This failure created the potential for adverse health outcomes, including poor oxygenation and impaired concentration, when Resident #29 was not receiving oxygen therapy as prescribed. Findings include:Resident #29 was admitted the facility on 7/15/25, with multiple diagnoses including chronic respiratory failure, respiratory disorder, and cognitive impairment.Resident #29's care plan, initiated 7/16/25, directed staff to provide oxygen as ordered.A physician order, dated 7/15/25, documented oxygen at 5 liters via nasal cannula continuously.A subsequent physician order dated 8/15/25 directed staff to wean oxygen therapy for oxygen saturation levels over 94%, and to administer 1-3 liters per minute via nasal cannula as needed to maintain oxygen saturation between 88-93%.On 9/10/25 at 9:03 AM, during a medication administration observation, Resident #29 was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-09-12 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolatedEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure the Medical Director and Director of Nursing Services acted upon pharmacist recommendations for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #90) reviewed for unnecessary medications. This failure created the potential for adverse effects and for residents to continue receiving medications without clinical justification. Findings include:The facility's policy titled Medication Drug Regimen Review, revised December 2023, documented that a medication regimen review (MRR) includes a review of the resident's medical chart. Identified irregularities are to be documented on a separate written report that includes the resident's name, the relevant drug, and the irregularity identified. The report is to be sent to the attending physician, the facility's Medical Director, and the Director of Nursing Services (DNS) to be acted upon.Resident #90 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including dementia, need for assistance…
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 · D2025-09-12 · 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 observation and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure that residents were free from significant medication errors for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #50) observed during medication administration. This failure created the potential for harm when RN #3 did not assess Resident #50's apical pulse (a pulse point on your chest that gives the most accurate reading of your heart rate) prior to administering digoxin, a medication known to affect heart rate. Findings include:Resident #50 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including cerebral infarction affecting the right dominant side, hypertension, and atrial fibrillation. A physician order, dated 3/14/25, documented digoxin 125 micrograms orally each morning for atrial fibrillation, with instructions to notify the provider for a heart rate less than 40 beats per minute. According to the Nursing Unbound Medicine website, accessed on 9/16/25, digoxin increases cardiac output and slows heart rate. The recommended assessment…
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 · D2025-09-12 · 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 representative interview, record review, and staff interview it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents obtained routine and emergency dental care to 1 of 1 resident (Resident #68) reviewed for timely dental care. This deficient practice created the potential for harm if the resident's nutritional status was altered or if she developed an infection related to dental damage. Findings include: Resident #68 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and readmitted on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including cellulitis of the left lower leg, diabetes, COPD, lack of coordination, delusional disorders, depression, and anxiety. A quarterly MDS Assessment, dated 7/24/25, documented Resident #68 was cognitively impaired. Resident #68's care plan, initiated 11/13/24, and updated on 3/12/25 alerted staff Resident #68 did not have teeth, would not wear dentures, and could be at nutritional risk related to additional diagnoses of diabetes and COPD. Resident #68's care plan, initiated on 7/1/25,…
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 · D2025-09-12 · tag F0807 — failed to offer suitable drinks — isolatedEnsure each resident receives and the facility provides drinks consistent with resident needs and preferences and sufficient to maintain resident hydration.
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 staff interview it was determined the facility failed to ensure resident's received hydration beverages during dining. This was true for 1 of 18 residents (Resident #3) observed coughing without a hydration beverage. This deficient practice created the potential for harm if hydration was not provided during meals. Findings include: Resident #3 was readmitted on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including atrial fibrillation, coronary artery disease, hypertension, renal insufficiency, and hyperlipidemia. On 9/8/25 at 12:00 PM, it was observed in the second-floor dining room Resident #3 was seated at a table with Resident #85. Resident #3 did not have beverages at her dining area; whereas Resident #85 had two beverages in front of him. On 9/8/25 at 12:30 PM, Resident #3 was observed coughing at her table while eating her lunch. The Dietary Manager (DM) asked Resident #3 if she was okay, she requested ice tea, which after drinking, her coughing stopped. On 9/8/25 at 12:45 PM, the DM stated…
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 before2025-09-12 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolatedProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review, staff interview, and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Food Code, it was determined the facility failed to ensure: a) ice machines and pans were cleaned and sanitized, b) appropriate glove use was followed by employees, and c) stored food and spices were not expired. This was true for 98 resident's who consumed food stored and prepared by the facility. This deficient practice placed residents at risk for potential contamination of food and adverse health outcomes, including food-borne illnesses. Findings include: 1. The FDA Food Code Section 2-301.14 When to Wash documented food employees shall clean their hands immediately before engaging in food preparation including working with exposed food, clean equipment and utensils, and before donning gloves to initiate a task that involves working with food.On 9/11/25 between 11:38 AM and 12:20 PM, multiple observations were made during tray line when Dietary Aide #1 did not wash his hands between changing tasks of using his bare hands to serve resident food with ladles and then donning gloves to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-09-12 · tag F0839 — isolatedEmploy staff that are licensed, certified, or registered in accordance with state laws.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the Division of Occupational Licenses database, facility personnel records, staffing schedules, and staff interviews it was determined the facility failed to ensure all registered nurses were working with a valid nursing license. This deficient practice had the potential to significantly harm residents if licensed nurses did not have the knowledge, competencies, and skill sets to provide care and respond to resident's needs. Findings include:On [DATE], a review of the Division of Occupational Licenses database documented RN #1's professional license had expired on [DATE].On [DATE], a review of the nurse staffing schedule documented RN #1 worked at the facility, performing licensed nursing duties on the following dates:[DATE]/[DATE]/[DATE]/[DATE]/25On [DATE] at 1:00 PM, the DON stated he found out RN #1's license was expired on [DATE] and reassigned her to do a 1:1 observation on a resident. The DON confirmed RN #1 worked 6 shifts before re-assigning her to the 1:1 observation.
- Potential for harm · D2025-09-12 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff interviews, and review of the Left Ventricular Assist Device (LVAD) Management Manual, the facility failed to implement appropriate infection prevention and control practices during medication administration, medication storage, and a sterile dressing change for 2 of 2 residents (#2 and #50) reviewed for infection control. This failure created the potential for cross-contamination, infection, and life-threatening complications. Findings include: 1.On 9/10/25 at 8:25 AM, during a medication administration observation, RN #3 was preparing medications when a tablet fell from the medication cup onto the top surface of the medication cart. RN #3 donned a glove, picked up the tablet from the cart surface, and returned it to the medication cup. She continued preparing and administering medications to Resident #50.On 9/10/25 at 8:45 AM, RN #3 stated that cross-contamination may have occurred when the tablet contacted the cart surface. She reported sanitizing the cart at the beginning of her…
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 before2024-06-28 · 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 and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure the kitchen equipment and environment was maintained, and food was stored in a safe and sanitary manner. These deficiencies had the potential to affect the 63 residents residing in the facility who consumed food prepared by the facility. This placed residents at risk for potential contamination of food and adverse health outcomes, including food-borne illnesses. Findings include: 1. The FDA Food Code Section 2-301.14 states food employees shall clean their hands and exposed portions of their arms as specified under paragraph 2-301.12 immediately before engaging in food preparation including working with exposed food, clean equipment and utensils, and unwrapped single-service and single-use articles and: (A) After touching bare human body parts other than clean hands and clean, exposed portions of arms; (B), after coughing, sneezing, using a handkerchief or disposable tissue, using tobacco products, eating, or drinking; E) After handling soiled equipment or utensils; (F) During food preparation,…
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 · E2024-06-28 · 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 policy review, record review, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents and their representatives received assistance to exercise their right to formulate an advanced directive. This was true for 6 of 16 residents (#12, #24, #42, #50, #54, and #55) whose records were reviewed for advanced directives. This deficient practice created the potential for harm or adverse outcomes if residents' wishes were not followed or documented regarding their advance care planning. Findings include: The State Operations Manual, Appendix PP, defined an advance directive as a written instruction, such as a living will or durable power of attorney for health care, recognized under State law (whether statutory or as recognized by the courts of the State), relating to the provision of health care when the individual is incapacitated. Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (or POLST [POST]) paradigm form is a form designed to improve patient care by creating a portable medical order…
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 before2024-06-28 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, policy review, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents were provided with a safe, clean, homelike environment. This was true for all 63 residents who resided in the facility whose environment was observed. This deficient practice created the potential for harm if: a) residents were embarrassed by dirty equipment and/or felt the lack of cleanliness in the facility was unacceptable, disrespectful, or undignified, and b) cross-contamination from spread of microorganisms. Findings include: The facility's Cleaning and Disinfection of Resident-Care Items and Equipment policy, revised September 2022, documented resident-care equipment, including reusable items and durable medical equipment will be cleaned and disinfected according to current CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) recommendations for disinfection and the OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Administration) Bloodborne Pathogens Standard. The following was observed: - On 6/24/24 at 2:33 PM, the stand aide (a lifting device used to assist residents who have…
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 before2024-06-28 · tag F0622 — patternNot transfer or discharge a resident without an adequate reason; and must provide documentation and convey specific information when a resident is transferred or discharged.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY 2. Resident #42 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including respiratory failure and liver disease. A progress note, dated 1/3/24 at 7:52 PM, documented Resident #42 had a change in condition: shortness of breath. A physician's order, dated 1/3/24, documented to send Resident #42 to the emergency room for evaluation and treatment. A Transfer form Document Checklist, dated 1/3/24 at 7:47 PM, was not completed. Resident #42's record did not include documentation pertinent medical information was provided to the receiving hospital. On 6/27/24 11:28 AM, the DON stated the resident's orders, resident profile, POST, DPOA (Durable Power of Attorney) forms, E-INTERACT form, progress note, any labs or x-rays are sent to the hospital with the resident. Two copies of these forms are made and sent with the resident. One copy is for the EMT (Emergency Medical Technician) and one for the hospital staff. A progress note is put in and it should include what was sent with the resident to the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-06-28 · 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, policy review, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure medications available for residents were labeled and dated; this was true for 1 of 2 medication storage rooms and 1 of 2 medication carts inspected. This failure created the potential for residents to receive expired medications with decreased efficacy. Findings include: The facility's Medication Labeling and Storage policy, revised 2/2023, documented labeling of medications and biologicals dispensed by the pharmacy is consistent with applicable federal and state requirements and currently accepted pharmaceutical practices. 1. On 6/26/24 at 9:17 AM, the facility's first floor medication storage room was inspected with LPN #1 present. The following medications were expired: * One bottle of Aspirin, expired 3/2024. * Three bottles of Saw Palmetto supplement, expired 3/2024. * One box of acetaminophen suppositories, expired 12/2022. On 6/26/24 at 7:58 AM, LPN #1 stated she was not sure whose job it was to check the medication room for expired medication. She also stated 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 · D2024-06-28 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, and resident and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to maintain or enhance residents' dignity during dining when residents seated at the same table were served their meals at different times. This was true for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #5) observed during dining in the facility. This failure had the potential to cause a decrease in resident's sense of self worth and psychosocial wellbeing. Findings include: Resident #5 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including anxiety, depression, and paraplegia (paralysis of the legs and lower body, typically caused by spinal cord injury). On 6/24/24 at 12:30 PM, Resident #5 and Resident #23 were seated across from each other at a table in the main dining room. Resident #23 was served her meal and started eating. Resident #5 did not receive his meal tray. He was quiet as he observed Resident #23 while she ate her meal. Resident #5 was also observed looking at the other residents seated at the table next…
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 before2024-06-28 · 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 record review and resident and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure the physician was notified of resident weight changes as ordered. This was true for 2 of 6 residents (#12 and #48) reviewed for timely physician notification. This placed Resident #12 and Resident #48 at risk of experiencing complications related to unexpected weight changes. Findings include: 1. Resident #12 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including end-stage renal disease (the stage of renal impairment that appears irreversible and permanent, requiring a regular course of dialysis or kidney transplantation to maintain life), and type 2 diabetes mellitus. A physician's order, dated 4/1/22, stated to obtain Resident #12's weight every dayshift for CHF, notify MD if weight gain greater than 2-3 pounds in 24 hours or 5 pounds in one week. Resident #12's treatment administration record (TAR) documented his weights were not taken or recorded for the following dates: 4/2/24, 4/4/24,…
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 before2024-06-28 · tag F0585 — failed to handle grievances — isolatedHonor the resident's right to voice grievances without discrimination or reprisal and the facility must establish a grievance policy and make prompt efforts to resolve grievances.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on policy review, record review, review of facility grievances, and resident and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure grievances were investigated and prompt corrective action was taken to resolve them. This was true for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #16) reviewed for grievances. This failure created the potential for psychological harm if residents' grievances were not acted upon. Findings include: The facility's Grievances/Complaints, Filing policy, revised April 2017, documented upon receipt of a grievance and/or complaint, the grievance officer will review and investigate the allegations and submit a written report of such findings to the administrator within (5) working days of receiving the grievance and/or complaint. Resident #16 was admitted to the facility 1/3/24, with multiple diagnoses including opioid dependence, anxiety, depression, and morbid obesity. Resident #16's quarterly MDS assessment, dated 4/10/24, documented she was cognitively intact. On 6/25/24 at 2:37 PM, Resident #16 stated that about two weeks ago, while she was watching 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 · D2024-06-28 · 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 observation, record review, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to develop and implement comprehensive resident-centered care plans. This was true for 1 of 16 residents (Resident #27) whose care plans were reviewed. These failures placed residents at risk of negative outcomes if services were not provided or provided incorrectly due to lack of information in their care plan. Findings include: The facility's Care Plan policy, revised 2022, documented the facility was to develop ongoing assessments and revise care plans as resident's condition changed. Resident #27 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple diagnosis including heart failure and kidney disease. 1. On 6/24/24 11:12 AM, Resident #27 was observed with upper and lower dentures in her mouth. Resident #27's care plan initiated 4/19/24, did not document she had dentures. On 6/28/24 at 9:45 AM, the DON stated Resident #27's dentures were not documented in her care plan, and it should have been. 2. On 6/24/24 at…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-06-28 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY 2. Resident #27 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple diagnosis including heart failure and kidney disease. A physician order, dated 4/25/24, documented Resident #27 was to have half side rails x 2 to the right and left side of his bed to enable bed mobility. On 6/28/24 at 9:10 AM, with the DON present, Resident #27's bed was observed with no half side rails. On 6/28/24 at 9:13 AM, the DON stated Resident #27 should have had half side rails on her bed and the bed half side rails should have been documented in her care plan. On 6/28/24 at 1:14 PM, LPN #2 stated Resident #27 did not have half side rails on her bed and she should have. Based on record review, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure professional standards of practice were followed for 2 of 16 residents (#27 and #53) reviewed for quality of care. Resident #27's physician's order to install a siderail to her bed was not followed. Resident #53's bowel medications were not administered as ordered by 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 before2024-06-28 · 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 — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure respiratory equipment was stored in a sanitary manner. This was true for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #27), reviewed for respiratory services. This created the potential for respiratory infections due to growth of pathogens (organisms that cause illness) in respiratory treatment equipment. Findings include: Resident #27 was admitted [DATE], with multiple diagnosis including heart failure and kidney disease. On 6/28/24 at 9:10 AM, in Resident #27 's room with DON present, Resident #27 's oxygen tubing and nasal cannula were observed lying on the floor. On 6/28/24 at 9:15 AM, the DON stated Resident #27 's oxygen tubing and nasal cannula should have been placed in the bag attached to the oxygen concentrator when it was removed from Resident #27.
- Potential for harm · D2024-06-28 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure that prior to the placement of bed rails, alternatives to bed rails were attempted, individual residents were thoroughly assessed for the risk of entrapment, and consent was in place. This was true for 2 of 3 residents (#47 and #56) reviewed for bed rails. This failure created the potential for harm due to the risk of entrapment and due to lack of opportunity for the resident and/or their representative to make an informed decision regarding the use of bed rails. Findings include: 1. Resident #47 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including metabolic encephalopathy (disorders where medical problems such as infections, organ dysfunction, or electrolyte imbalance impair brain function), end stage renal disease (the final, permanent stage of chronic kidney disease, where kidney function has declined to the point that the kidneys can no longer function on their own), and diabetes. A…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-06-28 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolatedEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on policy review, staff interview, and record review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure the pharmacist recognized and reported medication irregularities related to PRN psychotropic medication. This was true for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #16) whose medications were reviewed. This failure created the potential for harm should residents receive medications that were unnecessary, ineffective, or used for excessive duration. Findings include: The State Operations Manual, Appendix PP, revised 02/03/23, documented PRN orders for anti-psychotic drugs are limited to 14 days and cannot be renewed unless the attending physician or prescribing practitioner evaluates the resident for the appropriateness of that medication. Resident #16 was admitted to the facility 1/3/24, with multiple diagnoses including opioid dependence, anxiety, depression, and morbid obesity. Resident #16's physician's orders included the following: - Quetiapine (Seroquel - antipsychotic) Fumarate tablet 400 mg, give one tablet by mouth at bedtime for anxiety, ordered 1/3/24. - Quetiapine Fumarate 150…
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 before2024-06-28 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure PRN anti-psychotic medications were limited to 14 days. This was true for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #16) reviewed for unnecessary medications. This deficient practice created the potential for harm if residents receive PRN anti-psychotics medications that were unwarranted, ineffective, or used for excessive duration. Findings include: The State Operations Manual, Appendix PP, revised 02/03/23, documented PRN orders for anti-psychotic drugs are limited to 14 days and cannot be renewed unless the attending physician or prescribing practitioner evaluates the resident for the appropriateness of that medication. Resident #16 was admitted to the facility 1/3/24, with multiple diagnoses including opioid dependence, anxiety, depression, and morbid obesity. Resident #16's physician's orders included the following: - Quetiapine (Seroquel - antipsychotic) Fumarate tablet 400 mg, give one tablet by mouth at bedtime for anxiety, ordered 1/3/24. - Quetiapine Fumarate 150 mg, one tablet by mouth PRN for…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-06-28 · tag F0849 — isolatedArrange for the provision of hospice services or assist the resident in transferring to a facility that will arrange for the provision of hospice 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 record review and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure care was coordinated with a hospice provider and duties of the hospice provider and the facility were delineated. This was true for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #56) reviewed for hospice care. This failure created the potential for Resident #56 to receive inadequate care due to a lack of coordination between the facility and the hospice agency. Findings include: Resident #56 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including metabolic encephalopathy (disorders where medical problems such as infections, organ dysfunction, or electrolyte imbalance impair brain function), left thigh fracture, alcohol dependence, and depression. A significant change in status MDS assessment, dated 5/17/24, documented Resident #56 received hospice services. Resident #56's care plan did not include documentation of the responsibilities or care delineated between the facility and the hospice agency. On 6/27/24 at 5:05 PM,…
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 · F2023-05-08 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — widespreadProvide enough nursing staff every day to meet the needs of every resident; and have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift.
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 policy review, obsevation, record review, review of the Resident Council meeting minutes and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure there were sufficient numbers of staff available at all times to provide nursing and related services to meet the residents' needs and a charge nurse was identified for all shifts. This was true for 5 of 74 residents (#2, #40, #61, #62 and #69) reviewed for staffing concerns and had the potential to affect all resident in the facility. This created the the potential for physical and psychosocial harm if residents did not receive appropriate care or received a delay of care. Findings include: 1. The facility's Sufficient and Competent Nursing policy, revised 8/22, stated, A licensed nurse is designated as a charge nurse on each shift. This policy was not followed. During an interview on 5/5/23 at 10:43 AM, LPN #2 stated the staffing was sufficient on the weekends if there were no call-offs. LPN #2 stated there was no charge nurse on 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 · F2023-05-08 · tag F0800 — widespreadProvide each resident with a nourishing, palatable, well-balanced diet that meets his or her daily nutritional and special dietary needs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on policy review, observations, record review, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to provide a well-balanced diet that met residents nutritional and special dietary needs for 21 residents (#2, #11, #22, #26, #32, #36, #37, #41, #42, #43, #45, #47, #56, #57, #58, #59, #62, #68, #70, #72, and #176) of 74 residents residing in the facility. This resulted in residents on mechanical soft diets being served more restricted foods than their diets required and the same items repeatedly, residents on cardiac diets receiving regular foods they should not have received; and residents on renal diets receiving regular diets without any modifications. Findings include: The facility's Therapeutic Diets policy, dated October 2017, stated Therapeutic diets are prescribed by the Attending Physician to support the resident's treatment and plan of care and in accordance with his or her goals and preferences .A therapeutic diet is considered a diet ordered by a physician, practitioner, or dietitian as part of treatment for a disease or clinical condition, to modify specific…
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 · F2023-05-08 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — widespreadEnsure 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, record review, and staff and resident interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure menus met the nutritional needs of the residents and menus were followed for 2 residents (Residents #10 and #40), approximately half of the residents who ate on the second floor (52 residents lived on the second floor), and to residents on regular diets (40 residents) of 74 residents residing in the facility. This put residents at risk of not having their nutritional needs met or being on a more restrictive diet than required. Findings include: Observations on 4/30/23 for the lunch meal, showed staff ran out of the entrée due to not following the menu and serving size for half of the residents on the second floor who received two portions of the entrée instead of a serving of the entrée and the soup. All 40 residents on regular diets were routinely served sugar free pudding, ice cream, and gelatin, contrary to the menu. Furthermore, the menus were evaluated and signed by a RD prior to numerous…
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 · E2023-05-08 · tag F0565 — failed to support the resident council — patternHonor the resident's right to organize and participate in resident/family groups in the facility.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on policy review, review of Food Committee meeting minutes, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure concerns from the Food Committee meetings were documented and the Activity Director addressed. This deficient practice placed residents at risk of ongoing frustration and decreased sense of self-worth when their concerns were not promptly addressed by the facility. Findings include: The Resident Council policy, dated 4/2017, documented the facility would support residents' rights to organize and participate in the Resident Council. The purpose of the Resident Council was to provide a forum for: - Residents, families, and resident representatives to have input in the operation of the facility; - Discussion of concerns and suggestions for improvement; - Consensus building and communication between residents and facility staff; and - Disseminating information and gathering feedback from interested residents. This policy was not followed. On 5/4/23 at 2:17 PM, the Activity Director stated the Food Committee meetings started in 12/2022 due to residents'…
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 · E2023-05-08 · tag F0582 — patternGive residents notice of Medicaid/Medicare coverage and potential liability for services not covered.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on policy review, record review, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to give the Skilled Nursing Facility Advance Beneficiary Notice of Non-Coverage to 3 of 3 residents (Residents #58, #66, and #178) reviewed who were admitted to the facility with Medicare coverage. Findings include: The facility's policy, Medicare Advance Beneficiary and Medicare Non-Coverage Notices, stated the facility was to issue form CMS-10055 to the resident when the facility believed the resident would no longer be eligible for Medicare covered services. This policy was not followed. Residents #58, #66, and #178 were not provided with form CMS-10055 when discharge from the facility was anticipated, as follows: a. Resident #58 was admitted to the facility for Medicare Part A services on 11/23/22 and discharged on 2/3/23. Resident #58 received Physical Therapy services while at the facility. The facility failed to provide evidence CMS Form-10055 was given to Resident #58. b. Resident #66 was admitted to the facility for Medicare Part A services on 1/10/23 and discharged on 4/7/23.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-05-08 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — patternDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on policy review, observation, record review, and resident and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents' care plans were revised and updated as needed. This was true for 4 of 26 residents (#10, #18, #19, #61, and #329) whose care plans were reviewed. This created the potential for harm if care and/or services were not provided appropriately due to inaccurate information in the care plan. Findings include: The facility's Care Plan policy, revised 2022, documented the facility was to develop ongoing assessments and revise care plans as residents' condition changed. This policy was not followed. 1. Resident #329 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including right femur fracture and dementia. Resident #329 required assistance with personal care. a. A weekly head-to-toe skin check assessment, dated 9/6/21, documented Resident #329 developed nine new skin issues, as follows: - Right elbow: red. - Left elbow: red. - Coccyx (Tailbone): eschar (dead skin…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-05-08 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — patternProvide 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 3. Resident #19 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including lymphedema (a condition that results in swelling of the leg or arm due to blockage in the lymphatic system which is part of the immune system), Parkinson's disease ( disorder of the central nervous system that affects movement), hemiparesis (weakness of one side of the body), hemiplegia (paralysis of one side of the body), and dysarthria (difficulty speaking) following a stroke. A physician order, dated 11/29/19, directed staff to provide her nail care every Monday night. On 5/1/23 at 9:18 AM, Resident #19's representative stated Resident #19's fingernails on her left hand were too long and asked the staff to trim them. Resident #19's fingernails on her left hand were observed on 4/30/23 at 3:36 PM, 5/1/23 at 9:22 AM, and 5/2/23 at 9:01 AM. Resident #19's left hand was closed in a fist, her left thumb was bent over her four fingers. Resident #19's thumb, ring finger and little fingernails were long,…
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 before2023-05-08 · 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 2. The Neurological Assessment policy, dated 2018, documented neurological assessments were indicated as follows: - Upon physician order; - Following an unwitnessed fall; - Following a fall or other accident/injury involving head trauma and - When indicated by resident's condition. The policy stated also stated, When assessing the neurological status, always include frequent vital signs. Particular attention should be paid to widening pulse pressure (difference between systolic and diastolic pressures). This may be indicative of increasing intracranial pressure (ICP). Any change in vital signs or /neurological status in a previously stable resident should be reported to the physician immediately. This policy was not followed. Resident #2 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with multiple diagnoses including Parkinson's Disease (a disorder of the central nervous system that affects movement), muscle weakness, dementia, bipolar disorder (a disorder that exhibits mood swings), anxiety, and history of falling.…
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 · E2023-05-08 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — patternHave a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on policy review, review of facility staffing and staff interview, it was determined the facility facility failed to ensure an RN was on duty for eight consecutive hours per day, seven days a week. This failure created the potential for harm if routine and/or emergency nursing needs went unmet and had the potential to affect all 74 residents living in the facility. Findings include: The facility's Staffing, Sufficient and Competent Nursing policy, revised 8/2022, stated, A registered nurse provides services at least eight (8) consecutive hours every 24 hours, seven (7) days a week. The facility daily staffing sheets dated 1/1/22 through 6/30/22, documented there was no RN coverage on 2/5/22, 2/13/22, 2/19/22, 3/6/22, 3/27/22, 4/3/22, 4/10/22, 4/17/22, 4/24/22, 5/1/22, 5/7/22, 5/8/22, 5/15/22, 5/22/22, 6/5/22, and 6/12/22. The facility daily staffing sheets dated 10/1/22 through 12/31/22, documented there was no RN coverage on 10/1/22, 10/2/22, 10/09/22, 10/16/22, 10/10/22, 10/15/22, 10/22/22, 10/23/22, 10/29/22, 10/30/22, 11/6/22, 11/13/22, 11/20/22, 12/10/22, 12/11/22, and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-05-08 · 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 policy review, record review, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents receiving psychotropic medication had resident-specific target behaviors identified and monitored. This was true for 4 of 7 residents (#10, #12, #19, and #61) reviewed for unnecessary medications. This deficient practice created the potential for harm if residents received medications that may result in negative outcomes without clear indication of need. Findings include: The facility's Psychotropic Medication Use policy, dated 7/2022, documented residents would not receive medications that were not clinically indicated to treat a specific condition. Psychotropic medications management includes: indications for use, adequate monitoring for efficacy and adverse consequences, dose, duration and preventing, identifying and responding to adverse consequences. This policy was not followed. 1. Resident #19 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and readmitted on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-05-08 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — patternEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on policy review, observation, record review, and resident and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to serve palatable food to 8 of 8 residents (Residents #7, #13, #19, #25, #30, #34, #61, and #66) who were interviewed about food temperature and taste. This had the potential to create dissatisfaction with meals and decrease residents' quality of life. Findings include: The facility's Food and Nutrition Services policy, dated 2018, stated, Each resident is provided with a nourishing, palatable, well-balanced diet that meets his or her daily nutritional and special dietary needs, taking into consideration the preferences of each resident .Food and nutrition services staff will inspect food trays .the food appears palatable and attractive, and it is served at a safe and appetizing temperature. The policy was not followed. 1. During the survey, resdients reported the food was not at the right temperature when it was served and the food was not consistently palatable, as follows: a. During 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 · E2023-05-08 · tag F0806 — failed to honor food preferences — patternEnsure each resident receives and the facility provides food that accommodates resident allergies, intolerances, and preferences, as well as appealing options.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on policy review, observation, record review, and resident and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to obtain food preferences and dislikes from residents upon admission and on an ongoing basis and failed to serve preferred foods, offer choices, and provide selected foods which directly impacted 11 of 11 residents (Residents #7, #10, #19, #25, #30, #34, #38, #57, #61, #63, and #66) who were interviewed about food preferences. This had the potential to impact all residents who consumed food by mouth who resided in the facility. In addition, alternates were not always available and/or residents had to wait an extended time to receive them. These failures created the potential for dissatisfaction with meals and decreased quality of life. Findings include: The Resident Food Preferences policy, dated 2018, stated, Individual food preferences will be assessed upon admission and communicated to the interdisciplinary team .Upon the resident's admission (or within twenty-four-hour (24) hours after his/her admission) the Dietitian or nursing staff will identify a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-05-08 · tag F0808 — failed to follow doctor-ordered diets — patternEnsure therapeutic diets are prescribed by the attending physician and may be delegated to a registered or licensed dietitian, to the extent allowed by State law.
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 policy review, observation, record review, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure physician-ordered therapeutic diets were followed for 2 of 2 residents (Residents #22 and #70) whose renal diets were reviewed. This resulted in residents on renal diets receiving regular diets. Findings include: The Therapeutic Diets policy, dated October 2017, stated Therapeutic diets are prescribed by the Attending Physician to support the resident's treatment and plan of care and in accordance with his or her goals and preferences .A therapeutic diet is considered a diet ordered by a physician, practitioner, or dietitian as part of treatment for a disease or clinical condition, to modify specific nutrient in the diet, or to alter the texture of a diet. This policy was not followed. 1. During an observation on 4/30/23 at 9:33 AM, dietary staff were preparing the lunch meal. The ALF DM stated the lunch menu was tomato basil soup, broccoli cheese frittata (an egg custard without a crust),…
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 · D2023-05-08 · 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 policy review, observation, record review, and resident and staff interviews, it was determined the facility failed to assess whether residents had the ability to self-administer their medications for 2 of 4 residents (Residents #20 and #61) reviewed for self-administration of medications. This failure created the potential for adverse effects if medications were self administered inappropriately by the residents. Findings include: The facility's Self-Administration of Medication policy, revised 2018, stated, Residents have the right to self-administer medications/treatments if the interdisciplinary team has determined that it is clinically appropriate and safe for the resident to do so. As a part of the overall evaluation, the staff and practitioner will assess each resident's mental and physical ability to determine whether self-administering medications/treatments is clinically appropriate for the resident. This policy was not followed. 1. Resident #20 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], 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 · D2023-05-08 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolatedReasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of 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 policy review, observation, record review, and resident and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure a resident's light switch in the room was within reach for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #61) reviewed for residents' rights. This deficient practice had the potential to cause harm if the resident experienced falls or accidents because the room was dark and not being able to sleep when the room was too bright. Findings include: Resident #61 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with multiple diagnoses including cerebral ischemia (acute brain injury that results from impaired blood flow to the brain) and unsteadiness on feet. A quarterly MDS assessment, dated 1/27/23, documented Resident #61 was cognitively intact. He required supervision with set-up assistance for ADLs and one-person extensive assistance for toileting. He used a walker and wheelchair and was not steady when walking and turning around. On 5/1/23 at 9:39 AM, Resident #61's room was observed to be dark and no lights…
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 before2023-05-08 · 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 3. Resident #2 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including Parkinson's disease (a movement disorder that affects the nervous system), muscle weakness, and history of falling. Resident #2's care plan, dated 12/8/20, documented Resident #2 was at risk for falls r/t [related to] impaired mobility, fall prior to admission resulting in left femur [thigh bone] fracture, self-transferring, impaired cognition with poor safety awareness, elimination needs, pain, and medication regimen. A nurse's note, dated 11/18/22 at 9:00 PM, stated Resident #2 had an unwitnessed fall in her room on 11/18/22 at 8:30 PM. Resident #2 was on the floor between her wheelchair and bed and sustained a cut to her head with a moderate amount of bleeding and the nurse provided wound care by placing steri-strips (adhesive skin closure strips) to the skin opening. A quarterly MDS assessment, dated 4/7/23, documented Resident #2 was severely cognitively impaired and required a one person extensive assistance for…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-05-08 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, policy review, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents were provided with a sanitary environment. This was true for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #380) reviewed for a sanitary environment. This deficiency created the potential for cross contamination from spread of microorganisms. Findings include: Resident #380 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including multiple sclerosis (a potentially disabling disease of the brain and spinal cord). The facility's Pet, Animal, and Plant policy, revised May 2017, stated animals in the facility were monitored and managed to prevent the spread of microorganisms/infections due to contact with the animals. It also stated animals were not allowed in food preparation areas, dining areas, bathrooms, or treatment areas. This policy was not followed. On 8/8/23 at 9:15 AM, Resident #380 was observed resting in bed with her cat on her lap. Resident #380's bathroom was observed with a cat litter box…
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 · D2023-05-08 · 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 2. Resident #61 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including cerebral ischemia (acute brain injury that results from impaired blood flow to the brain) and unsteadiness. A quarterly MDS assessment, dated 1/27/23, documented Resident #61 was cognitively intact. On 5/1/23 at 9:32 AM, Resident #61 stated he fell about a month ago and smashed the middle of his forehead. The fall was witnessed by three staff members, and there were no vital signs were taken or any assessments performed for him. Resident #61 stated he walked back to his bed by himself after the fall. The first staff member who checked him was CNA #6 the following day. Resident #61 stated the CNA #6 asked him why he had blood all over his face. Resident #61 was observed with a small raised area in the middle of his forehead when Resident #61 mentioned and pointed to it. An I&A report, dated 3/31/23 at 7:30 PM, documented the charge nurse was preparing Resident #61's medication. The charge nurse saw Resident #61 walking…
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 before2023-05-08 · 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 2. Resident #61 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including cerebral ischemia (acute brain injury that results from impaired blood flow to the brain) and unsteadiness on feet. A quarterly MDS assessment, dated 1/27/23, documented Resident #61 was cognitively intact. On 5/1/23 at 9:32 AM, Resident #61 stated he fell about a month ago and smashed the middle of his forehead. The fall was witnessed by three staff members, and there were no vital signs were taken or any assessments performed for him. Resident #61 stated he walked back to his bed by himself after the fall. The first staff member who checked him was CNA #6. The following day, Resident #61 stated the CNA #6 asked him why he had blood all over his face. Resident #61 was observed with a small raised area in the middle of his forehead when it was mentioned and pointed to. An I&A report, dated 3/31/23 at 7:30 PM, documented the charge nurse was preparing Resident #61's medication. The charge nurse saw Resident #61 walking…
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 before2023-05-08 · tag F0622 — isolatedNot transfer or discharge a resident without an adequate reason; and must provide documentation and convey specific information when a resident is transferred or discharged.
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 policy review, staff interview, and record review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure information was provided to the receiving hospital for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #8) reviewed for transfer. This deficient practice had the potential to cause harm if the residents were not treated in a timely manner due to lack of information. Findings include: The facility's policy, Transfer of Discharge, Facility-Initiated, dated 10/2022, documented if a resident was transferred or discharged for any reason, the following information was to be communicated to the receiving facility or provider: - The basis for transfer or discharge, - Contact information of the practitioner(s) responsible for the care of the resident, - Resident representative information and contact information, - Advance Directive information, - All special instructions/precautions for ongoing care, and as appropriate treatments - Comprehensive care plans and goals and - All other information such as resident status, 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 · D2023-05-08 · tag F0637 — isolatedAssess the resident when there is a significant change in condition
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 and interview, it was determined the facility failed to complete comprehensive assessments when residents experienced a significant change in their health and functional status. This was true for 2 of 26 residents (Residents #61 and #329) reviewed for the comprehensive assessment process. This failure had the potential for harm if facility staff did not timely recognize significant changes in residents' health status and needs. Findings include: The facility's policy, Change in Condition, revised 2018, documented if a significant change in the resident's physical or mental condition occurred, significant change in status assessment would be conducted as required by the MDS RAI Manual. A significant change of condition is a major decline or improvement in the resident's status, based on the MDS RAI manual as well as the following: - Will not resolve itself without intervention by staff or by implementing standard clinical interventions. - Impacts more than one area of the resident's health…
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 · D2023-05-08 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
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, and resident and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents urinary care needs were met to decrease the risk of UTI. This was true for 2 of 5 residents (#3 and #10) reviewed for UTI and/or indwelling catheter. This failed practice placed residents at risk for UTI. Findings include The facility's Catheter Care policy, revised 2018, directed staff to provide catheter care to residents with a urinary catheter to prevent urinary tract infections and document the following: - The date and time the catheter care was given. - The name and title of the staff giving the catheter care. - All assessment data obtained when giving the catheter care. - Any problems noted at the catheter-urethral junction during perineal care, such as drainage, redness, bleeding, irritation, crusting, or pain. - Any problems or complaints made by the resident during catheter care. - If the resident refused the care, document the reason why and what intervention taken. This…
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 · D2023-05-08 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolatedProvide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure nutrition and fluids were administered as ordered b y the physician for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #64) identified by the facility as receiving nutrition and fluids by tube feeding (a tube inserted through the abdomen into the stomach). This resulted in the potential for a resident to experience weight loss, poor nutritional status, and dehydration. Finding include: 1. Resident #64 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], was discharged to the hospital on 4/25/23, and readmitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #64's diagnoses included a stroke, dysphasia (difficulty swallowing) and aphasia (difficulty speaking). Resident #64's Care Plan documented tube feeding was to be continuous. Resident #64's physician order, dated 3/1/23, stated Resident #64 was to receive Jevity 1.5 (a dietary formula) 50 milliliters [ml]) of formula every hour by tube feeding to meet Resident #64's nutritional needs. Resident #64…
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 before2023-05-08 · 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 policy review, observation, record review, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure a resident received oxygen therapy per physician's orders. This was true for 1 of 1 (Resident #66) reviewed for respiratory care. This failure put Resident #66 at risk for oxygen toxicity (breathing oxygen at increased pressures, resulting in cell damage and death). Findings include: The facility's Oxygen Administration policy, dated 2020, stated Verify that there is a physician's order for the procedure. Review the physician's orders or facility protocol for oxygen administration. This policy was not followed. 1. Resident #66 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including saddle embolus of pulmonary artery (a large blood clot in the pulmonary artery) and shortness of breath. Resident #66's quarterly MDS assessment, dated 3/2/23, documented Resident #66 was cognitively intact and required oxygen. Resident #66's physician order, dated 11/29/22, directed staff to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-05-08 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolatedEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on document review and staff interview, the facility failed to assure a licensed pharmacist reviewed each residents' medications at least monthly, and the physician/prescriber addressed the medications irregularities identified by the pharmacist. This was true for 2 of 7 residents (#14 and #31) whose medications were reviewed. These deficient practices created the potential for harm if residents' medications were administered without a clinical rationale. Findings include: The facility's Medication Regime Reviews (MRR) policy, revised 4/2007, stated, The Consultant Pharmacist will provide the Director of Nursing Services and Medical Director with a written, signed and dated copy of the report, listing the irregularities found and recommendations for their solutions. Copies of drug/medication regimen review reports, including physician responses will be maintained as part of the permanent medical record. Routine reviews will be done monthly. This policy was not followed. 1. Resident #14 was admitted to the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-05-08 · tag F0801 — isolatedEmploy sufficient staff with the appropriate competencies and skills sets to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service, including a qualified dietician.
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, policy review, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure nutritional assessments were completed. This was true for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #380) whose records were reviewed for nutritional assessments. This failure created the potential for residents to experience malnutrition. Finding include: The facility's Nutritional Assessment policy, dated October 2017, stated nutritional assessments were completed on admission within current baseline assessment timeframes, as indicated by a change in condition, and with a comprehensive assessment. This policy was not followed. Resident #380 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including multiple sclerosis (a potentially disabling disease of the brain and spinal cord). Resident #380's care plan, revised on 4/27/23, documented the Registered Dietitian was to evaluate nutritional needs quarterly and as needed. A nutritional assessment, dated 3/24/23, did not include Resident #380's food…
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 · D2023-05-08 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, policy review, record review, and resident and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure documentation of self-administration of medication was maintained. This was true for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #20) reviewed for self-administration of medication. This created the potential for harm if Resident #9 did not receive medications as ordered. Findings include: Resident #20 admitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including Asthma (a chronic lung condition that causes breathing difficulties and inflammation of the airway). The facility's Self-Administration of Medication policy, revised 2/2021, stated the nursing staff determined who was responsible for documentation of medications. It also stated if the resident was able and willing to take responsibility for documenting self-administration of medications, the resident was instructed on how to complete a record indicating the administration of the medication. This policy was not followed. 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 · Ccited before2024-06-28 · tag F0732 — widespreadPost nurse staffing information every day.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure census information was accurate and posted daily for each shift. This failed practice had the potential to affect the 63 residents residing in the facility and their representatives, visitors, and others who wanted to review the facility's census levels. Findings include: On 6/28/24 at 11:53 AM the daily census and staffing posting was located on first floor, across from the nursing station. The form included a resident census area that was left blank for the day, evening, and night shifts. On 6/28/24 at 1:35 PM, the Administrator stated, the [SDC] is the one who fills these out daily and posts them. On 6/28/24 at 1:40 PM, the SDC verified she never filled out the census information on the forms. On 6/28/24 at 1:45 PM, the census and staffing form was reviewed with the DON, who stated the census should have been listed on the form.
- No harm found · Ccited before2023-05-08 · tag F0732 — widespreadPost nurse staffing information every day.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, policy review, record review, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure nurse staffing information was posted daily for each shift, kept for review for 18 months, and accessible for residents and visitors. This failed practice had the potential to affect the 74 residents residing in the facility and their representatives, visitors, and others who wanted to review the facility's staffing levels. Findings include: The Posting Direct Care Daily Staffing policy, revised August 2022, documented the facility shall post each shift nurse staffing data on a daily basis, including the number of nursing personnel responsible for providing direct care to residents. The charge nurse or designee shall complete the Staffing Information form within two hours of the beginning of each shift and post it in the locations designated by the administrator. The policy was not followed. On 4/30/23 at 2:30 PM, and on 5/1/23 at 3:45 PM, two glass frames were observed on the left side of the hallway next to the front lobby bathroom with nothing inside it. 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.
“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
$30,654 in federal fines across 2 penalties.
- $15,327 — penalty dated 2025-09-12
- $15,327 — penalty dated 2025-09-12
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 THE ENSIGN GROUP — 342 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 | 3.2 | -2.2 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 1 of 5 | 2.8 | -1.8 vs chain |
| Staffing | 1 of 5 | 2.7 | -1.7 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 4.4 | -0.4 vs chain |
The other 341 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.2★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 341; lowest-rated first.
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| PENNANT HEALTHCARE LLC | Organization | DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | since 05/22/2025 |
| THE ENSIGN GROUP INC | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | since 05/22/2025 |
| ALLEN, DANIEL | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 06/25/2025 |
| ARNELL, PAUL | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 06/25/2025 |
| BURNAM, SOON | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE OFFICER | since 05/22/2025 |
| KEETCH, CHAD | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 03/01/2011 |
| FARNSWORTH, STEPHEN | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | since 07/29/2025 |
| PORT, BARRY | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | since 06/25/2025 |
| CRANE CREEK HEALTH HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 07/01/2025 |
| ENSIGN SERVICES INC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 05/22/2025 |
| STANDARD BEARER HEALTHCARE OP LP | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 04/01/2025 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 16 rows in the source record cover these 11 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.
5 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
This home reported $530K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in ID
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 Idaho 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 135098. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-09-12, 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.