Lorien Bulle Rock
1501 Blenheim Farm Lane, Havre de Grace, MD 21078 · For profit - Corporation · 78 certified beds · (410) 939-9300 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a strong health-inspection score (5/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Jul 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
- a high number of inspection citations overall (33) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
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 | 5 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 4 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 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 improved from 4 to 5 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 22.5% | 20.4% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 4.3% | 5.4% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.3% | 0.5% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 1.5% | 1.5% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 5.1% | 22.8% | 6.5% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 6.6% | 2.4% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 24.9% | 22.2% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 10.6% | 16.7% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 96.6% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 8.3% | 5.9% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 27.5% | 25.0% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 3.4% | 13.8% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 1.5% | 1.1% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 97.9% | 80.6% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 21.0% | 21.0% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 7.9% | 9.8% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 0.62 | 1.33 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 0.53 | 1.20 | 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.
65.3% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 359 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 35.5% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 169 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 0.43 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 73% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 11% 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 | 65.3%CMS range 60.9–69.5 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | better than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.0%CMS range 7.5–13.0 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 35.5% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 40.8% | 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 | 37.9% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 90.9% | 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 | 96.7% | 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 | 93.3% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 6.2% | 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 | 6.0%CMS range 3.8–8.6 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.93 | 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 78 beds and averages 71.1 residents a day — about 91% occupied, or roughly 7 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.92 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.61 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.08 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.46 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.11 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.69 to 0.40 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 44% is about the same as the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
33 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 23 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-07-01 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review and an interview it was determined that the facility failed to hold care plan meetings with the interdisciplinary team for a resident at the time of the quarterly revision of their care plan. This was evident for 1 (Resident #24) of 35 residents reviewed during the annual recertification survey. The findings include: Care plans are developed for residents to guide the care that residents receive in the facility. They are required to be developed within 7 days of completion of a resident's admission comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment and revised at least every quarter (or more often as needed). The facility is required to have care plans developed and revised by an interdisciplinary team including: the attending physician, a registered nurse, a nursing aide, a representative from dietary services, the resident, and the resident's representative (as practicable). On June 26, 2025, at 4:25 PM, the medical records for Resident #24 were reviewed. This review showed that Resident #24 had a quarterly MDS assessment on October 24, 2024, and 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 · D2025-07-01 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure proper medication storage according to professional standards of practice. This was found to be evident for 1 out of 3 medication carts observed during the recertification survey. The findings include: During an observation of a second-floor medication cart on [DATE] at 9:04 AM, a bottle of Acetaminophen was found with a manufacturers expiration date of 4/2025 and was labeled opened on [DATE]. LPN #7 stated that the Acetaminophen expired and needed to be discarded. No open date was found on a bottle of Milk of Magnesia and an open bottle of Active Critical Care liquid protein labeled as opened [DATE]. LPN #7 stated that both bottles should be discarded. On [DATE] at 10:22 AM the Director of Nursing was shown pictures of the bottles found in the medication cart. He acknowledged the concerns of unlabeled and expired bottles found in the medication cart.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-07-01 · 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 1c) On 7/01/25 at 8:45 AM a review of Resident #225 printed medical record revealed there was no documentation to verify the resident was repositioned at least every two hours. In addition, the staff documented the type of assistance the resident needed to get dressed but the documentation did not specify whether the resident was dressed. On 7/01/25 at 9:45 AM during an interview with the Director of Nursing (DON), the surveyor verbalized there was no documentation to verify the resident was being turned and/or repositioned. The DON verbalized they recently started having the GNA's sign off in Tasks. The staff should make sure the residents are turned every 2 hours. Based on interviews, and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain medical records in accordance with acceptable professional standards and practices by keeping complete and accurate documentation. This was found evident in 3 (Resident #62, #28 & #225) out of 35 residents reviewed during the survey. The findings include:…
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 · D2025-07-01 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of facility reported incident details, resident medical records, facility staff personnel files, and interview with facility staff, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure a resident was free from abuse. This was evident for 1 (Resident #76) out of 35 residents reviewed during the annual survey. The findings include: The Office of Health Care Quality received a facility reported incident on 3/22/23, MD00190490, that alleged a facility staff, Registered Nurse, RN #12, verbally abused Resident #76 on 3/20/23 during the 3 pm to 11 pm shift. In the investigation, the facility substantiated through multiple witnesses (Staff # 13, GNA #14, Staff #15, and GNA #16) that RN #12 used verbally abusive and inappropriate language while rendering care to Resident #76. Resident #76 was was admitted to the facility on [DATE] for long term care services. At the time of the incident, Resident #76 was under hospice care with diagnoses including, Alzheimer's, Dementia, and Repeated Falls. Review of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-07-01 · 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
Based on interviews and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to immediately report an allegation of abuse to the State Office of Health Care Quality within the allotted two-hour timeframe. This was found evident in 2 out of 4 (Resident #74 & 81) residents reviewed for abuse allegations during an annual and complaint survey.The findings include: 1a) On 6/30/25 at 9:15 AM, the surveyor reviewed the facility investigation into an allegation of abuse related to Resident #81. The investigation revealed that an allegation of abuse was reported to a staff member by Resident #81's family member on 4/12/25 in the afternoon, however, the date the allegation was reported to the Office of Health Care Quality (OHCQ) and the date the investigation was started was 4/13/25.On further review, a progress note written on 4/12/25 at 3:07 PM, by Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #10, stated that Resident #81's daughter reported that Resident #81 told her that someone working the night shift had been hurting him/her. On 6/3/25 at 10:58 AM, the surveyor conducted an interview with 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 · D2025-07-01 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interviews it was determined that the facility staff failed to interview all the staff who worked on the unit during the investigative phase of an allegation of abuse. This deficient practice was evidenced in 1 (#74) of 10 facility reported incident investigation reviewed during the recertification and complaint survey. The findings include: On 6/25/25 at 11:20 AM a review of the facility's investigation of Resident #74 allegation of abuse, the surveyor noted all the staff who worked on the unit during the alleged incident, statements were not included in the investigation. On 6/26/25 at 2:02 PM during an interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) the surveyor asked what process they follow when completing an investigation. The surveyor asked if there were statements from two Geriatric Nursing Assistant's (GNA) and a nurse who also worked on the unit during the time of the alleged incident. The DON verbalized they are in the process of revamping the policy on how investigations will be done. There were only 2 GNA's working at that time. The other GNA…
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 · D2025-07-01 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interview it was determined that the facility failed to reposition the resident, toilet or check the resident for being wet or being soiled for 4.5 hours. This was evident for 1 (Resident #80) of 1 residents reviewed for ADL's during an annual and complaint survey Findings include: On June 30, 2025 at 9:45 AM during a chart review, it was noted that the Physical Therapist/Occupational Therapist had documented that after therapy on 3/25/2025, the resident was returned to his/her room at 11:00 AM and instructed to sit in the chair for 1 hour. The resident was given the call bell and told to alert the staff when he/she was ready to go back to bed. The surveyor reviewed a complainant that stated that Resident #80's daughter called at 3:15 PM stating that he/she was left in the wheelchair since early that morning and that no one had responded to his/her call bell. At 9:15 AM on July 1, 2025, a further chart review noted that on 3/25/2025 at 3:41 PM, Registered Nurse (RN) #20 received a call from the resident's daughter stating his/her parent had been in…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2022-06-28 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — patternProvide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on clinical record review, observation, resident interview, and staff interview it was determined that the facility staff failed to ensure residents' pain management programs were overseen in a consistent manner. This was evident for 2 (#13 and #20) out of 27 residents in the survey sample. The findings are: 1. Resident #20 was interviewed on 06/22/22 at 10:33 AM. The resident stated that he/she has chronic back pain that radiates throughout the body and gets creams to treat. The resident was not observed to be in pain. A review of Resident #20's clinical record on 6/24, 6/27, and 6/28 revealed that the resident was ordered Oxycodone (pain medication) 5 mg every 6 hours as needed for moderate to severe pain to address the resident's chronic back pain. The nursing staff monitor the effectiveness of the pain medication by asking the resident to rate their pain level before and after the administration of the pain medication. The resident's plan of care includes interventions to: 1) Resident will experience relief or decrease in pain until score is met which allows for optimum…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-06-28 · 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
Based on medical record review, it was determined that facility staff failed to notify the physician of finger stick results below 100 as ordered by the physician for Resident #21. This was evident for 1 of 27 residents reviewed during the survey process. The findings include: Medical record review for Resident #21 on 6/24/22 at 10:00 AM revealed on 2/7/22 the physician ordered: Glucose Check (finger stick) before meals and bedtime; call physician if finger stick is <100 or >350. A fingerstick is a minimally invasive procedure using a lancet to draw a drop or two of capillary blood from a finger and is an easy way to measure the amount of a certain substances in your blood (glucose). Medical record review revealed the facility staff obtained and documented the resident's finger stick on: 3/2/22 at 4:31 PM as 91, 3/6/22 at 12:30 PM as 94, 3/8/22 at 11:30 AM as 80, 3/18/22 at 11:30 AM as 80, 3/21/22 at 11:42 AM as 91, 3/26/22 at 11:30 AM as 96, 4/10/22 at 11:30 AM as 84, 5/18/22 at 11:53 AM as 96, 5/22/22 at 6:22 AM as 71, 5/30/22 at 11:30 AM as 90, 6/2/22 at 12:09 PM as 83, and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-06-28 · 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
Based on medical record review it was determined the facility staff failed to perform a bladder scan as ordered for Resident #199 and failed to notify the physician of the results of a bladder scan for Resident #300 as ordered by the physician. This was evident for 2 of 27 residents selected for review during the annual survey process. The findings include: A bladder scan is a safe, painless, reliable procedure that allows the facility staff to assess the volume of urine retained within the bladder. The bladder scan measures ultrasonic (sound wave) reflections within the resident's body to differentiate the urinary bladder from the surrounding tissue. It is a noninvasive portable tool for diagnosing, managing, and treating urinary outflow dysfunction. Bladder scans determine the need for catheterization. 1. The facility staff failed to perform a bladder scan as ordered for Resident #199 as ordered by the physician. Medical record review on 6/23/22 at 12:00 PM for Resident #199 revealed on 6/22/22 at 3:00 PM the physician ordered: bladder scan x 1 and call physician with the results.…
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 23 citations
- Potential for harm · D2022-06-28 · tag F0732 — isolatedPost nurse staffing information every day.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observations and staff interviews it was determined the required staff posting information was not in prominent place readily accessible to residents and visitors. This was evident during the entire survey process. The finding includes: On 6/21/22, 6/22/22, 6/23/22, 6/24/22 and 6/27/22 the required nursing staffing information per this regulation the facility staffing posting was not posted visible upon entering the facility or readily accessible to residents, family members and legal representatives of residents. On 6/27/22 at 1:00 p.m. interview of Administrator and Director of Nursing verified the required staff posting was not available for resident or visitors during the survey process. The finding was discussed with the Administrator and Director of Nursing in detail of this concerns prior and during survey exit conference held on 6/28/22 at approximately 2:30 p.m.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-06-28 · 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
Based on medical record review it was determined that the facility staff failed to ensure Residents #4 and #300 were free from un-necessary medications. This was evident for 2 of 5 residents selected for review of un-necessary medications and 2 of 27 residents selected for review during the annual survey. The findings include: 1. The facility staff failed to ensure Resident #4 was free from un-necessary pain medication. Medical record review for Resident #4 on 6/22/22 at 11:30 AM revealed on 9/17/21 the physician ordered: Oxycodone 5 milligrams (mgs.) by mouth every 6 hours as needed for severe pain. Oxycodone belongs to a class of drugs known as opioid analgesics and is used to help relieve moderate to severe pain. It works in the brain to change how the body feels and responds to pain Medical record revealed the facility staff assessed and documented the resident's pain level as 0 on: 6/1/22 at 9:01 AM, 6/1/22 at 4:04 PM, 6/5/22 at 2:17 PM, 6/6/22 at 3:14 PM (1), 6/7/22 at 5:06 PM (1), 6/11/22 at 8:34 AM, 6/11/22 at 3:09 PM, 6/15/22 at 3:15 PM, 6/20/22 at 2:34 PM, 6/21/22 at 1:30…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2018-10-05 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — patternHonor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interviews it was determined the facility staff failed to provide showers to Residents (#20, #23, #35 and #21). This was evident for 4 of 39 residents selected for review during the annual survey process. The findings include: 1. The facility staff failed to provide showers to Resident #20. Medical record review for Resident #20 revealed the resident was to have showers on 3-11 shift on Wednesday and Saturday. Review of staff documentation revealed the facility staff documented showers for Resident #20 on 8/29/18, 9/7/18, 9/15/18 and 9/22/18 (4 showers in 2 months). Interview with the Director of Nursing on 10/5/18 at 2:00 PM confirmed the facility staff failed to provide Resident #20 showers at least 2 times a week. 2. The facility staff failed to provide showers to Resident #23. Interview with Resident #23 on 10/2/18 at 12:00 PM revealed Resident #23 revealed he/she did not get 2 showers a week. The resident also indicated she/he would like to have a shower on 10/2/18. Facility staff documentation revealed Resident #23 is to have showers…
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 · D2018-10-05 · 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 — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation and staff interview it was determined the facility staff failed to provide Resident #35 with the most dignified existence. This was evident for 1 of 39 residents selected for review during the survey process. The findings include: During initial surveyor interview with Resident #35 on 10/2/18 at 10:00 AM facility staff nurse #1 and Geriatric Nursing Assistant (GNA) #1 entered the room without knocking and proceeded to attend to Resident #35's roommate. Interview with the Director of Nursing on 10/5/18 at 2:00 PM confirmed the facility staff nurse #1 and GNA #1 failed to knock on the door of Resident #35's room and wait for permission to enter prior to entering the room.
- Potential for harm · D2018-10-05 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to properly void an old MOLST form when a new one is created. This was evident for 1 (Residents #62) of 9 residents reviewed for advance directives during an annual recertification survey. The findings include: A Maryland MOLST (Medical Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment) form is used for documenting a resident's specific wishes related to life-sustaining treatments. The MOLST form includes medical orders for Emergency Medical Services (EMS) and other medical personnel regarding cardiopulmonary resuscitation and other life-sustaining treatment options for a specific patient. Instructions for completing a Maryland MOLST include: A Physician, Nurse Practitioner (NP), or a Physician Assistant (PA) must be accurately and legibly complete the form and then sign and date it. Voiding the Form: to void this medical order form, a physician or nurse practitioner shall draw a line through the sheet, write VOID in large letters across the page, 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 · D2018-10-05 · tag F0623 — isolatedProvide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on complaint, reviews of a closed record, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility staff failed to notify residents and/or representative and the Ombudsman of transfer and reason for transfer to the hospital in writing. This was evident for 2 (Resident #216 and #66) of 2 residents reviewed for Hospitalization during an annual recertification survey. The findings include: 1. Review of complaint MD00126182 on 10/3/18 revealed an allegation that Resident #216 was not allowed to return to the facility after a brief hospitalization. Review of the medical record for Resident #216 revealed the resident was transferred to an acute care facility on 4/29/18. There was no documentation found in the medical record that the resident, the resident's responsible party, or the Ombudsman was given written notice of Resident #216 being transferred to the hospital and the reason for the transfer to the hospital. On 10/5/18 at 9:15 AM, the facility Administrator stated that Resident #216 and the Resident's responsible party did not receive written notice as to why Resident #216…
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 · D2018-10-05 · tag F0625 — isolatedNotify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on review of the medical record and staff interview, it was determined that the facility staff failed to provide the resident and their representative with a written notice of bed hold policy, at the time of the resident transfer for hospitalization. This was evident for 1 (Resident #66) of 5 residents reviewed for Hospitalization during an annual recertification survey. The findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #66 revealed the resident was transferred to an acute care facility on 8/3/18 and returned to the facility on 8/6/18. There was no documentation found in the medical record that the resident or the resident's responsible party was given a copy of the bed hold policy upon transfer to the hospital. On 10/5/18 at 11:06 AM, the Director of Nurses confirmed that Resident #66 and the Resident's responsible party did not receive the facility bed hold policy when Resident #66 was transferred to the hospital on 8/3/18.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2018-10-05 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, observation and staff interview, it was determined the facility staff failed to review and revise the interdisciplinary care plans to reveal accurate interventions for residents (#30 and #35). This was evident for 2 of 39 residents selected for investigation during the survey process. The findings include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) is part of the federally mandated process for clinical assessment of all residents in Medicare and Medicaid certified nursing homes. This process provides a comprehensive assessment of each resident's functional capabilities and helps nursing home staff identify health problems. Once the facility staff completes an in-depth assessment of the resident, the interdisciplinary team meet and develop care plans. Care plans provide direction for individualized care of the resident. A care plan flows from each resident's unique list of diagnoses and should be organized by the resident's specific needs. The care plan is a means of communicating and organizing the actions and assure the resident's needs are attended to. The care…
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 · D2018-10-05 · 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
Based on medical record review, observation and interview, it was determined the facility staff failed to apply ace wraps to Resident #35 according to the standard of practice. This was evident for 1 of 39 residents selected for review during the annual survey process. The findings include: Medical record review for Resident #35 revealed on 5/12/18 the physician ordered: ace bandage to bilateral lower extremities, apply in morning and remove at bedtime. Typically, legs swell during the day because of dependent edema, meaning because a resident is up (even in a chair) fluid settles in feet, ankles and lower legs. This swelling should disappear at night when laying down. Typically, health care providers recommend wrapping legs or support stockings when the resident is up and then nothing during the night to give them a break and let the skin breath. It is the standard of practice to apply the ace bandage to the knee (unless thigh high is ordered). Surveyor observation of the resident on 10/4/18 at 12:30 PM revealed the facility staff applied an ace wrap; however, the ace wrap only…
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 · D2018-10-05 · tag F0676 — failed to keep up residents' daily-living abilities — isolatedEnsure residents do not lose the ability to perform activities of daily living unless there is a medical reason.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, it was determined the facility staff failed to provide services that would allow residents the ability to achieve the greatest independence with performing Activities of Daily Living to Residents (# 116). This was evident for 1 of 39 residents selected for review during the survey process. The findings include: Activities of daily living are routine activities people do every day without assistance. There are six basic ADLs: eating, bathing, getting dressed, toileting, transferring and continence. It is the expectation the facility staff will provide dietary assistance to residents; cut food up, open milk and juice containers, butter breads and ensure the food is within reach to the resident 1. The facility staff failed to provide straws, plastic lid for liquids and to aid in opening of dietary packages for Resident #116. Surveyor observation of the resident's breakfast on 10/3/18 at 8:00 AM revealed the facility staff provided the resident with a carton of milk and coffee. The milk was unopened, and the facility staff failed to provide a straw…
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 before2018-10-05 · 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 medical record review, observation and interview, it was determined the facility staff failed to obtain consultations as ordered for Resident #20; failed to ensure the validity of a fluid restriction for Resident #35 and it was determined the facility staff failed to follow a physician order and obtain daily weights for Resident #66. This was evident for 3 of 39 residents selected for review during the annual survey process. The findings include: 1 A. The facility staff failed to obtain a neurological consultation for Resident #20. Medical record review for Resident #20 revealed on 11/3/17 the physician ordered: Neurological consultation. Neurology consultation is an appointment with a neurologist for the diagnosis, management, or treatment of conditions that affect the nervous system. A neurologist is a doctor with specialized training in diagnosing and treating diseases of the brain, spinal cord, peripheral nerves, and muscles. Further record review revealed the facility staff failed to obtain that…
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 · D2018-10-05 · tag F0685 — isolatedAssist a resident in gaining access to vision and hearing services.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on medical record review and interview, the facility failed to provide treatment/services to maintain vision (Resident #21). This is evident for 1 out of 39 residents selected for review during the investigation stage of the survey process. The findings include: During interview with Resident #21 on 10/2/18 at 11:55 AM, the resident stated he/she is waiting for a follow up appointment with the eye doctor. The resident stated I can't see out of my right eye. I have a cataract and was supposed to have surgery. Cataract surgery is a procedure to remove the lens of your eye and, in most cases, replace it with an artificial lens. Review of the resident's medical record revealed the resident did see the eye doctor on 4/26/18. The new orders for the resident at that time was a referral for Ophthalmology consult for low vision and cataract. Further review of the medical record revealed an Ophthalmology Consult was never scheduled. Interview with the Director of Nursing on 10/4/18 12:43 PM confirmed the surveyor's findings.
- Potential for harm · D2018-10-05 · tag F0687 — failed to care for feet properly — isolatedProvide appropriate foot care.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review and interview, the facility failed to obtain a podiatry consultation as ordered by the physician for Resident (#17) and the facility staff failed to assist in making the requested podiatry appointment for diabetic preventive care (Resident #25). This is evident for 2 out of 39 residents selected for review during the investigation stage of the survey process. The findings include: 1. The facility staff failed to obtain a podiatry consultation as ordered by the physician. Medical record review for Resident #17 revealed on 9/17/18 the physician ordered: podiatry consultation related to painful toes. Podiatry is the branch of medicine that treats the foot, ankle, and related structures of the leg. Interview with Resident #17 on 10/2/18 at 10:00 AM revealed the resident resting in bed; however, complained to toe nail pain; however, the facility staff failed to obtain the podiatry consultation as ordered. Interview with the Director of Nursing on 10/5/18 at 2:00 PM confirmed the facility staff failed to obtain podiatry consultation for Resident #17 as…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2018-10-05 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, observation and interview, it was determined the facility staff provided care to Resident #30 to prevent a potential accident. This was evident for 1 of 39 residents selected for review during the annual survey process. The findings include: Medical record review for Resident #30 revealed on 8/21/18 the physician in collaboration with Speech Language Pathologist (SLP) ordered: nectar thick liquids by spoon only and monitor for swallow completion. Liquids to be given by teaspoon only. SLPs specialize in the evaluation, diagnosis, and treatment of communication disorders (speech disorders and language disorders), cognitive-communication disorders, voice disorders, and swallowing disorders. Nectar-thick liquids are easily pourable and comparable to apricot nectar or thicker cream soups. Surveyor observation of lunch on 10/3/18 at 1:00 PM revealed the resident being fed by Geriatric Nursing Assistant (GNA) #2. It was further noted at that time, GNA #2 failed to provide liquids to the resident via teaspoon. The GNA #2 poured the liquids into a cup and put…
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 · D2018-10-05 · 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
Based on medical record review, observation and interview, it was determined the facility staff failed to obtain weights as ordered for Resident #20 and the facility staff failed to offer Resident #30 alternative foods. This was evident for 2 of 39 residents selected for review during the annual survey process. The findings include: 1. The facility staff failed to obtain weekly weights as ordered by the physician for Resident #20. Medical record review for Resident #20 revealed on 7/30/18, the physician ordered: weekly weights- on Mondays. Further record review revealed the facility staff documented the weights on the following days: 8/6/18, 8/13/18, 8/21/18---Tuesday, 8/27/18, 9/7/17-Friday, 9/10/18, 9/18/18-Tuesday and 9/27/18- Thursday. Further record reviews the facility staff failed to obtain a weight for Resident #20 on 10/1/18. Interview with the Director of Nursing on 10/5/18 at 2:00 PM confirmed the facility staff failed to obtain weekly weights on Mondays for Resident #20 as ordered by the physician. 2. The facility staff failed to offer an alternative food choice 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 · D2018-10-05 · 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 record review, observation and interview, it was determined the facility staff failed to administer DuoNeb treatment to Resident #118 in accordance with the standard of practice. This was evident for 1 of 39 residents selected for review during the annual survey process. The findings include: Surveyor observation of Resident #118 on 10/2/18 at 1:00 PM revealed the resident sitting in his/her room next to the nebulizer. A nebulizer changes medication from a liquid to a mist so that it can be more easily inhaled into the lungs. An interview of the resident at that time revealed that the resident had a change of condition on 10/1/18 that included coughing and fever and the physician ordered that he/she receive nebulizer treatments. The resident stated that he/she did not receive the first treatment until today. Review of the medical record revealed an order written on 10/1/18 at 10:30 AM for DuoNeb treatments every 8 hours for 2 days. Review of the Medication Administration Record (MAR) revealed documentation for the first DuoNeb was on 10/2/18 at 6 AM. Interview of the Nurse…
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 · D2018-10-05 · 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 medical record review and interview, it was determined the facility staff failed to act upon the consultant pharmacist recommendation in a timely manner for Resident #35. This was evident for 1 of 39 residents selected for review during the annual survey process. The findings include: Medical record review for Resident #35 revealed on 5/5/18 the consultant pharmacist was in the facility and noted: Resident on Lorazepam .5 milligrams by mouth every 4 hours as needed. The consultant pharmacist also noted the medication should be limited to 14 days and with the following information: indication for use (the medical record must show documentation of adequate indications for the medications' use and the diagnosed condition for which the medication was prescribed. The consultant pharmacist also indicated the attending physician believed the medication was to be extended beyond 14 days should: document the rationale and indicate the duration of the as needed order. Further medical record review revealed the facility staff failed to address those recommendations in a timely manner.…
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 before2018-10-05 · 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
Based on medical record review and interview, it was determined the facility staff failed to document the heart rate and blood pressure for Resident #44 when the physician ordered parameters. This was evident for 1 of 39 residents selected for review during the annual survey process. The findings include: Medical record review for Resident #44 revealed on 6/23/18 the physician ordered: Hydralazine 25 milligrams by mouth 3 times a day for blood pressure and Metoprolol extended release, 200 milligrams by mouth every day, hold for heart rate less than 50, hold for systolic blood pressure (top number) less than 110. Hydralazine is a medication used to treat high blood pressure and heart failure. Metoprolol is prescribed to treat high blood pressure and prevent angina (chest pain) and it works by relaxing blood vessels and slowing heart rate, which improves blood flow and lowers blood pressure. Review of the Medication Administration Record for the above medications revealed the facility staff failed to obtain/document the blood pressure and heart rate as ordered by the physician 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 · D2018-10-05 · 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 medical record review and interview, it was determined the facility staff failed to identify specific targeted behaviors to monitor and assess for the continued use of psycho-active medication for Residents (#20 and #35). This was evident for 2 of 39 residents selected for review during the survey process. 1. The facility staff failed to identify specific targeted behaviors to monitor and assess for the continued use of psycho-active medication for Resident #20. Medical record review for Resident # 20 revealed on 11/3/17 the physician ordered: Abilify 2.5 milligrams by mouth 2 times a day for psychosis. Abilify is an antipsychotic medication. It works by changing the actions of chemicals in the brain. Abilify is used to treat the symptoms of psychotic conditions such as schizophrenia and bipolar I disorder (manic depression). Further record review revealed the facility staff failed to identify specific target behaviors monitor and to justify the continued use of the medication. Interview with the Director of Nursing on 10/5/18 at 2:00 PM confirmed the facility staff failed…
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 · D2018-10-05 · 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
Based on medical record and staff interview, it was determined that the facility staff failed to provide treatment to maintain dental health for Resident #21. This is evident for 1 out of 39 residents selected for review during the investigation stage of the survey process. The findings include: During interview with Resident #21 on 10/2/18 at 11:55 AM, the resident stated he/she is waiting for treatment after a follow up appointment with the dentist. Review of the resident's medical record revealed the resident did see the dentist on 6/12/18. The new orders for the resident at that time was for Biotene to treat resident's Dry Mouth Syndrome. Biotene is an oral rinse to managing Dry Mouth symptoms. Dry Mouth Syndrome is a condition in which the salivary glands in the mouth don't make enough saliva to keep your mouth wet. Dry Mouth Syndrome is often due to the side effect of certain medications or aging issues. Dry Mouth Syndrome can cause problems speaking, tasting, chewing, and swallowing. Further review of the medical record revealed that the Biotene was never ordered to treat…
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 · D2018-10-05 · 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 — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, it was determined facility staff failed to label with an expiration date individual serving containers of fruit juice. The findings included: On 10/3/18 at 9:00 AM during a tour of the kitchen refrigerator and all unit nourishment refrigerators it was determined the individual packaged fruit juices were not labeled with an expiration date. The shipping box containing the fruit juices in the kitchen refrigerator was not labeled with an expiration date. Further review with the dietitian confirmed on 10/4/18 at 12:00 PM that the individual fruit juice containers had not been labeled with an expiration date nor had the shipping box.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2018-10-05 · 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 medical record review and interview, it was determined the facility staff failed to maintain the medical records for Residents ( #23, #35 and #25) in the most complete and accurate form. This was evident for 3 of 39 residents selected for review during the survey process. The findings include: A medical record is the official documentation for a healthcare organization. As such, it must be maintained in a manner that follows applicable regulations, accreditation standards, professional practice standards, and legal standards. All entries to the record should be legible and accurate. An advance directive is a written document, electronic document, or oral directive that indicates a patient's wishes about medical treatment and/or appoints a health care agent to make medical decisions. In the event, the resident does not have an advance directive, and no one is appointed a health care agent, a surrogate decision maker is appointed for the resident in accordance with the Health Care Decision Act. 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 · D2018-10-05 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
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 the facility staff failed to post an isolation sign on room [ROOM NUMBER] door to alert visitors, residents, and staff to see the nurse before entering the room. This was true for 1 out of 39 residents selected for review during the annual survey process. The findings include: 1. The facility staff failed to post a sign on a resident door indicating isolation. On 10/2/18 and 10/3/18, an observation outside resident's room [ROOM NUMBER] was a box. When opened contained items necessary for respiratory isolation, gowns, masks, and gloves. The box had no signage indicating the items needed to be worn before entering the room or to see the nurse before entering. The resident has an infection requiring isolation. No one entering without previous knowledge would be alerted that the box meant isolation was expected. On 10/3/18 at the Director of Nursing confirmed there was not signage to indicate to stop and see a nurse before entering room [ROOM NUMBER].
“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
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to LORIEN HEALTH SERVICES — 8 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 | 5 of 5 | 3.8 | +1.2 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 5 of 5 | 3.6 | +1.4 vs chain |
| Staffing | 4 of 5 | 3.8 | +0.2 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 2.6 | +1.4 vs chain |
The other 7 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.8★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| COLLISON, MICHELE | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 10% | since 12/17/1998 |
| JURAS, ROSEMARY | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE OFFICER | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 01/01/2003 |
| LICATA, LINDA | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE OFFICER | 10% | since 12/17/1998 |
| MANGIONE, JOANNE | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 10% | since 12/17/1998 |
| MANGIONE, JOHN | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE OFFICER | 10% | since 11/28/2012 |
| MANGIONE, LOUIS | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE OFFICER | 10% | since 12/17/1998 |
| MANGIONE, NICHOLAS | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 10% | since 12/17/1998 |
| MANGIONE, PETER | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 10% | since 12/17/1998 |
| MANGIONE, SAMUEL | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 10% | since 12/17/1998 |
| O'KEEFE, FRANCES | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 10% | since 12/17/1998 |
| HECK, ELISSA | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | — | since 04/27/2018 |
| GRIMMEL, LOUIS | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 12/27/1998 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 16 rows in the source record cover these 12 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
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 $1.3M 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 MD
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 Maryland 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 215359. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-07-01, 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.